Author Topic: male gymnasts (Read 22862 times)

romeo · « **on:** December 14, 2005, 06:14:22 PM »

I have noticed that male gymansts when working the bars and the rings have massive arms and delts. In fact they look pysically awesome.

presumably they wouldnt be in the habit of actually aiming to gain mass other than to get stronger. But it looks as though they have a fair amount of mass on them, although granted their bf% must be quite low.

so what kind of exercises do they do to look like that?? and what can we do in the gym to mirror that kind of training, all i can think of is dips?

haider · « **Reply #1 on:** December 14, 2005, 06:16:21 PM »

I read somewhere(on t-nation i think) that they only do body-weight exercises for their upperbody.

Blake · « **Reply #2 on:** December 14, 2005, 07:34:17 PM »

This is an interview (from T-Nation) with a gymnast coach. Should help to answer your questions about what gymnasts do and don't do in regards to exercises.

http://www.t-nation.com/findArticle.do?article=04-080-feature

onlyme · « **Reply #3 on:** December 14, 2005, 07:58:55 PM »

I was (believe or not) a gymnast from 3rd grade to 8th grade. In fact I was the Southern California Junior High Champion. I weighed about 120 then. I was doing iron crosses and giants when no one else was doing them in my age range. I went to the So.uth Bay Academy of Gymnastics in Torrance. We never lifted weights only exercises with our own bodyweight. Allot of bar work and floor work will get you very strong.

JOHN MATRIX · « **Reply #4 on:** December 14, 2005, 08:59:09 PM »

that article makes me want to get back to playing on monkey bars and rings. i always loved that stuff, and i can make you strong as fuck too!

Princess L · « **Reply #5 on:** December 14, 2005, 09:02:18 PM »

I seem to recall the_Hater claiming bodyweight exercises couldn't put on muscle.

http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=35336.0

Princess L · « **Reply #6 on:** December 14, 2005, 09:43:36 PM »

If you were fortunate enough to see this performance, you'd be in awe at he tremendous strength these guys have.
http://www.getbig.com/pics/arnold/2004/misc/brothers.htm

Hedgehog · « **Reply #7 on:** December 14, 2005, 09:45:52 PM »

High volume. High frequency. Low intensity.

YIP
Zack

Bluto · « **Reply #8 on:** December 15, 2005, 04:14:10 AM »

well most gymnasts obviously have the genetics for it, or they wouldnt be gymnasts, and they have a lifetime of working out since they start at an early age. Most are from what i understand pretty short too, which both work as an advantage in different exercises and give a certain look.
i agree that they do look phenomenal, at least their upper bodies, not sure about their legs though as from what i understand it would be no benefit for them to have big legs.

dontknowit · « **Reply #9 on:** December 15, 2005, 05:27:36 AM »

Physically awesome, yes,

but also short, small, light, very wrong body -> small legs, tremendous arms. The muscles are clearly visible by the low bodyfat, but that's it. Nothing to be jealous of.

Ever seen a 6,2" tall gymnast weighing 240lbs. Don't think so.

pumpster · « **Reply #10 on:** December 15, 2005, 01:36:17 PM »

Further verification that weights aren't essential to build an excellent physique that many prefer. Gymnasts & rowers have some of the best physiques.

To get more size than that resistance bands can be incorporated.

triple_pickle · « **Reply #11 on:** December 15, 2005, 06:52:50 PM »

forget the massive arms and delts. it is their abs i find awesome.

onlyme · « **Reply #12 on:** December 16, 2005, 12:34:31 AM »

As strong as Coleman is and the other pros not one of them could pull off one of those moves the brothers do. Those guys are unreal.

JPM · « **Reply #13 on:** December 16, 2005, 08:50:45 AM »

I've been to Circus 'Ole (butchered the spelling) and shows like it in Vegas a few times and have been blown away from those feats of balance & strength by those gymnast. Also saw the show from China.... unbelieveable. That would be the body prefered by most men , not the Mr. O type. And I think a lot of women would like a body,close and next to them, like that (for the weekend anyway)

If anyone did only dips & chins as their only upper body workout , twice or three times a week, they would achieve a very large chest/back/delts/traps/triceps/biceps and outstanding abs. Of course weight (by way of a belt, chain, etc) would be added as they progressed and got stronger. Some people complain about not having enought equipment for a good workout. They would be very surprised at what a dipping and chinning bar could accomplish in the way of size & power if they approached them with serious intent. Good Luck.

ARTI · « **Reply #14 on:** December 16, 2005, 09:04:09 AM »

Dips, Chins and they also do hand stand push-ups off of dumbbells. That will build your shoulders.

I understand them having huge delts & tri's but what about the huge Biceps on these little guys. Close grip Pull-ups maybe?

The Rings are always cool to watch.

Bear03 · « **Reply #15 on:** December 16, 2005, 10:16:35 AM »

Quote from: JPM on December 16, 2005, 08:50:45 AM

I've been to Circus 'Ole (butchered the spelling)

haha sorry mate, it's Cirque de Soleil...it's french. "Circus of the Sun". Anyways though i agree with your post, i think 160 lbs is not much to move when you're benching, but when you're suspended by your arms on two free moving rings dangling 15 feet above the ground, you can get pretty jacked. All fast twitch fibers too, so obv. much more growth potential.

Blake · « **Reply #16 on:** December 16, 2005, 10:42:04 AM »

Quote from: ARTI on December 16, 2005, 09:04:09 AM

I understand them having huge delts & tri's but what about the huge Biceps on these little guys. Close grip Pull-ups maybe?

If you check out that article I posted above, the coach being interviewed indicated that their extreme bicep development comes from the straight arm work they do (iron crosses on rings, etc.), not a "curling" movement.

ARTI · « **Reply #17 on:** December 16, 2005, 11:14:05 AM »

So should I do 1" BB curls with 315 and just hold it there for as long as I can?

I think they're curling their bodyweight in a variety of ways throughout all of the different events they do.

I wish I got into that when I was younger, always respected them.

Blake · « **Reply #18 on:** December 16, 2005, 11:31:41 AM »

Quote from: ARTI on December 16, 2005, 11:14:05 AM

So should I do 1" BB curls with 315 and just hold it there for as long as I can?

I think they're curling their bodyweight in a variety of ways throughout all of the different events they do.

From the article:

"T-Nation: Wait a sec, these guys with the killer biceps don't do barbell and dumbbell curls?

Sommer: No, not a single one! In fact, their amazing biceps development isn't the result of any kind of curling movement at all, but primarily due to the straight arm leverage work which they do on the still rings.

The straight-arm work is enormously difficult and puts tremendous strain on the biceps resulting in incredible growth. The key to success is being able to approach these exercises in a safe progressive manner.

T-Nation: What do you mean exactly by straight-arm work?

Sommer: By straight-arm work I'm primarily referring to the classic strength positions on the still rings (iron cross, planche, maltese, etc.) and the connecting movements between them.

Straight arm work basically means moving the body without the advantage of bending the joints. Essentially then, by increasing the length of the lever, we greatly magnify the intensity of the exercise.

A case in point would be a cross pull (basically a straight arm pull-up where the arms pull out to the sides) compared to a regular pull-up. The bodyweight is the same in both cases; however, the cross pull is several orders of magnitude harder than the pull-up, resulting in significantly higher strength and muscle gains.

Now consider that I had one teammate in college who could hold an iron cross with 60 pounds hanging on his feet and you begin to get an idea of the incredible strength of some of the high level gymnasts. By the way, this same gymnast had an upper body that was incredibly large and ripped!"

ARTI · « **Reply #19 on:** December 16, 2005, 12:10:30 PM »

Correct me if I'm wrong, to perform Cross Pull:

1. Hang from rings, arms straight up and locked ?

2. Without unlocking arms, go in an iron cross ?

3. Without unlocking arms, bring arms to your sides ?

-If this is true, what about for the millions of us that can't currently do an iron cross?

-Is there an exercise to work up to this? maybe cable crossovers to the sides, straight arms of course.

-Hard to believe that would work your biceps.

pumpster · « **Reply #20 on:** December 16, 2005, 05:04:55 PM »

Quote

extreme bicep development comes from the straight arm work they do

It's more than that-the motions they do are 360 degrees in nature, so all upper body muscles are involved at some points as the body rotates. Bis are used when pulling themselves up into starting position on the rings, and while spinning in up-and-down motion on the rings to gain speed, prior to dismount-all muscles are eventually used because the motions are never limited to one plane.

Blake · « **Reply #21 on:** December 16, 2005, 06:21:00 PM »

Quote from: pumpster on December 16, 2005, 05:04:55 PM

It's more than that-the motions they do are 360 degrees in nature, so all upper body muscles are involved at some points as the body rotates. Bis are used when pulling themselves up into starting position on the rings, and while spinning in up-and-down motion on the rings to gain speed, prior to dismount-all muscles are eventually used because the motions are never limited to one plane.

Sure, it's not the ONLY reason. And, the coach interviewed does say the straight arm work is "primarily" the reason for that development.

pumpster · « **Reply #22 on:** December 16, 2005, 06:23:50 PM »

He claims it's the primary reason. I doubt it; I think he's guessing.

He's completely wrong in claiming that there are no curling motions-most of them happen so quickly as just part of being in motion that it might not be obvious, such as when moving into and holding a position upside down on the rings-serious bicep work.

Just because it's in print or online or someone says it doesn't make it so.

Blake · « **Reply #23 on:** December 16, 2005, 07:15:29 PM »

Quote from: pumpster on December 16, 2005, 06:23:50 PM

He claims it's the primary reason. I doubt it; I think he's guessing.

He's completely wrong in claiming that there are no curling motions-most of them happen so quickly as just part of being in motion that it might not be obvious, such as when moving into and holding a position upside down on the rings-serious bicep work.

Just because it's in print or online or someone says it doesn't make it so.

What leads you to believe he's guessing? Just curious. Also, he doesn't claim that there are no curling motions. Of course there are to an extent. He said the gymnasts' development is not the result of curling motions, in response to the question of whether or not they do barbell or dumbbell curls.

Who knows. I wasn't a gymnast nor have I worked with them or seen the way they train day in and day out for years as someone like he has.

Also, personally I'm not trying to say that some of those curling movements 'don't' have an effect. And again, I'm certainly in no position to try and break down what percentage of a gymnast's bicep development is due to straight arm work and what percentage curling motions account for.

pumpster · « **Reply #24 on:** December 16, 2005, 09:12:06 PM »

I'm not sure why you're hung up on defending his position through the use of semantics, as in the case of curls-i read his comments. It's fairly obvious that shifting bodyweight quickly through space requires the rigorous use of all upper body muscles. Apparent to me and I think to others that they are in fact doing curl variations as part of wide ranges of motions.