Barbell curls

[chaos]

Eh, even if your arms weren't small you could still build muscle with everything else.

Yeah, my arms are pretty small, but I'm working on them, gggrrrrrrrrr

[Cap]

Yeah, my arms are pretty small, but I'm working on them, gggrrrrrrrrr

Lol, I wrote that wrong.  Haha, my bad.

But remember we're on Getbig and you don't have 22inch arms so they are small.   

[chaos]

Lol, I wrote that wrong.  Haha, my bad.

But remember we're on Getbig and you don't have 22inch arms so they are small.   

Someday my arms will be Valentino huge!!!

[turnerg31]

Warm or cold?  18.3/4 cold warm 19 +  Actually Im not really sure. That was about 6 months ago..

I like your routine and I've done the same in the past.  How tall are you and what do you weigh?  Good arm size. Congrats.

Pat

[dan18]

I like cable curls, keeps constant tension on my biceps instead of cutting off when I go above parallel

and you're arms show it

[Permabulker]

I like your routine and I've done the same in the past.  How tall are you and what do you weigh?  Good arm size. Congrats.

Pat

5' 9"
243lbs
A little bit to love...

[Buffgeek]

5' 9"
243lbs
A little bit to love...

I have seen him. Big dude!

I usuallly do only 9 total sets for biceps. Sometimes I will do more if I feel like I havent fried them, but Biceps are a weak point for me(getting better).. My triceps completely overpower them. 

[MartyMcFly]

biceps should be trained hard and heavy with good technique, no swinging. as for "rep ranges" find one that works for you. will it take you a while to find this "range?" yes. higher SEEMS to be the way to go (8-12+) for most people I've seen and trained. sadly, the more "pump" you get, as in past the point of pain, the more destroying you're doing and the harder it will be to recover THEN grow. you need both. not JUST recovery. 2, maybe 3 exercises. nothing crazy.

[pumpster]

biceps should be trained hard and heavy with good technique, no swinging.

haha ok tell Arnold. Bertil also did fine without that. After years of training i think their method is actually more effective and removes fatigue of the front delts that can easily interfere with hitting bis.

[chaos]

haha ok tell Arnold. Bertil also did fine without that. After years of training i think their method is actually better.

Do you know their steroid cycles as well?

[pumpster]

Do you know their steroid cycles as well?

Doesn't matter; the common but unproven theory that drugs make such a difference to training fundamentals is  flawed. Training fundamentals stay the same with everyone as far as effective training. I'm sure they would say same, that they preferred certain execises with or without chemicals. I think naturals sometimes like to cling to this belief about drugs.

[chaos]

I think naturals sometimes like to cling to this belief about drugs.

It's all in their heads.

[GoneAway]

haha ok tell Arnold. Bertil also did fine without that. After years of training i think their method is actually more effective and removes fatigue of the front delts that can easily interfere with hitting bis.

JPM and I both have never had a problem with front delts affecting strict curling technique, nor fatiguing before the biceps. Are you basing this off practical or theory knowledge?

[pumpster]

JPM and I both have never had a problem with front delts affecting strict curling technique, nor fatiguing before the biceps. Are you basing this off practical or theory knowledge?

Both. My own experience of 3.5 decades, and the underlying theory behind it that corroborates  the experience. Did strict curls for years, they're good but can be made more effective, wish i'd made those changes earlier. Schwarzenegger favored both cheat curls and the use of an arm blaster to remove front delts-akin to a preacher bench. I agree with both. Anyone doing strict curls should try an arm blaster, it effectively enhances biceps emphasis. Arm blasters are also great for incline curls.

It's the same reason that some machines like Nautilus enhanced certain exericses by improving the resistance curves.

[GoneAway]

Both. My own experience of 3.5 decades, and the underlying theory behind it that corroborates  the experience. Did strict curls for years, they're good but can be made more effective, wish i'd made those changes earlier. Schwarzenegger favored both cheat curls and the use of an arm blaster to remove front delts-akin to a preacher bench. I agree with both. Anyone doing strict curls should try an arm blaster, it effectively enhances biceps emphasis. Arm blasters are also great for incline curls.

It's the same reason that some machines like Nautilus enhanced certain exericses by improving the resistance curves.

True, arm blaster's and preachers do put less stress on the stabilisers and (possibly) more on the biceps themselves, but if you have relatively good control, a regular standing curl shouldn't involve the shoulders as much as you're saying, if at all. It hasn't in my experience, but it's good that there are ways to take out the stabiliser muscles if needed.

Pumpster, what are your thoughts on why cheat curls are so effective?

[turnerg31]

biceps should be trained hard and heavy with good technique, no swinging. as for "rep ranges" find one that works for you. will it take you a while to find this "range?" yes. higher SEEMS to be the way to go (8-12+) for most people I've seen and trained. sadly, the more "pump" you get, as in past the point of pain, the more destroying you're doing and the harder it will be to recover THEN grow. you need both. not JUST recovery. 2, maybe 3 exercises. nothing crazy.

I like what you are saying. Most people don't take enough time to recover before they are right back in there breaking the muscle down again.  When I was working at building my bi's I usually did one heavy exercise per workout with reps as low as 4 and as high as 8. I would then move on to more moderate so called "shaping or peaking" exercises. Only had to do 3 to 4 exercises with one of them being heavy.  Seemed to work out well for building mass and overall shape.  I've been training biceps once a week for the past few years and I can't complain about the results.  Recovery and not overtraining are definite keys to success.

Pat

[pumpster]

if you have relatively good control, a regular standing curl shouldn't involve the shoulders as much as you're saying, if at all.
Pumpster, what are your thoughts on why cheat curls are so effective?

Delt stress is inherent for many, it's not a question of control or form. Delts are so prominently effected from weights that they often wear out before biceps, which isn't obvious until the end of the set.

Keeping upper arms in a fixed position when the barbell's pulling downwards and out in front of the body actually requires plenty of stabilization, from the delts. It isn't obvious how much both  because there's no overt motion and because the burn only becomes noticable towards the end of the set. Just maintaining the arms steady in that context requires plenty of stabilzers, because with weights the pull is both downwards and in front of you, where the weight is held. Not the same with DBs, where the weight's held on each side rather than in front of you. That's part of why i like cable curls, the pull is not in the same directions and doesn't tax the delts in the same way.

Preacher and arm blaster definitely isolate biceps more, it's not maybe. Clearly the upper arms are far more immobile. The only way to get the same effect on standing BB curls is to use an arm blaster or to do curls standing against a wall. Upper arms aren't held nearly as steady with regular curls even when done under control, and trying to keep them steady enlists plenty of stabilizers, in this case delts.

Cheat curls and seated BB curls are better because they take the delts out and because the money part of ROM in curls especially with weights is just after the beginning and before the end of the ROM. Same reason box squats are better than full squats, and why partial range hack machine squats are better-in both cases more effective and less harsh on the joints.

[BatistaSL]

Warm or cold?  18.3/4 cold warm 19 +  Actually Im not really sure. That was about 6 months ago..

Man that's big...

And that was about 6 months ago...

I am really learning here....

I really wish you can look in to my thread(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=248926.0) and give me some advice..

peace

[GoneAway]

Cheat curls and seated BB curls are better because they take the delts out and because the money part of ROM in curls especially with weights is just after the beginning and before the end of the ROM. Same reason box squats are better than full squats, and why partial range hack machine squats are better-in both cases more effective and less harsh on the joints.

Would you say it's necessary to go any lower than 90 degrees on either squats or barbell curls? Any studies for this?

[pumpster]

Would you say it's necessary to go any lower than 90 degrees on either squats or barbell curls? Any studies for this?

The popular belief that full ROM is essential or that partial ROM is bad isn't founded on anything conclusive when it comes to growth. it's the same unfounded notion about free weights being better because of stabilizer muscle involvement, which isn't proven to make any difference for development.

90 degrees is too general though, try different ROMs for each exercise to find the best thing.

[turnerg31]

JPM and I both have never had a problem with front delts affecting strict curling technique, nor fatiguing before the biceps. Are you basing this off practical or theory knowledge?

I think I have to go along with you guys. I don't think in my twenty + years of lifting have I ever had a problem with delt fatigue while training biceps.  I can't say that about Chest but definitely not training biceps. Forearm fatigue is sometimes a problem.  I don't use gloves so hand pain sometimes comes into play as well.  I can't even imagine how your delts would become tired if you used proper form.  Maybe if you're rotating you upper arms in an effort to generate momentum on your curl (cheat curl), then I can see how delt fatigue may come into play.  Then again if you're coming up to high at the top of your curling motion and using the delts to raise the bar that last few inches.  I'm definitely not saying that it's impossible and I've learned over the years that my experience in the gym is not everyones experience. I'm glad to hear the different theories and opinions and just thought I'd throw my two cents in there to get feedback from some of you.

Pat

[pumpster]

Perfect is the enemy of good enough in this case. I think the mental block happens because everyone starts with the standard by-the-book exercises when they begin training. If the results are solid there's a natural assumption that it all works, which doesn't necessarily equate to being the best avenue.

It takes a fair degree of open-mindedness and patience to experiment with more advanced training methods. Until all possibilities are explored, it's really not possible to render fully informed opinions. Standing strict curls are good but the question is are they the most effective, aside from any delt involvement some do and some don't experience. Arnold likes the arm blaster to take delts out of it and make it closer to a preacher exercise, while standing.

My experience over close to 4 decades of workouts included years of standing strict curls, until i got into more advanced training and freed my mind of some preconceptions. Some guys with THE best biceps ever-Schwarzenegger, Coleman and Scott-didn't use or espouse standing strict curls because there are more effective avenues. It's just a slow evolvement into advanced techniques.

Scwharzenegger still likes alterntives to standing strict curls as the best avenues. Coleman prefers cables, something i also learned from experience over time.

http://www.getbig.com/articles/biceps2.htm

[jpm101]

What I heard from people around that time, when Arnold was at his peak, was the only reason he was pictured using a arm blaster was to sell arm blasters. He got money from the Weider corp to pose for and tell how important this piece of equipment was for his bicep peak in all his ghost written articles. Arnold, and many others, saw the wisdom of heavy BB and DB curling as a basic bicep builder. And with the old standby, cheating reps.

If the anterior delts become over worked doing any for of curling, cheating or standard reps, then you are doing front raises, not curls. Good Luck.

[tbombz]

the 'arm blaster' is the thing you wear around your neck that has a metal thingie that wars around under your chest and goes under your arms as you curl?

[pumpster]

What I heard from people around that time, when Arnold was at his peak, was the only reason he was pictured using a arm blaster was to sell arm blasters

LOL could see that coming a mile away. It was obvious looking at the mags in the early 70s that he wanted to sell em, but the fact that he still espouses them in recent books has nothing to do with that.

Funny the way no one actually discusses anything beyond the superficieal here with the exception of a few. Exactly why guys like Vince Basile who like me has been there done in terms of both long-term training and equipment design tells me it ain't worth posting on the training board due to the low level of discourse. Have to agree with him, not much curiousity here.

Here's a pic from the 70s. Just like preachers, they're superior at isolating the upper arm muscles by removing most of the supporting muscles that are strongly involved in stabilization during curls. Removes the front delts in free weight curl motions like standing and incline curls as well as triceps pushdowns. Looks to me like he was using it alot.