PPL, Full Body or Bro Split: How My Training Changed With My Life

The training that helped build my physique is not the schedule I use to maintain it. That is the thread connecting my Arnold Blueprint, full-body-minus-legs and training-split posts. Combining them makes the decision clearer: choose the workload you can recover from and repeat in the life you have now.

This is my training history and the tradeoffs I learned from it. My personal decision to omit dedicated leg work from some sessions is not a recommendation that other people should skip lower-body training.

The short answer

Approach	When it suited me	What made me change
Arnold-style push/pull/legs	A period when lifting and transformation were major priorities	Time and recovery demands became harder to sustain
My modified full-body sessions	Fewer lifting days alongside family life and other activities	Repeating them daily created too much overlapping fatigue
Bro split	A challenge that encouraged frequent training days	It spread the work rather than repeating the same large session
A sustainable weekly plan	My current priorities and available time	I adjust when recovery, schedule or goals change

The Arnold Blueprint phase

During my 2023 transformation, I used Arnold Blueprint-style push/pull/legs workouts adapted to smart gyms. The sessions included varied rep ranges, including sets of 6, 12, 15 and 25 reps. I followed a demanding version for several months, then reduced some of the higher-rep work.

The structured workouts helped me show up and do the work. Digital weight changes made the changing rep schemes convenient. But the fact that a routine coincided with my transformation does not prove that its rep range uniquely caused fat loss or preserved muscle. Nutrition, consistency, recovery and the broader routine all mattered.

This phase also demanded a great deal of time. A plan can be productive during a focused period and still be the wrong permanent schedule. My mistake would have been treating the routine that built momentum as an obligation I could never revise.

Why I changed to fewer lifting days

Once the problem became maintaining training alongside running, jiu-jitsu, work and family, I wanted fewer separate lifting sessions. I assembled larger sessions around movements I liked and would actually perform.

I called one version “full body minus legs.” That label describes my personal template rather than a balanced program for everyone. Dedicated leg sessions were the work I was most likely to skip, so I was honest about what my schedule actually contained.

That honesty is useful for planning, but it does not make an omission ideal. Someone building a general strength routine should consider how all major movement patterns and muscle groups fit their goals and abilities. Do not copy a label from my diary without examining what is missing from it.

What those larger sessions looked like

I carried favorite lifts from the Arnold workouts into sessions with roughly eight or nine exercises, with variations across the week. The attraction was fewer appointments with the machine: I could train a few times per week instead of planning my life around lifting every day.

The tradeoff was that each session could be long and demanding. Combining work into fewer days does not remove the recovery cost. It moves that cost. A schedule that looks efficient on a calendar can still be hard to repeat if every session leaves you exhausted.

My later accounts described a back-heavy selection and changing priorities. Those are useful details about my own routine, not evidence that everyone should use the same exercise distribution.

The Lunar Challenge exposed the limit

When a Speediance challenge encouraged daily workouts, repeating my large full-body-style session stopped making sense. After several consecutive days, overlapping fatigue made the approach difficult to sustain.

A bro split was more useful in that particular context because it distributed work across different days instead of repeating the same large session. It did not become the universally superior split. It solved a different scheduling problem.

That distinction is the reason I merged these accounts. Separate posts made each adjustment look like a new verdict on the “best” routine. Read together, they show the same rule: the appropriate split changes when the frequency and recovery demands change.

Account for training outside the gym

Running and jiu-jitsu are part of my workload even when they do not appear in the lifting app. A calendar that counts only strength sessions misses fatigue, time and priorities from the rest of the week.

I also learned not to worship completion percentages. Completing every assigned set is not automatically better than adjusting a session that no longer fits the day. Equally, routinely skipping the same portion of a plan is evidence that the plan needs review, not something to hide behind a perfect-looking template.

How I would choose now

Start with the days you can reliably train, then decide what each session needs to accomplish. A split that requires six dependable days is a poor match for a week that usually offers three. A large full-body session also needs enough recovery before you repeat it.

Track what you actually complete, how long it takes, and how well you recover alongside other activities. Keep the structure long enough to learn from it, then adjust the part that is failing. Change the plan for a reason rather than because a different split has become fashionable.

For me, consistency means returning to a workable routine, not freezing one successful phase forever. The best split is the one that covers your needs and survives contact with your real week.

Consolidated and revised on October 14, 2026. Earlier overlapping articles now lead to this guide; historical observations are identified in the text.