@trainedby_kashi: “2x may have a slight advantage for advanced lifters” oh you mean the lifters that only have higher end motor units left that can actually grow? The motor units that are the most fatiguing to use and atrophy the quickest while also needing 100% force output and stable exercises? Good luck recruiting those properly let alone growing those with a 45 degree row once a week for the whole back 🙏 @Keenanrmalloy @YO #kashi #gym #GymTok #fyp #viral

mpik2007 :

Let’s not forget Kashi is one of the founding fathers of sbl on TikTok

Wesley Chandler :

I remember ryan’s explanation for doing ABC days was so that you could PO every time you hit each exercise, falling back on the belief that “progressive overload drives hypertrophy”

Gio.Lifts :

Can you make an arguement for UL6x a week being better the fb 3x because of intra session fatigue

Suge887 :

What about different exercises with same joint action, what’s your take?

𝓪𝓺𝔁𝓿𝔃_ :

Curious to know, couldn’t you argue that doing the same tricep functions on each day suffice for this. For instance you could do a unilateral supinated tricep extension on A then do it bilaterally on B, etc?

pratyus313x :

Not very knowledgeable myself but wouldnot ABC even rationally be inferior?? realistically will fun excel brutal execution of movement ?

✞ nico :

I do a/p 6 time a week with the same session

Jordan :

Think Steve Reeves trained a similar way as well trying to bias multiple regions of a muscle in a single workout. But unfortunately the person who found it said “i spent a lot of money trying to find the article so im not sharing it nana nana boo boo”

zach :

might it be the case that although hypertrophy is fiber-specific, exercises are not 100% specific to the supposed region being worked such that training one function of a muscle (say shoulder adduction for the lats) would still provide stimulus for the fibers responsible for shoulder extension? if this is the case (i’m not knowledgeable enough to say whether it is), it might be worth it for someone running ULR to do 2 sets of something working shoulder adduction in order to get enough stimulus to maximize MYOPS duration for the fibers responsible for shoulder adduction while still providing enough stimulus to perhaps maintain the fibers responsible for shoulder extension (or at least get closer to maintaining them) whereas one set of shoulder adduction and one set of shoulder extension within one session would result in lackluster stimulus for both fiber groups. There’s still the argument that you should do two sets for both within that session, but then I’d see more legitimacy to the argument for there being too much intra-session fatigue if you were to apply that logic to all muscle groups in a session. I still see the logic behind FBEOD being better, this is just me spitballing about the possible reasoning behind alternating exercises in a lower frequency split

kenny :

wish i could understand the "fun" in waiting a week if not longer to do the same exercise again 😭

m :

how would the importance of frequency not stay the same for the enhanced? is it therefore not as optimal compare to ul for people blasting

zelle ฅ^._.^ฅ :

ydhdhdudu22929292 :

😳

David :

67 🤤🤤🤣✌️🔯✡️✡️✡️

Betty Enthusiast :

Kashi too tuff ❤️