“Bodybuilding Workout Programs”: Do you really need software with them?

“Your bodybuilding workout program should be so simple that you could record it on a friggin’ napkin. Not that you’d want to – but it should be THAT simple.”

Okay… so nearly every bodybuilding “expert” on the Internet is trying to “up the value” of his product by selling you software that helps you “track your bodybuilding progress.”  Why not (from their standpoint); it’s a simple digital “product” made of ones and zeros that can be added to an e-book that typically has oversized font and huge margins (also made of ones and zeros). It’s a no-brainer in terms of perceived customer value at nearly no cost to the merchant. And the bodybuilding neophyte thinks he or she is getting something super scientific.

In order to build muscle naturally, your 'bodybuilding workout program' needs to be comprehensive in application while being simple and easy to track for progress.

But do you really need “bodybuilding software.” Are you going to take your laptop to the gym? Do you have time to hit your desktop with information to input after you’re out of the gym? Do you think you need to plug in some esoteric formulas like business numbers on a spreadsheet and see your bodybuilding progress pop up like it’s the bottom line on a financial statement?

Give me a break; bodybuilding workout programs should not be complicated. They should be simple without being simplistic. They should allow you to see powerful forward momentum while you’re still at the gym – without having to go in front of a computer screen. This is what provides you with ongoing bodybuilding motivation; seeing short term progress while knowing how these workout-by-workout augmentations add up to awesome strength, power, and muscle size over the weeks and months. And it should all be simple enough to be seen right in front of you – in the ‘hard copy real world.’

One very happy user of my bodybuilding workout program shared in an email how he records his bodybuilding progress on blank sheets in the back of his checkbook. That’s efficiency and resourcefulness rolled into one. He feels comfortable doing this because the system I teach is comprehensive and highly effective while being simple to track at the same time.

Notice I said “simple to track” – not simple or simplistic in design. Let’s make the distinction. Many of the bodybuilding workout programs available on the Internet and in the pages of magazines are simply a regurgitation of the following simplistic principles:

• Work each body part once-per-week
• Eat five or six meals per day
• Keep workouts to a time of one hour or less
• Do three exercises per body part
• Do three or four sets per exercise
• Increase the workout weight whenever you can

Why do the above instructions, taken together, fail to deliver in too many cases?

It’s because they’re a ‘one-size-fits-all’ simplistic prescription. For one thing, they don’t take into account that as surely as thirty-six to forty-eight hours are often inadequate time to recuperate a torn-down muscle, one-hundred and forty-four hours frequently falls short as well.  The fact is, aside from breaking down muscle tissue in the first place, nothing is more important to a successful bodybuilding workout program than providing that muscle tissue optimal recuperation time between workouts. Yet the notion that this recuperation occurs perfectly within a rigid time window that never changes is ridiculous. The time required is different among individuals and changes within the same person depending on workout intensity, stress levels, sleep variations… etc.

So if someone’s bodybuilding workout program instructs you to take X amount of days between workouts and a rigid number of sets during each workout and then gives you tracking software to go along with it, realize the software might be a diversionary tactic. They’re possibly hoping to divert you from the inadequacies intrinsic within their inflexible methods while hoping your practice and digital recording of such methods never materializes to expose those inadequacies.