For the last few months, I've been going to the gym every single day working out a specific muscle group (e.g., chest on Monday, shoulders/triceps on Tuesday, back on Wednesday, biceps on Thursday, back to chest on Friday -- I don't do many leg exercises because I like to run, because when I used to work legs, I noticed that my running started to become sluggish and clunky). Besides not providing for any days off during the week, this routine has also become somewhat time consuming since every day is a "gym day" as well as a "running day."
The other day I came across a recently-published study that demonstrated equal effectiveness/results potential between a 3-day, full body split (the same exercises were done 3 days/week for 2 sets each with each set utilizing the same amount of weight) and a traditional "bodybuilding" split. The participants in the full body split group literally performed full body workouts (e.g., three different bench presses, several back exercises, shoulder and arm exercises) on each of their 3 training days. The only muscle group they didn't train was legs. As stated above, the same exercises were performed on each of the 3 training days for 2 sets each.
I'm seriously thinking about adopting the previously-discussed workout routine, but I'm wondering if a different 3-day split would be a better choice. The other routine I'm considering is one that still involves doing full body workouts 3 days/week, but instead of doing the same exact exercises on every training day, it would be set-up as follows (just an example): 3 sets each of incline BP, rows, triceps dips, barbell curls, and shoulder presses on Monday; 3 sets each of flat BP, pulldowns, triceps pushdowns, cable biceps curls, and Arnold presses on Wednesday; and so on. I would do this routine every other day and might or might not take off both days for the weekend.
Hopefully this post isn't an example of TL;DR. But for those of you with the patience to read through it, which training routine do you guys think would yield better results?
The other day I came across a recently-published study that demonstrated equal effectiveness/results potential between a 3-day, full body split (the same exercises were done 3 days/week for 2 sets each with each set utilizing the same amount of weight) and a traditional "bodybuilding" split. The participants in the full body split group literally performed full body workouts (e.g., three different bench presses, several back exercises, shoulder and arm exercises) on each of their 3 training days. The only muscle group they didn't train was legs. As stated above, the same exercises were performed on each of the 3 training days for 2 sets each.
I'm seriously thinking about adopting the previously-discussed workout routine, but I'm wondering if a different 3-day split would be a better choice. The other routine I'm considering is one that still involves doing full body workouts 3 days/week, but instead of doing the same exact exercises on every training day, it would be set-up as follows (just an example): 3 sets each of incline BP, rows, triceps dips, barbell curls, and shoulder presses on Monday; 3 sets each of flat BP, pulldowns, triceps pushdowns, cable biceps curls, and Arnold presses on Wednesday; and so on. I would do this routine every other day and might or might not take off both days for the weekend.
Hopefully this post isn't an example of TL;DR. But for those of you with the patience to read through it, which training routine do you guys think would yield better results?