What do you think of a minimalistic workout like pic related?
Only 15 minutes a day to get the kind of body that makes girls want to put male genitalia into their mouths seems like a great deal.
>but muh definition... muh isolation... if you just added...
The point is to make it as minimalistic as possible.
I mean it seems to be better than nothing, but id rather just work out properly. If this is what gets you started though, go for it man. Do factor in the time it takes to get ready and go to the gym, unless of course you have a home gym
This will just get you spidermode.
I'd rather do trap bar deadlifts in place of squats. Get a little bit of trap work that's missing from l-sit pullups.
I have a home gym. By which I mean I have a barbell, a bench and a pullup bar (the kind you can set on a door frame).
So it's really just 15 minutes a day for me, which is great, considering how lazy I am.
I've started 3 months ago and I'm already seeing definite gains.
Yeah, I was uncertain between squats and deadlifts. I chose squats because they develop legs much more, don't they?
You will see beginner gains and plateau after that. Not enough volume, it literally won’t work.
It will work. If you add 200lbs to your bench, progress to doing more than 5 chinups with a couple plates, and squat several hundred lbs, you will grow.
>I chose squats because they develop legs much more, don't they?
Compared to conventional deads, yes. Trap bar let's you use more quad so it's a more balanced than conventional. It's just a personal preference though. Squats are great too.
>I chose squats because they develop legs much more, don't they?
Yes. Deadlifts are mostly for your back. You already have chin-ups for that. You do have a glaring problem though. You can't really contract your lats if your abs are engaged.
10 sets per week is plenty of volume for an intermediate, Mike.
I wish I had the space for a home gym
>Not enough volume
This confuses me, because from what I've read, the optimal volume range is 60-120 reps per week for the big muscle groups, and it's suggested to stay in the lower end of that spectrum and using higher weights.
With this workout I'd get:
>benchpress: 80 reps per week
>pullups: 60-80 reps per week
>squats: 50 reps per week
Only the squats are a bit lacking. I might lower the weight and do 5x7 instead of 5x5, that'd be more than enough.
Thanks mate. I'm consistently adding weight, so it's working.
>You can't really contract your lats if your abs are engaged.
??
I manage to do L shaped pullups just fine. I couldn't do them if I couldn't contract my lats, right?
You probably do. I have a foldable bench, a short barbell (5 feet) and a removable pullup bar. Doesn't even occupy a couple square meters.
Minimalism means that you don't need a lot of machines. Barbell and pullup bar and you're set. (Even dumbbells instead of the barbell might be just fine, and they require even less space.)
You are oversimplifying thing and ignoring some common sense as well.
Not all volume is created equal, not every set is the same, nor is every rep. There are all sorts of different people who talk about ideal rep range, ideal set range, ideal time under tension, and many other factors. Further there is not good evidence to suggest stating in the lower rep range with more weight is better.
But this is only one small problem with your routine, what about your shoulders and arms? I get they are compound movements but it won’t be enough. Most people squatting are either quad or hamstring dominant, so one will get some development but the other will be underworked. Pull-ups do not significantly engage all the muscles in the back, so your back would be disproportional. Even if we assume a best case scenario where you do slow and heavy reps with very clean form (which 95% of people aren't doing), you will only see significant development in your chest/part of your back/and part of your legs.
There are many more issues, but you are falling into a trap of trying to reinvent and build a optimal efficient routine, many people have tried similar things to what you are doing before, and it never works, and ultimate you will be wasting a lot more time in the long run.
ITT: autistic Any Forums faggots SEETHING because OP has broken the code and condensed all of Any Forums's expertise into one fucking picture.
You really don't need more than that pic, they could delete the board after this.
Minimalist workouts are best once you built a base. If you put in 2 good years of hard work then focus on a few sets a day you will be better off than if you started off doing minimalist work.
>it won’t be enough
Dude, like it says in the pic, this is for people who don't care about bodybuilding and autistically developing every little muscle to perfection. It's for people who want to get in shape and look athletic and fit without investing too much time, effort and equipment into it. You're waaay overcomplicating it with all this talk about quality of volume and time under tension, etc. The accessory muscles (shoulders, forearms) will develop a bit thanks to the compound movements, and THAT IS ENOUGH FOR ME. Not for you, clearly, you need a different workout, but for me it is, in fact, enough.
>you'll plateau
Again, fine with me. If I plateau after reaching the modes listed at the end of the pic, I'm perfectly fine with it. Otter or Fight Club mode would be enough for me.
I don't think you get what a minimalistic workout is SUPPOSED to do. This is for people who can't be fucked with doing a "proper" workout because they can't or don't want to spend all the necessary time, money and effort. And it's for people who need an entry level workout to start, so they don't get overwhelmed. It's not supposed to be an exhaustive, complete workout.
You're criticizing a bike because it has only 2 wheels and saying that a car is clearly better because it has 4. They're different vehicles with different perks and purposes, it's not like one is inferior to the other.
>you will only see significant development in your chest/part of your back/and part of your legs.
95% of Any Forums would be happy with this.
>minimalistic workout
Just a fancy word for "i am a lazy and weak faggot".
If your schedule and workout plan is shorter than 60 mins per session, you are doing it wrong.
Wouldn't you lose all the isolation work you put in those first 2 years?
You would be better off switching out bench press for weighted dips and pull ups for barbell rows. Maybe have it be squats, weighted dips, barbell rows and chin ups.
>If your schedule and workout plan is shorter than 60 mins per session, you are doing it wrong.
Ridiculous gatekeeping autistic shit like this is why everybody mocks Any Forums.
That, and the constant faggotry.
Different people have different goals. The idea of wasting 60 minutes per session while I could get the results I want in just 10-15 is retarded. Wasting more time and effort doesn't make you cooler or smarter, all the opposite.
3 lifts maximum, ser.
>lazy
Smart people optimize. Stupid people waste effort.
If your goal is minimalism why not go dips/pullups/sprints?
Exactly. It's like the dude didn't look at the whole image. He's right that it's not enough to get big but OP clearly wants to be a twink.
>a twink
A powerbottom, ser.
Thank you and good day.
>it's not enough to get big
3 of the best compound lifts in existence twice a week are not enough to get big? Even if one were to eat the right amount of food with the right macros?
You can't get chiseled and defined like a bodybuilder, but you can definitely get big.