Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 54

Thread: how many times a week to do each muscle?

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    722

    how many times a week to do each muscle?

    right now, considering the amount of time i have available to lift, im lifting each muscle once a week, is this too much time between each muscle?

    monday: bis/tris
    tuesday: legs
    wednesday: chest
    thursday: shoulders/back

    this is my lifting schedule right now, is there anything i should double up on, as in do two times a week?
    id really like to get my calves and bench going as they are lacking extremely

    note: the days arent consistent because of my working schedule, neither is the order really, i try to stick to it but its not possible sometimes, however the lifts always stay how they are
    Last edited by greathuskie; 08-04-2004 at 05:22 PM.

  2. #2
    F'n RAGE man, RAGE
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Dallas area, TX
    Posts
    0
    I work Chest twice a week. One day I do heavy weights, the other I do light weight high reps. I also do Biceps and Triceps twice. I have a day, Wednesday, scheduled for nothing but arms, but I have others days with Biceps thrown in and Triceps thrown in. I work shoulders twice a week also. I do back, legs, and abs once a week.

    I work out M-F and rest on the weekend. Doing 45-60 minutes of cardio also every day I work out before the lifts. I begin at 5:15 am, and I am usually done by 7:15-7:30

  3. #3
    Bismarck in Training emjlr3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Abingdon, MD
    Posts
    802
    i say once a week

    i do chest/tris on mon and abs

    biceps/back on wed

    legs on thurs and abs

    shoulders on fri

    other then abs, the only thing i do mroe then once a week triceps, since the get a little workout on shoulder day, but other then that i only do every muscle part once per week and it works just fine and dandy

  4. #4
    Batista's Student –ragons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    England
    Posts
    392
    mon: chest/tri
    wed: back/shoulders/arms
    thu: chest/tri
    fri: shoulders/arms

    for me anyway
    PROFILE, COMMENT PLZ
    My Journal

  5. #5
    Gen_chat worst nightmare
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    0
    According to common bodybuilding mythology once week is optimal, according to science higher frequency should provide better results, at least provided overall volume stays the same.

    Personally I do everything three times a week, HST style.

  6. #6
    Steak and Eggs pusher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    NPWRAK, Canada
    Posts
    762
    Directly once a week, indirectly at least twice. Low volume heavy weights.
    "The highest reward for man's toil is not what he gets for it, but what he becomes by it." -John Ruskin 1819-1900

    "He who fights monsters should see to it that in the process, he does not
    become a monster. And when you look into the abyss, the abyss also looks into
    you." - Nietzche

  7. #7
    Go Heels! MixmasterNash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    10,215
    Quote Originally Posted by restless
    According to common bodybuilding mythology once week is optimal, according to science higher frequency should provide better results, at least provided overall volume stays the same.
    According to the fact that we organize our lives by weeks, and generally have fixed weekly schedules, once a week is easy for Joe Schmoe to remember and/or fit in. It has little to do with physiology or optimal gains, and everything to do with keeping a regular schedule.

    Just do a lot of compound exercises, and you'll hit all of your muscles a few times a week, while keeping a regular schedule.

  8. #8
    Wannabebig Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    11
    I train each muscle 3 times a week, i do 3 fullbody workouts a week.

  9. #9
    Down with the Sickness
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Brandon, Florida
    Posts
    340
    I train
    MON Chest/Tri's
    WEDS Back/BI'S (back includes traps)
    FRI Legs/shoulders (legs include calves some people don't consider calves part of legs don't ask me why)

    I do pretty much what pusher does directly once a week indirectly twice.

    Train abs on all three day and i train heavy and hard every week i only train each bodypart once a week that way there is 7 days of rest inbetween. I do cardio after everywork out for 30 to 40 min.
    Last edited by sublime99; 08-05-2004 at 04:37 PM.

  10. #10
    Bodybuilding Mythbuster
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Yeongsan. South Korea
    Posts
    5,907
    Quote Originally Posted by restless
    According to common bodybuilding mythology once week is optimal, according to science higher frequency should provide better results, at least provided overall volume stays the same.

    Personally I do everything three times a week, HST style.

    Science has nothing to do with it. It is what is optimal for the individual. For myself I have tried training programs from 1-5 days a week (the more days the less exercises). Once a week has proven to be the best (for me).
    Last edited by Songsangnim; 08-06-2004 at 01:20 AM.

  11. #11
    Gen_chat worst nightmare
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ExtremeAnabolic
    Science has nothing to do with it.
    Of course not.

  12. #12
    Senior Member Gavan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    586
    Do what make you grow stronger at the fastest rate. I train each muscles/exercises from 1 to 7 times per week. When I'm full of energy 7x, then I overreach and decrease frequency when I recover I increase frequency again and so on. I found it's better than a fixed frequency.
    Gain Muscles ? Overload !
    Lose Fat ? Input < Output
    Genetic determines your potential
    Chins : 10x106kg Dips 10x109kg

  13. #13
    Bodybuilding Mythbuster
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Yeongsan. South Korea
    Posts
    5,907
    Quote Originally Posted by restless
    Of course not.

    It's not science (rocket or any other kind). Eat, sleep and train. Do all these in the correct amounts and you will grow. What is the correct amount though? That varies from person to person. So again, what works is what is optimal for the person, be it three times a week or one time a week.

    Would you like to actually try and refute my points? No? That's what I thought.

  14. #14
    Gen_chat worst nightmare
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ExtremeAnabolic
    It's not science (rocket or any other kind). Eat, sleep and train. Do all these in the correct amounts and you will grow. What is the correct amount though? That varies from person to person. So again, what works is what is optimal for the person, be it three times a week or one time a week.

    Would you like to actually try and refute my points? No? That's what I thought.

    I could, if you actually made any other than that awfully vague "everyone is different" one, which seems to be so much in vogue.


    But I don't mind getting into an argument with you, if you agree to speak the same language as I do.

  15. #15
    Bodybuilding Mythbuster
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Yeongsan. South Korea
    Posts
    5,907
    Quote Originally Posted by restless
    I could, if you actually made any other than that awfully vague "everyone is different" one, which seems to be so much in vogue.


    But I don't mind getting into an argument with you, if you agree to speak the same language as I do.

    Sorry, I only speak English (and some Korean).


    So what you are saying is that everyone is NOT different? Sorry but that is why one standard customized program for everyone does not exist. If you have two people and one has very poor recovery levels and is natural, and the other is on steroids and has great recovery levels, you would have to give a different program (including times per week) for each. As for myself over the course of 14 years I have discovered that once a week gives me better gains than three times a week, even when I kept the volume the same.

    Bottom line: There are people who benefit more from a once a week program. I am one of them.

  16. #16
    WBB Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    1,065
    Quote Originally Posted by pusher
    Directly once a week, indirectly at least twice. Low volume heavy weights.
    This is what I do also. It seems to be working quite well.

  17. #17
    As I Am Paul Stagg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Baltimore, MD, USA
    Posts
    8,668
    You guys best be nice to each other.
    Squats work better than supplements.
    "You know, if I thought like that, I'd never put more than one plate on the bar for anything, I'd never use bands or chains, I'd never squat to parallel or below, and I'd never let out the slightest grunt when I lift. At some point in your lifting career (assuming you're planning on getting reasonably strong and big), you're going to have to accept that most people think you are some kind of freak." -Sensei
    "You're wrong, and I have a completely irrelevant pubmed abstract that may or may not say so." - Belial
    I has a blog.
    I has a facebook.

  18. #18
    Gen_chat worst nightmare
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ExtremeAnabolic
    Sorry, I only speak English (and some Korean).


    So what you are saying is that everyone is NOT different? Sorry but that is why one standard customized program for everyone does not exist. If you have two people and one has very poor recovery levels and is natural, and the other is on steroids and has great recovery levels, you would have to give a different program (including times per week) for each. As for myself over the course of 14 years I have discovered that once a week gives me better gains than three times a week, even when I kept the volume the same.

    Bottom line: There are people who benefit more from a once a week program. I am one of them.

    By speaking my language I mean having the hability to define concepts in a specific and clear manner and being able to support your ideias with solid arguments or scientific "evidence".

    I will ask you first to define this "recovery" concept, which I don't exactly understand.

    And please don't get this personal, I may think that your observations and conclusions on exercise frequency are wrong but I have nothing against you on a personal level.
    Last edited by restless; 08-06-2004 at 02:02 PM.

  19. #19
    Senior Member getfit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    montreal quebec
    Posts
    17,445
    Quote Originally Posted by greathuskie
    right now, considering the amount of time i have available to lift, im lifting each muscle once a week, is this too much time between each muscle?

    monday: bis/tris
    tuesday: legs
    wednesday: chest
    thursday: shoulders/back

    this is my lifting schedule right now, is there anything i should double up on, as in do two times a week?
    id really like to get my calves and bench going as they are lacking extremely

    note: the days arent consistent because of my working schedule, neither is the order really, i try to stick to it but its not possible sometimes, however the lifts always stay how they are
    my workout program consists of doubling up so this is how mine goes
    monday chest, back, biceps,abs(heavy day)
    tuesday shoulders,tris,abs
    wednesday.legs (heavy day) abs
    thursday repeat monday not heavy lighter weights more reps
    friday legs shoulders abs for legs though since not much of a gap from wednesday i just do lunges, extensions, curls, and run for 25 mins
    wknd off rest ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh relax!

  20. #20
    Bodybuilding Mythbuster
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Yeongsan. South Korea
    Posts
    5,907
    Quote Originally Posted by restless
    By speaking my language I mean having the hability to define concepts in a specific and clear manner and being able to support your ideias with solid arguments or scientific "evidence".

    I will ask you first to define this "recovery" concept, which I don't exactly understand.

    And please don't get this personal, I may think that your observations and conclusions on exercise frequency are wrong but I have nothing against you on a personal level.

    First I have to ask you if you agree that different people have different levels of recovery. By recovery I mean the ability to tolerate and grow on exercise (specifically bodybuilding). Remember there are many factors that come into play here. Are you suggesting that for each person they are the same?
    Please refer back to my previous example and give some reasons why my conclusion is wrong. As for my observations and conclusions on exercise frequency they are shared by many on the board, and backed up by many years of personal experience.


    As for scientific evidence, to the best of my knowledge I know of no studies that have conclusively proved that once a week is better than three times a week. Nor do I know of studies that have conclusively proved that three times a week is better than once a week. This is why my claim of "It all comes down to the individual." But if you know of such studies I would be quite interested to see the links (when you have time to post them).

    Nothing personal. I just like to see better arguments than "of course not"





    .
    Last edited by Songsangnim; 08-07-2004 at 02:45 AM.

  21. #21
    love to lift BIG C's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    893
    I hit each bodypart once a week on a different day, but bi's/ tri's twice a week.
    If the bar aint bending your just pretending!!!!


    My journal!

  22. #22
    Gen_chat worst nightmare
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ExtremeAnabolic
    First I have to ask you if you agree that different people have different levels of recovery.
    It depends on what you men with recovery. Of course there's variation in exercise tolerance and some people are more susceptible to neural fatigue but the frequency you train each muscle as nothing to do with that.

    Quote Originally Posted by ExtremeAnabolic
    By recovery I mean the ability to tolerate and grow on exercise (specifically bodybuilding).
    Alright. This is something I can understand. The accepted time frame during which protein synthesis remains elevated is 48 hours, you probably heard that before when we had this same discussion. There's is certainly some individual variation but we're still all humans so the variation won't be spomething like +5 days. Now the tolerance part is something a bit more relevant to overall volume and intensity (as in closeness to failure) used, but not frequency itself.

    There will certainly be an increase in caloric demand though, which may explain your supposed lack of success with increased frequency.


    Quote Originally Posted by ExtremeAnabolic
    As for scientific evidence, to the best of my knowledge I know of no studies that have conclusively proved that once a week is better than three times a week. Nor do I know of studies that have conclusively proved that three times a week is better than once a week.
    It doesn't surprise me you don't know about them. There were studies done that showed that between two routines performed with the same exact volume and exercise choice, one split in three sessions and the other all performed in one day per week, there was a significant difference in the hypertrophic response. But then again, if science has nothing to do with it what would you care? Your empirical observations and conclusions are probably more accurate, no? The abstracts I may post later if I actually have time to search for them otherwise you'll have to search yourself. They may be in the HST FAQ, I don't know.

    And there's more data on that suggests your aproach is sub-optimal, but unfortunately it's all in the science realm.

    Quote Originally Posted by ExtremeAnabolic
    This is why my claim of "It all comes down to the individual." But if you know of such studies I would be quite interested to see the links (when you have time to post them).

    Nothing personal. I just like to see better arguments than "of course not".
    And I'd like to see something a bit more clever than "science has nothing to do with it". My response was at the worst appropriate for your comment.
    Last edited by restless; 08-07-2004 at 09:35 AM.

  23. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    219
    I have been working out each muscle group about once every six to seven days and have had only great positive results with significant gains each and every week. I have tried many routines over the last 19 years and this has been working the best for me over the last three years.

    Good luck and listen to ExtremeAnabolic, he knows what he is talking about

  24. #24
    Bodybuilding Mythbuster
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Yeongsan. South Korea
    Posts
    5,907
    Quote Originally Posted by restless
    It depends on what you men with recovery. Of course there's variation in exercise tolerance and some people are more susceptible to neural fatigue but the frequency you train each muscle as nothing to do with that.



    Alright. This is something I can understand. The accepted time frame during which protein synthesis remains elevated is 48 hours, you probably heard that before when we had this same discussion. There's is certainly some individual variation but we're still all humans so the variation won't be spomething like +5 days. Now the tolerance part is something a bit more relevant to overall volume and intensity (as in closeness to failure) used, but not frequency itself.

    There will certainly be an increase in caloric demand though, which may explain your supposed lack of success with increased frequency.




    It doesn't surprise me you don't know about them. There were studies done that showed that between two routines performed with the same exact volume and exercise choice, one split in three sessions and the other all performed in one day per week, there was a significant difference in the hypertrophic response. But then again, if science has nothing to do with it what would you care? Your empirical observations and conclusions are probably more accurate, no? The abstracts I may post later if I actually have time to search for them otherwise you'll have to search yourself. They may be in the HST FAQ, I don't know.

    And there's more data on that suggests your aproach is sub-optimal, but unfortunately it's all in the science realm.



    And I'd like to see something a bit more clever than "science has nothing to do with it". My response was at the worst appropriate for your comment.

    The frequency at which you train each muscle has nothing to do with recovery or neural fatigue? First time I've heard this. Care to expand?


    I was/am well aware of the needed increase in caloric demand. During my time with HST, I was taking upwards of 4000 calories a day.

    Oh you mean (what I call) the HST studies? The studies that were done with the goal of proving HST is superior? I was talking about studies that were done by an independent research group and published in a peer-review journal. If you have links to such studies please post them. Don't just claim something along the lines of 'they are out there somewhere' Not a terribly convincing argument I am afraid. Again with the "more data" please show us where this "data" is and what peer-reviewed journals it has been posted in.

    As for my empirical observations and conclusions well yes they are probably more accurate regarding myself and how I should train. Who is likely to be more correct? Some study saying how I should train (when I followed such recommendations and made little gains) Or should I trust my experience and judgment and follow the training methods that actually produced significant gains? As a side note how many people do you know (on here) that follow strict "scientific" recommendations to as how they should train? HST is NOT the only valid training method.

    As for the "science has nothing to do with it" that was not the sum total of my argument in that post. Your response "Of course not" was. I made a valid point in that post about what is optimal for the individual. You choose not to respond to that. But hey it's all good. I just like debates to which the replies are a wee bit more elaborate
    Last edited by Songsangnim; 08-08-2004 at 12:35 AM.

  25. #25
    Gen_chat worst nightmare
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ExtremeAnabolic
    The frequency at which you train each muscle has nothing to do with recovery or neural fatigue? First time I've heard this. Care to expand?

    Well, increased frequency obviously will mean more fiber damage and more growth, but it also as by shown that these boots don't hinder recovery. And neural fatigue, well, you explain me why would three sets done in one day or in MWF would produce more neural fatigue? If anything the ones that do the three sets in one day would have a harder time completing the final set and would put more of a strain in the CNS while the MWF group would not. Volume, intensity and frequency are different things why do you insist in not seeing this?


    Quote Originally Posted by ExtremeAnabolic
    I was/am well aware of the needed increase in caloric demand. During my time with HST, I was taking upwards of 4000 calories a day.

    I am not impressed.

    Quote Originally Posted by ExtremeAnabolic
    Oh you mean (what I call) the HST studies? The studies that were done with the goal of proving HST is superior? I was talking about studies that were done by an independent research group and published in a peer-review journal. If you have links to such studies please post them. Don't just claim something along the lines of 'they are out there somewhere' Not a terribly convincing argument I am afraid. Again with the "more data" please show us where this "data" is and what peer-reviewed journals it has been posted in

    AH!! What a bunch of crap. Bryan never did any studies, Just goes to show how much you are willing to distort things in order to prove your unfundamented point. The studies were all done by independant researchers in Japan, US, etc... and were all published in peer review journals. But hey, remember, science has nothing to do with it. I have posted a lot of these studies before here and in other places.

    The HST studies. Hilarious. There was never such thing. Bryan always used his interpretation of independant research in order to support his training method.


    Quote Originally Posted by ExtremeAnabolic
    As for my empirical observations and conclusions well yes they are probably more accurate regarding myself and how I should train. Who is likely to be more correct? Some study saying how I should train (when I followed such recommendations and made little gains) Or should I trust my experience and judgment and follow the training methods that actually produced significant gains? As a side note how many people do you know (on here) that follow strict "scientific" recommendations to as how they should train? HST is NOT the only valid training method.
    For the recod, YOU brought HST in here, not me.
    Last edited by restless; 08-08-2004 at 04:23 AM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •