lifting is not nearly as complex and multifaceted as enthusiasts think. among those who have a good idea what they're talking about, there is one theory and one theory alone. this theory changes names over time it seems (has been called supercompensation or fatigue/fitness), but it has not really been expounded upon much over the last few decades because there's nothing new. advances in record setting over the last several decades has been almost exclusively a genetic selection, equipment alteration, and drugging.

a couple years ago i got into lifting and studying it and i loved it and set out to be the best i could be and coach others. i read everything at tnation, everything at defrancos site, charliefrancis.com, ruggedmag.com, bodyrecomposition.com, totalelite.com, (the last four being among the best sources) and a few other sites. the more i learned about the subject the more i realized how simple it really is (theoretically, not necessarily easy to do)

hard work + consistency + time = results. i'll add to that balance and injury prevention/rehab, and there you have it. you can achieve what you want with any realistic split, any realistic exercises, and realistic balances of intensity volume and frequency.

you can do nothing but deadlifts and bench press, or nothing but isolation lifts, you can do high reps or low reps, you can do just one lift a day or ten a day. doesnt really matter as long as you work hard, are consistent, and give it time

fwiw, wes said something about having to recover from lifting, and he thinks this is a short term thing (like most other enthusiasts). this is not true because lifting results are a long term thing (for non-beginners). for fifty years, olympic coaches/athletes have been doing basically the same long term fitness/fatigue and peaking cycling. this can involve long periods of time of high intensity and long periods of time of lower intensity. just like with poker, it's the averages over the long term that provide the results.