Why does everyone here recommend strength based programs?

jimmmer

This idea of doing SS or similar to 'prime' your body for size gains is just as much broscience as the bro-iest of splits. A well designed split can increase strength and size just as well as SS can, especially if well chosen isolation exercises help improve strength on compounds.

But a full-body three times a week routine will build strength faster in an untrained individual because you'll be progressing everything faster than you would on a split.

When you've got things up to speed then you can jump on a "well designed split" that is more appropriate to your lifting experience and strength.

Surely, the whole idea of a split is to provide the maximum amount of recovery per whatever you're splitting, so a more experienced trainee can hammer something harder than they could as a beginner and still get the recovery they need before they get back around to working it again.

What's bro-sciency about getting yourself stronger using the fastest possible method?

FrnkLft

Can someone define "bro split" for me? I've always known that to be a 5-day split hitting everything once a week, right?

Also, the more you can lift (strength), the heavier you can go on your hypertophy work (high reps).

Also-also, strength programs are the most basic and uncontroversial programs around. Referring a beginner to a pure hypertrophy program is like throwing them to the wolves. So much bull**** and complication out there that they really don't need to worry about right now.

phatguerilla

This idea of doing SS or similar to 'prime' your body for size gains is just as much broscience as the bro-iest of splits. A well designed split can increase strength and size just as well as SS can, especially if well chosen isolation exercises help improve strength on compounds.

But a full-body three times a week routine will build strength faster in an untrained individual because you'll be progressing everything faster than you would on a split.

When you've got things up to speed then you can jump on a "well designed split" that is more appropriate to your lifting experience and strength.

Surely, the whole idea of a split is to provide the maximum amount of recovery per whatever you're splitting, so a more experienced trainee can hammer something harder than they could as a beginner and still get the recovery they need before they get back around to working it again.

What's bro-sciency about getting yourself stronger using the fastest possible method?

Starting strength/stronglifts that focus solely on the 'big' compound lifts tend to ignore certain muscles unless a person is a particular build. While in theory a oh pressing and benching should be enough for pecs shoulders and triceps this isn't the case for many, perhaps most individuals. Same with upper back or hamstrings. They end up stalling on this program because a lack of isolation lifts limits their strength capacity.

In addition many people here are pointing to a full body strength programme as being better on a deficit than a split - why would a programme designed to maximise noob gains and which requires full body recovery be much better on a deficit than a program that allows for localised, periodised recovery?

The answer on this board is always ss/sl, no matter what the problem is. One guy started a thread saying his legs weren't growing from squats and was told to squat more. There's more to it than that as the OP has demonstrated.

Myhaloslipped

Even 4chan has moved away from telling everyone to do SS and call it a day. Most people here want aesthetics more than strength. I've seen much better results on a "bro split" than I ever did on a strength based program. I don't lift heavy. The heaviest I ever go is lmao2plate!!!1! and half the time I don't go heavier than 185 on any lift. I do my compounds and then a million different isolation exercises. Training for strength is great... if your goal is strength. I've been training my little brother the way I train (he's a 16 year old boy) and he's been packing on mass very quickly. I just feel like a lot of people are getting trolled out of decent gains by being told to do strength based programs.
/rant

If you use /fit/ as a resource for information you're going to have a bad time.

I don't want to have a bad time.

tedrickp

The answer on this board is always ss/sl, no matter what the problem is. One guy started a thread saying his legs weren't growing from squats and was told to squat more. There's more to it than that as the OP has demonstrated.

Well one thing I mentioned earlier - in a caloric deficit no one is going to make their legs or any part of their body bigger (outside of the factors we all know - noobie gains, very obese, muscle memory) so that is why SS/SL (and others) are often recommended here - because they will do a great job of allowing you to retain LBM, plus it is simple and "easy".

So no surprise on a site where majority of people are trying to lose weight (aka in a caloric deficit) that strength routines are more often recommended.

That said I agree with your sentiment - the OP has different goals - so a body building split makes sense for her - especially for a women because quite often they do have to work the upper party harder than the lower.

I would assume (total guess since it is new) that the "maintaining" and "gaining weight" forums would be more body building split friendly. Just a hunch.

smittybuilt19

Bump