Seems like every other article or book or post here contradicts a previous one. I'm trying to make a choice between full body workouts and split routine workouts.
Right now, I'm doing two full-body workouts a week - squats, dead lifts, bench press, incline db flys, pullups, db rows, military press, abs, etc. I don't do any concentration or minor muscle work, just all-Fing-out on the big guys. I've read this in numerous books (and in the sticky at the top of this forum!) that this is the best way to train...
However, after doing a brutal session of squats, dead lifts, etc. I am usually completely whipped by the time I get into the later movements...I always put 110% into any movement and go for failure. Lots of things I've read say that the big compound movements are the ones that make you grow, not biceps curls.
Lots of people really like split workout routines. I was wondering if that's perhaps a better way to go, since you can go all out on legs or whatever and then next time hit arms/chest/etc. just as hard. But then, if you're doing 3 splits a week, isn't that risking overtraining? How much do you really rest if you're split?
I suppose the other way of looking at it is now you're only training individual muscles once a week instead of 2-3 times a week when you do full body...
I should mention I do 60 mins of low-intensity cardio (stairmaster) on my off days, except for one day of complete rest/wanking.
ARrrrrrggh...I wish there was some consensus science on this stuff...
__________________
When life sucks, make it swallow. | 
