In a 2000 study by McLester...

>In a 2000 study by McLester, they took experienced male weightlifters and put them on a workout plan made up of three workouts per week. Both groups used the same lifts, same total amount of sets, and same total amount of reps. The only difference was that one group had their lifts organized into full body workouts, whereas the other group did a classic triple split routine. After twelve weeks of lifting the full body group increased their muscle mass by 8%. The triple split group increased their muscle mass by 1%.
>bonytobeastly.com/the-tale-of-two-ectomorphs/
>(Studies linked in article)

Brosplit BTFO

I can believe that, before I tried PPL and brosplit i was doing full body and i felt stronger

High-frequency has always been more efficient in terms of strength, this is nothing new. The only argument brosplitters have is muh aesthetics which studies also has proven to be false. There's barely any difference in hypertrophy in the different rep ranges, but there are strength differences, so strength training should obviously be the choice since it leads to more overload on the muscle in the long run since you'll add more and more weight.

guess why people always recommend strength routines to establish a "base".

>experienced male weightlifters
>three workouts per week
>After twelve weeks of lifting the full body group increased their muscle mass by 8%.

gaining 0.67% mass per week
that is ~1.5 lbs per week for a 200 lbs guy

BASED researchers injecting roids to discredit a split

SS says that you can gain 3258932285963728568732568735678325635lb of solid muscle in 2 weeks

>the entire body is made out of muscles
cmon son

even tho his math is retarded an 8% increase in muscle mass in 12 weeks seems a bit steep for an "experienced lifter".

yeah the link in the article is broken so its hard to tell how they define "experienced"

If you are gonna workout for 3 days then yes brosplit is useless. The point of it is that since you use different muscles every day you can go 5-6 days non stop. Which will usually be better for hypertrophy.

Obviously 3 day split is gonna be retarded.

>Studies linked in article
Link doesn't work, and the only McLester 2000 study I find is about comparing 3 workouts in a week to just one workout in a week

>3 day a week non-fullbody workouts
Why would anyone do this ever? Of course that wouldn't work....

>After twelve weeks of lifting the full body group increased their muscle mass by 8%

Yeah I'm reciving pretty clear signals that McLester study about a completely different matter is all there is. But clearly the OP blogger was citing something.

I don't get it, am I retarded? They used the same everything, but one group did something like SS, and the other did like just pull one day, push another, and then legs?
is that analogy okay?

Something's wrong with this study.

>8% increase
>experienced lifter

The entire point of a brosplit is to be able to hit each part with higher volume

This
/thread
Who the hell only works out 3 times a week

That's what it sounds like, and if that's the case this study doesn't really say anything that isn't already really obvious.

The volume was NOT matched

Yeah.
I tried a 3 days/week squat/bench/DL split a few months back on the recommendation of the owner of the gym I go to.
It was a shit ton of volume each day but it sucked for progression so I quite and went back to Smolov jr for bench/squat.