I bought the Powerbuilding II 2nd Generation template a while back and was a little surprised – negatively, perhaps – that it had switched to a Lower/Upper split, vs. the original’s 4 Full Body. It also appears to have a little less overall training load. I’m curious as to the reason behind this, and also looking for some reassurance, I guess, that this plan will be equally effective.
Powerbuilding 3 gave me my best gains ever – I wrote a glowing review on it years ago. I think squatting ~3x per week and benching 4x per week was uniquely beneficial for my strength development. The new Strength and PB templates have switched to L/U splits, which gives fewer exposures to practicing the big lifts. Am I overthinking all of this?
The training load is actually higher than both PB 2 and 3. I swapped to a upper/lower split in order to fit all that training load in without the sessions getting too long. Yes, I suspect this program will work well for someone who previously responded well to the PB programs.
My thought is that frequency is a tool to distribute training volume. I can fit in more volume on an upper lower split for a given amount of time, though spreading the fatigue to more days (time be damned!) may be preferable for some. I think more training volume is generally a better first move than increasing frequency without changing training volume.
This is very much a me issue, but I have found I am far better at staying at the right proximity to failure when I’ve got a higher frequency. Years of work harder = better results thinking means even though I know better the temptation to push a set to its limit is something I have to battle against constantly. Knowing I have to squat again tomorrow rather than not having to do it again for another 3 or 4 days makes me far less likely to YOLO any of my sets.
I get that isn’t an inherent benefit of that sort of structure but Ive found it a pretty interesting aspect
I have done both the PB2 3day comp and hypertrophy II 3day. From what i can see both have the exact same exercises and volume as the 4day counterparts. My sessions typically run for about 2h when i rush it and I get pretty exhausted at the end when doing 7 exercises each time (2 gpp per session).
Would it make more sense to switch to the 4 day upper lower? I have never done a split because it looks so brutal doing dl, squat and then rdl. Does it work because you recover legs for much longer?
In periods where 4day wont work and 3day run too long, would it be sensible to shorten the gpp work by doing 2 hard sets of biceps curl instead of 5?
I have kids and the flexibility of switching days in the 3 day is very nice, but i suppose it would work similar in the ul split since you can do them back to back more easily.
Yea, I like increasing the frequency to 4-days per week in situations like this. It spreads the training load out more, generally allowing for you to be fresher for more exercises. Because the 3- and 4-day versions have the same training load, you could do the 3-day/wk version when you have to, but otherwise stick to the 4-day version.