Designing a 3-Day Strength Training Program That Fits Real Life (Full-Body Split Framework)

Frameworks with Carl Hardwick | CoachRx Podcast Network

Watch on YouTube

Listen on Spotify

If you coach (or train) long enough, you start to see the same problem over and over. People don't fail because they "need a better exercise." They fail because the plan doesn't fit their life, their schedule, their stress, or their body.

That's why I keep coming back to a 3-day per week strength training program. I've used this split for myself for about 8 to 10 years. I still do other things outside those lifting days, but three full-body sessions per week has been the most repeatable structure I've found.

Simple enough to repeat, strong enough to elicit change, flexible enough to fit in your client's real life situations.

Below are the five frameworks I use to make 3-day programming clear: context, patterns, letting the goal be the goal, daily structure, and progression.

Why a 3-day strength split works (and why I keep using it)

Three days gives me enough frequency to get strong, practice the main patterns, and build meaningful volume. At the same time, it doesn't force someone into a weekly puzzle where recovery becomes the whole job.

When coaches try to pack 5 days of lifting into 7 days of life, ordering exercises gets tricky. Recovery gets tricky. Stress adds up fast. With three sessions, I can usually keep the plan simple and still get results for a wide range of people, from beginners learning basic motor control to advanced trainees refining skill and getting stronger.

I'm also only talking about full-body resistance training here. With just three sessions to work with, it doesn't make much sense to split the week into "push day, pull day, leg day," then wait a full week to hit those patterns again. I'd rather push upper and lower frequency as high as I can across those three days, because frequency matters when time is limited.

This approach also scales cleanly. It works for the parent who can only train Monday, Wednesday, Friday. It also works for the person whose week is messy, as long as I respect what back-to-back days do to exercise selection and fatigue.

If you want a deeper coaching education track that supports this kind of thinking, I also point coaches toward the OPEX Method Mentorship. The big win is learning how to think in principles, not just templates.

Framework 1: Start with context so the program actually sticks

Before I even look at exercise selection, I start with context, because context tells me what's possible.

First, I check my own context as a coach. I want to know what intention I'm bringing to every client on my roster. That doesn't mean forcing everyone into the same goal, but it does mean I have to be clear about the common thread. Maybe my "grounding context as a coach" is helping people live the most energetic life they can. Maybe it's helping them perform at their best in their day-to-day. Either way, that context shapes what I prioritize.

Then I move to the client's context. Here's what I look at, in order, before I write a single set or rep:

1. Goals and capabilities: What do they want, and what can they realistically handle right now?

2. Movement quality and coordination: Can they control the basic patterns?

3. Schedule and session length: Do we have 20 minutes, 40 minutes, or 90 minutes?

4. Training days and spacing: Monday, Wednesday, Friday is clean. Wednesday, Thursday, Friday changes how I plan because interference gets real.

5. Equipment access: Commercial gym, garage gym, barbell only, dumbbells only, some mix.

6. Injuries and limitations: What do I need to work around, or work through?

7. Training history: Beginner, intermediate, advanced, this changes everything.

8. Life stressors: Work, relationships, kids, sleep, all of it affects recovery.

When I ignore context, the program becomes friction. That friction is what makes people quit.

A few examples make this obvious. A parent with a hard 35-minute cap needs a different structure than a 32-year-old with 90 minutes to train. Someone with a cranky shoulder might still train the push pattern, but I'll choose push variations that respect the joint and don't keep poking the bear. A client under heavy work stress can still build strength, but I have to manage volume and intensity with care.

The best program isn't the "best program on paper." It's the best program for the person doing it.

If I don't know who the program is for, I can't call it good or bad. Context decides that.

Framework 2: Train movement patterns to keep programming honest

When I sit down to design a 3-day split, I build it on patterns because patterns keep me honest.

There are a lot of ways to organize training. I've written muscle-based splits, pattern-based splits, and more. Still, patterns stay the simplest. At OPEX, we teach six foundational patterns:

• Squat

• Lunge

• Bend

• Push

• Pull

• Core

With three full-body days, I'm not trying to create a bunch of different "themes" across the week. I want coverage. That means I'm not making Day 1 all pushing, Day 2 all pulling, then Day 3 all legs. If I do that, I've created low frequency for every pattern, and I've boxed myself in.

Patterns also help me think about carryover and interference. A few rules I keep in my head:

1. If I have a heavy squat priority that day, I probably don't need a lunge the same day (and vice versa).

2. If I have a big compound lift with high bracing demands, I may not need direct core work that day.

3. If my pull or bend work is heavy and grip intensive, I don't stack a ton of extra grip work on top.

Those rules create restraint. Instead of adding exercises because I feel like I "should," I choose what fits the goal of the day and the fatigue cost of the session.

Patterns give structure, and carryover rules keep that structure from turning into chaos.

Framework 3: Let the goal be the goal (one priority per day)

This is where I see coaches get too eager. With only three days to train, it's tempting to cram everything into every session. That usually backfires.

A 3-day program needs focus. So I recommend one priority movement per day. Two can work sometimes, but one is safer.

That priority movement sets the tone for the day. It gets the best energy, the best attention, and usually the best loading. Most of the time, it's a compound, multi-joint lift.

Priority examples by pattern

Squat priorities

Back squat, front squat, safety bar squat, and for some people, goblet squat with a kettlebell.

Bend priorities

Deadlift variations (conventional, Romanian, stiff-leg, deficit, trap bar), good mornings (barbell or kettlebell), and hip thrusts.

Lunge priorities

Split squats, step-ups, reverse lunges, walking lunges, loaded with barbells, safety bars, trap bars (with an opening), dumbbells, or kettlebells.

Push priorities

Bench press variations (wide grip, close grip, multi-grip), plus shoulder press variations.

Pull priorities

Pull-up variations, rows (Pendlay, bent-over), lat pulldowns, chest-supported rows.

Core (usually not the priority)

I treat core as a pattern, but I also keep it real. Heavy compound work already uses the core hard. A solid front squat and a weak brace rarely show up together.

Pairing the priority without creating conflict

The priority lift usually goes first. It can stand alone, or I can pair it with a non-competing movement (often upper with lower).

Here are a few clean pairings I use often:

Priority (A1)Non-competing pair (A2)Why it worksBack squatLat pulldownLower plus upper, no direct conflictBench pressProne hamstring curlPush plus posterior chain accessoryTrap bar deadliftSeated dumbbell pressBend plus vertical push, different demands

The takeaway is simple: avoid conflict. If back squat is the priority, I'm not pairing it with lunges. I'm also careful pairing it with heavy bending, because I want my priority to stay the priority.

Framework 4: Choose a daily structure that's easy to run

Once I have the priority clear, structure becomes the tool that makes the day doable.

In a 3-day full-body plan, I aim for a close to 1:1 upper and lower exposure each session. Some days can lean more upper or lower, but I keep it simple unless there's a strong reason to bias the week.

I use two main options.

Option 1: Supersets across (A1/A2, B1/B2, C1/C2)

This is clean, time-efficient, and repeatable. It's six exercises total, organized into three supersets. In this setup, A1 is usually the priority.

Here's an example day where squat is the priority:

• A1: Back squat

• A2: Chest-supported row

• B1: Incline dumbbell press

• B2: Prone hamstring curl

• C1: Dumbbell split squat

• C2: Carries

I like this because it keeps training moving without turning the session into conditioning. I still rest as needed, but the upper-lower pairing helps manage fatigue and time.

Option 2: Priority lift alone, then paired work (A, then B1/B2, C1/C2, optional D1/D2)

Sometimes I want the priority to stand on its own. This makes the focus very clear. It can also change rest times, because I'm no longer alternating with another movement.

Here's an example day where push is the priority:

• A: Incline bench press (alone)

• B1: Lat pulldown

• B2: Dumbbell step-ups

• C1: GHD hip extensions

• C2: Row variation (bent-over dumbbell rows) or rear delt work

• D1: Farmer carries

• D2: Pallof press (anti-rotation)

In this structure, I don't rush the priority lift.

If the priority stands alone, rest needs to match it, often 3 to 4 minutes between sets.

Structure isn't where results come from. Structure is what makes the plan executable, week after week.

Framework 5: Progression levers that don't need to be complicated

Progression is where a lot of coaches overthink things. I try to keep it calm. First, I decide what progression means for this client, in this cycle. Then I pick a lever and run it.

Here are the progression levers I use most.

Load (intensity)

Load goes up over time. I keep reps the same, or I let reps float a bit as load climbs. For example, Week 1 might be 5 reps. Week 2 might be 4 to 5 reps, with the goal to lift heavier.

Volume

Volume can increase through sets, reps, or total work. If I pull the volume lever, I try to keep load steady. For example, 3 sets of 5 becomes 4 sets of 5 with the same weight.

Exposure

Sometimes the progression is practice. Repeating the same movement, getting smoother, and building confidence is a win. This works for most people. It's not the best choice for a strength athlete peaking for a meet.

Range of motion

Going deeper, adding a pause, or owning a longer position can be progression. If someone's squat depth improves over a cycle, that matters.

Exercise selection (usually intermediate to advanced)

A new movement creates a new challenge. One week could be back squat, then front squat, then safety bar squat, then cyclist squat. I save this lever for people who can handle frequent changes.

Tempo

Changing the speed changes the challenge. A 5-second eccentric in Week 1 can become a 2-second eccentric later. As time under tension drops, load often rises.

Rest time and density

Rest can go down to make the same work harder (more density), or rest can go up to support heavier loads. Density is simply the same work in less time.

My simple rule set for a 3-day strength block looks like this:

• Keep the priority lift stable for 4 to 6 weeks.

• Progress one variable at a time (exercise selection can be the exception, for higher-level clients).

• If recovery dips, I reduce volume before I throw out the plan.

• I don't change things after one bad day. I look for an issue that's trending, meaning it shows up two or more times.

• Progress only what the client can recover from.

How I apply this to a real 3-day program (my simple workflow)

When I want to build a 3-day split quickly, I follow a short sequence. It keeps me from drifting into random exercise selection.

1. Write the context in one line: goal plus constraints (time, equipment, injuries, schedule).

2. Pick weekly priority patterns: one priority per day, three total, matched to the client.

3. Build each day with pattern balance: keep upper and lower in every session, and avoid interference with today's priority (and tomorrow's, if days are stacked).

4. Choose a structure: supersets across, or priority alone then pairing work.

5. Choose one progression lever for the cycle: run it for 4 to 6 weeks, keep it clear, and make it easy for the client to execute.

I'm also uploading a full 4-week split built from these principles into LearnX, and it'll be usable as a template inside CoachX.

If you want the tools I use for delivery, CoachRx coaching software and a free 14-day trial is available. If you want to keep up with what I'm posting and thinking about, you can also find me on my Instagram profile.

Conclusion: Simple, repeatable, and built for the person in front of me

A good 3-day strength program isn't a copied template with fancy exercise names. It's a clear priority each day, balanced patterns across the week, a structure that fits the clock, and progression the client can recover from.

When I keep it that simple, the plan stops feeling like pressure and starts feeling like practice. Above all, I come back to three reminders: build with context, train patterns (not just muscles), and prioritize what matters most for the person I'm coaching.

Listen to Episode 33 Now

▶️ Watch on YouTube
🎧 Listen on Spotify
📖 Catch up on past episodes + blog recaps

Have questions? DM Carl on Instagram @hardwickcarl

Frameworks is part of the CoachRx Podcast Network, your hub for principled, purpose-driven coaching conversations.

For more shows, visit: coachrx.app/podcast-network

Stay ahead of the curve and provide the best for your clients with CoachRx.

Start Your 14-Day Free Trial!