Training Secrets of Old-School Bodybuilders

Some "Mass-from-the-Past" Training Ideas of Classical Bodybuilders

Arnold looking massive in his "Pumping Iron" days from the mid '70s.

     When I began training in the late ‘80s, I was enamored with “old-school” bodybuilders, particularly - as with most young men my age at the time - that of Arnold Schwarzenegger and his other cohorts in the “documentary” Pumping Iron.  The funny thing is that I thought of Arnold, and other bodybuilders from the ‘70s (and even bodybuilders from the ‘80s), as “old-school” even though it had only been a decade, or less, since the time of their heyday competing, not to mention training at Gold’s Gym in Venice, California.  And I still love old-school “classical” bodybuilding, both the bodybuilders themselves, and their assorted training methods.  It’s the reason I still write about them to this day, such as what you’re currently reading on your computer (or mobile device or whatever).

     What follows here are some of the best “secrets” of old-school bodybuilders, especially ones from the “Golden Era” or “Silver Era” of bodybuilding’s past.  Some of this - such as the principles themselves - comes from an article I wrote around 20 years ago for IronMan magazine.  But my views have changed some, and they continue to change to this day, so you will find some different ideas and thoughts here than what you would have read in that original article, or in some of the other pieces I have written along similar themes.

Principle #1—Don't go by the mirror, go by the weight on the bar.

     One of the major mistakes current bodybuilders make is to assess their progress based on the results they see in the mirror.  A lot of this has to do with the way they lift.  When you train for the pump, you often go by feel, and never make many strides toward increasing the weight that is used.

      There are a lot of problems with going by "feel" or "looks."  Often, your memory lies to you.  You think you look better than you did three months ago when, actually, there isn't any change (or you look worse).

     While bodybuilders of the past enjoyed the benefits and the feeling from getting a good pump—they often called it “chasing the pump”—they worried more about increasing their strength.  It's the reason they used methods like 5 sets of 5 (a favorite of Reg Park's), 5 sets of 5/4/3/2/1, and heavy triples or doubles.  With these techniques, the emphasis is on performance, though the looks will soon follow.

     Even when training for da pump (as Arnold liked to call it), old school ‘builders still believed in progressive resistance, and in trying your best to continue to increase weight or reps or both.

     Now, one thing must be noted here before we move on to the next principle: you should go by the mirror instead of the scale!  There are a good deal of trainees - especially your “average” person who works out - who worry about the scale instead of taking an honest assessment of their physique.  I know, for instance, way too many people who have gone on weight loss diets, and, sure, they lose weight but if they looked in the mirror and were honest with themselves, they would admit that before they were big and looked like crap, and now they’re just smaller versions of the same crap.  In other words, their physiques didn’t change any, they just got smaller.  And, of course, the scale can lie in reverse.  I’ve known many guys (this wouldn’t be typical of most female lifters) who went on weight gaining diets in order to pack on more muscle, and, once again, sure, the scale increased, but if they would have taken an honest assessment of themselves in the mirror, they would have admitted that they looked worse after the weight gain since most of it was fat and not muscle mass.  And you can’t “out-train” a bad diet.

Principle #2—Train through the soreness.

     I know this method is going to be a bit controversial, given all the emphasis in muscle magazines - and now various internet sites and news articles -  the past few decades or so on giving your muscles enough time to "recuperate" and "repair" (although I do think the pendulum is beginning to swing the other way).  Let me explain, and maybe I'll have a few converts (especially once you put the method to proper use).

     I think it's mistakenly believed that bodybuilders of the past trained so frequently (usually 3x weekly for each bodypart) because they simply didn't know any better.  But if you were to have asked the great Bill Pearl - before he left this world for the bodybuilder’s Valhalla - if he would have changed the way he used to train considering all the new "knowledge" about recovery, he would have flatly and plainly told you, "no."

     One of the reasons bodybuilders who train each bodypart once-per-week get so sore is because, well, they train everything once-per-week.  This never allows you to increase your rate of recovery, because the demands are never placed on your body to do so.  Sure, if you start training everything two, or even three, times a week you're going to be sore, but after a couple of weeks the soreness will subside.  Then, look out, because it's growth time!

Principle #3—Train long, not hard.

     A favorite quote of Arthur Jones - the de facto “inventor” of H.I.T. - goes something like this: "You can either train long, or you can train hard, but you can't do both."  And everyone seems to immediately assume that the answer is to train hard.  Not many consider that training long might be the better option.  Bodybuilders from the past, however, understood this well.  It's the reason Bill Pearl always advised taking sets about two reps short of failure.  This allows one to perform more sets.

     This training long option doesn't necessarily have to apply to the length of the workout.  It applies more to the duration spent on an exercise.  For instance, what do you believe is the better sets/reps method for the squat?  Three sets of ten reps or ten sets of three?  Three sets of ten is definitely the "hard" method, even though both schemes involve the same total workload.  And if you were to ask this question in the gyms of today, you would undoubtedly get the answer that three sets of ten is the best.  Any lifter who trains with me, however, would immediately know my answer.  Ten sets of three is the better method.  Though both involve the same workload, only the ten sets method allows for maximum force to be applied on every rep.  It also ensures that all reps are performed with perfect form, and none are taken to failure.

Principle #4—Perform only one or two exercises per bodypart.

     When Reg Park was in preparation for a bodybuilding contest, he would always perform multiple exercises-per-bodypart (sometimes as many as eight), but he didn’t train this way in the off-season.  He was adamant about using only one to two exercises-per-bodypart, as were the vast majority of other lifters from his era (and before).

     There are several benefits to the multiple sets of one exercise approach.  One, it allows you to get really strong on your core exercises: benches, squats, deadlifts, curls, overhead presses, etc.  And remember, you are worried about the weight on the bar.  Performing multiple sets on bench presses, for example, allows you to improve your synaptic facilitation on the lift, or what Russian strength coaches would call "greasing the groove."  Basically, the more you perform the exercise, the better (and, therefore, stronger) you get at it.

     Another benefit is it allows you to really focus on the body part you're training.  I can't tell you how many times when I was performing the multiple exercises method that I lost focus (and pump, strength, etc.) when, after a couple of sets on my first exercise, I moved to something else.

     Vince Gironda called one-exercise-per-bodypart training the "honest workout."  Why?  Because he knew it worked like no other.