Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: TestDummy on March 02, 2015, 03:24:57 PM
-
I know there are some good ones out there! When I was in the Navy these 2 dipshit's kept asking me stupid questions while I was in the gym so I told them the best way to get huge was to drink a big glass of salt water every day.... sure enough the next day I see them in the galley both chugging a big ass glass of salt water...
-
It's only gay if you swallow ::)
-
Shizzo recently described to me the advantages of possessing "functional strength."
-
Can't lose bodyfat while eating carbs (heard this one a lot around here lately)
-
Joon-science: "You'll lose three pounds of muscle for every one pound of fat while cutting and on the sauce"
-
can't build muscle and lose fat at same time.
can only gain .5 pounds of muscle per week.
-
A calorie is a calorie
-
That the nervous system will respond the same way to volume as to max attempts... somehow this is beleived by literally everyone on these powerlifting programs. Even lifting gurus.
-
That insulin alone is useless...
That standard dose is 10iu...
That without drugs you cant be strong...
That ifbb pros got big from supplements...
That benching with a slingshot is necessary..
-
Do not train biceps the day before back or you'll have a weak back workout
-
Training the inner/outer/upper/lower <name of muscle> ::)
-
Do not train biceps the day before back or you'll have a weak back workout
That is true.
-
An old timer once told me to not shower immediately after working out.
Says it ruins the pump. You want the blood to stay in your muscles for as long as possible.
-
An old timer once told me to not shower immediately after working out.
Says it ruins the pump. You want the blood to stay in your muscles for as long as possible.
I never told you not to shower you stinky bastard.
The best bro science I have heard is that drugs are just the finishing touch. Then when you see a guy who completely gives up drugs looking like crap, their new tune is lifting without drugs are a waste of time.
-
"You should bathe more than twice a month"
-
You need muscle maturity
Grainy muscle
Supplements will make you infertile
Creatine comes from the word " creation" which means it is created so not natural and very dangerous
When you'll stop lifting your pecs will turn to tits and your skin will hang
-
The "original" Hebrews were BLACK.
The "original" Egyptians were BLACK.
Just two examples of why science is not a strong point of "bros".
Were we talking about something else?
-
That is true.
Agree.
-
"Ditch the eggs brah. Too much cholesterol in there."
-
you gain muscle from eating turkey because of the steroids they use to grow them
bench
-
Weighted chins are dangerous and non productive.
-
"You should bathe more than twice a month"
Hahaha
-
If you play with it too much, you'll go blind.
-
I remember this gem from a similar thread:
Love this one - " when consuming a protein shake make sure to chew it so your brain recognizes it as food and not water " ;D
-
Shizzo recently described to me the advantages of possessing "functional strength."
Shizzo and functional strength just don't go together, the heaviest thing he lifts is is fat, hungover, piss soaked, fat sack of shit body out of his bed every afternoon.
-
"Crossfit" ::)
-
"Crossfit" ::)
;D
-
Treadmill at 3.2mph for more than 45 minutes only burns muscle. - Bob Chick
-
I remember this gem from a similar thread:
I remember reading about chewing your shakes on t-nation a long while back. He had some interesting reasons to his theory, not saying it's true...
-
The bunny suit will protect you from getting HIV.
-
You can eat huge amounts of ice cream and pizza while losing fat. (you can also watch your nails and muscle grow) just need to get HGH! Blue ones ::)
But the biggest bs is V.Basiles hypertrophy!
-
Squats will add inches to your arm
Cardio kill gains
you cant get fat on tren and/or gh
muscle maturity
graininess
-
Squats will add inches to your arm
Cardio kill gains
you cant get fat on tren and/or gh
muscle maturity
graininess
Haha, yes!
"Direct arm training isn't necessary"
-
You can't do cardio and weightlifting at the same day and make progress ::)
-
If you don't use it you lose it.
-
If you don't use it you lose it.
that one is true for me. I lose gains like no other if I don't train or eat.
-
You can eat huge amounts of ice cream and pizza while losing fat. (you can also watch your nails and muscle grow) just need to get HGH! Blue ones ::)
But the biggest bs is V.Basiles hypertrophy!
There's actually some truth to eating ice cream and pizza and still lose fat while taking GH, depends on your genetics
-
There's actually some truth to eating ice cream and pizza and still lose fat while taking GH, depends on your genetics
Only on legit Kigtropin.
8)
-
Squats will "spread your hips." Vince Gironda. Any old Iron Man magazine has tons of Bro science even before there were Bros.
-
Doing pull overs will expand the rib cage making your chest look wider.
-
Once you go black you never go back.
-
Once you go black you never go back.
Once you go mack you never go black
-
You need to lifty heavy weight to get big.
You can build a good chest without Bench Presses.
If only the tip goes in your ass it's not gay.
-
It's only gay if you want it to be-Robert Maximilian Chick
-
Masturbation will make you weak... ::) so guys beating off to the porn section is good for your gains.. ;)
-
Medium weights and lots of reps (15-20) makes you cut!! ;)
Heavy Weights 6-8 reps makes you huge!! :D
-
The best protein is straight from the tap.
-
Cybergenics.
-
(http://www.gmv.com.au/images/09%20bodybuilding%20pix/Cottrell-1.jpg)
Quality not quantity.
-
(http://www.bodybuilders.com/ray57.jpg)
Always drink two big glasses of water with meals.
-
Cybergenics.
Sigh. I spent some good money on that.
-
Graininess/muscle maturity= amount of tren and winny and lack of bodyfat
-
Tren is abs in a bottle.
-
Careful to not jog after weights or you will run off all your gains.
-
- 45 minute anabolic window
- No such thing as overtraining, only undereating and under sleeping
- Hit each muscle group only once every 7 days
- Any of the Tnation supplement "protocols"
-
- 45 minute anabolic window
I wouldn't call that "bro science ", just a fancy name for a simple concept. When I was a kid, I could down much more food after a workout than I could on eating at the same time on a day I didn't train.
- No such thing as overtraining, only undereating and under sleeping
There is such thing as overtraining; but much can be attributed to lack of rest and crappy diets.
- Hit each muscle group only once every 7 days
This makes no sense, especially since most people start training by doing that whole-body workout thing, 3 times a week.
- Any of the Tnation supplement "protocols"
I rarely, if ever, go to that site. So I can't speak on that one way or the other.
-
Careful to not jog after weights or you will run off all your gains.
yes so funny ;D
-
I wouldn't call that "bro science ", just a fancy name for a simple concept. When I was a kid, I could down much more food after a workout than I could on eating at the same time on a day I didn't train.
There is such thing as overtraining; but much can be attributed to lack of rest and crappy diets.
This makes no sense, especially since most people start training by doing that whole-body workout thing, 3 times a week.
I rarely, if ever, go to that site. So I can't speak on that one way or the other.
Eh I think the point of this thread was to post things that you think are bro-science and don't agree with? Meaning I don't actually believe those things I listed so not sure why you are trying to debunk them?
-
Sigh. I spent some good money on that.
Actually it was before my time, but I kept hearing stories about it. It was the opposite of what Ultimate Orange was. Where as Ultimate Orange worked like a mofo for energy and leaning out, Cybergenics didn't do shit. From what I understand they put you on this crazy ass system of deliberate over training to shock your body into adapting.
Their spokesperson Franco Santeriollo or however it was spelled, was a joke. I found an old mag that a buddy of mine had in his collection where they did an article in it on him with the title "I Will Be Mr Olympia In Three Years". I don't even know if the dude ever set foot on the Mr O stage.
-
Doing pull overs will expand the rib cage making your chest look wider.
I forgot about that one!
-
I forgot about that one!
I did pullovers for years without the slightest hint of "expansion". Damn you, Arnold!
-
Medium weights and lots of reps (15-20) makes you cut!! ;)
Heavy Weights 6-8 reps makes you huge!! :D
That's not true?
-
That cock and vagina taste the same. They don't.
-
I did pullovers for years without the slightest hint of "expansion". Damn you, Arnold!
Exactly! Arnold has to be the Godfather of bro science, I've heard him say so many crazy things over the years
-
That cock and vagina taste the same. They don't.
lol sometimes my cock smells like vagina....
-
Actually it was before my time, but I kept hearing stories about it. It was the opposite of what Ultimate Orange was. Where as Ultimate Orange worked like a mofo for energy and leaning out, Cybergenics didn't do shit. From what I understand they put you on this crazy ass system of deliberate over training to shock your body into adapting.
Their spokesperson Franco Santeriollo or however it was spelled, was a joke. I found an old mag that a buddy of mine had in his collection where they did an article in it on him with the title "I Will Be Mr Olympia In Three Years". I don't even know if the dude ever set foot on the Mr O stage.
This is correct. The system was so extreme that pretty much no one could follow it, but I did, down to the letter and got jack shit results. But the diet part did hip me to the importance of monitoring everything and that was a silver lining. Cybergenics broke my cherry on the "supplements are a scam" idea.
-
If you have cramps before a show, eat 2 aspirin and a thin slice of banana. Hearsay to a friend from JJ Marsh.
-
If you have cramps before a show, eat 2 aspirin and a thin slice of banana. Hearsay to a friend from JJ Marsh.
JJ Marsh used to work out sometimes at Lee Haney's in Atlanta when I lived there. Nice guy, very pleasant but you could never tell when he was being serious about anything.
I overheard him telling one group of amateur competitors that having sex right before stepping onstage was the key to his trade mark vascularity. He said "really vigorously and hard thrusting for at least 15 minutes." At first I thought "WTF?" because competitors today can barely walk to the stage without needing an oxygen mask, no way in hell they could have the wind power to jerk off, let alone actually have sex for 15 minutes.
But then again, when he was competing they were much healthier and wasn't carrying a shit load of extra weight around. Who knows?
-
That cock and vagina taste the same. They don't.
Gonna take the easy bait here....
So tell me then, what does cock taste like???
-
Tren is abs in a bottle.
lol! i heard that one or Gods piss
-
Eh I think the point of this thread was to post things that you think are bro-science and don't agree with? Meaning I don't actually believe those things I listed so not sure why you are trying to debunk them?
I'm not trying to debunk anything. In fact, I actually agree with you (to a certain degree) on most of what you said.
-
Best one!
Anyone can look good on steroids!
-
I'm not trying to debunk anything. In fact, I actually agree with you (to a certain degree) on most of what you said.
Why don't you just take it easy McGay, or do we need to take this outside?
-
Why don't you just take it easy McGay, or do we need to take this outside?
Would love to hold you back :P
-
Muscle maturity.
-
Sounds like DickYay needs an external adjustment to his tone.
-
Wide grip grins will make your back wider.
-
Wide grip grins will make your back wider.
Another one that I did for 20 years hurting my shoulders and elbows along the way. Thanks Arnold!
-
Another one that I did for 20 years hurting my shoulders and elbows along the way. Thanks Arnold!
I believed this too when I first started. But Lee Haney told me "you know what makes your back get wide? Getting a full contraction and you can't do that while in a half crucifix pose."
-
I believed this too when I first started. But Lee Haney told me "you know what makes your back get wide? Getting a full contraction and you can do that while in a half crucifix pose."
Only recently have I noticed that bent-over rows make my back wider than pullups. All these years, "Rows make the back thick, pullups make the back wide" and I believed it.
-
squats make your hips wide.
-
Only recently have I noticed that bent-over rows make my back wider than pullups. All these years, "Rows make the back thick, pullups make the back wide" and I believed it.
Vince McMahon would would have realized this fallacy from the beginning, and did that walk right out of the gym.
(http://i.imgur.com/oDwalX0.jpg)
-
Only recently have I noticed that bent-over rows make my back wider than pullups. All these years, "Rows make the back thick, pullups make the back wide" and I believed it.
Same here. But Haney said when a muscle grows, it grows in all directions not just one. Make it bigger and it will look thicker and wider as a result.
-
Another one that I did for 20 years hurting my shoulders and elbows along the way. Thanks Arnold!
So, this all basically boils down to the old adage, "One's man's meat is another man's poison".
An exercise that's worthless for one guy does wonders for another. Even Arnold experienced that with preacher curls. He had that exercise pushed on him because he trained at Vince Gironda's gym and that exercise was the one that Larry Scott did to blow up his arms.
Arnold said he later reduced his usage of preacher ("Scott") curls because, while they did wonders for Scott, they did far less for him.
Squats are in the same boat. In one magazine, you have two USA champions talking legs. One sings the praises of squats (1999 USA winner, Melvin Anthony); the other declares that squats suck (2000 USA champion, Bob Chicherillo). Both had great leg development, yet the advocate different exercises to get there.
I don't train to failure; others swear by going to failure. Is one "bro science" vs the other?
-
So, this all basically boils down to the old adage, "One's man's meat is another man's poison".
An exercise that worthless for one guy does wonders for another. Even Arnold experienced that with preacher curls. He had that exercise pushed on him because he trained at Vince Gironda's gym and that exercise was the one that Larry Scott did to blow up his arms.
Arnold said he later reduced his usage of preacher ("Scott") curls because, while they did wonders for Scott, they did far less for him.
Squats are in the same boat. In one magazine, you have two USA champions talking legs. One sings the praises of squats (1999 USA winner, Melvin Anthony); the other declares that squats suck (2000 USA champion, Bob Chicherillo). Both had great leg development, yet the advocate different exercises to get there.
I don't train to failure; others swear by going to failure. Is one "bro science" vs the other?
Bob Chic hates squats and bench because of his longer limbs. It is a lot harder keeping heavy weight balanced with longer limbs than shorter.
-
Incline benching develops the upper chest.
-
Bob Chic hates squats and bench because of his longer limbs. It is a lot harder keeping heavy weight balanced with longer limbs than shorter.
Good point. Anthony is 5'8" (I believe); Chic is 6 feet.
-
Whatever happened to Anthony? He just disappeared off the scene.
-
Human body cannot process more than 30 grams of protein in one feeding.
-
An exercise that worthless for one guy does wonders for another. Even Arnold experienced that with preacher curls. He had that exercise pushed on him because he trained at Vince Gironda's gym and that exercise was the one that Larry Scott did to blow up his arms.
Arnold said he later reduced his usage of preacher ("Scott") curls because, while they did wonders for Scott, they did far less for him.
To quote Larry Scott about the preacher bench: "That series I just mentioned is very, very painful, but it just blows the arms up like nothing I've ever seen--- if the preacher bench is designed correctly."
"Most of the benches you see have a flat face , and they don't work."
"As a matter of fact, I remember Arnold saying to me,'I don't know how you ever made any progress on a preacher bench.' And I went in to shoot some photos on the preacher bench at the gym in Venice where he was training, and thought, 'God, no wonder he says that. This is terrible."
Though Arnold did get some training from Vince Gironda, he didn't train on the better designed preacher bench, that Vince had in his gym, as Larry Scott did.
-
Bob Chic hates squats and bench because of his longer limbs. It is a lot harder keeping heavy weight balanced with longer limbs than shorter.
That's why Chic utilizes a different technique and a partner:
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=390809.0;attach=422358;image)
Sometimes his partner gets overly excited though.
(http://i42.tinypic.com/o7mt4x.gif)
-
don't know if it's been mentioned, but two words.....stabilizing muscles
-
don't know if it's been mentioned, but two words.....stabilizing muscles
Stabilizing muscles?
-
Stabilizing muscles?
Yes, the obvious reason that "free weights" are vastly superior to machines. Because "Free weights" require you to use your "stabilizer muscles" to move the weight.
-
Yes, the obvious reason that "free weights" are vastly superior to machines. Because "Free weights" require you to use your "stabilizer muscles" to move the weight.
Yes, I thought he meant "stabilizer" muscles, not "stabilizing" muscles. That was what the question mark was for.
-
Only recently have I noticed that bent-over rows make my back wider than pullups. All these years, "Rows make the back thick, pullups make the back wide" and I believed it.
Bent over BB rows one of the best back exercises around.
-
Vince McMahon would would have realized this fallacy from the beginning, and did that walk right out of the gym.
(http://i.imgur.com/oDwalX0.jpg)
spot on
-
To quote Larry Scott about the preacher bench: "That series I just mentioned is very, very painful, but it just blows the arms up like nothing I've ever seen--- if the preacher bench is designed correctly."
"Most of the benches you see have a flat face , and they don't work."
"As a matter of fact, I remember Arnold saying to me,'I don't know how you ever made any progress on a preacher bench.' And I went in to shoot some photos on the preacher bench at the gym in Venice where he was training, and thought, 'God, no wonder he says that. This is terrible."
Though Arnold did get some training from Vince Gironda, he didn't train on the better designed preacher bench, that Vince had in his gym, as Larry Scott did.
Are there any pics of these two preacher benches to compare by?
-
Are there any pics of these two preacher benches to compare by?
I don't have a link to a picture. Here's a description of the good preacher bench that Larry Scott used at Vince's Gym, quoting Larry Scott again. "The correct design of the bench is that it has to have a face that is convex rather than flat. In other words, the face should bulge out in the middle. Most preacher benches are flat because they are easier to manufacture that way. But the bench has to have a convex face. And the area at the top where you place your armpits has to be rounded and well padded, because you're going to be bearing down real hard on that bench when you're doing the curls. Most benches have a sharp ridge on top. and it hurts your arm pits."
-
Are there any pics of these two preacher benches to compare by?
Found a pic, thanks to funk51:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=466913.0;attach=595236;image
It's the bench in the middle of the pic.
-
Would love to hold you back :P
Would be an honor to have you in my corner, chief.
-
Found a pic, thanks to funk51:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=466913.0;attach=595236;image
It's the bench in the middle of the pic.
Straight up awesome gym. Probably smells like rich mahoghany.
-
Straight up awesome gym. Probably smells like rich mahoghany.
Gym wise, Vince Gironda certainly knew what he was doing.
-
Found a pic, thanks to funk51:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=466913.0;attach=595236;image
It's the bench in the middle of the pic.
Is that a ghost in the mirror?
-
I don't have a link to a picture. Here's a description of the good preacher bench that Larry Scott used at Vince's Gym, quoting Larry Scott again. "The correct design of the bench is that it has to have a face that is convex rather than flat. In other words, the face should bulge out in the middle. Most preacher benches are flat because they are easier to manufacture that way. But the bench has to have a convex face. And the area at the top where you place your armpits has to be rounded and well padded, because you're going to be bearing down real hard on that bench when you're doing the curls. Most benches have a sharp ridge on top. and it hurts your arm pits."
Larry Scott never explained why the preacher bench needs to be convex with a bulge in the middle. Does it just 'feel' better or is there another reason? I think I know.
Larry avoided putting much pressure on the elbows joints because of the curved surface of the Preacher Bench.
The elbow joint has a delicate sheath going over it that connects forearm muscles to the upper arms. When pressure is put directly on the elbows either doing
curls or triceps extensions over a bench then the sheath can be damaged and might not heal if sufficient damage is done. You can see that most manufacturers
of gym equipment have no clue about this and continue to build curl machines where the elbows contact the pads. These can be dangerous. The pads should
be shortened to a couple of inches above the elbows. I have had to modify some Nautilus machines to make them safer. We also now do our lying triceps
extensions with the elbow joints a couple of inches past the ends of the benches. You won't notice much if using light weights but when you get stronger the
force causes rubbing on the joints and this is when the damage occurs.
-
Larry Scott never explained why the preacher bench needs to be convex with a bulge in the middle. Does it just 'feel' better or is there another reason? I think I know.
He didn't say, except that it was way better than the flat surface preacher bench, in terms of results obtained. And he was living proof of those results.
My take on it, is that the convex surface allows for the natural hyper extension of the elbow joint, that allows for greater muscle use in the curl movement, including the negative. Would work that way too, for the "burns" he did, that were great for brachialis growth.
-
Larry Scott probably could have done straight curls only and would have looked the same. It's mostly genetics.
-
Found a pic, thanks to funk51:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=466913.0;attach=595236;image
It's the bench in the middle of the pic.
It looks no different than the one in my gym.
-
Larry Scott probably could have done straight curls only and would have looked the same. It's mostly genetics.
My thoughts exactly.
-
seems like the curve would allow the torso to come forward a little into a more natural posture.
-
Larry Scott probably could have done straight curls only and would have looked the same. It's mostly genetics.
The genetics excuse again, for your lack of gains.
-
My thoughts exactly.
Not so fast. Let us not have Bro science popping up in the middle of a Bro science thread.
Larry did some exercises expressly to make his biceps larger nearer the elbows. I respect Larry as an authority on exercise performance and execution.
He would turn his hands inwards to try to build that part of the biceps/brachialis.
-
Crossfit CROSS-SHIT is really the winner here. It is the ultimate Broscience.
-
seems like the curve would allow the torso to come forward a little into a more natural posture.
How? The convex curve is under the arms, not the torso.
-
The genetics excuse again, for your lack of gains.
Erik C I like you as a poster but must insist you lower your tone when addressing Grape Ape, he is a large man and a close friend.
-
Erik C I like you as a poster but must insist you lower your tone when addressing Grape Ape, he is a large man and a close friend.
Then why cop the genetics plea?
-
Then why cop the genetics plea?
Are you seriously saying that genetics has nothing to do with the shape, size, bellies and insertions of Scott's biceps?
-
Not so fast. Let us not have Bro science popping up in the middle of a Bro science thread.
Larry did some exercises expressly to make his biceps larger nearer the elbows. I respect Larry as an authority on exercise performance and execution.
He would turn his hands inwards to try to build that part of the biceps/brachialis.
I am not convinced you can build one area of a muscle up with specific exercises. A muscle contracts as whole or not at all. Any twists or supination or what not exercises would work the biceps evenly through out.
-
Are you seriously saying that genetics has nothing to do with the shape, size, bellies and insertions of Scott's biceps?
No. I'm saying that the work he did got him the shape and size that he ended up with. If he hadn't have worked those muscles, then they wouldn't have grown at all. There's this stupid notion out there that, some people will get big no matter what they do, and that isn't true at all. Before he hit that special preacher bench at Vince's gym, and started using Rheo Blair's protein powder, he didn't have big guns, and he wouldn't have had them without doing what he did, and that was before he used roids.
-
How? The convex curve is under the arms, not the torso.
the curve bulges out to accommodate the torso and the arms will come back a little
-
the curve bulges out to accommodate the torso and the arms will come back a little
The curve is on the front of the bench under the arms. The torso is at the back of the bench when you are curling.
-
I am not convinced you can build one area of a muscle up with specific exercises. A muscle contracts as whole or not at all. Any twists or supination or what not exercises would work the biceps evenly through out.
Wow. Totally wrong.
-
Not so fast. Let us not have Bro science popping up in the middle of a Bro science thread.
Larry did some exercises expressly to make his biceps larger nearer the elbows. I respect Larry as an authority on exercise performance and execution.
He would turn his hands inwards to try to build that part of the biceps/brachialis.
Well yes, but in those pictures, Larry is posing for pictures. That's not the way he used a preacher bench. His arms are way too high up, as the bench should be under his armpits, elbows further down, and that looks like a flat surface preacher bench, that he said doesn't work.
-
"carbs make you fat"
-
"carbs make you fat"
Absolute Fact!
-
Absolute Fact!
I can just imagine you waking up at night screaming such phrases, lol.....
-
I can just imagine you waking up at night screaming such phrases, lol.....
That's quite an imagination that you have.
-
yee ha
we got us an imbecile
-
MCT oil.
-
Well yes, but in those pictures, Larry is posing for pictures. That's not the way he used a preacher bench. His arms are way too high up, as the bench should be under his armpits, elbows further down, and that looks like a flat surface preacher bench, that he said doesn't work.
Yes, Larry is demonstrating what NOT to do in those two exercises. I am amazed he didn't have sore elbows. Well, maybe he did?!
Larry, Vince Gironda and Ray Mentzer were three guys who used their brains re exercise. Lots of little things can make a difference. They analysed
how the muscles function and selected exercises that targeted those muscles.
We have all seen how the shapes of biceps vary heaps among the champion bodybuilders. Arnold has two different biceps. Sergio never had a peak. Albert Beckles and Boyer Coe had peaks on peaks.
So the question remains: can doing different exercises affect the ultimate shape of the biceps-brachialis?
-
So the question remains: can doing different exercises affect the ultimate shape of the biceps-brachialis?
The answer is yes.
-
Joon-science: "You'll lose three pounds of muscle for every one pound of fat while cutting and on the sauce"
Hahahaha! prepairing us for another failure of his latest diet plan.
-
The answer is yes.
I can tell you that training biceps on my biceps-supinator machine sure feels different from other machines and even free weights.
Since one can load a resistance on the twisting movement it is still there even if you don't turn your hand while curling the weight.
At the completion of an arm workout my biceps are truly stimulated.
-
I can tell you that training biceps on my biceps-supinator machine sure feels different from other machines and even free weights.
Since one can load a resistance on the twisting movement it is still there even if you don't turn your hand while curling the weight.
At the completion of an arm workout my biceps are truly stimulated.
I don't know what specific machine you are talking about, as there are a lot of machines.
Of course there is a difference between free weights and machines. One isn't better than the other. They work the muscles differently, and that's a good thing, so one should do both.
-
just head over to the Steroid board, print out a screenshot of the topics, tape printout on dartboard, put on a blindfold, throw a dart.
there's a 50% chance whatever question/statement contained in the thread is the stupidest bro-science you'll ever hear.
such as "you need to increase the dose with each cycle" or the assentation that if a guy uses 2g/wk his first cycle, he simply MUST use 2.5-3g for his second or else he won't grow.... etc... such utter stupidity.
-
I can tell you that training biceps on my biceps-supinator machine sure feels different from other machines and even free weights.
Since one can load a resistance on the twisting movement it is still there even if you don't turn your hand while curling the weight.
At the completion of an arm workout my biceps are truly stimulated.
You never lifted real weights. You wouldnt know what truly stimulated means. Except when it comes to stalking people
-
I don't know what specific machine you are talking about, as there are a lot of machines.
Of course there is a difference between free weights and machines. One isn't better than the other. They work the muscles differently, and that's a good thing, so one should do both.
Surprisingly, you pretty much define bro science re bodybuilding with that statement!
-
I don't know what specific machine you are talking about, as there are a lot of machines.
Of course there is a difference between free weights and machines. One isn't better than the other. They work the muscles differently, and that's a good thing, so one should do both.
Wow, something we can agree on! Add a cable movement perhaps in the mix and now we're talking...
-
Surprisingly, you pretty much define bro science re bodybuilding with that statement!
How so? Free weights and machines do work the muscles differently. For instance, MRI studies prove that a free weight front squat, and a front squat in a vertical Smith Machine, work different muscles. The casual observer would assume otherwise. The latter would be bro science.
-
How so? Free weights and machines do work the muscles differently. For instance, MRI studies prove that a free weight front squat, and a front squat in a vertical Smith Machine, work different muscles. The casual observer would assume otherwise. The latter would be bro science.
I am someone who did 10 deep reps with 400 pounds in the squat but didn't get huge legs from them. My conclusion was that squats weren't that good. Several decades later I watched Tom Platz explain how to do squats and I realized
what I was doing wasn't targeting the thighs like I thought they were. It is possible to cheat using a Smith Machine, too. Hey, I was the first manufacturer (1982) to put linear bearings on a Smith Machine and that transformed the device
because it reduced friction. Previously, most Smith Machines had chains and sprockets that joined one side to the other to prevent jamming. My machine can be lifted from one side without jamming.
When it comes to moving systems (bodies) so many factors are introduced that it is unlikely any science can be made of all the different champions doing the same exercises.
-
I am someone who did 10 deep reps with 400 pounds in the squat but didn't get huge legs from them. My conclusion was that squats weren't that good. Several decades later I watched Tom Platz explain how to do squats and I realized
what I was doing wasn't targeting the thighs like I thought they were. It is possible to cheat using a Smith Machine, too. Hey, I was the first manufacturer (1982) to put linear bearings on a Smith Machine and that transformed the device
because it reduced friction. Previously, most Smith Machines had chains and sprockets that joined one side to the other to prevent jamming. My machine can be lifted from one side without jamming.
When it comes to moving systems (bodies) so many factors are introduced that it is unlikely any science can be made of all the different champions doing the same exercises.
You're wrong. Dr.Per A. Tesch's MRI studies are over 25 years old at this point, and have never been refuted. Originally, practically all his peers disagreed with his MRI results on muscle use. He told them try it yourselves. They did. The results that they got all agreed with his results. Real science = repeatable results. Science, not bro science. Fact.
-
You're wrong. Dr.Per A. Tesch's MRI studies are over 25 years old at this point, and have never been refuted. Originally, practically all his peers disagreed with his MRI results on muscle use. He told them try it yourselves. They did. The results that they got all agreed with his results. Real science = repeatable results. Science, not bro science. Fact.
We can observe different people doing the same exercise. Some find the exercise effective while others get mixed results. Why is that? Lots of factors re individuals, levers, muscle fibers, etc.
All things can seldom be equal in gyms or labs. It would be interesting to do studies on a group of identical twins. Then most of the variations will be eliminated. Well, except when it comes
to moving systems. We can seldom be sure everyone is doing the exercise in exactly the same way. As proof, remember the amazing MedX lower back testing machine Arthur Jones built. Subjects
were strapped in the device and adjustments made to make sure only the target muscles were recruited. Even doing all those things didn't stop some people from cheating. If those MedX
machines couldn't restrict subjects then what does that say for typical equipment and free weights?
-
We can observe different people doing the same exercise. Some find the exercise effective while others get mixed results. Why is that? Lots of factors re individuals, levers, muscle fibers, etc.
All things can seldom be equal in gyms or labs. It would be interesting to do studies on a group of identical twins. Then most of the variations will be eliminated. Well, except when it comes
to moving systems. We can seldom be sure everyone is doing the exercise in exactly the same way. As proof, remember the amazing MedX lower back testing machine Arthur Jones built. Subjects
were strapped in the device and adjustments made to make sure only the target muscles were recruited. Even doing all those things didn't stop some people from cheating. If those MedX
machines couldn't restrict subjects then what does that say for typical equipment and free weights?
Now that's bro science. Completely rejecting real science, for casual observations under no scientific controls. Tesch's work was repeated by dozen of other researchers, using different study subjects, and all the results were the same. Science is based on repeatable results. That's what is real. Unless you believe that MRI machines had some reason to lie.
-
Now that's bro science. Completely rejecting real science, for casual observations under no scientific controls. Tesch's work was repeated by dozen of other researchers, using different study subjects, and all the results were the same. Science is based on repeatable results. That's what is real. Unless you believe that MRI machines had some reason to lie.
Ignore Basile. He told me that his theory was correct based purely on anecdotal evidence.
You can't argue with stupid.
-
Now that's bro science. Completely rejecting real science, for casual observations under no scientific controls. Tesch's work was repeated by dozen of other researchers, using different study subjects, and all the results were the same. Science is based on repeatable results. That's what is real. Unless you believe that MRI machines had some reason to lie.
Yeah, sure, there is heaps of science available re how to bodybuild. Sorry, but the scientists aren't interested in large muscles and never have been.
I don't reject science because it is seldom applicable to bodybuilding.
It is one thing to do exercises yourself and quite another to get someone else to do them for a specific result. Some people, even closely supervised, still can't
put sufficient mechanical tension on a target muscle. I mean, that defies all science. You wouldn't believe it unless you saw it yourself. People cheat. They swing.
They do all manner of things and believe they are doing the right thing. They don't get a result so blame the exercise.
-
Ignore Basile. He told me that his theory was correct based purely on anecdotal evidence.
You can't argue with stupid.
It is always refreshing to hear the opinion of a true expert!
-
Yeah, sure, there is heaps of science available re how to bodybuild. Sorry, but the scientists aren't interested in large muscles and never have been.
I don't reject science because it is seldom applicable to bodybuilding.
It is one thing to do exercises yourself and quite another to get someone else to do them for a specific result. Some people, even closely supervised, still can't
put sufficient mechanical tension on a target muscle. I mean, that defies all science. You wouldn't believe it unless you saw it yourself. People cheat. They swing.
They do all manner of things and believe they are doing the right thing. They don't get a result so blame the exercise.
Granted some people make half assed efforts at exercise. However, those who are really serious about their workouts, will do what works, and get results. To say an exercise will work for one person but not another is wrong. Any exercise, done correctly by anyone, will get results. Again, some people will be fuck ups and not do things correctly. As Vince Gironda used to say, "My methods work. Some of my trainees don't."
-
It is always refreshing to hear the opinion of a true expert!
Coming from the guy who told me and OMR that the way scientists define "theory" is wrong. Yes, all those scientists are wrong and you're right. :D :D
Youre a bitter, old, desperate man, who is mad Arnold made something of himself and you didn't. :D :D
-
Granted some people make half assed efforts at exercise. However, those who are really serious about their workouts, will do what works, and get results. To say an exercise will work for one person but not another is wrong. Any exercise, done correctly by anyone, will get results. Again, some people will be fuck ups and not do things correctly. As Vince Gironda used to say, "My methods work. Some of my trainees don't."
I have seen some very serious guys spend years and years at getting specific results only to fail. How do you explain that? I conclude that they failed to put sufficient mechanical tension on those muscles so didn't get them to grow more.
So the statement "Any exercise, done correctly by anyone, will get results." is hardly true because both the instructors and subjects believed they were doing the exercises correctly. To be consistent we would have to conclude
that they weren't doing the exercises correctly. What science and experts have a difficult time explaining is why so many train so hard for so little in the way of results? You can go to any gym and the vast majority of trainees aren't growing much.
-
I am someone who did 10 deep reps with 400 pounds in the squat but didn't get huge legs from them. My conclusion was that squats weren't that good. Several decades later I watched Tom Platz explain how to do squats and I realized
what I was doing wasn't targeting the thighs like I thought they were. It is possible to cheat using a Smith Machine, too. Hey, I was the first manufacturer (1982) to put linear bearings on a Smith Machine and that transformed the device
because it reduced friction. Previously, most Smith Machines had chains and sprockets that joined one side to the other to prevent jamming. My machine can be lifted from one side without jamming.
When it comes to moving systems (bodies) so many factors are introduced that it is unlikely any science can be made of all the different champions doing the same exercises.
True story. The one at my gym is called a Basile Machine.
-
I guess someone misspelled the name Basile ::)
"When Jack LaLanne invented the Smith machine, he used it as part of a complete muscle-toning regime utilizing free weights too."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_machine
-
That you will keep the gains you made from steroids when you come off of them
-
I guess someone misspelled the name Basile ::)
"When Jack LaLanne invented the Smith machine, he used it as part of a complete muscle-toning regime utilizing free weights too."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_machine
Rudy Smith got someone to design this version of Jack's machine. Primitive design requiring chains and sprockets. My machine was the first to
use Linear Motion Bearings that solved the friction problem. Now almost all Smith Machines use these bearings and no one uses chains any more.
Just because I post on Getbig doesn't mean I didn't come up with new ideas for gym equipment.
-
My gym has this 20+ old version from Technogym. I seldom use it, but it's a solid one.
(http://www.shfitness.nl/site/tweedehands-technogym-multi-power-isotonic-line-m053/$FILE/Multi%20Power_1.jpg)
These days you have slight diagonal ones as well. Do you believe that these versions offer certain advantages?
(http://www.eweightplanner.com/img/vendors/lifefitness/lif_ssm.jpg)
-
My gym has this 20+ old version from Technogym. I seldom use it, but it's a solid one.
(http://www.shfitness.nl/site/tweedehands-technogym-multi-power-isotonic-line-m053/$FILE/Multi%20Power_1.jpg)
These days you have slight diagonal ones as well. Do you believe that these versions offer certain advantages?
(http://www.eweightplanner.com/img/vendors/lifefitness/lif_ssm.jpg)
Over the last several decades most of the equipment companies have assessed all the available machines and modified
their machines so that most get things right now.
Stand sideways beside a mirror. Put a mark where your head is at the start of the squat. Do the same at the bottom of the squat.
You will find the body does not go in a straight line but forward perhaps 10 to 15 degrees. Same thing for bench press and
standing press. So an angled smith machine will more correctly follow the actual body movement and thus will feel much better.
I have modified a few of my machines to have a slight angle and they are superior in my opinion.
I don't let any metal part contact another metal part so my pins have polyurethane cylinders covering them. No clanging here.
-
The answer is yes.
How?
-
Wow. Totally wrong.
I don't think so. Or else everyone could build bicep peaks like Robby or an upper chest like Dennis just by doing certain exercises.
-
That you will keep the gains you made from steroids when you come off of them
Only if you do your PCT correctly bro.
-
I guess someone misspelled the name Basile ::)
"When Jack LaLanne invented the Smith machine, he used it as part of a complete muscle-toning regime utilizing free weights too."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_machine
God knows wikipedia is THE source for solid information.
-
I don't think so. Or else everyone could build bicep peaks like Robby or an upper chest like Dennis just by doing certain exercises.
There it is.
-
God knows wikipedia is THE source for solid information.
I'm not saying that, but feel free to change the lemma in case you know your shit