>wholebody routine 3x per week >diet of %60 carb, 20% protein,

no roids, so he actually had to do stuff that works and was based in athletic performance.

>>41417159
As much as I admire Steve Reeves, but training three times a week seems to less.
I mean, you train every body part of yours one time in the week, if I would do that, I would be still a dyel, 4 times a week were I hit every muscle group directly two times a week was the best decision I made, I did 3 times a week for almost 2 years and grew very slowly and stuck at 90 kg bench for almost an entire year. So it didn't worked for me.

>>41417159
He looks small though

>>41418505
seriously?
wtf is wrong with you guys

>>41417159
What's his routine

>>41418485

Maybe I'm confused but on full body you every muscle group every time you go into the gym (3x weekly) not once

>>41418544
It is for today's bodybuilding standards, still pretty aesthetic

File: steve.jpg (118KB, 982x919px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 982x919px

>>41418557

File: steve reeves routine.png (13KB, 417x360px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 417x360px

>>41418557
from his book

slow negatives, don't pause at the top or bottom but don't use momentum either

short breaks (45 seconds between sets, 2 minutes between exercises)

didn't care too much about exercise selection but cared about order

he would save legs for last so he didn't tire himself out before his other exercises, always used this order in his workouts

delts > chest > lats > biceps&triceps > legs > core

>Compete in an era where you don't have to be inhumanly large to even get on stage, let alone win
>Have god-tier genetics, so the fact that most everyone is clueless on how shit works is actually in your favor because the competition boils down 99% to raw genetic talent anyway

Simple as that, anon. Most bodybuilders from that era look like dogshit; trying to learn from their primitive understanding of diet/training just because it happened to work out for one freak out of a thousand is stupid.

>>41418590
Ah, now I get it. But I thought it is a bad Idea to train back and legs on the same day and then even chest and arms? Everything in one day?

>>41418656
why 1x20 squats?

>>41418682
I read an old bodybuilding book that recommended the same, pre-steroid era bb'ers were all about 1x20 I guess.

>>41418682
Tbh it might just be broscience, but the conventional wisdom in the older days was that legs need higher reps to grow.
There might actually be some truth to it since they are bigger muscles and take more to fill with blood, and we know now that metabolic stress is a key driver of hypertrophy.

Arnold also swore by it. 20 reps for squats was pretty much the norm

>>41418633
>>41418656
Thanks, I'm going to try this routine 1xF with very light weight to ease into it

>>41418663
you got it backwards. in the era where everyone uses the same 5-day brosplit, it's all about genetics. Back then when there was a lot of misinformation and different ways to train, only the people that got it right actually looked good

>>41417159
Afaik Reeves did a 5x5 when he started and also did early steroids (he was m8s with the guy that developed DBol iirc).

>>41418810
Does everyone do brosplits nowadays? Am I pleb for doing ppl for 3 years?

>>41418855
only normies, and it's garbo so dont worry about it.

t. upper/lower patrish

>>41418855
I meant that pro bodybuilders these days all use brosplits. No h8 on ppl

>>41418899

Brosplits are for bodybuilders. The reason a brosplit is the way to go as BB, is that it lets you work every single muscle in a muscle group from multiple angles. Thats why BB look better than SS/PPL functional strength fatties.

>>41417159

G
E
N
E
T
I
C
S

>>41418633
30 lbs of muscle in 4 months isn't possible though....this all seems impossible what am i missing??

>>41419018
>S T E R O I D S
>S
>T
>E
>R
>O
>I
>D
>S

>>41419034
ok yeah thats what i thought some dipshit in the first post said no roids idk why i believed that

File: -when-someone-think-they-have-an-argument-but-its-not-2777133.png (54KB, 500x534px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 500x534px

>>41417178
>no roids

>>41419209
fucking retard

>>41418668
It's pretty good but focus on compounds and have some isolations as assistance.

File: 0e9.jpg (24KB, 499x499px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 499x499px

>>41419305
Ikr? to think that this drug addict was natty you gotta be brain dead.

>>41419209
>>41419323
Dumb fuck steroids didn't exist at that time.

>>41419332
when steve was say........24, it would have been 1950, roids definitely existed then m8.

>>41419332
He was 26 y/o when dbol was FDA approved. Test was used for a decade leading up to that. I doubt he was natty.

File: 1484373328909.jpg (59KB, 604x402px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 604x402px

>>41419332
> So began an era of increasingly sophisticated hormonal treatments that led to the synthesis in 1935 of testosterone, the primary male hormone produced by the testicles. Since then, Testosterone and its primary derivatives, the anabolic-androgenic steroids, have led a curious double life. Since the 1940s countless eliteathletes and bodybuilders have taken these drugs to increase muscle mass and to intensify training regimens.

>Steve Reeves became mr america in 1947
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7817189

You're welcome, nigger.

>>41418505
first of all, you're autistic

second of all, what's your definition of "big?"

thirdly, if this is "small" then that's what I want to be