My rib cage sucks

[jpm101]

No doubt about it, the rib box can expand to an increased size with pullovers and heavy breathing exercises. All experience weight trained men are aware of this. And if their not, they should be. It's the cartilage between and around the rib cage (not the rib bones themselves..that's where some confusion can come in), that has not reached a mature state, that can be encourage to stretch and expand to a greater volume. Around the ages of 22 to 24 years, the cartilage begins to lose that plastic state, becoming firmer and fixed. In which case, the potential for that expansion is reduced. But even men in their 30's and 40's (or more) have improved the ligaments/attachments around the rib box area to give a feeling of a higher lifting and fuller rib cage.

Quite a few BB'er now days focus on only the pec's for chest development. If they might re-focus that a bit to the rib box, applying some breathing pullovers with higher reps squats, they could jointly increase their gains. Taking a young BB'er with a 46" chest/pecs and adding at lease a couple more inches to at lease 48" through heavier pullovers (straight or bent arm...BB or DB) will be that much more impressive. That type pullover program will also affect the lat's very strongly. That's like icing on the cake, toward that 50" chest measurement, with time.

If your one of the lucky one's born with a deep rib box, than so much the better for you. You can have the foundation for adding to an even more impressive chest. Good Luck.

[pumpster]

Anyone with common sense knows that bones ain't growin after an early age. Everything else considered "rib box growth" is either from torso development (primarily lats & serratus & some chest) or is psychological, something that might fool some. Breathing also isn't going to develop anything.

[natural al]

There's no way it takes a week to recover; no one wants to admit that HIT which most don't like is responsible for this idea of long periods of rest between workouts. Plenty of great BBs have and continue to train twice or thrice weekly with no problem and excellent results.

an individual BP may recover enough to train again but the cns as a whole needs more time to recover.  When I'm firign on all cylinders doing DC and lfiting like a monster-or as close as I can get some BP's need almost a week to recover and be ready to be pounded into dust.

[pumpster]

an individual BP may recover enough to train again but the cns as a whole needs more time to recover.  When I'm firign on all cylinders doing DC and lfiting like a monster-or as close as I can get some BP's need almost a week to recover and be ready to be pounded into dust.

That is your opinion & perception. The guys training 2-3 times a week didn't seem phased; i know i didn't really have a problem with it, especially age teens-twenties.

[LT]

here's what I would do with the chest routine that you posted...first get it out of your head that you have to train a bodypart 2 times a week to make it grow:

Barbell flat chest press    10 reps, 8 reps, 6 reps for 3 sets
              Barbell incl. chest press   10 reps, 8,reps, 6 reps for 3 sets
              Cables decline press        10 reps, 8 reps, 6 reps for 3 sets
              Peck- Deck machine         10 reps, 8, reps, 8reps for  3 sets

here's the first thing I'd consider doing.  flat bench is probably ok, there's nothing wrong with going 10, 8, 6 for 3 total sets.  When you go to the incline just jump right into your heaviest sets for 6 reps, do 2-3 sets.  Muscles grow from overload and look at it this way, you're doing 3 sets, 2 of which are relatively light weight so in essence they are a waste of time.  You'll get more out of it if you go something like this:

Flat Bench-10, 8, 6-last set should be as heavy as you can go, if you get more than 6 reps it's to light.

Incline-at least 2 but not more than 3 sets, heavy as you can go for 6 reps a set.  Take 2-3 minutes of rest between sets but make sure that you are pushing the absolute most weight that you can.

Pec Deck-do the same thing as with the inclines.

heavy weight builds muslce, not volume-that's what I think anyway.  If you do this routine for a couple of weeks and are feeling burnt out, drop the pec decks.

if you want to stick with a traditional chest routine that's what I would do, if not go read up on DC training.

Thanks natural al your post was very helpful. After reading your post I felt really pumped up working out my chest by going from barbell flat chest press to Barbell incl. and going real heavy. I will do less reps and heavier lifting. I just got into a funk at the gym and felt I was wasting my time. I'm going to change it up and go real heavy less reps thanks.

[LT]

Working a bodypart twice a week IMO is unnecessary and can stunt growth by forcing a muscle to work again before it has fully recovered.  Also, with higher volume workouts you are using up to much energy (calories) and will find it difficult to gain weight.


Anyways, here's a possible routine for you, it removes some of the volume you have been doing.  Each bodypart once a week, heavy compound movements.

Day 1 - Chest & Bi's (forearms)            (12 sets chest/8 sets bi's)
Day 2 - Legs (calves & abs)                (15-20 sets total)
Day 3 - REST
Day 4 - Shoulders & Tri's (calves)         (10 sets shoulders/10 sets tri's)
Day 5 - Back (calves & abs)                (12-16 sets total)

You can switch things around a bit as well.  Keep legs and back where they are, but do maybe chest & tri's/shoulders & bi's one week, or chest & shoulders/arms another.  Stick to heavy compound movements, reps 6-12, and you'll be in and out in under an hour.  Rest 2 mins between exercises, and 1 min between sets.  (The number of sets given is for the main bodyparts, abs calves and forearms are extra.)

Anyways, just another option for you.

You said "Also, with higher volume workouts you are using up to much energy (calories) and will find it difficult to gain weight." You hit the nail on the head! That's defiantly my problem and that makes sense to me. I have started working out heavier with less reps and I defiantly fell more pumped up thanks leonp1981.

[leonp1981]

You said "Also, with higher volume workouts you are using up to much energy (calories) and will find it difficult to gain weight." You hit the nail on the head! That's defiantly my problem and that makes sense to me. I have started working out heavier with less reps and I defiantly fell more pumped up thanks leonp1981.

Good stuff!

Sometimes the body has just adapted to what you are already doing and kinda needs a 'slap in the face' to get going again.  I use different exercises every workout and change everything every 6-10 weeks. 

Good luck with hittin your targets and let us know how it goes!

[natural al]

That is your opinion & perception. The guys training 2-3 times a week didn't seem phased; i know i didn't really have a problem with it, especially age teens-twenties.

in reading his initail post LT stated that he had virtually stopped growing, he was stuck at about 220lbs.  His current routine had him going 6 times a week, hitting either chest or back twice a week.  First thing I would say was I "believe" he's probably overtraining or he's doing alot of "worthless" movements.  he's 6'0 and weighs about 220, just going by that in my minds eye I'm seeing an ectomorph.  It's my opinion that an ecto needs alot less time in the gym than a guy who's walking around being a mesmorph or even an endomorph.  Now there are exceptions but by the description we were giving my initial thought was and usually is "if growth stops, you've overstepped your CNS boundries".  Yeah, there are some guys who can train 2-3 times a week and continue to grow but GENERALLY if someone stops growing the first thing I suggest is cut down and re-examine the routine you're using...yes, I like Mike Metzer and arthur Jones.  I think they really hit the nail on the head..now Metzer flipped out and took it too far for the average guy to use his theories effectivelly they both were on the right track IMO.

Not true.  Take care of your body and you will be fine.  I pile alot into my life and still don't get burned out.  Listening to your body is good but to say that a rule fits all is wrong and Pump is right that many young guys can do it. What the hell do you think military personnel do?  They train nonstop and I know Spec Ops guys who are more fit that everyone besides the pros here.  Look at guys after boot camp. Lean, cut, vascular adn strong.

that's great but...we're not really talking about military personel, we're talking about a guy who's busting his balls-or he says he is-and has stopped growing.  I'm not an expert but I don't believe you can condition your CNS, it is what it is and I don't think there's anything wrong with telling someone who's stopped growing to consider the simple fact that they might be overtraining.  Maybe they're undertraining...but judgeing by what he initially said I'd go with the first on.

not trying to start a fight, just responding.

[jpm101]

I grew up and live around a SEAL (west coast) recruit/training center and a Marine top boot/training base. When those poor guy's are done with their training cycles, for the most part, they are leaned out with outstanding stamina (endurance/strength). They are not all that muscular or even cut-up. Their muscle mass is at a bare minimum. It's when their attached to a regular duty post they begin to recover and increase the  muscle mass losted during those grunt and grind training weeks. The CNS gets a opportunity to recover and return to a somewhat normal state. The CNS can be trained to adapt (that's what they do in the military) but their are certain limits for everyone. Another example would be the tri athletes around San Diego. They train almost every day, but they do know their limits and how to apply training stress/cycles to their best advantage. Training is usually broken up during the day. Same could be said with regards to training for the BB'er/lifter. They must understand their limits and take time for the CNS to adjust for future muscle and strength gains. If they don't then those 5 or 6 days a week workouts just become manual labor.

I agree a lot with some of the things Natural AL was suggesting. Lot of common sense. Why some people make BB'ing out to be rocket science is beyond me: K.I.S.S.(Keep It Simple Stupid) should be the motto for just about everyone. Good Luck.

[pumpster]

Excellent; my advice on common sense & simplification has resonated, which should lead to shorter less meandering posts.

there are some guys who can train 2-3 times a week and continue to grow but GENERALLY if someone stops growing the first thing I suggest is cut down and re-examine the routine you're using...yes, I like Mike Metzer and arthur Jones.  I think they really hit the nail on the head..now Metzer flipped out and took it too far for the average guy to use his theories effectivelly they both were on the right track IMO.

Actually it works both ways; adjustments in frequency can be made either up or down, depending on the original context. Growth never continues indefinitely on any program, thus one way to shock the system is to create changeups either up or down. Obviously someone training more infrequently might want to try more frequent workouts as one example.

I agree a lot with some of the things Natural AL was suggesting. Lot of common sense. Why some people make BB'ing out to be rocket science is beyond me: K.I.S.S.(Keep It Simple Stupid) should be the motto for just about everyone. Good Luck.

Exactly why common sense is a scarce commodity to some. Apparently the KISS principle i've been suggesting for months has to be made even more basic.

[Cap]

Sure everyone has a limit but it is possible to do things (esp for the average lifter) to side step this.  I've made gains on volume and workload that would surprise you and then have dropped it down at times and gotten gains too.  Don't be afraid to push yourself.  I remember reading once to train your ass off for a long time and then rest for a month with maintenance training and then you will increase mass.  Pump is right about shocking the body.  I did training with the Marines and lost 10 pounds in a week.  I was leaner and lighter and tired as hell.  After upping my calories from their deficit model and decreasing workload I gained some muscle but I also gained lifting and overall stamina as a result and have made good gains swimming 11x 2hr workouts in a week.  It's all in HOW you do it.

[pumpster]

Don't be afraid to push yourself, as cap says..if you don't you're maintaining, IMO. Change either physical or mental is a bitch, your mind and body want status quo! It's going to adapt to unusual stress, not to what you can already do.

This whole idea of less frequent workouts comes right from HIT, which is pretty funny when you consider how few people believe in HIT let alone use it. Not to say it doesn't work, but how many realize it comes from HIT that they don't believe in?

[natural al]

HIT bores me.  When I did volume training for the first time I was called a madman but I loved it.  The first time I started running 5 miles a day I loved it.  Swimming miles a day is crazy  but awesome.  All these things make you adapt.  Supersetting in between hard ass exercise makes the body adapt and can really put you in the type of shape that people only dream of.  Milos' atheletes look pretty good for their crazy ass shit that they do every so often.

the problem when people talk about HIT is that 9 times out of 10 they don't know how to execute HIT properly-no offense to anyone on here and I don't think I'd even have success with it.  HIT has to be done a certain way and I think only a handful of people have been able to put everything together-Jones, Metzer-until he flipped out. Ellington Darden.....I'm sure there's others but the bottom line is very few people have gotten it down to a point where it can be effective overall.

How many people do you honestly think can workout at the intesity level that Viator had during the colaroda experiment and do it on a consistant basis?  From what I've read those workouts were brutal and for 'joe average" or even "al average" trying to do this on his own on a consistant basis would be next to impossible.  Even with DC where I lift some brutally heavy weights-for me-it's incredibly hard to keep the intensity up.  Now if Arthur Jones came up to me and said "let's do it" I'd do it in a minute, I'd probably puke my guts out but I'd be game. 

Simply by limiting the number of sets performed shouldn't really qualify something as HIT, it's just-in this case-common sense.  I don't remember exactly but lets say LT was doing 12 sets and he stopped growing.  Now could you perscribe a routine that's the exact opposite of what i recommended?  Sure.  Would it be effective?  Who knows. 

What I tried to do was look at the routine, what's "meat and potatoes"what's fluff?  Eliminate the fluff and go from there, if it works great if not then it's up to LT to watch his progreess and go from there.

[pumpster]

the problem when people talk about HIT is that 9 times out of 10 they don't know how to execute HIT properly-no offense to anyone on here and I don't think I'd even have success with it.  HIT has to be done a certain way

I doubt most do HIT properly, and have said this. The fundamental problem is that doing it properly is even less appealing, and almost certainly requires a training partner. Doing it properly would further marginalize HIT, because it's the emotional and physical toll of doing it properly that most dislike rabidly. The gains might be there but there's no emotional appeal to the HIT for most.

My point was that it's interesting that many buy into less frequent training belief, in some part due to unproven theories about the body being unable to handle more training, while categorically rejecting HIT in general, which is bizarre. Either the approach should make sense overall, or not. If you want to play devil's advocate you notice that the only part that many continue to accept about HIT-the reduced training frequency rather than HIT itself-just happens to be easier and less work. Coincidence?

[natural al]

I doubt most do HIT properly, and have said this. The fundamental problem is that doing it properly is even less appealing, and almost certainly requires a training partner. Doing it properly would further marginalize HIT, because it's the emotional and physical toll of doing it properly that most dislike rabidly. The gains might be there but there's no emotional appeal to the HIT for most.

My point was that it's interesting that many buy into less frequent training belief, in some part due to unproven theories about the body being unable to handle more training, while categorically rejecting HIT in general, which is bizarre. Either the approach should make sense overall, or not. If you want to play devil's advocate you notice that the only part that many continue to accept about HIT-the reduced training frequency rather than HIT itself-just happens to be easier and less work. Coincidence?

what's less work and what's a plain old waste of time?  Don ross did an article years ago and wrote something that I still think about, he said that alot of the time a guy will come to him with a weak chest and once he looks at the program he'll see the guy is doing inclines, declines, and flat bench presses along with flyes and a pec deck.  The first thing he would say was that it's just to many pressing movements and by the time you get to the 3rd you're shoulders and tris are gonna be fried so they're not even worth doing. 

I have nothing againts volume training but if I look at a guys routine and he's complaining aobut not getting bigger but he's doing 15 sets jsut for the sake of doing 15 sets then that's probably the problem.

As far doing less work and it being a coincidence...that's an individualistic thing.  I bust my f'n balls in the gym and there is no correlation to lack of volume and lack of inetesity.  Everything I do is as heavy and as for as many reps as I can get.  I worked out 2 hours ago and my chest is still quivering when I tense it.  If you dont' know how to train hard, it won't make a difference how little or how much you do, you'll fail in the end.

alot of my routines are based around "common sense".  If you are going all out and are doing benches, inclines and finally declines what are the chances you're gonna be able to push it come decline time?  Not very good IMO.  then throw in some flyes and the pec deck.....if you're going hard those pec deck sets are gonna be garbage.

for me it's about not wasting time and maximizing effort and effect.

[natural al]

another thing I think alot of guys that are frustrated with don't seem to understand is something I like to call the "touch n go" technique.  Jones talked about this so did Metzer.  Once a muscle hits a certain point and the growth process starts it's pointless to do anything after that.  So what I try to do when I train is bust ass enough so I "touch" that point and then "go" to another bodypart.

essentially you're wasting your time once you've hit that point if you do anything else.  Some guys who have it down to a point might be able to hit that point with a couple of sets some guys it might take 7-9 sets but if you've been training long enough you should know when you've had enough.