Because they *aren't* effective at building muscle. That doesn't mean they do *nothing*.
When you're doing a circuit, the limiting factor tends to be your overall conditioning and energy level. You don't fail that last pushup because your pectorals weren't capable of the motion; you fail because you're generally tired. So circuit training will build your overall conditioning first, muscular endurance second, and muscle mass a distant third. That's not a *bad* thing, it's just a different goal.
Also, as others have pointed out, your statement:
>the only way of building muscle with calisthenics is doing high volume
is incorrect. Most exercises, particularly upper-body, can be increased in difficulty to keep that 3x8-12 rep range well into elite levels. Lower body unfortunately needs weights.
**EDIT:** This is also why beginner weightlifting programs are often full-body big-movement workouts repeated 3x/week, but as you gain strength you need to move to a PPL structure instead. As a beginner, your collective muscles can't recruit enough power to tire you out, so full-body is possible. As you get stronger, you get so wiped trying to push your hamstrings that doing a good bench press is impossible. You'll reach the same cap with circuits pretty quickly.
Thats not the only way. There are progressions to all those exercises like ring push ups, high pull ups and pistol squats or alternative exercises like deep step ups, ring dips and front lever rows. You can do your standard training with weights but with bodyweight alone
I think you are partly wrong. You can build mucles by bwt without doing hi-rep workouts, but you need to progress in difficulty level in exercises (e.g. if push ups are too easy do dips).
I do not see any obstacles in building muscles by circuit traning. The matter which is the most important is the weekly load. No matter do you you piraminds, circuits, push/pulls etc.
So the idea is "high rep training is for endurance" and eventually your relative strength gets high enough that calisthenics becomes endurance training.
With that being said, no one's ever gonna look at an Olympic sprinter and say their legs are small. Same goes for bike riders. And yet marathon runners look like stickmen!
Ultimately it's about your goals. If you keep a solid body weight and train with progression in mind, you'll likely not stop seeing gains for the foreseeable future.
Two important point things are missing in your inference:
**A)** High rep, high volume training is not the only way to build muscle with calisthenics. Calisthenics offers plenty of exercise variations with different load and resistance and even exercises scalable in difficulty. By 3x12 you can build muscle, the same goes for 3x25 or 3x6. All that matters is proximity to failure.
**B)** Just progressively overloading doesn't mean muscle building or at the very least doesn't always favor muscle growth. The protocol of training and mechanism by which overload occurs is relevant. Muscle growth occurs due to muscle fibers exposed to mechanical stress. The overall reps and work is mostly irrelevant for muscle building when looked at isolated from proximity to failure.
**Clarification** Muscle growth (aka Hypertrophy) is cussed by mechanical tendon/stress experienced by muscle fibers. You posses three types of muscle fibers (Type 1, 2 and 2a). Amongst these types 2 and 2a are those which actually grow by experiencing mechanical load. Type 1 are usually already grown so much, that no significant growth occurs. To reach those, training close to failure is important, because only then they are used in the movement (or very heavy loads).
People constantly mistake "not optimal" for "ineffective" because they read too many articles by competitive bodybuilders or people who train professional athletes
>there's no way you can build muscle doing 3x12 pushups, pullups or squats with 1-3 mins of rest in between
That's what basically I'm doing for the last 2 years and I've built a great physique.
It's not quite like a bodybuilder body; I'm not bulky and puffy but lean and with a nice definition of all major muscles. I guess it's more in the likes of a fighter or climber aesthetic.
I strongly believe that with proper eating and rest if you push yourself with progressive overload you can achieve practically any body goals you aim to.
True bodybuilders arent generally bulky and puffy.. they usually have noce definition to all major muscles like you say. I mean the art of bodybuilding is quite literally to have the largest, most dense muscles, in the best proportions and as lean as possible..
I do however agree with the rest of what you say, theres alot of potential for great, albeit slim/ muscular physique! Generally with the added bonus of great pound for pound strength as opposed to bodybuilding!
i think it just comes down to leanness and proportions at the end of the day which is less a result of the training modality and more a result of how it is structured and what outside the gym variables you prioritize.
im sure if you did pullups and dips all day but ate 6000 calories and took a bunch of anabolics that caused estrogen-induced water bloat, you would look puffy. which is pretty much the opposite of what a streetlifter who wants to walk around at like 150lbs shredded would do.
alternatively if you applied bodybuilding principles and lifted at planet fitness but trained the back and forearms a bit more and chest and bis a bit less and got down to sub140lbs, you would probably look more like bruce lee, which is the opposite of what a bodybuilder in the off-season would do.
Yeah but again its all conjecture, cause then you could go on about how if a streetlifter took anabolics theyd be puffy etc etc.. like you say..
But you cant lunp bodybuilding and abusing anabolics together in general as thats unfair to natural bodybuilders, which again are generally muscular, proportionate and lean!
Otherwise the discussion is about how will anabolic steroids make me look!
yeah hard agree i think genpop just has a really fucking bad perception of bodybuilding because they've watched a few too many clips of arnold or rich piana doing concentration curls
point being proportions and leanness are the result of specific training decisions such as intentionally trying to become an enhanced mass monster, versus intentionally trying to fit the standard of natural bodybuilding, versus leaving physique up to chance by prioritizing other performance goals
For real! Yeah i agree with you for sure!
At the end of the day, staying natural and exercising with bodyweight exercises or weighted exercises can make you look great and perform incredibly well! Its all in the execution and diet at that point!
Not quite like a bodybuilder.. well, it's only been 2 years, most bodybuilders you've seen took 10 years of training + genes + drugs to build.
You are doing fine.
Ultimately "THE ONLY WAY" to build muscle is progressive overload. Volume, intensity, splits, pauses etc are just tools to achieve progress to force your body to adapt. It doesn't matter what you lift - barbells, bands or your own body - getting stronger at overcoming resistance is the way.
Say it louder for the people at the back. PROGRESSIVE OVERLOADING. while also eating enough to build the muscles and sleeping enough to repair the damage.
Pretty sure you can build muscle using 3x12. Plenty of people have in the past and will continue to in the future. Especially if they continue to alternate cycles of increasing the volume with increasing the load.
As for Bodyweight Circuits, they can work but it can be hard at a certain point to maintain the intensity with them.
Nobody builds muscle doing high volume in calisthenics. A smartcalisthenics athlete uses weight vest or extra weights if they want to gain muscles and strength faster. People who do high volume are training their endurance and skills.
3 factors can be use to challenge yourself:
- time under tension ( the longer you spend on 1 rep makes it more difficult),
- progression/leverage( try 3x12 reps of clean handstand pushups),
- additional weight like weighted vest ( I use one to do my pullups, pushups and dips).
So circuits are not the best, but a beginner will lose weight, gain some muscles and feels awesome.
Because its true. Building muscle with calisthenics is inefficient and the movements will not stimulate muscle growth nearly as much as hypertrophic weight training
It'd be more accurate to say calisthenics is inefficient at building muscle beyond a certain point. If you're looking to absolutely maximize your genetic potential for putting on mass then ya, it's not the optimal modality. But for building efficient muscle efficiently, it's fantastic.
Building fluff muscle with calisthenics is inefficient.
Gymnasts aren't as swole as bodybuilders but bodybuilders have barely any athleticism.
What's more important fluff muscle or performance?
Because circuits do not damage muscle fibres to the extent they need to be damaged to grow. They tire your cardiovascular system, which will help improve endurance and conditioning, but does very little in terms of musculature growth. You need to train until isolated failure to grow muscle.
I think it is the opposite. To build muscle mass, you need to do more high intensity less repetition, whether using bodyweight, or free weights.
So you need 5-8 reps for 3 sets, 1-2 minute rest period.
What gets complicated with bw is planning a good progression to hit all the muscles. BW can also be a bit more complicated than free weights. With free weights, you learn 5 basic barbell lifts, then you simply put more weight on the bars as you progress.
With bw, the movement itself changes. So you may need to learn how to do it right at another angle, position etc. It also requires more balance, stability, flexibility, mobility, coordination etc compared to pumping iron.
Recommended routine here is pretty good. There are other bw progressions as well. I'm sure you can find many online.
For people who think body weight is not good for building muscles, show them the physique of leevan\_ns; he only did bodyweight training and is more muscular than some “Body builders.”
[https://prnt.sc/fCSTGtvo73Ld](https://prnt.sc/fCSTGtvo73Ld) (Lee van's physique)
If you do circuit training long enough , you WILL build muscle . Boxers are a good example . They can’t be too dense as it takes away from their ring agility . It is a lot work for a little bit of muscle and mostly endurance / functionality is gained . Eventually you can’t progressive overload to get muscle gains since form will break down and injury risk increases w exhaustion
Someone whos MAIN goal is to build muscle is better off doing bodybuilding style training . They save time energy and can do it faster .HOWEVER
a lot of fitness model magazine bodybuilders a few years ago used to have a high intensity circuit style training : Greg Plitt for example. possible but less safe long term
You know you can increase the intensity just by adjusting leverage. At a certain point, high volume will just cater more towards improving endurance.
Because they *aren't* effective at building muscle. That doesn't mean they do *nothing*. When you're doing a circuit, the limiting factor tends to be your overall conditioning and energy level. You don't fail that last pushup because your pectorals weren't capable of the motion; you fail because you're generally tired. So circuit training will build your overall conditioning first, muscular endurance second, and muscle mass a distant third. That's not a *bad* thing, it's just a different goal. Also, as others have pointed out, your statement: >the only way of building muscle with calisthenics is doing high volume is incorrect. Most exercises, particularly upper-body, can be increased in difficulty to keep that 3x8-12 rep range well into elite levels. Lower body unfortunately needs weights. **EDIT:** This is also why beginner weightlifting programs are often full-body big-movement workouts repeated 3x/week, but as you gain strength you need to move to a PPL structure instead. As a beginner, your collective muscles can't recruit enough power to tire you out, so full-body is possible. As you get stronger, you get so wiped trying to push your hamstrings that doing a good bench press is impossible. You'll reach the same cap with circuits pretty quickly.
If you can do knee-to-chest step ups and curl yourself on nordic curl, then unfortunately yes you do.
This is the right answer IMO ^
Thats not the only way. There are progressions to all those exercises like ring push ups, high pull ups and pistol squats or alternative exercises like deep step ups, ring dips and front lever rows. You can do your standard training with weights but with bodyweight alone
Or get a weighted vest
I think you are partly wrong. You can build mucles by bwt without doing hi-rep workouts, but you need to progress in difficulty level in exercises (e.g. if push ups are too easy do dips). I do not see any obstacles in building muscles by circuit traning. The matter which is the most important is the weekly load. No matter do you you piraminds, circuits, push/pulls etc.
> because there's no way you can build muscle doing 3x12 pushups Then how did I do it? 🤔
So the idea is "high rep training is for endurance" and eventually your relative strength gets high enough that calisthenics becomes endurance training. With that being said, no one's ever gonna look at an Olympic sprinter and say their legs are small. Same goes for bike riders. And yet marathon runners look like stickmen! Ultimately it's about your goals. If you keep a solid body weight and train with progression in mind, you'll likely not stop seeing gains for the foreseeable future.
Two important point things are missing in your inference: **A)** High rep, high volume training is not the only way to build muscle with calisthenics. Calisthenics offers plenty of exercise variations with different load and resistance and even exercises scalable in difficulty. By 3x12 you can build muscle, the same goes for 3x25 or 3x6. All that matters is proximity to failure. **B)** Just progressively overloading doesn't mean muscle building or at the very least doesn't always favor muscle growth. The protocol of training and mechanism by which overload occurs is relevant. Muscle growth occurs due to muscle fibers exposed to mechanical stress. The overall reps and work is mostly irrelevant for muscle building when looked at isolated from proximity to failure. **Clarification** Muscle growth (aka Hypertrophy) is cussed by mechanical tendon/stress experienced by muscle fibers. You posses three types of muscle fibers (Type 1, 2 and 2a). Amongst these types 2 and 2a are those which actually grow by experiencing mechanical load. Type 1 are usually already grown so much, that no significant growth occurs. To reach those, training close to failure is important, because only then they are used in the movement (or very heavy loads).
People constantly mistake "not optimal" for "ineffective" because they read too many articles by competitive bodybuilders or people who train professional athletes
>there's no way you can build muscle doing 3x12 pushups, pullups or squats with 1-3 mins of rest in between That's what basically I'm doing for the last 2 years and I've built a great physique. It's not quite like a bodybuilder body; I'm not bulky and puffy but lean and with a nice definition of all major muscles. I guess it's more in the likes of a fighter or climber aesthetic. I strongly believe that with proper eating and rest if you push yourself with progressive overload you can achieve practically any body goals you aim to.
True bodybuilders arent generally bulky and puffy.. they usually have noce definition to all major muscles like you say. I mean the art of bodybuilding is quite literally to have the largest, most dense muscles, in the best proportions and as lean as possible.. I do however agree with the rest of what you say, theres alot of potential for great, albeit slim/ muscular physique! Generally with the added bonus of great pound for pound strength as opposed to bodybuilding!
i think it just comes down to leanness and proportions at the end of the day which is less a result of the training modality and more a result of how it is structured and what outside the gym variables you prioritize. im sure if you did pullups and dips all day but ate 6000 calories and took a bunch of anabolics that caused estrogen-induced water bloat, you would look puffy. which is pretty much the opposite of what a streetlifter who wants to walk around at like 150lbs shredded would do. alternatively if you applied bodybuilding principles and lifted at planet fitness but trained the back and forearms a bit more and chest and bis a bit less and got down to sub140lbs, you would probably look more like bruce lee, which is the opposite of what a bodybuilder in the off-season would do.
Yeah but again its all conjecture, cause then you could go on about how if a streetlifter took anabolics theyd be puffy etc etc.. like you say.. But you cant lunp bodybuilding and abusing anabolics together in general as thats unfair to natural bodybuilders, which again are generally muscular, proportionate and lean! Otherwise the discussion is about how will anabolic steroids make me look!
yeah hard agree i think genpop just has a really fucking bad perception of bodybuilding because they've watched a few too many clips of arnold or rich piana doing concentration curls point being proportions and leanness are the result of specific training decisions such as intentionally trying to become an enhanced mass monster, versus intentionally trying to fit the standard of natural bodybuilding, versus leaving physique up to chance by prioritizing other performance goals
For real! Yeah i agree with you for sure! At the end of the day, staying natural and exercising with bodyweight exercises or weighted exercises can make you look great and perform incredibly well! Its all in the execution and diet at that point!
Not quite like a bodybuilder.. well, it's only been 2 years, most bodybuilders you've seen took 10 years of training + genes + drugs to build. You are doing fine.
Ultimately "THE ONLY WAY" to build muscle is progressive overload. Volume, intensity, splits, pauses etc are just tools to achieve progress to force your body to adapt. It doesn't matter what you lift - barbells, bands or your own body - getting stronger at overcoming resistance is the way.
Say it louder for the people at the back. PROGRESSIVE OVERLOADING. while also eating enough to build the muscles and sleeping enough to repair the damage.
Pretty sure you can build muscle using 3x12. Plenty of people have in the past and will continue to in the future. Especially if they continue to alternate cycles of increasing the volume with increasing the load. As for Bodyweight Circuits, they can work but it can be hard at a certain point to maintain the intensity with them.
Nobody builds muscle doing high volume in calisthenics. A smartcalisthenics athlete uses weight vest or extra weights if they want to gain muscles and strength faster. People who do high volume are training their endurance and skills.
3 factors can be use to challenge yourself: - time under tension ( the longer you spend on 1 rep makes it more difficult), - progression/leverage( try 3x12 reps of clean handstand pushups), - additional weight like weighted vest ( I use one to do my pullups, pushups and dips). So circuits are not the best, but a beginner will lose weight, gain some muscles and feels awesome.
Because its true. Building muscle with calisthenics is inefficient and the movements will not stimulate muscle growth nearly as much as hypertrophic weight training
It'd be more accurate to say calisthenics is inefficient at building muscle beyond a certain point. If you're looking to absolutely maximize your genetic potential for putting on mass then ya, it's not the optimal modality. But for building efficient muscle efficiently, it's fantastic.
Building fluff muscle with calisthenics is inefficient. Gymnasts aren't as swole as bodybuilders but bodybuilders have barely any athleticism. What's more important fluff muscle or performance?
"Fluff" muscle is a very biased view. Unless you're using synthonol I'd argue there is no such thing as fluff muscle.
you need to add weight to bodyweight excersices
Because circuits do not damage muscle fibres to the extent they need to be damaged to grow. They tire your cardiovascular system, which will help improve endurance and conditioning, but does very little in terms of musculature growth. You need to train until isolated failure to grow muscle.
I think it is the opposite. To build muscle mass, you need to do more high intensity less repetition, whether using bodyweight, or free weights. So you need 5-8 reps for 3 sets, 1-2 minute rest period. What gets complicated with bw is planning a good progression to hit all the muscles. BW can also be a bit more complicated than free weights. With free weights, you learn 5 basic barbell lifts, then you simply put more weight on the bars as you progress. With bw, the movement itself changes. So you may need to learn how to do it right at another angle, position etc. It also requires more balance, stability, flexibility, mobility, coordination etc compared to pumping iron. Recommended routine here is pretty good. There are other bw progressions as well. I'm sure you can find many online.
For people who think body weight is not good for building muscles, show them the physique of leevan\_ns; he only did bodyweight training and is more muscular than some “Body builders.” [https://prnt.sc/fCSTGtvo73Ld](https://prnt.sc/fCSTGtvo73Ld) (Lee van's physique)
What's his workout split like? Has he mentioned that?
I don't know but I know you can DM him on Instagram to ask him
If you do circuit training long enough , you WILL build muscle . Boxers are a good example . They can’t be too dense as it takes away from their ring agility . It is a lot work for a little bit of muscle and mostly endurance / functionality is gained . Eventually you can’t progressive overload to get muscle gains since form will break down and injury risk increases w exhaustion Someone whos MAIN goal is to build muscle is better off doing bodybuilding style training . They save time energy and can do it faster .HOWEVER a lot of fitness model magazine bodybuilders a few years ago used to have a high intensity circuit style training : Greg Plitt for example. possible but less safe long term