[Snuggles]

I was told by a college professor that working muscle groups once per week won't get the job done. He told me to work out every other day doing all muscle groups. He also told me that by doing one set per muscle group you get 80% of your value, 2 sets 15% and 3 sets 5%.

Also I was told that not counting your calories is fine.

Does anyone agree with these things???

[sf9ersfan8]

i hope hes not a professor in sports or nutrition science. i doubt that everyone on AM as well as every other bodybuilding site has been doing it wrong for all these years and hes just 400 pounds of shredded muscle ready to win the next 110 years of the olympia. sorry, it just goes against everything ive learned here, and ver the course of my journey for more muscle.

[Rugger1]

Most pros and serious lifters workout each muscle group more than once a week....

[SilentBob187]

Originally Posted by Rugger1

Most pros and serious lifters workout each muscle group more than once a week....

Is that for maintenance purposes or for maximizing growth?

[OCCFan023]

shenanigans on the professor.

[OCCFan023]

Originally Posted by Rugger1

Most pros and serious lifters workout each muscle group more than once a week....

most pros also have additional recovery "tools" in their arsenals though. I think a higher frequency training protocol is certainly productive though when cycled properly.

[BodyWizard]

Originally Posted by Snuggles

I was told by a college professor that working muscle groups once per week won't get the job done.

How does he define "the job", specifically?
What determines whether it's been "done"?

Originally Posted by Snuggles

He told me to work out every other day doing all muscle groups.

That is a valid/useful approach - depending on your goals, and how you intend to achieve them, but it's not a one-size-fits-all solution.

I want to know what question he thinks he's answering.

Originally Posted by Snuggles

He also told me that by doing one set per muscle group you get 80% of your value, 2 sets 15% and 3 sets 5%

???

Sorry, maybe I'm tired or distracted or something, but this just makes no sense to me, unless he's saying the first set on a bodypart gains the most benefit (I'd want a good breakdown on how that's supposed to work, 'cause it's arguable either way IMO)

Originally Posted by Snuggles

Also I was told that not counting your calories is fine.

As with the rest of this, it depends entirely on the question, and the goals it reflects.

Originally Posted by Snuggles

Does anyone agree with these things???

Not so far.

[ozarkaBRAND]

professor sounds like a D bag..

My professors (at UT) wouldn't agree with him, nor would I.

[Resolve]

Variety is the key to lifting - preventing your body from adapting to a specific routine. Full body wo's can be one phase of doing that, but I think just about every pro out there has done a split routine at some point - it allows you to better emphasize your different muscle groups.
Also, keeping at least a vague idea of your caloric intake is really beneficial. Crap if I didn't, I'd still weigh 180, and at 6'4", that's skinny. Wanna gain muscle? Gotta eat the right amount and right macronutrient ratio.
Your Prof doesn't have the whole picture. But it's not the first time a teacher didn't know his stuff - good job for doing some research on your own.

[shaddow]

Your professor is stupid!

[Reaper329]

Originally Posted by OCCFan023

most pros also have additional recovery "tools" in their arsenals though. I think a higher frequency training protocol is certainly productive though when cycled properly.

Indeed, also many work on a plan of 1x per week for most body parts, however they adjust based on need as well as "weak points"

[Nabisco]

A rough calorie count every day is not "essential" if you're a mesomorph and sprout muscle everytime you lift. But it's key to achieving your goals if you're truly serious.

Full body workouts 3 times a week is one way to go about it. Look up the HST routine, its pretty much what he's talking about. However, there is absolutely nothing wrong with focusing on specific muscle groups each day either.

As far as each successive set providing less "bang for your buck". That doesn't make sense. So according to him, its not worth doing more than one set per muscle group? So I'm only getting a good workout if I do one set of ten reps for bench press? Or is he referring to exercises? As in you get less from your second and third exercise.

I'd find a new adviser for your lifting/nutrition goals.

[kwyckemynd00]

Originally Posted by Snuggles

I was told by a college professor....

What is he a professor of?

[Rodja]

He is probably referring to strength, not muscular hypertrophy.

[chim_chim]

I think exactly 0% of pro bodybuilders are doing full-body, 3x/week.

It's also a misnomer to say that there is a single, best routine for everybody. There are many approaches that can work, and none of them are going to be optimal if used continuously.

[LSU Gladiator]

I have had this debate before. The age old question:

What's better, single set or multi-set training?

The research doesn't really say what a bodybuilder wants to hear. Most of the initial studies were done with weight lifting novices, and those studies showed that people who followed a single set protocol improved in strength just as much as the people who followed a multi-set protocol. For a while we could just look back at those studies and say, "OF COURSE NOVICES ARE GOING TO IMPROVE! IT WON'T MATTER HOW THEY TRAIN!" Then a study was conducted with experienced weight lifters - same procedure (single vs multi set). This study, suprisingly, revealed similar results.

A couple of typical ACSM studies on the issue:

http://www.acsm-msse.org/pt/re/msse/...195629!8091!-1

http://www.acsm-msse.org/pt/re/msse/...195628!8091!-1

He also told me that by doing one set per muscle group you get 80% of your value, 2 sets 15% and 3 sets 5%.

I have al