Anyone here who's done Arthur Jones' ideal workout?

File: arthur jones2.png (784KB, 762x649px) Image search: [Google]

784KB, 762x649px

>>42302146
The way Dorian Yates described it on the Joe Rogan podcast made it sound very impressive, but since it was created a few decades ago I don't know if it holds up well with other more modern programs.

>>42302146
bump

>2 replies
>1 poster
>25 minutes ago
Maybe this is a sign that nobody cares
Read the sticky and do SS

>>42302302
no its more likely because this board is pretty slow while its night in the US, and I didn't include any pics of skantily clad females

anyway m8 the sticker doesn't cover this, and I'm trying to move beyond the /ss/ meme. According to Dorian Yates this is what got him fucking ripped but besides him I can't find too many personal anecdotes probably because its pretty old. It sounds like a decent idea but before I dive head first into this I want to see if any /fit/fags can give me their personal experiences with it.

if you want to know more about it-
https://physicalculturestudy.com/2015/07/21/the-ideal-workout-by-arthur-jones/

>>42302489
>I'm trying to move beyond the SS meme
Jesus Christ, learn more about fitness before posting here please
I can bet you can't even formulate one cohesive thought as to why SS is "a bad routine"

>>42302501
I mean I'm not saying I'm an expert but from what I understand it leaves out some muscle groups, and doesn't isolate the muscles enough, and your muscles eventually become used to a program.

Anyway I've been on it for a couple of months and gotten decent gains compared with where I was at, but they're slowing down now so I want to move on to something more complex. Arthur Jones was apparently just this billionaire who was interested in scientifically figuring out a program that would get you fit as quickly as possible natty. I just want

>>42302658
-to know if it actually does work well or not. I mean clearly since Yates used a modified version it must'e been at least decent but i dunno if we've progressed to better programs yet or not, since I'm admittedly not an expert.

>>42302146
bump

>>42302658
>it leaves out some muscle groups
Which? Power cleans target traps. Chin ups target biceps and lats. Squats, hamstrings, quads, glutes, abs, lower back. Deadlift, almost same as squats but remove quads and add in forearms. Bench, chest, triceps. The Press (TM) triceps and delts

Which muscle group is being left out?

>and your muscles eventually become used to a program
So what? Doesn't mean that progress can't be made. As long as your linearly progress throughout SS, you can achieve gains no matter what. There's no such thing as "Getting stronger but not growing muscle". At least in a calorie surplus
>but they're slowing down now
http://startingstrength.com/article/the_first_three_questions
>to something more complex
Unless you're an intermediate with a 3 plate squat for reps, don't bother
If you are, move to Texas method or something more specialized on your goals

File: 1500781115510.gif (142KB, 1221x1007px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 1221x1007px

>>42302302
>>42302501
kys

>>42302489
>>42302658
>>42302675
kys

File: 1500624855329.jpg (1MB, 3024x2695px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3024x2695px

>>42302824
this is now a ss circlejerk threaed

>>42302861

B L U E
O
A
R
D

>>42302146
bump?

>>42302861
nice gyno you fuckin fag