Geschatte leestijd: 5 minutenWhat are the differences between a split training and a full body schema? The different training methods are highlighted, and the main advantages and disadvantages of these two training methods are mentioned.
What is a split training?
The principle of split training is that you train one or several muscle groups per session. You divide your workouts into different parts. For example, there are athletes who divide their workouts by targeting chest and triceps exercises in one session, doing only shoulder and leg exercises in the next session, and then focusing on biceps and back exercises in the following session. Another commonly seen split is chest with biceps, legs separately, back and triceps together, and shoulders separately.
Athletes divide their muscle groups into various combinations, often depending on personal preferences and goals.
What is a full body training?
A full body training is exactly what it says; a workout for the whole body. During a full body training, you train your entire body in one session. This can be done through various exercises targeting specific muscles or through a few exercises that engage many muscle groups at once.
The difference: the theory
Which one is more suitable for you depends on your goals, but especially on the time you have available for training. Moreover, factors such as fitness level and gender can also play a role.
Key variables in assessing the usefulness of a split schedule versus full body are intensity and training frequency. You can load specific muscle groups much more when you only work on one or two muscle groups per session with a split training schedule. This is briefly and clearly highlighted below.
Intensity
As mentioned earlier, one advantage of a split schedule is that you can load one or two muscle groups more intensively per session because you have more time to let them recover.
The specific training of certain muscle groups is therefore an advantage of the split schedule. You have all the time and energy to give your specific muscle groups relatively more attention. With a Full Body training, you have to divide your energy and strength.
With a split schedule, it is possible to target specific muscle groups more intensively. A full body schedule is not specific because you want to train the whole body in one session and thus you have to divide your attention and energy.
Training frequency
To make your muscles respond to a workout, they need the right amount of rest. The necessary rest depends on factors such as the intensity of the training. However, you want to ensure a stimulus again when there has been enough rest because otherwise the effects of overcompensation (supercompensation, the muscles becoming stronger than before for protection) may have disappeared before you can build on it. Depending on your training intensity, this may mean that you need to train a muscle group twice a week.
If you work with a split schedule and need to train each muscle group twice a week, you have to train almost every day. Many people therefore choose only certain muscle groups that need extra attention to train twice a week. Even then, you are still in the gym for four to seven days. If you don’t have time for that, you could do two full body workouts twice a week and thus train all muscle groups twice a week. However, you often do only one exercise per muscle group with your split schedule, while you often do three or four exercises per muscle group with your split schedule.
Anabolic hormones
Strength training causes your body to release more anabolic hormones such as testosterone and growth hormone. These hormones play a role in muscle growth by instructing the body to create more protein and thereby build muscle mass. Training larger muscles releases more hormones, which you then benefit from in training smaller muscles. At least that’s what seems to be the case in studies comparing training only the arm with training the arm and leg [1,2]. This was examined in both sequences in two diverse studies.
One of these studies would show that the arm became stronger when the leg was trained first [1]. Both testosterone and strength increased more in the group that trained the leg first. However, the men divided into the groups were not compared in strength first. The group that trained both leg and arm in one session was found to have weaker arms beforehand, allowing for more growth potential.
In the other study, this problem was avoided by not comparing different men among themselves, but the different arms of the same individuals [2]. By the way, in that study, the arm
was trained first and then the leg instead of the other way around. The group that trained both leg and arm did indeed produce more hormones in the fifteen weeks of the study. However, this did not lead to more muscle growth or strength.
The studies
The studies on the differences between full body and a split schedule show different results. Some show no difference [3], others show an advantage for a split schedule [4]. These differences are logical because what are you comparing? Four days split with two days full body, or 1 day full body with three days split? And how many exercises, sets, and reps are done and compared per session? There are so many possibilities that a simple answer is not possible.
There are studies showing that it is better to train three times a week than to do the same amount on one day, which would preach for a split schedule [5].
Researchers at McMaster University in Canada suggest that it is not so much growth hormone and testosterone that are responsible for muscle growth, but mainly the net protein balance (more protein is created in the muscle than broken down) that is achieved through training [6]. By causing this net balance more often, so by training more frequently, you would ensure more muscle growth. This could be seen as an argument for a split schedule.
Full body vs. Split
However, the studies do not show a clear picture. So you could look at practice, but that is not always clear either. We have already discussed on this site the contrast between Arnold Schwarzenegger who went for a “classic split” (two muscle groups per session) and Mike Mentzer who did at least three muscle groups per session, including one major muscle group like legs or back. So it seems like the full body vs split discussion and both achieved great results. Mike did not train all muscle groups on one day, but still had to train all muscle groups less frequently than Arnold because he needed more rest.
Often full body will be recommended out of necessity. When someone can only train once or twice a week and otherwise cannot cover all muscle groups with a split schedule for example. Ultimately, it is primarily a personal consideration and preference.
Advantages of a split training schedule
- Commonly used training schedule to achieve specific results
- More intense load per muscle
- More attention to a muscle group
- More frequent training
Advantages of a full body training schedule
- Easier way to train a muscle group more frequently
- Less frequent training
- More hormone production (effect unclear)
References
- Hensen, et al. The effect of short-term strength training on human skeletal muscle: the importance of physiologically elevated hormone levels. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports. 2001;1: 347–354.
- West, et al. Elevations in ostensibly anabolic hormones with resistance exercise enhance neither training-induced muscle hypertrophy nor strength of the elbow flexors. Journal of Applied Physiology. 2010;108(1):60-67.
- Calder AW, Chilibeck PD, Webber CE, Sale DG. Comparison of whole and split weight training routines in young women. Can J Appl Physiol. 1994 Jun;19(2):185-99. PubMed PMID: 8081322.
- Schoenfeld BJ, Ratamess NA, Peterson MD, Contreras B, Tiryaki-Sonmez G.Influence of Resistance Training Frequency on Muscular Adaptations in
Well-Trained Men. J Strength Cond Res. 2015 Apr 30. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 25932981. - J.McLester. Comparison of 1 Day and 3 Days Per Week of Equal-Volume Resistance Training in Experienced Subjects. The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research (Impact Factor: 1.86). 07/2000; 14(3). DOI: 10.1097/00005768-199905001-00443
- West DW, Phillips SM. Anabolic processes in human skeletal muscle: restoring the identities of growth hormone and testosterone. Phys Sportsmed. 2010 Oct;38(3):97-104. doi: 10.3810/psm.2010.10.1814. Review. PubMed PMID: 20959702
Other sources
- Kloosterboer: Elementary training theory and training methods.
- Fisher, J., Steele, J., Bruce-Low, S., & Smith, D. (2011). Evidence-based Resistance Training Recommendations. Med Sport 15(3): 147-162.
- Kraemer, W. J., & Ratamess, N. A. (2004). Fundamentals of resistance training: Progression and exercise prescription. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 36(4), 674-688.
