Is he right?

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    He did cap the ''none'' so he must be.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    No.

    You know your body.

    Put in the work.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Imo, most of your gains come from working out consistently. No matter how you do it. There may be some differences at the end, but they will be similar enough.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      This isn't even an 'imo' it's fact
      Anyone panicking and shitpositing about nutrition/routine/supps has been working out for less than a year

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      exactly

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why would you care what the result is in 5 years? And if the results are the same in 5 years, but different in between, why would I pick the one that is worse in the meantime?

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The only way to prove it would be a twin study, even then, tracking someone's every living moment for years is difficult. I think he's chosen an argument that cannot be contested because the data cannot be gathered in an effort to protect his ego.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Maybe or maybe not. It is impossible to tell because you can't make such experiment. What you should read in his post is "Eat big and train hard" or something

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    the fuck he mean by this? how's this mutually exclusive? am i stupid or frequency training means something else

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    what does he mean by frequency training

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    No he's not right. The sentiment is right but he posted this with 0 zero evidence. He has no idea if the gains would be equal.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >no important difference in size
    Probably
    >in strength
    Retarded. Unless your "chest day" is really just a bench day and your "back day" is deadlifts etc. bodypart splits are inferior for strength training & this goes for actual athletes as well

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >>no important difference in size
      >Probably
      >and your "back day" is deadlifts etc

      ok bro do your deadlifts for 5 years and lets see if we have the same back size, lmaoing @ u powershitters

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >ok bro do your deadlifts for 5 years and lets see if we have the same back size
        I never said that you fucking moron

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          yes, you actually did. you agreed with him that no matter what you do you will get to the same size after 5 years, i gave it as an example doing deadlifts

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            No you stupid gay, "size" and "strength" were clearly delineated by the fact I said different things about them. Body part splits for strength training is stupid unless each body part day is just a proxy for a movement day.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              fair enough

              >ok bro do your deadlifts for 5 years and lets see if we have the same back size
              someone who pulls 595 will definitely have a bigger back than you doing lat pulldowns with 175

              i doubt it

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >ok bro do your deadlifts for 5 years and lets see if we have the same back size
        someone who pulls 595 will definitely have a bigger back than you doing lat pulldowns with 175

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Pulling 595 takes a lot more work than lat pulling whatever the equivalent of that would be

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >takes a lot more work
            so what? still not better for hypertrophy

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              the issue is that it's a false equivalence. I can just as easily say that someone doing 6pl8 chinups will have a bigger back than someone doing 4pl8 deadlifts. No shit, 6pl8 chinups are world-class tier while 4pl8 deadlifts obviously are not.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          and someone who does chinups with +100kg for reps will have a bigger back than someone who pulls 595. your point?

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    depends on the person, also it doesn't really matter

  12. 1 month ago
    Gary

    Results are 100% genetics. Genes are responsible for protein synthesis.

    One lifter will end up more muscular than the other due to better genetics for protein synthesis in muscle.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      A lazy person with great genetics might still outshine a less lazy person with shit genetics, but an extreemely dedicated person with average genetics will blow both out of the water. Ronnie and Jay etc all had excellent genetics, excelent drug tolerance, AND worked their asses off. You and I are probably checking zero of those boxes right now. We dont deserve to be in the conversation and yet you wanna tell others that they cant see themselves become something great?

      • 1 month ago
        Gary

        >A lazy person with great genetics might still outshine a less lazy person with shit genetics, but an extreemely dedicated person with average genetics will blow both out of the water
        Your personality traits are also genetic

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >le everything is genetic

          • 1 month ago
            Gary

            I know, what an idiot that anon is, blacks choose to be more aggressive and impulsive than whites, it has nothing to do with the inherent genetics of their race whatsoever.

          • 1 month ago
            Gary

            Wait until you find out that there is no free will. The universe is just a series of cause and effects of particles interacting with each other in predictable ways according to fundamental laws. Your life was always going to end up like this regardless, choice is an illusion, you were always going to choose A over B. It's fate.

            Even retarded Ronnie Coleman knows this intuitively, as he credits "god" for his success. God put his soul into his body, and his body just operated on autopilot due to the chemical interactions of the atoms in his body, much like the moon revolves around the earth without choice, just following the laws of physics. He just doesn't realize the mechanisms but understands the concept of fate. Ronnie was always going to succeed, if you could rewind the universe back to the beginning, the exact same outcome would play out, just like rewatching a movie. Exactly the same.

            ?t=413

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >he can't astral project
              Divine light severed. NGMI

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              God created man in His image and therefore man has free will to chose his fate. Period.

              • 1 month ago
                Gary

                No, fate is predetermined. Like a computer simulation. God is the entity that created the software and hardware and the big bang was god double clicking on universe.exe. And it's currently playing out. I was always going to type this at this moment in time. I didn't have a choice, it just seemed to happen for some reason. Fate.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I've seen good arguments on both sides for free will and determinism, but I choose to ignore both and believe that I have a will. Why?
                >Scenario 1: You have free will
                In this scenario, the man who believes he has free will and the man who believes he does not have free will are both correct.
                >Scenario 2: You do not have free will
                In this scenario, it doesn't matter what you believe since your beliefs are predetermined anyway

                And again
                >he can't astral project

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Fate
                >fat
                It's over bros.

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    No, the brosplitter will be bigger because of better recovery. Also genetics. I find him weird because he has videos where he says he doesn't a know a single advanced lifter that uses a full body routine and then turns around tells people to squat 3-4x a week?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >No, the brosplitter will be bigger because of better recovery.
      Don't think so, good/bad recovery exists independently from your training split, it's something you need to manage regardless of the frequency. I would wager that other splits (U/L, full body, PPL, etc) would work better since you get less junk volume (after your 15th set of chest are you really doing quality volume anymore? lol) and you can also do more weekly volume (eg 8 sets of chest on two upper days is more volume than 15 sets of chest on one day, and they're also higher quality sets). This is especially relevant for back training, since the back is a conglomerate of muscles you're going to hit one part well and hit the other parts badly if you're doing a brosplit since your later sets won't be very high quality.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Nobody recovers from even 2x a week frequency as a natty unless they're pulling women weight with no intensity. That's why everyone has a story of not doing a lift for a few weeks then coming back stronger. Brosplits make it dead simple because if you do it right, it's 7 days recovery, more than enough for most normal people.

        Of course, the whole thing is a fake argument because NOBODY does high frequency shit for more than a year, maybe 2 if they're really dogmatic. You feel like absolute shit and then you move to the bodypart split like everyone else and all those problems go away. Not even the old school guys. Leroy Colbert spent the last years of his life saying FULL BODY ONLY 3x A WEEK. People dug and found his routines he gave to magazines and they're upper lowers. It's all fake. Zane is another one full body is attributed to even though 5x5 full body was barely a fraction of his training career. It's literally just pushed by SS and "functional" coaches.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Nobody recovers from even 2x a week frequency as a natty unless they're pulling women weight with no intensity.
          Are you retarded? I do plenty of sets to failure with a 2x a week frequency (higher for some bodyparts eg back) and I recover just fine. Get better work capacity, don't project your deficiencies onto others.
          >That's why everyone has a story of not doing a lift for a few weeks then coming back stronger.
          Fatigue masks fitness, this is why some elite powerlifters/strongmen lift much less weight in training compared to comp, since they're training under lots of fatigue but when competition comes around they shed all that fatigue so they can display their full strength.
          >Of course, the whole thing is a fake argument because NOBODY does high frequency shit for more than a year
          I've been running a non-restrictive U/L for ages now. Most muscles are running at 2x a week but some (namely back) are at 4x a week, while others are at 3x a week. Try again.
          >You feel like absolute shit
          More projection, I feel great.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Most people don't sleep 8 full hours, abstain from alcohol and drugs etc . If you are focused on recovery then 2x a week is fine. If you have 5 hours of pothead sleep and a stressful dayjob maybe it's not

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Wrong. Time under tension is biggest deciding factor. Frequency wins every time. This is why crossfit athletes have the best physiques on the planet.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      How the hell did you barge into this thread with the worst possible opinion bro? You should earn a medal for that

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    no one cares about aestheticsfags

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Higher frequency (2-3x a week) allows:
    >more quality working sets
    >more touches with the bar, this one is big for strength oriented lifting
    >more easy to stay consistent, if you do full body or upper/lower and miss a day or even half a week you can jump straight in and have total coverage in 1/2 days

    It's harder to juggle though, and requires a bit more thought and fine-tuning. Smashing a main lift and then doing a lot of volume for related body parts once a week only will give you progress too it's much harder to fuck up the recovery/progression.

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    BHUD is right again

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    yes, it doesn't make much difference. it is down to personal preference. plus more importantly is people don't actually train for 5 years, they often quit, or never get started due to procrastinating about worthless things like splits etc. Also, normal people would not want to put on maximum muscle you can obtain after 5 years, that is dumb. You really don't need that much muscle, so in the end, nothing really matters other than you stop fucking thinking about it all and go lift.

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    he's wrong, but the difference will be genetics not routine

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *