Picking The Right Weightlifting Routine
The progression of any weight training program comes down to one central tenant, the continued and progressive improvement of one's physical performance capabilities via PROGRESSIVE OVERLOAD.
Progressive overload, in essence, is the gradual and systematic application of a more demanding stimulus throughout a training program, while still allowing for recovery. Recovery TRULY is key and will be touched on often in this article.
To achieve any form of physical advancement in regards to your fitness, training variables must be manipulated, progressed and adapted to (recovered from). Here are some examples of progressively overloading multiple variables.
1. LIfting the same weight you did last week but for more reps.
2. Lifting the same reps you did last week but with more load.
3. Lifting the same general volume/load but using less rest.
4. Lifting using a slower tempo and increasing overall time under tension independent of changes in load/volume.
5. Progressing from exercises of low skill/technical requirement to exercises of higher skill/technical demand.
There are certainly more examples than this, but these serve as a generally sound representation of the many ways one can program. More advanced lifters could also consider selecting two variables and progressing them simultaneously - but this usually requires more foresight and more in-depth programming.
With the basics now covered, a second question arises:
WHAT is the best SCHEDULE to train to OPTIMIZE ones continued progression in fitness?
There is no simple answer to this. As with any fitness program, the individual's lifestyle and needs will dictate the schedule on which they train. No matter how busy someone is, there is a training frequency and split that will work into any schedule. In my years of training, I have honed in on three splits. I very much enjoy for both myself and clients.
OPTION 1: TOTAL BODY 3 x WEEK.
I like this split for novices, busy schedules, and those looking to build strength over time as it promotes frequency over intensity (driving adherence) and allows for mastery of the foundational lifts through skill acquisition. In other words, if you want to be a good squatter you have to squat - and squat often. There is also tons of time for recovery and additional mobility or even athletic work in between training sessions. I have seen both linear and daily undulating periodization work well with this split. From what I have seen this split is better for strength than size gains, but making solid progressions with aesthetics is not out of the question at all.
MY FAVORITE ROUTINES THAT FOLLOW A THREE DAY SPLIT:
MAPS PERFORMANCE: https://products.mindpumpmedia.com/a/571/77v7aJX9
MAPS AESTHETIC: https://products.mindpumpmedia.com/a/2303/77v7aJX9
MAPS ANABOLIC: https://products.mindpumpmedia.com/a/503/77v7aJX9
OPTION 2: Upper/Lower days 4 x WEEK
This is a more straightforward approach to a body part split. U/L allows for a slight increase in volume for most trainees and allows more time to be spent with each muscle group/movement pattern to drive the desired adaptation. This type of split allows for the introduction of non-linear forms of periodization that focus on two different adaptations. Such as days that can be divided into an upper and a lower workout for both strength and two for hypertrophy.
OPTION 3: Push Pull Leg (PPL) 6x week
This is the split that allows for the greatest volume and still respects the need for frequency (as we now know the literature shows about 2x week to be optimal) this split can lend itself to many different periodization schemes as well. So two adaptations can be trained concurrently (for example: strength the first three-day wave, and hypertrophy the next three-day wave), while this example is not optimal for driving one adaptation this split does offer a great deal of versatility. However, this type of split and volume is best reserved for those looking to grow and really shines when run as a purely hypertrophy based program. Advanced lifters only!
MY FAVORITE ROUTINES THAT FOLLOW A SIX DAY SPLIT:
MAPS SPLIT: https://products.mindpumpmedia.com/a/9038/77v7aJX9
What does the science say? A recent study by Yue et al. compared two EQUATED volume programs (meaning both groups did the same amount of work) the difference between the groups was that one group trained two times per week, and one group trained four times per week. The data revealed little to no difference in measures of strength or body composition between the two and four-week group (1). Compare this to a meta-analysis from Schoenfeld, Ogborn, and Krieger published in 2016 that illustrated two times per week training to be superior to a single session per week training (2). And inference could be made after reviewing the data from both the Yue and Schoenfeld studies that one training session per week is TOO LITTLE and that four or more training sessions per week is TOO MUCH. The data suggest that two times a week is probably the optimal training stimulation for gains in both strength and hypertrophy with a three time a week frequency showing little to no added benefit.
What does this mean for you? Simple, train movements and muscle groups anywhere from two to three times a week. Yes, that’s right, your bro split – has got to go. The days of hitting the chest, back, shoulders, arms, and legs once per week are long gone. Instead, opt for one of the following protocols:
To conclude, the take-home points are as follow:
1. Aim for a 2-3 time per week training stimulus per muscle group.
2. Find a way to fit that into your schedule in a way that allows for
a. Adherence
b. Recovery
c. Enjoyment
3. Don’t be afraid to break paradigms, ditch the bro split and try something new.
Yue, F, Karsten, B, Larumbe-Zabala, Seijo, M, Naclerio, F. Comparison of two equated training weekly volume routines using different frequencies on body composition and performance in trained males. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism. 2017,ja.
Schoenfeld BJ, Ogborn D, Krieger JW. Effects of resistance training frequency on measures of muscle hypertrophy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Medicine. 2016 Nov 1;46(11):1689-97.