# Why all top BB use a low frequency routine?



## AgoSte (Apr 14, 2015)

Serious question... We're all here talking about higher frequency routine are better for building muscles and actually there are studies to prove it in some way.

Then, eveytime I look at s video of someone famous training, I see him doing the classic Bro-Split...

Be it Buendia, Sadik, Steve Cook or pro BB like Phil, Kai... Everyone, everyone is doing the classic body part split..

I don't understand why, seriously, is there someone with a valid explanation?

I mean... They can't be all stupid right?


----------



## Prince Adam (Mar 17, 2012)

Because if they train legs more than once their quads get out of control.


----------



## swole troll (Apr 15, 2015)

with the amount of gear theyre using protein synthesis is elevated for far longer than a natural or mildly enhanced

where as a natural or someone on low dose of gear may only stimulate protein synthesis for 48hrs bringing in the need for a higher frequency to get faster results, hitting muscles 2-3 times per week will likely yield faster results than someone on a typical 'bro split' where body parts are hit once per week

some will argue that they need to hit the muscle from multiple angles but as i said above you can only stimulate so much growth, 5x5 bench at 85% may be all thats needed to stimulate maximum protein synthesis in the chest for example, there is no need for 3-4-5 extra chest exercises

for naturals and mildly enhanced

frequency > volume

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8563679

*The time course for elevated muscle protein synthesis following heavy resistance exercise.*

MacDougall JD1, Gibala MJ, Tarnopolsky MA, MacDonald JR, Interisano SA, Yarasheski KE.

*Author information*

*Abstract*

It has been shown that muscle protein synthetic rate (MPS) is elevated in humans by 50% at 4 hrs following a bout of heavy resistance training, and by 109% at 24 hrs following training. This study further examined the time course for elevated muscle protein synthesis by examining its rate at 36 hrs following a training session. Six healthy young men performed 12 sets of 6- to 12-RM elbow flexion exercises with one arm while the opposite arm served as a control. MPS was calculated from the in vivo rate of incorporation of L-[1,2-13C2] leucine into biceps brachii of both arms using the primed constant infusion technique over 11 hrs. At an average time of 36 hrs postexercise, MPS in the exercised arm had returned to within 14% of the control arm value, the difference being nonsignificant. It is concluded that following a bout of heavy resistance training, MPS increases rapidly, is more than double at 24 hrs, and thereafter declines rapidly so that at 36 hrs it has almost returned to baseline.

PMID:

8563679

[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


----------



## AgoSte (Apr 14, 2015)

swole troll said:


> with the amount of gear theyre using protein synthesis is elevated for far longer than a natural or mildly enhanced
> 
> where as a natural or someone on low dose of gear may only stimulate protein synthesis for 48hrs bringing in the need for a higher frequency to get faster results, hitting muscles 2-3 times per week will likely yield faster results than someone on a typical 'bro split' where body parts are hit once per week
> 
> ...


the doubt I have is a bit abstract, but I'll try to explain it to you.

Let's take Buendia, he has aan FFMI of 24 and something, which is not even AT human genetic limit (25), surpassable only by blasting and cruising.

This means he oobviously takes gear, but he's not on great amounts of gear and not year around, he probably cycles as most of us do.

But, he still train with low frequency and I doubt he doesn't know what he's doing, as he's the winner of men's physique Olympia.

Why's that?


----------



## SK50 (Apr 7, 2013)

They are different beasts both genetically and chemically. No off-the-shelf studies apply here. The 'studies' in pros are in the form of the anecdotal evidence from themselves.

Low frequency blast and bomb is time tested and proven. I am sure they have all tried high frequency at some point in their training. They often say this in interviews in MD etc. They try everything then end up doing what gets the results. It's no coincidence that nearly all of them end up doing each lift/bodypart 1 - 2 x per week.


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

AgoSte said:


> the doubt I have is a bit abstract, but I'll try to explain it to you.
> 
> Let's take Buendia, he has aan FFMI of 24 and something, which is not even AT human genetic limit (25), surpassable only by blasting and cruising.
> 
> ...


Because it works. I used the bro-split for 15 years when I was natty, barely changed my routine over them years. Got me to 19st plus, natty, in decent shape.


----------



## AgoSte (Apr 14, 2015)

Dark sim said:


> Because it works. I used the bro-split for 15 years when I was natty, barely changed my routine over them years. Got me to 19st plus, natty, in decent shape.


maybe i should give this a try again... I'm getting a bit bored on high frequency doing always the same three exercises.


----------



## AgoSte (Apr 14, 2015)

SK50 said:


> They are different beasts both genetically and chemically. No off-the-shelf studies apply here. The 'studies' in pros are in the form of the anecdotal evidence from themselves.
> 
> Low frequency blast and bomb is time tested and proven. I am sure they have all tried high frequency at some point in their training. They often say this in interviews in MD etc. They try everything then end up doing what gets the results. It's no coincidence that nearly all of them end up doing each lift/bodypart 1 - 2 x per week.


yeah probably ggenetic plays a big part here...


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

We generally know about how the pros train once they are pros I.e. Once they are already very advanced. What is optimal at this stage is probably not the same as what was optimal much earlier in their development.

Regarding studies on how long MPS is elevated, I've not seen this assessed on a bro split type of routine. Does a very high volume session lead to MPS being elevated for longer than a lower volume routine, and if so, by how much?


----------



## AgoSte (Apr 14, 2015)

Ultrasonic said:


> We generally know about how the pros train once they are pros I.e. Once they are already very advanced. What is optimal at this stage is probably not the same as what was optimal much earlier in their development.
> 
> Regarding studies on how long MPS is elevated, I've not seen this assessed on a bro split type of routine. Does a very high volume session lead to MPS being elevated for longer than a lower volume routine, and if so, by how much?


You're right. We know how they train as a pro... Btw i was referring to 2014 buendia, preparing for his first Olympia win...

So they haven't made studies on high volume brosplit and MPS? Seriously?


----------



## swole troll (Apr 15, 2015)

as others have highlighted a big determining factor is the level you are at in your development

someone who has been lifting for 2 months squatting four times per month would most certainly be leaving gains on the table

where as someone who has been training for 3-4-5 years maybe they have accrued enough muscle mass that simply hitting their legs four times per month is all they can recover from as the volume needed to stimulate growth is that much higher

what i am an advocate of is if you are able to squat, bench, deadlift more then you should be doing it

as layne norton said (rough quote) "if someone had your family and was threatening to kill them unless you brought your 3 lift total up, would you really squat bench and deadlift just once per week?"

or would you hit each movement multiple times per week, greasing the grove, improving motor unit recruitment and just the opportunity to increase each lift multiple times per week as opposed to once

who doesnt want to add to their squat four times as much weight per year?

generally the stronger you get the bigger you will get and vice versa, neither one can be trained for exclusively

then there is of course the factor of enjoying what youre doing, if youre going into the gym and squatting 2-3 times per week and your heart's not in it and you just get each session 'out the way' then switch things up, if you find a bro split is what motivates you then you are likely to put in that much more effort on that approach and subsequently get better results

with regards to pro bodybuilders my point remains that protein synthesis remains elevated for FAR longer due simply to the fact they are on a lot of drugs in most circumstances if not all, they have amazing genetics for muscle building and they have so much muscle mass that it takes that much more volume to break them down therefore that much longer of a recovery time to repair the damaged muscle (protein synthesis)


----------



## Jamieson (Jul 11, 2014)

Sorry to sound like I'm raining on your parade but It is absolutely irrelevant how any pros or top level/elite Bbs train, or how any elite athlete in any sport does for that matter.

All pros/elites BBs would likely respond well to any type of volume/frequency/intensity variants, hence the reason they have made it to that level in the first place.

There are literally 10's of thousands of BBs globally, with the vast majority of 'serious' lifters using gear, but only a fraction, ie, 1% or so, will ever make it as a pro/elite level amateur.

We all have access to the same meds, supplements, food, equipment etc etc so what separates the pros from the rest? They are naturally physically suited to the sport and have the genetic propensity to fulfil all the necessary requirements, ie, they build muscle easily, have good muscle bellies, good symmetry, recovery well from training, competitive mind set etc etc - in short, , their physical attributes make them well suited to BBing.

Just like taller people tend to be better at sports where height is an advantage, like basketball or volleyball, BBs are no different, they are the best at it because they are hard wired to be so. Nature and your genetics almost inevitably map out a pathway that you will follow in terms of your hobbies, sports, even job or academic choices, as we always gravitate towards what we are good at or enjoy, but inevitably we enjoy things because we're good at them or get results.

A prime example of this Nature/Nurture issue is Boston Lloyd. If BBing was just about taking shed loads of gear as he claims, then he'd be MrO and we'd all be strolling round looking like Dorian, Arnold, Ronnie or whoever we wanted to emulate. Clearly this isn't the case. As I said earlier, people chose hobbies, jobs, sports etc that they are good at and thrive in, that's because we are programmed that way, we lean towards doing what we excel in not what we struggle at.

As to your initial point about bro splits, sure they work for those who need greater localised recovery, but this is usually because they've done so much volume they need the extra rest days to recover, but for the vast majority hitting a muscle once a week is not optimal, it can be effective, but is not optimal.


----------



## RexEverthing (Apr 4, 2014)

swole troll said:


> with the amount of gear theyre using protein synthesis is elevated for far longer than a natural or mildly enhanced
> 
> where as a natural or someone on low dose of gear may only stimulate protein synthesis for 48hrs bringing in the need for a higher frequency to get faster results, hitting muscles 2-3 times per week will likely yield faster results than someone on a typical 'bro split' where body parts are hit once per week
> 
> ...


This guy right here droppin' those knowledge bombs!


----------



## AgoSte (Apr 14, 2015)

Jamieson said:


> Sorry to sound like I'm raining on your parade but It is absolutely irrelevant how any pros or top level/elite Bbs train, or how any elite athlete in any sport does for that matter.
> 
> All pros/elites BBs would likely respond well to any type of volume/frequency/intensity variants, hence the reason they have made it to that level in the first place.
> 
> ...





swole troll said:


> as others have highlight a big determining factor is the level you are at in your development
> 
> someone who has been lifting for 2 months squatting four times per month would most certainly be leaving gains on the table
> 
> ...


prwctically it's all genetic based we can say... For the most higher frequency works better.

They just to it good on every routine


----------



## Colin (Sep 28, 2015)

AgoSte said:


> the doubt I have is a bit abstract, but I'll try to explain it to you.
> 
> Let's take Buendia, he has aan FFMI of 24 and something, which is not even AT human genetic limit (25), surpassable only by blasting and cruising.
> 
> ...


You would be very surprised by this.

I know a WBFF Pro who is in muscle Category and the amount of substances he is taking would blow your mind. Albeit not as much as IFBB Pro bodybuilding standards but going by the average cycle way way more.


----------



## RexEverthing (Apr 4, 2014)

Dark sim said:


> Because it works. I used the bro-split for 15 years when I was natty, barely changed my routine over them years. Got me to 19st plus, natty, in decent shape.


Been meaning to ask you about your natural training for ages as I seem to remember seeing you in great nick in your photos. I find it really interesting that you had so much success with a "bro-split" while natural as the consensus these days seems to be high frequency. What did your split look like?


----------



## 1manarmy (Apr 22, 2012)

Dark sim said:


> Because it works. I used the bro-split for 15 years when I was natty, barely changed my routine over them years. Got me to 19st plus, natty, in decent shape.


exactly. your body doesnt know whats coming in my opinion so if you do the same thing day in day out and increase weights and food ect over time your body is still forced to grow its just how things work.


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

RexEverthing said:


> Been meaning to ask you about your natural training for ages as I seem to remember seeing you in great nick in your photos. I find it really interesting that you had so much success with a "bro-split" while natural as the consensus these days seems to be high frequency. What did your split look like?


Chest/Bi's

Quads

Back/Tris

Shoulders/Hams

I do remember doing arm days, so guess I would of dropped them from chest & back.


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

1manarmy said:


> exactly. your body doesnt know whats coming in my opinion so if you do the same thing day in day out and increase weights and food ect over time your body is still forced to grow its just how things work.


Exactly. there was a period of about 5 years where I just maintained, as bodybuilding took a back seat. I ate same, lifted same weights during that time, surprise surprise my weight stayed the same


----------



## RexEverthing (Apr 4, 2014)

Dark sim said:


> Chest/Bi's
> 
> Quads
> 
> ...


Did you go to failure and use drop sets and the like? How many sets per muscle group?

I'm intrigued as I haven't done that split since I first started and Im tempted to give it another go for shits and giggles.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

firstly no studies are available that have been completed on Bodybuilders who use PED's so applying any study for what happens to drug using BB is irrelevant........

to think a Mens Physique competitor does not use high doses is being pretty naive at best, not all users who use high dose cycle look like a 300lb monster.....

i know many mens physique competitors and they use a lot of gear (some do)

if you train hard enough most splits will work, i train 3 days a week and grow very nicely on this system, but then when i follow the fortitude training split 3 days a week where i train the whole body each of those days i grow very well.......


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

RexEverthing said:


> Did you go to failure and use drop sets and the like? How many sets per muscle group?
> 
> I'm intrigued as I haven't done that split since I first started and Im tempted to give it another go for shits and giggles.


3-4 exercises, 3-4 sets per exercise, between 6-12 reps.

I would sometimes go to failure, or drop sets on certain things. I never wrote anything down, Just went in stuck to the basics and changed up the accessory work now and again. I was very consistent.


----------



## JNape25 (Jun 29, 2015)

Dark sim said:


> Because it works. I used the bro-split for 15 years when I was natty, barely changed my routine over them years. Got me to 19st plus, natty, in decent shape.


Are you posing in your avi or walking aggressively?


----------



## AgoSte (Apr 14, 2015)

Pscarb said:


> firstly no studies are available that have been completed on Bodybuilders who use PED's so applying any study for what happens to drug using BB is irrelevant........
> 
> to think a Mens Physique competitor does not use high doses is being pretty naive at best, not all users who use high dose cycle look like a 300lb monster.....
> 
> ...


you're right oon everything you say. I was referring to Buendia in particular, since he has 24 something FFMI.

As we knw FFMI is a good iindicator of "how much roided" someone is.

One thing for surthat can be deducted by his FFMI is that he ccycles and don't blast and cruise (in theory at least).

So I was curious to know why he does a brosplit without having elevated MPs year around.

Probably "genetic" iso the answer


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

JNape25 said:


> Are you posing in your avi or walking aggressively?


LOL, it is how I walk round the gym


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

AgoSte said:


> So they haven't made studies on high volume brosplit and MPS? Seriously?


The study Swole Troll mentioned was 12 sets for biceps actually. The other commonly cited paper is from memory rather fewer sets for legs, I'll try to remember to check when I get home. This study actually shows there is still some growth going on after 48 hours, but it's not much above baseline.

I am a fan of higher frequency training, but I know when you start looking for hard research evidence it is definitely better it is less clear cut than it could be.

The major limitation for most here of course is that all study data is without PEDs.


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

> You would be very surprised by this.
> 
> I know a WBFF Pro who is in muscle Category and the amount of substances he is taking would blow your mind. Albeit not as much as IFBB Pro bodybuilding standards but going by the average cycle way way more.


Out of interest, what did the cycle look like?


----------



## Quinn92 (Jul 25, 2010)

They don't all do that, Juan Morrel likes to lift 2 x a day


----------



## AgoSte (Apr 14, 2015)

Chelsea said:


> Out of interest, what did the cycle look like?


exactly


----------



## Colin (Sep 28, 2015)

Chelsea said:


> Out of interest, what did the cycle look like?


He won is Pro card in 2012 but hasn't competed since.

However during his cutting diet:

Trenbolone acetate 175mg 3 x per day.

Sustanon 250mg ED.

Winstrol 100mg-150mg per day.

GH 10iu per day.

3 50mcg Tablets of T3/T4 Before his cheat meal which was 2-4 times a week up until the latter stages of the show.

Insulin Morning / PWO not on diet but on his off season. This i do not know quantities on.

He stepped on stage at 89kg 5 foot 11 3-4 % Bodyfat.


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

> He won is Pro card in 2012 but hasn't competed since.
> 
> However during his cutting diet:
> 
> ...


Tren Ace 175mg 3 times per day????? You mean per week right?


----------



## Colin (Sep 28, 2015)

Chelsea said:


> Tren Ace 175mg 3 times per day????? You mean per week right?


No I Mean per day.


----------



## Incredible Bulk (Sep 19, 2007)

TBH not a lot of indepth thought is needed with genetics on your side... not a single fck is given to studies or pubmed entries...

If you are dealt a bum hand, you need science/hormone support and a lot of focus on the diet to get anything out of your training.

Those with the good genetics just train and grow... i've seen beasts in the gym train like retards but still it works for them as the genetic buffer allows them to get away with murder.

Some guys have every article poured over, his macros nailed, his training is a work of new age science...still looks like a noob though....


----------



## Chelsea (Sep 19, 2009)

> No I Mean per day.


Christ above!!



> TBH not a lot of indepth thought is needed with genetics on your side... not a single fck is given to studies or pubmed entries...
> 
> If you are dealt a bum hand, you need science/hormone support and a lot of focus on the diet to get anything out of your training.
> 
> ...


Couldn't agree more.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

AgoSte said:


> you're right oon everything you say. I was referring to Buendia in particular, since he has 24 something FFMI.
> 
> As we knw FFMI is a good iindicator of "how much roided" someone is.
> 
> ...


you are assuming a lot in this post, do you know this guy personally?

either way you are not him so it is all irrelevant really....


----------



## AgoSte (Apr 14, 2015)

Colin said:


> He won is Pro card in 2012 but hasn't competed since.
> 
> However during his cutting diet:
> 
> ...


he's actually really bigger than Olympia men physiques... That's a shitload of drugs anyway... I mean, the tren... Ahahah


----------



## JNape25 (Jun 29, 2015)

Dark sim said:


> LOL, it is how I walk round the gym


Same here, just without the shorts. And the muscles.


----------



## AgoSte (Apr 14, 2015)

Incredible Bulk said:


> TBH not a lot of indepth thought is needed with genetics on your side... not a single fck is given to studies or pubmed entries...
> 
> If you are dealt a bum hand, you need science/hormone support and a lot of focus on the diet to get anything out of your training.
> 
> ...


dealt a bum hhand? What does that mean? Sorry I'm not english...

AAlso get away with murder...

AnywayAnyway yes if genetic is on your side, you can do it "easIiy"... But IMO this doesn't exclude that you can do better in one way than another...


----------



## andyboro (Oct 1, 2006)

Dark sim said:


> *I was very consistent.*


To sound a little like the sensible old man here... isn't that whats important?


----------



## Incredible Bulk (Sep 19, 2007)

AgoSte said:


> dealt a bum hhand? What does that mean? Sorry I'm not english...
> 
> AAlso get away with murder...
> 
> AnywayAnyway yes if genetic is on your side, you can do it "easIiy"... But IMO this doesn't exclude that you can do better in one way than another...


They have bad genetics = bum hand

can train and eat how they like and still grow = get away with murder


----------



## AgoSte (Apr 14, 2015)

Incredible Bulk said:


> They have bad genetics = bum hand
> 
> can train and eat how they like and still grow = get away with murder


i just realized... Is that you in your avi? In that case we can say you can get away with murder lol...

Anyway I would like to return to brosplit because I like it, but at the same time I know it's probably less effective (although I can't say on me since it worked well, but it was the period of beginner gains probably, first 3/4 months...) And i' m fighting inside...


----------



## Colin (Sep 28, 2015)

AgoSte said:


> he's actually really bigger than Olympia men physiques... That's a shitload of drugs anyway... I mean, the tren... Ahahah


The tren i couldn't believe but there you go.

You'll find a lot of WBFF Pros are bigger than their IFBB Counterparts.


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

andyboro said:


> To sound a little like the sensible old man here... isn't that whats important?


I think so


----------



## Incredible Bulk (Sep 19, 2007)

AgoSte said:


> i just realized... Is that you in your avi? In that case we can say you can get away with murder lol...
> 
> Anyway I would like to return to brosplit because I like it, but at the same time I know it's probably less effective (although I can't say on me since it worked well, but it was the period of beginner gains probably, first 3/4 months...) And i' m fighting inside...


it is me 

I have always trained low volume for upper body, 3 sets of 5-6 reps for most exercises, 4-5 exercises tops.

Only on lighter days do i reach 10 reps just to break it up now and again.

My legs respond to high volume so 15-20 reps standard.


----------



## AgoSte (Apr 14, 2015)

Incredible Bulk said:


> it is me
> 
> I have always trained low volume for upper body, 3 sets of 5-6 reps for most exercises, 4-5 exercises tops.
> 
> ...


you seem to have a great pphysique... Frequency?


----------



## Incredible Bulk (Sep 19, 2007)

AgoSte said:


> you seem to have a great pphysique... Frequency?


i train 5 times a week, chest and back normally being hit twice a week as they need to come up more

thank you for the kind words


----------



## AgoSte (Apr 14, 2015)

Incredible Bulk said:


> i train 5 times a week, chest and back normally being hit twice a week as they need to come up more


mmm that's interesting... That's wat I need... Would you mind to explain me how yyour routine looks?


----------



## Incredible Bulk (Sep 19, 2007)

AgoSte said:


> mmm that's interesting... That's wat I need... Would you mind to explain me how yyour routine looks?


look in my journal


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

WOW @Incredible Bulk is that you


----------



## Incredible Bulk (Sep 19, 2007)

Pscarb said:


> WOW @Incredible Bulk is that you


that was the BEEF mag shoot in July. Hopefully covered in Octobers edition


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

it was a good shoot buddy......


----------



## Incredible Bulk (Sep 19, 2007)

Pscarb said:


> it was a good shoot buddy......


thanks Paul  i hope to get as many covers as you one day haha!!


----------



## TITO (Nov 11, 2008)

Dark sim said:


> I think so


How has your training changed now your not natty DS?

When are you gonna start coaching lol


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

TITO said:


> How has your training changed now your not natty DS?
> 
> When are you gonna start coaching lol


My training changes every 6 weeks now, one of the benefits of having a coach. I still have a standard 5 day split (bro-split). There are more training techniques utilised now, than I used to - drop sets, giant sets, tut, forced reps

I do a little bit, but I am time restricted.


----------



## Fluke82 (Sep 10, 2015)

Dark sim said:


> My training changes every 6 weeks now, one of the benefits of having a coach. I still have a standard 5 day split (bro-split). There are more training techniques utilised now, than I used to - *drop sets, giant sets, tut, forced reps*
> 
> I do a little bit, but I am time restricted.


Is there really any major benefit to these?

It is progressive overload = gains. Why not just focus on getting stronger (which is the simplest form of PO)?


----------



## Dark sim (May 18, 2013)

Drogon said:


> Is there really any major benefit to these?
> 
> It is progressive overload = gains. Why not just focus on getting stronger (which is the simplest form of PO)?


I hear what you are saying. I do try to increase weight through certain phases, on certain exercises, but when is enough enough? I lift more than a lot of pro's, not all. I try and lift outside my comfort zone, but not always, as I don't always have someone to spot me and the body cannot take the constant pursuit of pb's. It would also be silly imo to ignore other training methods and just utilising PO.

I try to be a smart bodybuilder and stay injury free, which is a must for progression. I partially tore my quad 15 months ago, chasing numbers, so it is not always the best method.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

If over time you use more weight or do more reps on drop sets then this is still a form of progressive overload. Muscle growth is also not just about adding contractile muscle fibre components but also other changes that allow more total work to be done and things like drop sets are aimed at stimulating the latter.


----------



## Vasea (Mar 8, 2011)

deleted


----------



## The-Real-Deal (Dec 5, 2014)

In simple terms, you grow when your NOT at the gym. If your putting the muscle down 4x per week it ain't going t grow, If you keep picking a scab it will not heal!

At the end of the day training a muscle 2x per week with the correct form and intensity thus allowing sufficient time for recovery,repair, and growth, this is optimum IMO.

It is this simple. There is no need to try and reinvent the wheel.


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

In studies on naturals, both beginners and trained, higher frequency full-body shows better results than a split.... however, the actual real world difference is small, and is not uniform to every participant tested. For some individuals it appears that the bro split works better.

I do think the claim that the extended period of elevated anabolism/reduced catabolism from AAS use is one reason why most pro's use split routines and do well is valid, but there's also another possible factor in that when at extreme levels of muscularity and right at the edge of an individuals potential it may become more necessary to reply upon severely exhausting training methods than it is when at lesser muscle mass with gainz potential still very much unfulfilled, and the need for more things like negatives, dropsets, forced reps and super high per session volume would necessitate fewer body parts per session and longer times between sessions. I'm not aware of any study data to support that idea directly, but I do believe there is evidence to suggest it might be true.

So basically a few points overall - firstly, higher frequency probably better for most but not necessarily everyone, and possibly varying from one to the other over time might be even better than always sticking to one frequency only and forever; and secondly what works for most people who haven't reached their limits might not at all work best for someone who has, so don't assume because a pro does it it's automatically best for you.

Main point though has to be to experiment, giving each way of training a proper and equal chance, and then working mainly with what seems to work best for you as an individual... and then not to go around telling everyone else that only the way that works for you can possibly work for everyone else.


----------

