Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Captain Equipoise on December 28, 2009, 02:17:26 AM
-
I remember over the years, you saying that some exercises were pointless 'ego' exercises, ie. bench press, I think you mentioned squats or deadlifts as well.. I agree with your assessment with a lot of these, could you possibly post the complete list. I remember on your bodybuilding.com Masters series you mentioned some of these exercises...
thanks.
-
bollox... how can Bench press be a pointless excersise - it all depends how you do it - it all has its place - it just depends how you do it.
-
bollox... how can Bench press be a pointless excersise - it all depends how you do it - it all has its place - it just depends how you do it.
I'm not even arguing that point..I was just curious which ones Bob considered to be not worth doing , either do to risk of injury or not really doing much for the muscle trained..
-
I'm not even arguing that point..I was just curious which ones Bob considered to be not worth doing , either do to risk of injury or not really doing much for the muscle trained..
what you guys forget is that these guys are proffesionals, they HAVE to train differnet then we do, they cannot afford a month of due to injury.
So whats the point of him saying (for excample) I consider Benching to be too risky to the shoulders or joints - for you personaly that makes no difference what so ever.
What I want to say is - we (the normal joes who just simply lift because its fun or because we want to change the way our body looks) and unless you have any ambitions to go pro - shouldnt forget that all this is supposted to be fun - and benching is or better should be a lot of fun.
-
Indeed, there is no need to do the bench press, squat and full deadlift. Look at the results if you don't: Spend an eternity in the novice ranks and then have a 'career' as a Z-list bodybuilder. Bob clearly knows all about which exercises are the best.
-
Bob has been known to do multiple sets of hammer curls when visiting the mirage hotel.
-
I think you mean this article 8) (sorry for my bad Chick imitation)
(source: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0KFY/is_5_21/ai_103376701/)
Butchering sacred cows: some basic exercises are basically wrong. Here's why, and what alternatives you should use for better results
You don't have to do anything. Ther goons in the gym say you have to train balls-to-the-wall heavy on quats, bench presses and other "compound classics" if you want to be a hardcore bodybuilder. That's a load of B.s. You don't have to do anything except what works best for you, and the surprising truth is may free-weight basics are not the safest or most efficient lifts for buildng muscle mass.
Because I've been training for 25 years, people assume I work out old-school style with mostly barbells and compound lifts. It's true that I trained that way for many years. However, I've also learned a few things over the past quarter century, and I've readily adapted to the advantages of modern bodybuilding. Most important, I've figured out what works, what doesn't and what can be improved. If you think weight training has sacred cows that are exempt from criticism, stop reading now, because some of them are about to become hamburger.
SQUATS
Let's start at the top, with the so-called "King of All Exercises." For advanced bodybuilders, this is more like the "King of All Back Breakers and Butt Builders." Like most trainers, I did squats for years, and I'm of two minds regarding their effectiveness. It's a good fundamental exercise for some, if kept in check. The problem is that too few people keep them in check, and many people just aren't built for them.
Along with the bench press and the deadlift, the squat is one lift in which guys really pile on the plates for low reps. The bottom line is if you're always going heavy, eventually there will be a straw that breaks the camel's or, in this case, the bodybuilder's back. It happened to me. Heavy squatting was the primary reason I had lower back surgery in 1998.
Consider what you're doing when squatting. You have a heavy weight on your traps, sometimes more than 500 pounds, pressing down on your spine. Then you bend down, putting your lumbar region in a vulnerable position, not to mention the strain on your knees and even your shoulders, from holding the bar. All of this is compounded if you're my height or taller. If you're Lee Priest or Dexter Jackson, you can do squats all day with good form and little discomfort, but if you're over 5'10", it's tough to do them without bending forward too far.
Gym rats blindly worship at the squat racks because that's how it's always been. The funny thing is I know guys who've been training more than 10 years who still squat because they say they need the legs. They haven't figured out that if it hasn't worked by now, it ain't gonna work. The longer you've been training, the less you should squat. In addition to the injury factor, once you have a foundation of mass, the squat can harm your appearance. It expands your hip flexors, glutes and upper thighs, which aren't typically areas in which experienced trainers need more size. Over time, I think squats outlive their usefulness.
Instead of traditional squats, I do h0ack squats and leg presses. They're better than squats for muscling up the quads and targeting different areas, and they're safer, too. I believe in full ranges of motion, all the way down and all the way up for these movements, and for leg presses, I take a relatively wide stance. The taller you are, the wider your stance should be.
PRESSES BEHIND THE NECK
Unlike squats, I have absolutely nothing positive to say about presses behind the neck. No one should ever do them. They combine my two least-favorite factors: a straight bar and a behind-the-neck motion. Anything behind the neck is the worst: presses, chins and pulldowns. It's an unnatural and unsafe position. You may be able to get away with these as a beginner. Kids tell me "I do presses behind the neck, and my shoulders don't bother me," and I always say "Talk to me in five years if you're still doing them."
Instead of these, I recommend military (front) presses or dumbbell presses, both of which work front delts much more safely. I never lower the weight below chin level. You'll notice this is about as far as you can go without your shoulders dropping. All that's happening between your chin and your chest is an upper-pec movement and a whole lot of potential damage. I usually perform military presses on a Smith machine, which lets me roll my palms back and find a more natural position. Dumbbells allow for greater freedom of motion, and I typically do partial Arnold presses, starting with my palms facing each other and twisting my wrists on the way up so my palms face forward.
BARBELL ROWS
I can't think of a good reason to do bent barbell rows.
Again, you're using a straight bar, which forces your hands and, consequently, your arms into a somewhat, unnatural position, and again your lower back is vulnerable. T-bar rows are better because you stand more upright, putting less strain on your lumbar region, and you can usually take an angled or parallel grip. One-arm rows are also good, as long as you don't go too heavy. The best thing for those of us who've had back problems is a rowing machine with a chest pad. That will take virtually all the lower-back action out of the movement.
DEADLIFIS
I won't condemn deads and say you should never do them, but too many people end up gaining little muscle for all the straining they do and the injury risks they take. Supposed bodybuilders load up a bar just to see how much they can lift. That's not bodybuilding and, as with squats, many guys just aren't built for deadlifts (the ideal shape is short with relatively long arms), so this becomes a strength exercise that hits the glutes and legs as much as the back.
Instead of traditional deadlifts, I prefer top deadlifts. You can do these on a Smith machine or a power rack. Set the safety catch or support bar so the bar can't go below knee-level. That way you focus mostly on your back instead of legs, hips and glutes, and you reduce the risk of injury.
BENCH PRESSES
For some odd reason, people take it personally if I say the bench press sucks. They consider it blasphemy. "You've got to bench to be hardcore," they say. I hate to break it to them, but most pro bodybuilders haven't done free-weight bench presses in years. Are you going to tell Tom Prince or Jay Cutler they're not hardcore because they don't bench?
The problem is that unless you keep your shoulders down and back and maintain the precise groove for every rep, free-weight bench presses place too much pressure on shoulders. Again, the taller you are, the more this is amplified. There's also the possibility that you'll suffer a pec tear by doing bench presses. Think of how often you hear about guys popping pecs while benching and how rarely pecs are torn doing anything else. I need two hands to count the number of top bodybuilders whose careers have been shortened by bench-press injuries.
People bench primarily to answer the question, "What do you bench?" That's not enough of a reason for me. I'd much rather do what's best for building pec mass, and there are at least 10 exercises superior to free-weight benches, starting with incline presses, machine bench presses and dumbbell flyes. As with shoulder presses, I avoid the lowest position in any chest press.
BARBELL CURLS
Here's another exercise I never do, and it's all because of that devil's tool -- the straight bar. Straight bars put too much pressure on inner elbows. If you have elbow pain, chances are it's from a straight bar. Using a straight bar to perform curls forces you into an unnatural position. If you stand talking to someone, your knuckles or palms aren't facing forward unless you're planning to clock him or beg for money. The natural position for hands at your sides is with your palms facing each other, and the natural position for a curl is for the thumbs to come up higher than the pinkies, which a cambered bar approximates.
Instead of barbell curls, I do cambered-bar curls in most biceps workouts. There are many other curling lifts that I like, and I'm a big advocate of workout variety, but I'll single out dumbbell preacher curls as an excellent exercise. Dumbbell preachers both restrict your movement (by bracing your arms against a bench) and provide for more freedom, as you can rotate your wrists.
LYING TRICEPS EXTENSIONS
Here's a lift you should avoid just based on its nickname: skull crushers. That's taking "no pain, no gain" way too far. Again, lying triceps extensions are typically done with the dreaded straight bar. Worst of all, each rep starts and stops with your head as the base. That's not good, at least not for those of us who like our heads. If you want to do a two-hand free-weight extension, do French presses (while seated, lower the bar behind your head), which at least won't bounce off your forehead, and always use a cambered bar. While we're on the subject of triceps, don't use a straight bar for pushdowns, either; use an angled bar or rope instead. Have I gotten across the message to avoid straight bars?
MODERN ADVANTAGES The common link among all the classic movements I dislike is that they were invented a hundred years ago before anyone had much knowledge of training, and they were just making it up as they went along. You don't see anyone doing one-arm kettledrum presses anymore. Other ancient exercises should be obsolete as well. I suppose we could still crank-start our cars, but I prefer to just slip my key in the ignition and turn it on. Trainers need to take advantage of the many modern tools they have at their disposal and not be too concerned about what others think is "hardcore."
You can be hardcore with Nautilus, Hammer Strength, Strive or whatever the latest computer designed contraption is. Why not incorporate as many tools as you can? Too many guys get this ridiculous "hardcore" mentality, which ends up limiting their muscle gains. There is no rule that the more noise you make or the faster you drop the weight the quicker you'll grow, and there's no rule that you have to do certain exercises just because they've been around since the Sig Klein era It's a new millennium. Training hardcore today doesn't mean limiting ourselves to the same movements our great-grandfathers performed. It means having the stones to say there are no sacred cows in bodybuilding, and it means doing only what works best for you to build maximum muscle.
CHICK'S HIT LIST
These are the exercises Bob Cicherillo doesn't like and the alternatives
he recommends.
BODYPART AVOID ALTERNATIVES
Quadriceps Squats Hack squats, leg presses
Upper back Barbell rows Machine rows, T-bar rows
Rear pulldowns Front pulldowns with a parallel
grip
Chest Bench presses Incline presses, machine presses
Lower back Deadlifts Top deadlifts
Good mornings Hyperextensions
Shoulders Presses behind the neck Smith machine military presses,
dumbbell presses
Triceps Lying triceps extensions Cambered-bar French presses
Biceps Barbell curls Cambered-bar curls, dumbbell
preacher curls
Abdominals Situps Machine crunches
-
I think you mean this article 8) (sorry for my bad Chick imitation)
(source: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0KFY/is_5_21/ai_103376701/)
Butchering sacred cows: some basic exercises are basically wrong. Here's why, and what alternatives you should use for better results
You don't have to do anything. Ther goons in the gym say you have to train balls-to-the-wall heavy on quats, bench presses and other "compound classics" if you want to be a hardcore bodybuilder. That's a load of B.s. You don't have to do anything except what works best for you, and the surprising truth is may free-weight basics are not the safest or most efficient lifts for buildng muscle mass.
Because I've been training for 25 years, people assume I work out old-school style with mostly barbells and compound lifts. It's true that I trained that way for many years. However, I've also learned a few things over the past quarter century, and I've readily adapted to the advantages of modern bodybuilding. Most important, I've figured out what works, what doesn't and what can be improved. If you think weight training has sacred cows that are exempt from criticism, stop reading now, because some of them are about to become hamburger.
SQUATS
Let's start at the top, with the so-called "King of All Exercises." For advanced bodybuilders, this is more like the "King of All Back Breakers and Butt Builders." Like most trainers, I did squats for years, and I'm of two minds regarding their effectiveness. It's a good fundamental exercise for some, if kept in check. The problem is that too few people keep them in check, and many people just aren't built for them.
Along with the bench press and the deadlift, the squat is one lift in which guys really pile on the plates for low reps. The bottom line is if you're always going heavy, eventually there will be a straw that breaks the camel's or, in this case, the bodybuilder's back. It happened to me. Heavy squatting was the primary reason I had lower back surgery in 1998.
Consider what you're doing when squatting. You have a heavy weight on your traps, sometimes more than 500 pounds, pressing down on your spine. Then you bend down, putting your lumbar region in a vulnerable position, not to mention the strain on your knees and even your shoulders, from holding the bar. All of this is compounded if you're my height or taller. If you're Lee Priest or Dexter Jackson, you can do squats all day with good form and little discomfort, but if you're over 5'10", it's tough to do them without bending forward too far.
Gym rats blindly worship at the squat racks because that's how it's always been. The funny thing is I know guys who've been training more than 10 years who still squat because they say they need the legs. They haven't figured out that if it hasn't worked by now, it ain't gonna work. The longer you've been training, the less you should squat. In addition to the injury factor, once you have a foundation of mass, the squat can harm your appearance. It expands your hip flexors, glutes and upper thighs, which aren't typically areas in which experienced trainers need more size. Over time, I think squats outlive their usefulness.
Instead of traditional squats, I do h0ack squats and leg presses. They're better than squats for muscling up the quads and targeting different areas, and they're safer, too. I believe in full ranges of motion, all the way down and all the way up for these movements, and for leg presses, I take a relatively wide stance. The taller you are, the wider your stance should be.
PRESSES BEHIND THE NECK
Unlike squats, I have absolutely nothing positive to say about presses behind the neck. No one should ever do them. They combine my two least-favorite factors: a straight bar and a behind-the-neck motion. Anything behind the neck is the worst: presses, chins and pulldowns. It's an unnatural and unsafe position. You may be able to get away with these as a beginner. Kids tell me "I do presses behind the neck, and my shoulders don't bother me," and I always say "Talk to me in five years if you're still doing them."
Instead of these, I recommend military (front) presses or dumbbell presses, both of which work front delts much more safely. I never lower the weight below chin level. You'll notice this is about as far as you can go without your shoulders dropping. All that's happening between your chin and your chest is an upper-pec movement and a whole lot of potential damage. I usually perform military presses on a Smith machine, which lets me roll my palms back and find a more natural position. Dumbbells allow for greater freedom of motion, and I typically do partial Arnold presses, starting with my palms facing each other and twisting my wrists on the way up so my palms face forward.
BARBELL ROWS
I can't think of a good reason to do bent barbell rows.
Again, you're using a straight bar, which forces your hands and, consequently, your arms into a somewhat, unnatural position, and again your lower back is vulnerable. T-bar rows are better because you stand more upright, putting less strain on your lumbar region, and you can usually take an angled or parallel grip. One-arm rows are also good, as long as you don't go too heavy. The best thing for those of us who've had back problems is a rowing machine with a chest pad. That will take virtually all the lower-back action out of the movement.
DEADLIFIS
I won't condemn deads and say you should never do them, but too many people end up gaining little muscle for all the straining they do and the injury risks they take. Supposed bodybuilders load up a bar just to see how much they can lift. That's not bodybuilding and, as with squats, many guys just aren't built for deadlifts (the ideal shape is short with relatively long arms), so this becomes a strength exercise that hits the glutes and legs as much as the back.
Instead of traditional deadlifts, I prefer top deadlifts. You can do these on a Smith machine or a power rack. Set the safety catch or support bar so the bar can't go below knee-level. That way you focus mostly on your back instead of legs, hips and glutes, and you reduce the risk of injury.
BENCH PRESSES
For some odd reason, people take it personally if I say the bench press sucks. They consider it blasphemy. "You've got to bench to be hardcore," they say. I hate to break it to them, but most pro bodybuilders haven't done free-weight bench presses in years. Are you going to tell Tom Prince or Jay Cutler they're not hardcore because they don't bench?
The problem is that unless you keep your shoulders down and back and maintain the precise groove for every rep, free-weight bench presses place too much pressure on shoulders. Again, the taller you are, the more this is amplified. There's also the possibility that you'll suffer a pec tear by doing bench presses. Think of how often you hear about guys popping pecs while benching and how rarely pecs are torn doing anything else. I need two hands to count the number of top bodybuilders whose careers have been shortened by bench-press injuries.
People bench primarily to answer the question, "What do you bench?" That's not enough of a reason for me. I'd much rather do what's best for building pec mass, and there are at least 10 exercises superior to free-weight benches, starting with incline presses, machine bench presses and dumbbell flyes. As with shoulder presses, I avoid the lowest position in any chest press.
BARBELL CURLS
Here's another exercise I never do, and it's all because of that devil's tool -- the straight bar. Straight bars put too much pressure on inner elbows. If you have elbow pain, chances are it's from a straight bar. Using a straight bar to perform curls forces you into an unnatural position. If you stand talking to someone, your knuckles or palms aren't facing forward unless you're planning to clock him or beg for money. The natural position for hands at your sides is with your palms facing each other, and the natural position for a curl is for the thumbs to come up higher than the pinkies, which a cambered bar approximates.
Instead of barbell curls, I do cambered-bar curls in most biceps workouts. There are many other curling lifts that I like, and I'm a big advocate of workout variety, but I'll single out dumbbell preacher curls as an excellent exercise. Dumbbell preachers both restrict your movement (by bracing your arms against a bench) and provide for more freedom, as you can rotate your wrists.
LYING TRICEPS EXTENSIONS
Here's a lift you should avoid just based on its nickname: skull crushers. That's taking "no pain, no gain" way too far. Again, lying triceps extensions are typically done with the dreaded straight bar. Worst of all, each rep starts and stops with your head as the base. That's not good, at least not for those of us who like our heads. If you want to do a two-hand free-weight extension, do French presses (while seated, lower the bar behind your head), which at least won't bounce off your forehead, and always use a cambered bar. While we're on the subject of triceps, don't use a straight bar for pushdowns, either; use an angled bar or rope instead. Have I gotten across the message to avoid straight bars?
MODERN ADVANTAGES The common link among all the classic movements I dislike is that they were invented a hundred years ago before anyone had much knowledge of training, and they were just making it up as they went along. You don't see anyone doing one-arm kettledrum presses anymore. Other ancient exercises should be obsolete as well. I suppose we could still crank-start our cars, but I prefer to just slip my key in the ignition and turn it on. Trainers need to take advantage of the many modern tools they have at their disposal and not be too concerned about what others think is "hardcore."
You can be hardcore with Nautilus, Hammer Strength, Strive or whatever the latest computer designed contraption is. Why not incorporate as many tools as you can? Too many guys get this ridiculous "hardcore" mentality, which ends up limiting their muscle gains. There is no rule that the more noise you make or the faster you drop the weight the quicker you'll grow, and there's no rule that you have to do certain exercises just because they've been around since the Sig Klein era It's a new millennium. Training hardcore today doesn't mean limiting ourselves to the same movements our great-grandfathers performed. It means having the stones to say there are no sacred cows in bodybuilding, and it means doing only what works best for you to build maximum muscle.
CHICK'S HIT LIST
These are the exercises Bob Cicherillo doesn't like and the alternatives
he recommends.
BODYPART AVOID ALTERNATIVES
Quadriceps Squats Hack squats, leg presses
Upper back Barbell rows Machine rows, T-bar rows
Rear pulldowns Front pulldowns with a parallel
grip
Chest Bench presses Incline presses, machine presses
Lower back Deadlifts Top deadlifts
Good mornings Hyperextensions
Shoulders Presses behind the neck Smith machine military presses,
dumbbell presses
Triceps Lying triceps extensions Cambered-bar French presses
Biceps Barbell curls Cambered-bar curls, dumbbell
preacher curls
Abdominals Situps Machine crunches
I remember this article... It is/was a good one.
-
I read that article years ago in Musclemag
I thought at the time even it was bullshit
-
This is false, word round the campfire is that Bob has been seen supersetting schmoe squats, deadlifts and Benchpress at the Mirage circa 1993.
-
I remember over the years, you saying that some exercises were pointless 'ego' exercises, ie. bench press, I think you mentioned squats or deadlifts as well.. I agree with your assessment with a lot of these, could you possibly post the complete list. I remember on your bodybuilding.com Masters series you mentioned some of these exercises...
thanks.
Yep..god forbid you don't do 'Bench Presses"...What would be your answer when you inevitably get asked for the 100th time, "Hey bro, how much you bench?" Seriously though, there's a guy in my gym...has totally destroyed his shoulders from benching..but he still stupidly starts off every chest workout with benches. The guy's in agony after every set, can't raise his arm above his head, yet still does singles on the bench and has some spotter helping him with the first reps on every set. I told the guy that maybe he should layoff benching for a while. Guy goes, "I can't...I'll never stop..gonna get surgery on my rotators one day.." Idiot.
-
Bob is lazy. That's why he prefers machines.
Machines has their place but you need heavy free weights also.
-
when you're all drugs, it doesn't matter what exercises you do so long as you don't get injured.
-
The bench press is one of the most overrated exercises in the gym. It screws your front delts and there are much saver and more effective exercises like dumbell presses and wide dips.
-
Bob is lazy. That's why he prefers machines.
Machines has their place but you need heavy free weights also.
It's not only machines but also dumbell instead of barbell exercises. You can train hard on machines too. For example look at Dorian Yates, he trained a lot on Hammerstrength equipment.
-
Nice generalizations, Robert.
How is machine bench any safer compared to freeweight bench?
-
Nice generalizations, Robert.
How is machine bench any safer compared to freeweight bench?
Try to bench to absolute failure and you discover the difference soon. A good chest press machine, like a Hammer, let you perform the movements in a less stressful direction for your delts and wrists than a fixed barbell grip.
-
Like Chic, he knows not of which he talks. all of the exercises he mentions have a place in any training program. the key is to maintain proper form and not let ego over ride common sense with regard to amount lifted.
-
Bob's physique lacks the depth and thickness of a true Olympia caliber bodybuilder. You take guys like Sergio, Arnold, Franco, etc. they all did their share of heavy powerlifts and that's what makes those guys so damn impressive. Bob has no density and looks like a twit.
-
thanks for the great tips bob
we always learn fascinating things when u open your mouth
-
thanks for the great tips bob
we always learn fascinating things when u open your mouth
rofl
-
thanks for the great tips bob
we always learn fascinating things when u open your mouth
hahahaha classic
Bob treated the gym like a social club while guys like Ronnie, Shawn, Kevin, Nasser, Dorian, gh15 treated it like a time to bust their asses and work hard. The proof is in the physiques. Tom Prince even said Bob would never go to failure.
No, you don't need to do all the exercises on the list... but for the most part stick with the basics.
-
thanks for the great tips bob
we always learn fascinating things when u open your mouth
lol ;D
-
thanks for the great tips bob
we always learn fascinating things when u open your mouth
lmao!
-
Nice generalizations, Robert.
How is machine bench any safer compared to freeweight bench?
Find me someone who has torn their pec using a Hammer, etc....
-
when you're all drugs, it doesn't matter what exercises you do so long as you don't get injured.
That's the point. When you have 30-50 times the amount of Testosterone and GH of a regular guy in your bloodstream you'll grow perfectly by toying around on machines and cables as well.
Problem is that the heavy basic exercises stimulate the natural hormone release the most, a fact a juicer can't relate to. Especially as a natural you can't even afford NOT to squat or deadlift imo. These exercises will also speed up your metabolism for at least 48 hours.
That's always the problem when average Joe wants to get training tips from a pro, cause "He's huge and has to know what he's talking about".
-
That's the point. When you have 30-50 times the amount of Testosterone and GH of a regular guy in your bloodstream you'll grow perfectly by toying around on machines and cables as well.
Problem is that the heavy basic exercises stimulate the natural hormone release the most, a fact a juicer can't relate to. Especially as a natural you can't even afford NOT to squat or deadlift imo. These exercises will also speed up your metabolism for at least 48 hours.
That's always the problem when average Joe wants to get training tips from a pro, cause "He's huge and has to know what he's talking about".
So, if I just jack up my test intake, I can get 20-inch arms by lifting 25-lb dumbbells??
-
That's exactly the list I was looking for, thanks guys.
-
I wonder what its like being a PRO BODYBUILDER and have some obese dude just dwarf you.
-
So, if I just jack up my test intake, I can get 20-inch arms by lifting 25-lb dumbbells??
Bob thinks so.
-
I wonder what its like being a PRO BODYBUILDER and have some obese dude just dwarf you.
Must break their heart.
-
Find me someone who has torn their pec using a Hammer, etc....
Hammer machines force you into a fixed plane of movement, so if your limbs/body structure doesn't mesh with the machine, then you are asking for injury. Dumbells would in fact be the safest option, (for your first intial exercise), while machines would be a reasonable option only towards the end of a workout, when you would only be using a fraction of the weight. (Note that this is better served for machines that have handles/levers that are adjustable and can better mimic your own natural plane of movement...in other words NOT Hammer machines.)
-
This is what worked for Bob , will it work for you? who knows we are all different..just more cheap shots aimed at chicko
-
Bob is lazy. That's why he prefers machines.
Machines has their place but you need heavy free weights also.
::) ::) ::) ::) what have you acomplished other than collecting jays soiled trunks?
-
Hammer machines force you into a fixed plane of movement, so if your limbs/body structure doesn't mesh with the machine, then you are asking for injury. Dumbells would in fact be the safest option, (for your first intial exercise), while machines would be a reasonable option only towards the end of a workout, when you would only be using a fraction of the weight. (Note that this is better served for machines that have handles/levers that are adjustable and can better mimic your own natural plane of movement...in other words NOT Hammer machines.)
All Hammer machines have handles that are set to mimic the natural position of the hand/ arm....not sure what machines youre talking about....the straight bar forces your position into a completely UNnatural position, thus the many injuries (especially to the shoulder/ rotator cuff)
I've advocated DB over BB for many years as my many articles would support
-
All Hammer machines have handles that are set to mimic the natural position of the hand/ arm....not sure what machines youre talking about....the straight bar forces your position into a completely UNnatural position, thus the many injuries (especially to the shoulder/ rotator cuff)
I've advocated DB over BB for many years as my many articles would support
well spoken chick fuk them haters ;)
-
All Hammer machines have handles that are set to mimic the natural position of the hand/ arm....not sure what machines youre talking about....the straight bar forces your position into a completely UNnatural position, thus the many injuries (especially to the shoulder/ rotator cuff)
I've advocated DB over BB for many years as my many articles would support
I agree with you that DB are better then barbells....but I would still say that the Hammer machines are not ideal for use as primary exercises in a program. I use them, but only as the finishing touch to my workouts...I always try to incorperate compound movements/basic free weight exercises at the begining of any workout.
I have aggravated my shoulders far more with Hammer machines then any other form of exercise...I still use them, but sparingly, and I dont pile too much weight on them.
Also I agree with you that the flat BB bench sucks ass...I never do it anymore...and my chest hasnt suffered at all.... I do however do advocate the Incline BB press as a good movement.....
-
I agree with you that DB are better then barbells....but I would still say that the Hammer machines are not ideal for use as primary exercises in a program. I use them, but only as the finishing touch to my workouts...I always try to incorperate compound movements/basic free weight exercises at the begining of any workout.
I have aggravated my shoulders far more with Hammer machines then any other form of exercise...I still use them, but sparingly, and I dont pile too much weight on them.
Also I agree with you that the flat BB bench sucks ass...I never do it anymore...and my chest hasnt suffered at all.... I do however do advocate the Incline BB press as a good movement.....
Thats my whole point of the article...that there really shouldnt be any "primary" exercises...they are all just a emans to and end...tools of the trade that should be as customized and taylored to peoples physiques...
The primary exercise were developed in the 1800's, and based on what they knew and what they had to work with at the time...
-
All Hammer machines have handles that are set to mimic the natural position of the hand/ arm....not sure what machines youre talking about....
I think he means that they are still fixed. You can't adjust the motion to suit your ideal plane of motion since your body is fixed. Any fixed plane motion when done repeatedly could cause overuse injuries and muscular imbalances - at least that's what some esteemed trainers say. Squats on the smith machine would be dangerous for the same reason.
I don't know if there's a "natural position" for any limb. More or less dangerous when loaded maybe. I've even seen some argue that any type of straight out pressing motion isn't "natural" when loaded heavily. Man is not "designed" (or didn't evolve) to move significant loads straight out like that.
-
I think he means that they are still fixed. You can't adjust the motion to suit your ideal plane of motion since your body is fixed. Any fixed plane motion when done repeatedly could cause overuse injuries and muscular imbalances - at least that's what some esteemed trainers say. Squats on the smith machine would be dangerous for the same reason.
I don't know if there's a "natural position" for any limb. More or less dangerous when loaded maybe. I've even seen some argue that any type of straight out pressing motion isn't "natural" when loaded heavily. Man is not "designed" (or didn't evolve) to move significant loads straight out like that.
a "fixed" position isnt really the problem...it becomes a problem when the weight exceeds the purpose...then the problem becomes compounded
-
Thats my whole point of the article...that there really shouldnt be any "primary" exercises...they are all just a emans to and end...tools of the trade that should be as customized and taylored to peoples physiques...
The primary exercise were developed in the 1800's, and based on what they knew and what they had to work with at the time...
I should have said "optimal" rather then "primary."
You are correct in that there is no right or wrong answer in exercise selection, but there are always questions of what is or is not optimal, and most of the time what is optimal, is also what is the most difficult, or painfull.
You didn't build the foundation of your physique on Hammer, or any other type of machine, you built it on barbells, and dumbells,....I'm sure it was only when you achevied most of your size, that you started going that route...
Also.. . As Van B pointed out...repetitive stress injuries are much more likely with a fixed plane of movement that is to be found in machine, as opposed to a Dumbell where you can allow a much more natural range of motion.... Of course this is assuming that the person executing the exercise is using good form, and not using too much weight...
The injuries that we see from Bodybuilders have less to do with free weights, and have more to do with them using stupid amounts of weight that they were not meant to handle in the first place...Steroids have a cortisone like effect on the body, and when you reduce inflammation, you run the risk of masking "good" pain that would otherwise tell you to back off...
You never see natural lifters getting pec tears or other similar injuries.
-
I should have said "optimal" rather then "primary."
You are correct in that there is no right or wrong answer in exercise selection, but there are always questions of what is or is not optimal, and most of the time what is optimal, is also what is the most difficult, or painfull.
You didn't build the foundation of your physique on Hammer, or any other type of machine, you built it on barbells, and dumbells,....I'm sure it was only when you achevied most of your size, that you started going that route...
Also.. . As Van B pointed out...repetitive stress injuries are much more likely with a fixed plane of movement that is to be found in machine, as opposed to a Dumbell where you can allow a much more natural range of motion.... Of course this is assuming that the person executing the exercise is using good form, and not using too much weight...
The injuries that we see from Bodybuilders have less to do with free weights, and have more to do with them using stupid amounts of weight that they were not meant to handle in the first place...Steroids have a cortisone like effect on the body, and when you reduce inflammation, you run the risk of masking "good" pain that would otherwise tell you to back off...
You never see natural lifters getting pec tears or other similar injuries.
Sure you do,,,and almost always due to the same thing...using stupid weight. Layne Norton ring a bell?
-
Sure you do,,,and almost always due to the same thing...using stupid weight. Layne Norton ring a bell?
I would imagine that there are some exceptions to that statement, but you see it far more in Juiced atheletes.... Let's face it...most naturals cant bench anywhere near 350-500 pounds...which is almost always the range that is stated when I hear about pros talking their pec tear experiences...
-
I'm no expert, but to me that list makes sense. Especially if you're never going to step on stage - why risk injury? I've had problems with both the squat and the deadlift. I will still do squats occasionally although now i keep something under my heel which keeps my back straighter and emphasizes my quads. And failure IS overrated - just do another set if you feel you haven't done enough.
-
Sure you do,,,and almost always due to the same thing...using stupid weight. Layne Norton ring a bell?
Yes, he sure is stupid.
-
Bob, have you ever put your showy muscles to any kind of test? Done any high rep sets to failure for example (bodyweight bench etc), or have your muscles always been full of air? ;)
-
Bob has stated he did 405 for 20 on the bench. So he has done plenty of barbell benching cause that's absolute world class even in powerlifting circles. :D
-
I'm no expert, but to me that list makes sense. Especially if you're never going to step on stage - why risk injury? I've had problems with both the squat and the deadlift. I will still do squats occasionally although now i keep something under my heel which keeps my back straighter and emphasizes my quads. And failure IS overrated - just do another set if you feel you haven't done enough.
Exactly...training to failure (true failure) is just about the dumbest routine I ever tried...and an engraved invitation to injury...often, the failure, is the muscle or tendon pulling off the bone, or some other nagging injury that takes you out of action for months...
-
Ronnie Coleman
Dorian Yates
Lee Haney
Dennis James
Branch Warren
...to name a few
-
Ronnie Coleman
Dorian Yates
Lee Haney
Dennis James
Branch Warren
...to name a few
What are you naming these guys for? The only guy that trained to failure...is Yates, who is the last guy I would use as a example of injury free training
-
Powerlifters don't go to failure and they lift way heavier weights.
-
I think you mean this article 8) (sorry for my bad Chick imitation)
(source: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0KFY/is_5_21/ai_103376701/)
Butchering sacred cows: some basic exercises are basically wrong. Here's why, and what alternatives you should use for better results
You don't have to do anything. Ther goons in the gym say you have to train balls-to-the-wall heavy on quats, bench presses and other "compound classics" if you want to be a hardcore bodybuilder. That's a load of B.s. You don't have to do anything except what works best for you, and the surprising truth is may free-weight basics are not the safest or most efficient lifts for buildng muscle mass.
Because I've been training for 25 years, people assume I work out old-school style with mostly barbells and compound lifts. It's true that I trained that way for many years. However, I've also learned a few things over the past quarter century, and I've readily adapted to the advantages of modern bodybuilding. Most important, I've figured out what works, what doesn't and what can be improved. If you think weight training has sacred cows that are exempt from criticism, stop reading now, because some of them are about to become hamburger.
SQUATS
Let's start at the top, with the so-called "King of All Exercises." For advanced bodybuilders, this is more like the "King of All Back Breakers and Butt Builders." Like most trainers, I did squats for years, and I'm of two minds regarding their effectiveness. It's a good fundamental exercise for some, if kept in check. The problem is that too few people keep them in check, and many people just aren't built for them.
Along with the bench press and the deadlift, the squat is one lift in which guys really pile on the plates for low reps. The bottom line is if you're always going heavy, eventually there will be a straw that breaks the camel's or, in this case, the bodybuilder's back. It happened to me. Heavy squatting was the primary reason I had lower back surgery in 1998.
Consider what you're doing when squatting. You have a heavy weight on your traps, sometimes more than 500 pounds, pressing down on your spine. Then you bend down, putting your lumbar region in a vulnerable position, not to mention the strain on your knees and even your shoulders, from holding the bar. All of this is compounded if you're my height or taller. If you're Lee Priest or Dexter Jackson, you can do squats all day with good form and little discomfort, but if you're over 5'10", it's tough to do them without bending forward too far.
Gym rats blindly worship at the squat racks because that's how it's always been. The funny thing is I know guys who've been training more than 10 years who still squat because they say they need the legs. They haven't figured out that if it hasn't worked by now, it ain't gonna work. The longer you've been training, the less you should squat. In addition to the injury factor, once you have a foundation of mass, the squat can harm your appearance. It expands your hip flexors, glutes and upper thighs, which aren't typically areas in which experienced trainers need more size. Over time, I think squats outlive their usefulness.
Instead of traditional squats, I do h0ack squats and leg presses. They're better than squats for muscling up the quads and targeting different areas, and they're safer, too. I believe in full ranges of motion, all the way down and all the way up for these movements, and for leg presses, I take a relatively wide stance. The taller you are, the wider your stance should be.
PRESSES BEHIND THE NECK
Unlike squats, I have absolutely nothing positive to say about presses behind the neck. No one should ever do them. They combine my two least-favorite factors: a straight bar and a behind-the-neck motion. Anything behind the neck is the worst: presses, chins and pulldowns. It's an unnatural and unsafe position. You may be able to get away with these as a beginner. Kids tell me "I do presses behind the neck, and my shoulders don't bother me," and I always say "Talk to me in five years if you're still doing them."
Instead of these, I recommend military (front) presses or dumbbell presses, both of which work front delts much more safely. I never lower the weight below chin level. You'll notice this is about as far as you can go without your shoulders dropping. All that's happening between your chin and your chest is an upper-pec movement and a whole lot of potential damage. I usually perform military presses on a Smith machine, which lets me roll my palms back and find a more natural position. Dumbbells allow for greater freedom of motion, and I typically do partial Arnold presses, starting with my palms facing each other and twisting my wrists on the way up so my palms face forward.
BARBELL ROWS
I can't think of a good reason to do bent barbell rows.
Again, you're using a straight bar, which forces your hands and, consequently, your arms into a somewhat, unnatural position, and again your lower back is vulnerable. T-bar rows are better because you stand more upright, putting less strain on your lumbar region, and you can usually take an angled or parallel grip. One-arm rows are also good, as long as you don't go too heavy. The best thing for those of us who've had back problems is a rowing machine with a chest pad. That will take virtually all the lower-back action out of the movement.
DEADLIFIS
I won't condemn deads and say you should never do them, but too many people end up gaining little muscle for all the straining they do and the injury risks they take. Supposed bodybuilders load up a bar just to see how much they can lift. That's not bodybuilding and, as with squats, many guys just aren't built for deadlifts (the ideal shape is short with relatively long arms), so this becomes a strength exercise that hits the glutes and legs as much as the back.
Instead of traditional deadlifts, I prefer top deadlifts. You can do these on a Smith machine or a power rack. Set the safety catch or support bar so the bar can't go below knee-level. That way you focus mostly on your back instead of legs, hips and glutes, and you reduce the risk of injury.
BENCH PRESSES
For some odd reason, people take it personally if I say the bench press sucks. They consider it blasphemy. "You've got to bench to be hardcore," they say. I hate to break it to them, but most pro bodybuilders haven't done free-weight bench presses in years. Are you going to tell Tom Prince or Jay Cutler they're not hardcore because they don't bench?
The problem is that unless you keep your shoulders down and back and maintain the precise groove for every rep, free-weight bench presses place too much pressure on shoulders. Again, the taller you are, the more this is amplified. There's also the possibility that you'll suffer a pec tear by doing bench presses. Think of how often you hear about guys popping pecs while benching and how rarely pecs are torn doing anything else. I need two hands to count the number of top bodybuilders whose careers have been shortened by bench-press injuries.
People bench primarily to answer the question, "What do you bench?" That's not enough of a reason for me. I'd much rather do what's best for building pec mass, and there are at least 10 exercises superior to free-weight benches, starting with incline presses, machine bench presses and dumbbell flyes. As with shoulder presses, I avoid the lowest position in any chest press.
BARBELL CURLS
Here's another exercise I never do, and it's all because of that devil's tool -- the straight bar. Straight bars put too much pressure on inner elbows. If you have elbow pain, chances are it's from a straight bar. Using a straight bar to perform curls forces you into an unnatural position. If you stand talking to someone, your knuckles or palms aren't facing forward unless you're planning to clock him or beg for money. The natural position for hands at your sides is with your palms facing each other, and the natural position for a curl is for the thumbs to come up higher than the pinkies, which a cambered bar approximates.
Instead of barbell curls, I do cambered-bar curls in most biceps workouts. There are many other curling lifts that I like, and I'm a big advocate of workout variety, but I'll single out dumbbell preacher curls as an excellent exercise. Dumbbell preachers both restrict your movement (by bracing your arms against a bench) and provide for more freedom, as you can rotate your wrists.
LYING TRICEPS EXTENSIONS
Here's a lift you should avoid just based on its nickname: skull crushers. That's taking "no pain, no gain" way too far. Again, lying triceps extensions are typically done with the dreaded straight bar. Worst of all, each rep starts and stops with your head as the base. That's not good, at least not for those of us who like our heads. If you want to do a two-hand free-weight extension, do French presses (while seated, lower the bar behind your head), which at least won't bounce off your forehead, and always use a cambered bar. While we're on the subject of triceps, don't use a straight bar for pushdowns, either; use an angled bar or rope instead. Have I gotten across the message to avoid straight bars?
MODERN ADVANTAGES The common link among all the classic movements I dislike is that they were invented a hundred years ago before anyone had much knowledge of training, and they were just making it up as they went along. You don't see anyone doing one-arm kettledrum presses anymore. Other ancient exercises should be obsolete as well. I suppose we could still crank-start our cars, but I prefer to just slip my key in the ignition and turn it on. Trainers need to take advantage of the many modern tools they have at their disposal and not be too concerned about what others think is "hardcore."
You can be hardcore with Nautilus, Hammer Strength, Strive or whatever the latest computer designed contraption is. Why not incorporate as many tools as you can? Too many guys get this ridiculous "hardcore" mentality, which ends up limiting their muscle gains. There is no rule that the more noise you make or the faster you drop the weight the quicker you'll grow, and there's no rule that you have to do certain exercises just because they've been around since the Sig Klein era It's a new millennium. Training hardcore today doesn't mean limiting ourselves to the same movements our great-grandfathers performed. It means having the stones to say there are no sacred cows in bodybuilding, and it means doing only what works best for you to build maximum muscle.
CHICK'S HIT LIST
These are the exercises Bob Cicherillo doesn't like and the alternatives
he recommends.
BODYPART AVOID ALTERNATIVES
Quadriceps Squats Hack squats, leg presses
Upper back Barbell rows Machine rows, T-bar rows
Rear pulldowns Front pulldowns with a parallel
grip
Chest Bench presses Incline presses, machine presses
Lower back Deadlifts Top deadlifts
Good mornings Hyperextensions
Shoulders Presses behind the neck Smith machine military presses,
dumbbell presses
Triceps Lying triceps extensions Cambered-bar French presses
Biceps Barbell curls Cambered-bar curls, dumbbell
preacher curls
Abdominals Situps Machine crunches
actually thats a pretty good article. You cant argue with any of his points. i think EVERY bodybuilder agrees that you get better stretch with dumbbells. also the straight bar curls do put too much ressure on the inner part of the elbows AS well as the wrist.
as for Squats, come on, how many topics on GB have been about a skinny twink doing half rep squats loaded with plates who claim they have been lifting for MANY years?
im not so fond of Bob, but you cant argue with 95% of this article.
-
actually thats a pretty good article. You cant argue with any of his points. i think EVERY bodybuilder agrees that you get better stretch with dumbbells. also the straight bar curls do put too much ressure on the inner part of the elbows AS well as the wrist.
as for Squats, come on, how many topics on GB have been about a skinny twink doing half rep squats loaded with plates who claim they have been lifting for MANY years?
im not so fond of Bob, but you cant argue with 95% of this article.
yes you can, there is much to write ;) but bob is right you dont have to squat, deadlift or do bench if ur a bodybuilder. but for many people they are very good exercises. for some not. you also have to think about who your talking about...situation is very different between drug using 280lbs guy who does 500+ in bench press and compare to natural guy who does 275. heavier weight= more risk of injury,. futher; naturals VEry rarely rip muscles...drugs users do more often , due to heavier weights but also other reasons (one is muscle stronger than tendons if u grow/get strong fast). awlays gotta look at specific situation
-
All Hammer machines have handles that are set to mimic the natural position of the hand/ arm....not sure what machines youre talking about....the straight bar forces your position into a completely UNnatural position, thus the many injuries (especially to the shoulder/ rotator cuff)
I've advocated DB over BB for many years as my many articles would support
Using your previous statement that the "natural" position of the hand is with palms facing one another contradicts your current statement above. Specifically the HS preacher curl. Your palms are facing upwards (note: I did not say perpendicular to the floor). I would like for you to explain how the position of "palms up" is UNnatual for the body. The very fact that the human body can supinate the hand to that position dictates that it is not UNnatural. When you supinate the wrist, bicep contraction occurs. Bob....do you advocate turning of the feet during exercises like leg extensions, leg curls, calf raises?
-
I remember reading that article when it came out. Very well written in my opinion.
-
Using your previous statement that the "natural" position of the hand is with palms facing one another contradicts your current statement above. Specifically the HS preacher curl. Your palms are facing upwards (note: I did not say perpendicular to the floor). I would like for you to explain how the position of "palms up" is UNnatual for the body. The very fact that the human body can supinate the hand to that position dictates that it is not UNnatural. When you supinate the wrist, bicep contraction occurs. Bob....do you advocate turning of the feet during exercises like leg extensions, leg curls, calf raises?
Just because you CAN turn your hand to a position of holding on to a straight bar, doesnt mean you should, or that its natural. As youre standing, the hands naturally hang at an angle, not like a caveman, or with palms facing outward...as you're positioned on the HS curl machine, your palms face inward toward each other...the more you supinate them outward to a straight bar position, the more UNnatural it is, and the more emphasis is placed on the inner elbow tendon (a common injury to those who do big BB curls...I never said having the palms up was unnatural, you misread what I wrote, or didnt understand it...
As for legs...the same thing applies. Feet should be set in a natural position, toes slightly facing outwards.
-
Just because you CAN turn your hand to a position of holding on to a straight bar, doesnt mean you should, or that its natural. As youre standing, the hands naturally hang at an angle, not like a caveman, or with palms facing outward...as you're positioned on the HS curl machine, your palms face inward toward each other...the more you supinate them outward to a straight bar position, the more UNnatural it is, and the more emphasis is placed on the inner elbow tendon (a common injury to those who do big BB curls...I never said having the palms up was unnatural, you misread what I wrote, or didnt understand it...
As for legs...the same thing applies. Feet should be set in a natural position, toes slightly facing outwards.
I disagree on the curls, supinization with the straight bar attains peak contraction, if you do a concentration curl with a dumbell and turn your pinky finger out toward the shoulder you will feel the contraction difference vs curling inward with index finger, straight bar is best...I agree on the squats.
-
I disagree on the curls, supinization with the straight bar attains peak contraction, if you do a concentration curl with a dumbell and turn your pinky finger out toward the shoulder you will feel the contraction difference vs curling inward with index finger, straight bar is best...I agree on the squats.
Like I wrote, its going TOO HEAVY with that positioning that will lead to the inner/ outer elbow killing you...and most guys looking for big arms are going to go right to the BB curl as their means to an end. If you want peak contraction, then you go lighter and use a preacher style machine, or concentration curl with a lighter DB
-
I actually cannot supinate my wrists all the way out, so I have never in my life done barbell curls, always relied on cambered bars, dumbells, and machine. I watch people do straight bar curls and I just wonder how on earth they are doing it completely pain-free.
Bob, I want to go back to the test/hormone release incurred by exercises like squats, do you think you can have similar effects when doing leg presses or hack squats? It seems that everything written argues that squats are an absolute MUST, and its become so ingrained in our minds since this is all we've been reading from the first day we start bodybuilding.
-
I actually cannot supinate my wrists all the way out, so I have never in my life done barbell curls, always relied on cambered bars, dumbells, and machine. I watch people do straight bar curls and I just wonder how on earth they are doing it completely pain-free.
Bob, I want to go back to the test/hormone release incurred by exercises like squats, do you think you can have similar effects when doing leg presses or hack squats? It seems that everything written argues that squats are an absolute MUST, and its become so ingrained in our minds since this is all we've been reading from the first day we start bodybuilding.
The reason squats have that stigma, is simply for the fact that they are one of (if not THEE) hardest exercises...you would achieve the same with a DL, Leg Press, Hacks....whats funny, is the minute release of any test/ hormones being attributed to anything significant.
As for straight bar curls...you are correct...and the bigger you get, the harder they are. You'll notice most guys with any type of build, as they come up with the bar, their pinky and finger next to it, arent even on the bar...
-
Like I wrote, its going TOO HEAVY with that positioning that will lead to the inner/ outer elbow killing you...and most guys looking for big arms are going to go right to the BB curl as their means to an end. If you want peak contraction, then you go lighter and use a preacher style machine, or concentration curl with a lighter DB
If you do strict form no cheating no weight is too heavy the straight bar provides natural supinization.
-
If you do strict form no cheating no weight is too heavy the straight bar provides natural supinization.
Riiiight.... ::)
-
The reason squats have that stigma, is simply for the fact that they are one of (if not THEE) hardest exercises...you would achieve the same with a DL, Leg Press, Hacks....whats funny, is the minute release of any test/ hormones being attributed to anything significant.
As for straight bar curls...you are correct...and the bigger you get, the harder they are. You'll notice most guys with any type of build, as they come up with the bar, their pinky and finger next to it, arent even on the bar...
I'm not sure if I understand your post correctly. What you are saying is that any hormone release when training is not significant enough to choose one exercise over the other?
-
I'm not sure if I understand your post correctly. What you are saying is that any hormone release when training is not significant enough to choose one exercise over the other?
That is correct, sir...negligable at best
-
That is correct, sir...negligable at best
Advice to Chick: Burn your Ed Hardy Shirts/Affliction/Famous Stars and Straps.
Other than that, carry on.
-
That is correct, sir...negligable at best
Thanks Bob, this helpful information. Something to think about when i'm in the gym!
Off-topic Question for you, I may be moving to NYC next year are there any good gyms that you recommend over there? Only place I ever traind at there was Golds Gym in Time Square - and that was... well.... interesting! :-\
-
Thanks Bob, this helpful information. Something to think about when i'm in the gym!
Off-topic Question for you, I may be moving to NYC next year are there any good gyms that you recommend over there? Only place I ever traind at there was Golds Gym in Time Square - and that was... well.... interesting! :-\
Depends on where you are...Bob Bonhams Strong and Shapley and Steve/ Bev Weinbergers Gym are two of the best, whichever you're closer to...
-
Advice to Chick: Burn your Ed Hardy Shirts/Affliction/Famous Stars and Straps.
Other than that, carry on.
Why dont you post some pics of yourself ,wearing what you think I should be wearing to look cool...help me out, Mr. Blackwell
-
That is correct, sir...negligable at best
Actually that is not entirely true. If one has not been training for a long period of time, or if their muscle has degenerated due to environmental conditions, different exercises will certainly cause more hormone response than others.
For instance, NASA has tested the efficacy of barbell squats versus leg extensions on returning astronauts and found the hormone response to be varied greatly.
-
some of you guys can't read. Bob did not say squats suck. He stated that they are a bad idea for taller guys and I agree. Even naturally squatting at my height I cannot help but lean forward. A long torso doesn't allow you to maintain that natural curve as it would some 5'1" midget who can stay straight throughout.
-
Depends on where you are...Bob Bonhams Strong and Shapley and Steve/ Bev Weinbergers Gym are two of the best, whichever you're closer to...
Thanks man, not sure yet about where we will be staying, we were there 2 weeks ago scoping out some areas and then the Blizzard hit, took the Acela back and stood the entire ride between New York and DC! That was fun! :)
Will look up those two gyms next time I'm there!
-
Why dont you post some pics of yourself ,wearing what you think I should be wearing to look cool...help me out, Mr. Blackwell
Harris Tweed, Pringle Cashmere, Bespoke Kassner with Turnbull and Asser tie.
(http://aesthetictraditionalist.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/taransay-harris-tweed-jacket-l.jpg)
-
Harris Tweed, Pringle Cashmere, Bespoke Kassner with Turnbull and Asner tie.
(http://aesthetictraditionalist.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/taransay-harris-tweed-jacket-l.jpg)
Do they even have bodybuilder sizes in those? I'm not even that big and I have the hardest time buying a suit!
-
Actually that is not entirely true. If one has not been training for a long period of time, or if their muscle has degenerated due to environmental conditions, different exercises will certainly cause more hormone response than others.
For instance, NASA has tested the efficacy of barbell squats versus leg extensions on returning astronauts and found the hormone response to be varied greatly.
Well. most guys training consistantly to get bigger, arent in Zero gravity for extended periods of time...which makes your point negligable...ANYTHING will have a greater impact after doing NOTHING for months
-
Do they even have bodybuilder sizes in those? I'm not even that big and I have the hardest time buying a suit!
I am sure Fat people can have them made so a Bodybuilder should have no problem.
I fit perfectly in a 42 or 44 if on a Vintage pattern and have the waist taken in. Any good tailor should be able to do this. Also, any custom suit maker can hand-tailor a bespoke suit to your measurements. Harris Tweed offers this service as well.
-
Actually that is not entirely true. If one has not been training for a long period of time, or if their muscle has degenerated due to environmental conditions, different exercises will certainly cause more hormone response than others.
For instance, NASA has tested the efficacy of barbell squats versus leg extensions on returning astronauts and found the hormone response to be varied greatly.
Bob certainly doesn't need me to speak for him, but comparing the efficacy of solely doing leg extensions vs. doing barbell squats is downright silly. Now, if NASA had compared barbell squats vs. a program of leg extensions/leg press/hack squats (or some variation threof), then you'd have a study.
I'm surprised people are actually trying to make weight training into rocket science. It ain't.
-
Harris Tweed, Pringle Cashmere, Bespoke Kassner with Turnbull and Asser tie.
Haha, meanwhile back in the physics dept...
-
Harris Tweed, Pringle Cashmere, Bespoke Kassner with Turnbull and Asser tie.
(http://aesthetictraditionalist.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/taransay-harris-tweed-jacket-l.jpg)
Awesome...next time I have a need to look like a Professor Higgins, I'll take your advices!
-
some of you guys can't read. Bob did not say squats suck. He stated that they are a bad idea for taller guys and I agree. Even naturally squatting at my height I cannot help but lean forward. A long torso doesn't allow you to maintain that natural curve as it would some 5'1" midget who can stay straight throughout.
Maybe if you have unusual proportions that mostly come with a frame well over 6', a clear minority at the gym. Most superheavyweight weightlifters are over 6' and they squat just fine in upright fashion, I have never heard of a lifter that complained that a backsquat wasn't for him. All weightlifters do them, and to hit the quads specifically.
-
Awesome...next time I have a need to look like a Professor Higgins, I'll take your advices!
Are you saying that the rain in Spain falls mainly on the plain?
-
i think bob prefers to WATCH others squat. . .
-
i think bob prefers to WATCH others squat. . .
Bob has a nice watch
-
hahahaha classic
Bob treated the gym like a social club while guys like Ronnie, Shawn, Kevin, Nasser, Dorian, gh15 treated it like a time to bust their asses and work hard. The proof is in the physiques. Tom Prince even said Bob would never go to failure.
No, you don't need to do all the exercises on the list... but for the most part stick with the basics.
Unlike Toms kidneys
-
J Appl Physiol 74: 882-887, 1993;
8750-7587/93
Articles by Hakkinen, K.
Articles by Pakarinen, A.
Journal of Applied Physiology, Vol 74, Issue 2 882-887, Copyright © 1993 by American Physiological Society
ARTICLES
Acute hormonal responses to two different fatiguing heavy-resistance protocols in male athletes
K. Hakkinen and A. Pakarinen
Department of Biology of Physical Activity, University of Jyvaskyla, Finland.
To examine endogenous hormonal responses to heavy-resistance exercise, ten male strength athletes performed two fatiguing but different types of sessions on separate days. In session A the loads for the leg extensor muscles in the squat-lift exercise were maximal so that the subjects performed 20 sets at 1 repetition maximum (RM) (20 x 1 RM x 100%), whereas during session B the loads were submaximal (70%) but the subjects performed each of the 10 sets until the RM (i.e., 10 repetitions/set or 10 x 10 x 70%). The recovery time between the sets was always 3 min. A decrease of 10.3 +/- 4.7% (P < 0.001) occurred in the squat-lift in 1 RM during session A, whereas session B led to a decrease of 24.6 +/- 18.9% (P < 0.001) in 10 RM. Increases in the concentrations of serum total and free testosterone (P < 0.05 and 0.05, respectively), cortisol (P < 0.001), and growth hormone (GH, P < 0.001) were observed during session B, whereas the corresponding changes during session A were statistically insignificant except for the relatively slight increase (P < 0.01) in serum GH level. The significant (P < 0.001) increase in blood lactate concentration during the two sessions correlated significantly (P < 0.01) with the increase in serum GH concentration. The morning values of serum testosterone and free testosterone were significantly (P < 0.05-0.001) lowered on the 1st and 2nd rest days after the sessions.
-
W. P. VanHelder1, 2, K. Casey1, 2 and M. W. Radomski1, 2
(1) Department of Physiology, and the School of Physical and Health Education, University of Toronto, Canada
(2) Defence and Civil Institute of Environmental Medicine, Downsview, P. O. Box 2000, M3M 3B9, Ontario, Canada
Accepted: 22 May 1987
Summary Five normal men performed seven sets of seven squats at a load equal to 80% of their seven repetition maximum. Plasma growth hormone (GH) and lactate levels increased during and after the completion of the exercise. A significant (r=0.93, P<0.001) linear correlation was found between GH changes and the corresponding oxygen Demand/Availability (D/A) ratio expressed by (where f=[lactate at time x]/[lactate at time 0]). A retrospective examination of previously published data from our laboratory and others also demonstrated the existence of a significant correlation between changes in plasma GH levels and the D/A ratios over a wide variety of exercise; aerobic and anaerobic, continuous and intermittent, weight lifting and cycling, in both fit and unfit subjects under normoxic and hypoxic conditions. It is suggested that the balance between oxygen demand and availability may be an important regulator of GH secretion during exercise.
-
J Appl Physiol 74: 882-887, 1993;
8750-7587/93
Articles by Hakkinen, K.
Articles by Pakarinen, A.
Journal of Applied Physiology, Vol 74, Issue 2 882-887, Copyright © 1993 by American Physiological Society
ARTICLES
Acute hormonal responses to two different fatiguing heavy-resistance protocols in male athletes
K. Hakkinen and A. Pakarinen
Department of Biology of Physical Activity, University of Jyvaskyla, Finland.
To examine endogenous hormonal responses to heavy-resistance exercise, ten male strength athletes performed two fatiguing but different types of sessions on separate days. In session A the loads for the leg extensor muscles in the squat-lift exercise were maximal so that the subjects performed 20 sets at 1 repetition maximum (RM) (20 x 1 RM x 100%), whereas during session B the loads were submaximal (70%) but the subjects performed each of the 10 sets until the RM (i.e., 10 repetitions/set or 10 x 10 x 70%). The recovery time between the sets was always 3 min. A decrease of 10.3 +/- 4.7% (P < 0.001) occurred in the squat-lift in 1 RM during session A, whereas session B led to a decrease of 24.6 +/- 18.9% (P < 0.001) in 10 RM. Increases in the concentrations of serum total and free testosterone (P < 0.05 and 0.05, respectively), cortisol (P < 0.001), and growth hormone (GH, P < 0.001) were observed during session B, whereas the corresponding changes during session A were statistically insignificant except for the relatively slight increase (P < 0.01) in serum GH level. The significant (P < 0.001) increase in blood lactate concentration during the two sessions correlated significantly (P < 0.01) with the increase in serum GH concentration. The morning values of serum testosterone and free testosterone were significantly (P < 0.05-0.001) lowered on the 1st and 2nd rest days after the sessions.
Ive seen your pictures...you'll need more than the ability to cut and paste to make me believe you have any credible knowledge of training/ bodybuilding....
-
Ive seen your pictures...you'll need more than the ability to cut and paste to make me believe you have any credible knowledge of training/ bodybuilding....
Bob,will I go pro?
-
Bob,will I go pro?
in what?
-
in what?
Bodybuilding
-
Fuck this thread is just limping along now.
-
Leslie A. Consitt1, 2 , Richard J. Bloomer1, 3 and Laurie Wideman1
(1) Department of Exercise and Sport Science, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Greensboro, NC 27402-6169, USA
(2) Human Performance Laboratory and Department of Exercise and Sport Science, East Carolina University, 363 Ward Sports Medicine Building, Greenville, NC 27858, USA
(3) Present address: Department of Health and Sport Sciences, The University of Memphis, Memphis, TN 38152-3480, USA
Accepted: 15 February 2007 Published online: 15 March 2007
Abstract The purpose of this study was to compare the growth hormone (GH) response, including the immunfunctional (IF) GH response, between an acute bout of aerobic and resistance exercise in the same subjects. Ten cross-trained males (24.3 ± 1.2 years) performed both 30 min of continuous cycling at 70% of VO2max, and intermittent free weight squatting at 70% of 1-RM, in a randomly assigned crossover design, separated by at least 1 week. Blood samples were collected at 10-min intervals for 2 h (30 min rest, 30 min exercise, 60 min recovery) and analyzed for total human and IF GH. After adjusting for the amount of work performed per minute of exercise, integrated GH AUC was significantly greater during the resistance session than the aerobic session as measured by both the total and IF GH assays (P = 0.008 and P = 0.014, respectively). Peak GH concentrations were significantly greater during the resistance session than the aerobic session (P = 0.05). A similar overall GH pattern was observed in response to both types of exercise, with peak values occurring at the end of exercise, regardless of the GH assay used. These data demonstrate that in young, cross-trained males, intermittent resistance exercise elicits a greater response of GH, including IF GH, compared to a continuous aerobic session, when controlling for the work performed per minute, intersubject variability, relative exercise intensity and session duration.
-
I fit perfectly in a 42 or 44 if on a Vintage pattern...
Brutal 14 year old boy physique. Nothing screams twink more than a 150 lb schmoe giving advices on heavy training.
-
Hormonal Responses to Resistance Exercise in Long-Term Trained and Untrained Middle-Aged Men
Cadore, Eduardo Lusa; Lhullier, Francisco Luiz Rodrigues; Brentano, Michel Arias; Silva, Eduardo Marczwski da; Ambrosini, Melissa Bueno; Spinelli, Rafael; Silva, Rodrigo Ferrari; Kruel, Luiz Fernando Martins
Abstract
Cadore, EL, Lhullier, FLR, Brentano, MA, Silva, EM, Ambrosini, MB, Spinelli, R, Silva, RF, and Kruel, LFM. Hormonal responses to resistance exercise in long-term trained and untrained middle-aged men. J Strength Cond Res 22(5): 1617-1624, 2008-This cross-sectional study compared hormonal responses to resistance exercise between trained and untrained men to investigate the adaptations of the endocrine system to long-term strength training in middle-aged men. Twenty-one middle-aged men were recruited for this study and matched into a strength-trained group (SG) (n = 10) and an untrained group (UG) (n = 11). In the SG, the individuals had practiced strength training for hypertrophy for at least 3 years. Upper- and lower-body muscle strength was measured with a 1 repetition maximum (1RM) test. Blood samples were collected at rest and after multiple sets of a superset strength training protocol (SSTP), with an intensity of 75% of 1RM values. With these blood samples, the levels of total testosterone (TT), free testosterone (FT), dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), cortisol, and sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) were determined. In addition, the TT-to-cortisol ratio and TT-to-SHBG ratio were calculated. There was no difference at rest between groups in hormonal values for TT, FT, DHEA, cortisol, the TT-to-SHBG ratio, and the TT-to-cortisol ratio. There were increases after SSTP in the levels of TT, FT, DHEA, and cortisol and the TT-to-SHBG ratio in the UG, but only FT increased in the SG. The SG demonstrated lower values in the TT-to-SHBG ratio after the training session. These results suggest the presence of alterations in anabolic and catabolic hormonal responses to resistance exercise in long-term trained middle-aged men, with the trained subjects demonstrating lower responsiveness in the hormone values. Long-term trained men seem to require a higher volume of training, at least similar to their daily workout, to stimulate greater hormone responses.
-
Brutal 14 year old boy physique. Nothing screams twink more than a 150 lb schmoe giving advices on heavy training.
I bet if you were not obese, your suit jacket would be in the 30s.
People NEVER wear the right fit as it is,(always much much larger than they are supposed to).
No human under 6 ft will ever wear a 50 inch jacket, no matter how many roids they are on and have it fit correctly. If you are wearing anything in the 50s and you are under 6 ft, you are MORBIDLY obese.
Hope this helps.
-
I bet if you were not obese, your suit jacket would be in the 30s.
People NEVER wear the right fit as it is,(always much much larger than they are supposed to).
No human under 6 ft will ever wear a 50 inch jacket, no matter how many roids they are on and have it fit correctly. If you are wearing anything in the 50s and you are under 6 ft, you are MORBIDLY obese.
Hope this helps.
Not a single one of my suits fit me well (and I have to wear one everyday to work), my tailor hates me!
-
Ive seen your pictures...you'll need more than the ability to cut and paste to make me believe you have any credible knowledge of training/ bodybuilding....
Surely this isnt a cheap shot about someone being smaller than your average juiced up bodybuilder having no knowledge of lifting becos of their size? :-X
-
Surely this isnt a cheap shot about someone being smaller than your average juiced up bodybuilder having no knowledge of lifting becos of their size? :-X
No...for lack of practical knowledge. Would you trust a dr. to perform surgery on you when he learned it in college, but never actually did one?
Anyone can cut and paste, doesnt make them experienced, or knowledgeable...sometime s, things just dont work in the real world, while they look pretty damn good on paper
-
No...for lack of practical knowledge. Would you trust a dr. to perform surgery on you when he learned it in college, but never actually did one?
Anyone can cut and paste, doesnt make them experienced, or knowledgeable...sometime s, things just dont work in the real world, while they look pretty damn good on paper
There are tons and tons and tons of Doctors that know how to make muscles bigger. There are even a few thousand doctors that workout; I see plenty at my gym.
Just because you know how to do something in theory, does not mean it will translate to reality.
-
No...for lack of practical knowledge. Would you trust a dr. to perform surgery on you when he learned it in college, but never actually did one?
Anyone can cut and paste, doesnt make them experienced, or knowledgeable...sometime s, things just dont work in the real world, while they look pretty damn good on paper
To be fair to TA Bob, that's a pretty groundless dismissal. If there's no fault in the study then it's results are valid and reproducible.
Still, I liked your article and agree that the barbell is blindly worshipped by some trainees. Injury prevention is more important than a minimal increase in progress.
-
I bet if you were not obese, your suit jacket would be in the 30s.
People NEVER wear the right fit as it is,(always much much larger than they are supposed to).
No human under 6 ft will ever wear a 50 inch jacket, no matter how many roids they are on and have it fit correctly. If you are wearing anything in the 50s and you are under 6 ft, you are MORBIDLY obese.
Hope this helps.
You wear an "off the rack" size 42 jacket...you're a skinny, know-nothing twink. I'd suggest a lot of heavy chest and back work to try to do something about that pigeon-chest of yours. Or you could just wait until you reach puberty and hope that your rib cage expands.
Ironic that an extreme ectomorph like you is giving advice on heavy basic movements....you're another Google/Wikipedia training expert, they're a dime a dozen around here.
-
Exactly...training to failure (true failure) is just about the dumbest routine I ever tried...and an engraved invitation to injury...often, the failure, is the muscle or tendon pulling off the bone, or some other nagging injury that takes you out of action for months...
What are you naming these guys for? The only guy that trained to failure...is Yates, who is the last guy I would use as a example of injury free training
Nothing magical happens at the failure point but saying only Yates trained to failure? Have you seen Branch train? Coleman? Based on the videos I've seen these two guys trained beyond failure from the very first rep a lot of times! Using entirely too heavy weights to perform even a single "correct" rep. Yates execution was very precise and correct, not cheated and bounced from the first rep like so many others'. And Branch tore many muscles, Coleman had tons of small tears. That Yates had more severe injuries wasn't because he was more reckless and trained "heavier" and to failure. He was just unlucky, less injury resistant. Had Yates trained like Coleman he might have never even made it to the pros.
-
Nothing magical happens at the failure point but saying only Yates trained to failure? Have you seen Branch train? Coleman? Based on the videos I've seen these two guys trained beyond failure from the very first rep a lot of times! Using entirely too heavy weights to perform even a single "correct" rep. Yates execution was very precise and correct, not cheated and bounced from the first rep like so many others'. And Branch tore many muscles, Coleman had tons of small tears. That Yates had more severe injuries wasn't because he was more reckless and trained "heavier" and to failure. He was just unlucky, less injury resistant. Had Yates trained like Coleman he might have never even made it to the pros.
HUH?
-
Nothing magical happens at the failure point but saying only Yates trained to failure? Have you seen Branch train? Coleman? Based on the videos I've seen these two guys trained beyond failure from the very first rep a lot of times! Using entirely too heavy weights to perform even a single "correct" rep. Yates execution was very precise and correct, not cheated and bounced from the first rep like so many others'. And Branch tore many muscles, Coleman had tons of small tears. That Yates had more severe injuries wasn't because he was more reckless and trained "heavier" and to failure. He was just unlucky, less injury resistant. Had Yates trained like Coleman he might have never even made it to the pros.
X2 Mentzer never had injuries as I recall, its all about form and drugs allow you to push beyond your limits as well.
-
HUH?
Meaning they couldn't even perform ONE SINGLE "correct" rep with the weight they chose. Too heavy. So there won't be a clear "failure point" because the set starts out with cheating and just progresses with increased breakdown of form as they tire.
Think of Coleman doing T-bar rows. Did he train to failure? Maybe not in the traditional sense because it's just an ugly display of heaving the weight using every muscle in your body and just cheating more and more. It's beyond failure from the first rep! :D
-
Chick, would you agree with something that I've realized over the last decade of training...that;
Most exercises are no better than others so long as they target the same muscle area, but the one that fits your body type/training style will be the 'best' one to use?
I haven't touched barbells for biceps in years...just dumbells, yet my arms are a good size. Ditto with triceps; no skullcrushers here, as they aggrevate my elbows...but dumbell extensions get the job done pain free (in the joints, that is).
As far as squats go, I've tried to do leg presses exclusively but sometimes I prefer the extra benefits of squats as they target more of the body (lower back especially)...that said, do I think squats build better QUADS than leg presses? I don't think they do, for me anyway.
Again...I've found through trial and error that the 'best' exercise for any given body part is the one that allows you to: train the target area with the required intensity, fit your body type/training style so as not to cause excessive joint pain.
The only injury I've had was the result of too much weight doing two-bench dips...an exercise that, before the injury, was a great way to finish a triceps workout. Unfortunately, not anymore. That's probably the hardest lesson to learn...how far to go without going too far. That day, even though I was capable of lifting the weight, I was too lean to push my joints that far. I'm not sure that I could have seen the injury coming; but I now have a better idea how to prevent it happening again. If you're precontest lean, DON'T go stupid heavy...even if you can, it may affect you in the long run.
-
Bob still has much of his original hair
-
Bob,will i become a pro bodybuilder?
-
Bob,will i become a pro bodybuilder?
Start your own federation...simples!
-
Meaning they couldn't even perform ONE SINGLE "correct" rep with the weight they chose. Too heavy. So there won't be a clear "failure point" because the set starts out with cheating and just progresses with increased breakdown of form as they tire.
Think of Coleman doing T-bar rows. Did he train to failure? Maybe not in the traditional sense because it's just an ugly display of heaving the weight using every muscle in your body and just cheating more and more. It's beyond failure from the first rep! :D
I dont agree with this at all. To say that Coleman couldnt do 1 correct rep with the weight he used in videos is ridiculous. I would say Yates was more careless then Ronnie. Taking sets way past the effective point.
-
I dont agree with this at all. To say that Coleman couldnt do 1 correct rep with the weight he used in videos is ridiculous. I would say Yates was more careless then Ronnie. Taking sets way past the effective point.
What do you mean by "way past the effective point"? Maybe a slight touch from his partner on the last rep or two is way past the effective point? Dorian did deadlifts with 440lbs max, Coleman did deads with 800lbs. Was Yates that much weaker or was he just way more careful?
Have you seen Coleman do the t-bar rows for example?
See at 3:20. Don't know if that was even the peak set but it's leg drive and then meeting the weight with the chest. See the squats a 4:30. Does it look like he's in full control of the weight?
Here's an even better example at 0:30
-
I dont agree with this at all. To say that Coleman couldnt do 1 correct rep with the weight he used in videos is ridiculous. I would say Yates was more careless then Ronnie. Taking sets way past the effective point.
lol coleman trains with the most reckless of form , it works for him but if "most" were to try they would rupture and tear muscles left and right..Dorian trained with quite decent form and used to lighten the weight if he thought his form was getting to sloppy.
-
FYI
If you look at the upper thigh development of guys who don't squat (yates etc.) it looks odd, stringy and doesn't flow. Just because judges don't comment on it doesn't mean it's not there. I'm surprised yates doesn't get called out for this hole more often. The upper quads looks real funny next to the guys he's "beating"... :o
You may notice certain irregularities in the quads of other anti-squat advocates. As a matter of respect those fellows will remain nameless.
Have a nice day.
8)
-
lol coleman trains with the most reckless of form , it works for him but if "most" were to try they would rupture and tear muscles left and right..Dorian trained with quite decent form and used to lighten the weight if he thought his form was getting to sloppy.
X2
-
FYI
If you look at the upper thigh development of guys who don't squat (yates etc.) it looks odd, stringy and doesn't flow. Just because judges don't comment on it doesn't mean it's not there. I'm surprised yates doesn't get called out for this hole more often. The upper quads looks real funny next to the guys he's "beating"... :o
You may notice certain irregularities in the quads of other anti-squat advocates. As a matter of respect those fellows will remain nameless.
Have a nice day.
8)
Yates was a squatter.
Have a nice day
-
Yates was a squatter.
Have a nice day
(according to DORIAN YATES: December 26th, 2009, 09:11 AM)
"I didnt do either freeweight squat or bench past my first few years of training as i found i goyt better results from other movements and deadlift..."
http://forums.musculardevelopment.com/showthread.php?p=1801587 (http://forums.musculardevelopment.com/showthread.php?p=1801587)
???
-
(according to DORIAN YATES: December 26th, 2009, 09:11 AM)
"I didnt do either freeweight squat or bench past my first few years of training as i found i goyt better results from other movements and deadlift..."
http://forums.musculardevelopment.com/showthread.php?p=1801587 (http://forums.musculardevelopment.com/showthread.php?p=1801587)
???
He did them in a smith machine
-
short term pulse of GH and testosterone due to training doensnt effect growth. heavy squats dont give you bigger arms by an overall hormone pulse.
as for free weight vs machine....it depends..some machines are good some not (depends on person too,)..some will have problems doing squats safely due to their structure many wont,, and like i said you have to factor in strength level and drug use into the equation too. anything that lets you use progressively heavier tension onm the muscle will grow you
-
Meaning they couldn't even perform ONE SINGLE "correct" rep with the weight they chose. Too heavy. So there won't be a clear "failure point" because the set starts out with cheating and just progresses with increased breakdown of form as they tire.
Think of Coleman doing T-bar rows. Did he train to failure? Maybe not in the traditional sense because it's just an ugly display of heaving the weight using every muscle in your body and just cheating more and more. It's beyond failure from the first rep! :D
good view point, i think colemans training style (alot of momentum and partial bouncy reps can create high tension but also increased risk of injury). i agree i dont think dorians training is inherently more dangerous than colemans...some people just have different tolerance for abuse. also these guys are on such amount of drugs i dont think so many conclsuions can be drawn from their training although yes its popular to analyse these guys working routines, i have done it too but generalizing from this analysis doesnt necessarily say so much.
-
Why on earth are you asking Chic's advice?. Pros don't know how to train and a lot of them are on hormones before they have ever even lifted a weight. Safe bet that he's probably never trained hard or heavy in his whole life. His fake muscles come from steroids and you don't even need to work out when you are on them. Steroids will make you bigger and stronger without doing anything at all but they don't want you to know that. How do you think female bodybuilders get so muscular with their puny workouts and I for one have yet to see a prize bull working out in a gymnasium.
-
Why on earth are you asking Chic's advice?. Pros don't know how to train and a lot of them are on hormones before they have ever even lifted a weight. Safe bet that he's probably never trained hard or heavy in his whole life. His fake muscles come from steroids and you don't even need to work out when you are on them. Steroids will make you bigger and stronger without doing anything at all but they don't want you to know that. How do you think female bodybuilders get so muscular with their puny workouts and I for one have yet to see a prize bull working out in a gymnasium.
LOL
-
LOL
Bob, what could lifetime naturals learn from your (and other pros') training experiences when most of you guys don't even bother lifting unless your on the sauce?
-
Bob, what could lifetime naturals learn from your (and other pros') training experiences when most of you guys don't even bother lifting unless your on the sauce?
Get on the juice asap if you wana look like a BB :D
-
The bench press is one of the most overrated exercises in the gym. It screws your front delts and there are much saver and more effective exercises like dumbell presses and wide dips.
I dont dought for some people the bench is a godsend, packing on muscle. But when you're 6'2" with a wingspan of someone 6'5" bench sucks. I get no pump in my chest and almost luckily I hurt my shoulder doing them probably only a couple years into training. It was a blessing because I scrapped them for incline bar or DBs. Even though I am tall its more my torso than legs, so squats are out too. I have always loved deadlifts though I dont do them much because I dont want to widen my waist. Theres plenty of people who the big 3 dont work for. For some because they are lazy but others body dont favor the exercise. You do everything BESIDES the big 3 and take it to the max you will grow. A sidenote I hate little 5'5" bench heros who have t-rex arms. Thats ok they have a big bench but I gotta bend down to talk to them.
-
LOL
Bob, what is your take on smith machine incline and flat bench?
-
This whole thread highlights why Chick has never won a major show. Simple Taking heavy doses of drugs and doing pussy workouts will not make you a top tier pro. Guys like Chick, Tamali and even Wolf now are in that class. Afraid of pain and blood and pushing themselves to the ultimate limit to succeed.
-
I was always warned by the old timers and vet's when I started out about doing behind the neck presses, they all told me if would f*ck up my shoulders badly.. that seems to be another one of those old school exercises that you still see some jackasses doing (incorrectly) their first week of working out, I gave up on that exercise once I started hearing click and pops in my shoulders from doing them :S
-
I was always warned by the old timers and vet's when I started out about doing behind the neck presses, they all told me if would f*ck up my shoulders badly.. that seems to be another one of those old school exercises that you still see some jackasses doing (incorrectly) their first week of working out, I gave up on that exercise once I started hearing click and pops in my shoulders from doing them :S
It's a sad thing that there are a lot of trainers who don't seem to know or care about risky exercises/techniques. On the other hand there are a lot of guys who don't give a fuck when you try to make them aware :-\
-
This whole thread highlights why Chick has never won a major show. Simple Taking heavy doses of drugs and doing pussy workouts will not make you a top tier pro. Guys like Chick, Tamali and even Wolf now are in that class. Afraid of pain and blood and pushing themselves to the ultimate limit to succeed.
And how many pro shows have you done so far, Mr Expert?
-
Bench = best single compound excercise for chest.....you're neurological and muscle response with regards to pec/delt/tricep development is unsurpassed
As for Hammer vs Bench.....are yu kidding me?.....its a non-argument.....people tear pecs because they do singles and overload the bar....fucking ego-warriors....what, 6 reps is considered high reps hey?.....lol.....Arnold, Sergio, Nubret.....gods with chests from the heavens.....how do you think they developed them?
Bttom line -----------> show me someone with the good fortune to have years of benching Vs a hammer strength pirate, and the quality of development will be day and night.
-
Bench = best single compound excercise for chest.....you're neurological and muscle response with regards to pec/delt/tricep development is unsurpassed
As for Hammer vs Bench.....are yu kidding me?.....its a non-argument.....people tear pecs because they do singles and overload the bar....fucking ego-warriors....what, 6 reps is considered high reps hey?.....lol.....Arnold, Sergio, Nubret.....gods with chests from the heavens.....how do you think they developed them?
Bttom line -----------> show me someone with the good fortune to have years of benching Vs a hammer strength pirate, and the quality of development will be day and night.
yes that is correct-bob dressed like an out dated pirate one time when he was mcing a show
-
So, if I just jack up my test intake, I can get 20-inch arms by lifting 25-lb dumbbells??
If you have very good genetics- yes.
Hell I have seen semi-fat drug free guys with arms that big that rarely do curls.
-
Exactly...training to failure (true failure) is just about the dumbest routine I ever tried...and an engraved invitation to injury...often, the failure, is the muscle or tendon pulling off the bone, or some other nagging injury that takes you out of action for months...
BOB,
Are you saying DC training is dumb? Afterall he advocates rest pause sets which is basically taking 2 extra sets to failure after you already reached muscular failure.
-
Bench = best single compound excercise for chest.....you're neurological and muscle response with regards to pec/delt/tricep development is unsurpassed
As for Hammer vs Bench.....are yu kidding me?.....its a non-argument.....people tear pecs because they do singles and overload the bar....fucking ego-warriors....what, 6 reps is considered high reps hey?.....lol.....Arnold, Sergio, Nubret.....gods with chests from the heavens.....how do you think they developed them?
Bttom line -----------> show me someone with the good fortune to have years of benching Vs a hammer strength pirate, and the quality of development will be day and night.
Incline, not flat..
-
BOB,
Are you saying DC training is dumb? Afterall he advocates rest pause sets which is basically taking 2 extra sets to failure after you already reached muscular failure.
No...it crap ;D
If you're doing multiple sets, then you're not really training to failure, are you? Thats why I said TRUE failure..
As Ive stated many times here...the only right and wrong is what the end result is. ANY training method is fine if the ends justify the means
-
I can see that the always pompous and delusionally self-important True Adonis' cut and paste skills has not diminished with age. I wonder if he's perfected his faux European accent yet.
Bob Chick once again smacking down the haters without so much as a single strand of the greatest head of hair in the business falling out of place.
-
Hell I have seen semi-fat drug free guys with arms that big that rarely do curls.
No you haven't.
-
Harris Tweed, Pringle Cashmere, Bespoke Kassner with Turnbull and Asser tie.
(http://aesthetictraditionalist.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/taransay-harris-tweed-jacket-l.jpg)
lies lies lies......you forgot the lip stick and kmart turtle neck you broke ass FAG....
-
lies lies lies......you forgot the lip stick and kmart turtle neck you broke ass FAG....
are you suggesting adonis has a love for his protein straight from the tap?
if so, i concur.
-
Regarding bench presses, I make the claim that flat benches develop the upper chest better than inclines. Look at the upper chests of pros who did tons of flat work and compare to those who did mostly inclines. Anyone disagree? ;D
-
Regarding bench presses, I make the claim that flat benches develop the upper chest better than inclines. Look at the upper chests of pros who did tons of flat work and compare to those who did mostly inclines. Anyone disagree? ;D
i think flat press can grow your chest very well overall but also think its a good idea to cover all your bases and include incline pressing. as bodybuilder do both. some kind of flat press +some kind of incline press.
-
I remember over the years, you saying that some exercises were pointless 'ego' exercises, ie. bench press, I think you mentioned squats or deadlifts as well.. I agree with your assessment with a lot of these, could you possibly post the complete list. I remember on your bodybuilding.com Masters series you mentioned some of these exercises...
thanks.
he admits he did these to build a base
you reach a point where the risk outweighs the reward with those kinds of lifts
-
he admits he did these to build a base
you reach a point where the risk outweighs the reward with those kinds of lifts
That reminds me of Titus and his 405 rule
-
That reminds me of Titus and his 405 rule
whats the 405 rule?