|
Post by mr potatohead on Jan 14, 2022 13:30:54 GMT
Youtube are bombarding me with this stuff now without me looking for it! (rofl) Here's ............ Thanks for sharing your spam, m8.
|
|
carlson
Caneguru
Jabroni
Posts: 442
|
Post by carlson on Jan 17, 2022 7:28:41 GMT
To continue the biceps discussion that spilled over into the porker thread, Texasringer had some good comments and said:
"What about the flies vs. pressing comparison. Well, different movments sports fans but the delts are still involved, heavily, as a stabilizer as are your biceps and triceps."
Whether the delts are acting as a stabiliser or not, in a fly surely they are not actually responsible for pulling the dumbells in towards the center line? In which case, who cares if they are stabilising or not, the pecs are taking the brunt of the strain.
I am interested in the comments regarding partial push ups, not saying I disagree (would like to hear more), but the world is jam packed with partial push up ponces with xylophone ribs and non existent pecs.
Back to biceps, the fact that some of us have seen noticeable improvement when incorporating direct work such as curls suggeata compounds are not enough for full development.
Jabronies.
|
|
TexasRanger
Caneguru
A little here, a little there...
Posts: 2,223
|
Biceps
Jan 17, 2022 12:07:46 GMT
Post by TexasRanger on Jan 17, 2022 12:07:46 GMT
Whether the delts are acting as a stabiliser or not, in a fly surely they are not actually responsible for pulling the dumbells in towards the center line? In which case, who cares if they are stabilising or not, the pecs are taking the brunt of the strain.I am interested in the comments regarding partial push ups, not saying I disagree (would like to hear more), but the world is jam packed with partial push up ponces with xylophone ribs and non existent pecs. Back to biceps, the fact that some of us have seen noticeable improvement when incorporating direct work such as curls suggeata compounds are not enough for full development. Jabronies. Well, flies are actually engaging the delts as a prime based on how far the weight is lowered via transverse flexion. At the top of the a DB fly, the pecs are offloaded -- big reason why some folks use cable machines or a pec deck. On the push ups, I've been searching the web and can't find the drawing -- yet. It was probably 8 - 10 years ago when I originally posted the picture, which was an excellent depiction of each portion of a push up (applicable to chest presses as well) and muscles engaged. But, even if you do partials (emphasizing pecs, per se) on a bench or push up, you're still engaging the entire muscle, your delts, etc. Folks who don't have pecs? I'd ask what their genetics are. Speaking for myself, I could do all the silly variations of biceps work we see in the muscle rags yet never see a 'peak' like certain people, a full biceps muscle like others. Sorry, but the muscle rags and books are filled with so much BS and myth over the last century even when science has shown them to be wrong. There was a triceps cable movement that I saw Larry Scott and Robby Robinson performing in Weider rags -- it "BLASTED" their triceps. Wow, I probably thought...if it worked for those two guys, no doubt it will work for me. Ended up loving the exercise -- a lot safer for me regarding working the triceps. But alas I never ended up with anything close to those two -- don't have the genetics, don't dope. Nice "pump" afterwards, admittedly. But that goes away. "noticeable improvement" What are you calling noticeable improvement? For example, have direct biceps work helped you win Mr Olympia, ? And when did you see the noticeable improvement? I'd venture to guess 100% of us see the most growth when we're starting out and doing the basics. Squats, benches or dips and a pulling exercise -- row, pulldown, chin, deadlift. After that, returns vs. work starts to diminish. A lot of biceps "size" is intramuscular fat -- especially when sarcopenia starts. If you've got 4-pack abs and 18" guns for example, IMHO you've got legit upper arms. At the same time, you can have a 6-pack and 15" arms...still legit. And what is "full development"? Asking as I've seen this in the Weider or Muscle Mag rags...Bill Phillips' late mag alluded to it. The thing is, a muscle is either engaged or it isn't. If you do a deadlift or biceps curl, the fibers of the biceps muscle are engaged in response to the resistance. It isn't either or -- science has shown this. ...then, we add genetics into the mix.
|
|
carlson
Caneguru
Jabroni
Posts: 442
|
Post by carlson on Jan 17, 2022 14:57:38 GMT
Whether the delts are acting as a stabiliser or not, in a fly surely they are not actually responsible for pulling the dumbells in towards the center line? In which case, who cares if they are stabilising or not, the pecs are taking the brunt of the strain.I am interested in the comments regarding partial push ups, not saying I disagree (would like to hear more), but the world is jam packed with partial push up ponces with xylophone ribs and non existent pecs. Back to biceps, the fact that some of us have seen noticeable improvement when incorporating direct work such as curls suggeata compounds are not enough for full development. Jabronies. Well, flies are actually engaging the delts as a prime based on how far the weight is lowered via transverse flexion. At the top of the a DB fly, the pecs are offloaded -- big reason why some folks use cable machines or a pec deck. On the push ups, I've been searching the web and can't find the drawing -- yet. It was probably 8 - 10 years ago when I originally posted the picture, which was an excellent depiction of each portion of a push up (applicable to chest presses as well) and muscles engaged. But, even if you do partials (emphasizing pecs, per se) on a bench or push up, you're still engaging the entire muscle, your delts, etc. Folks who don't have pecs? I'd ask what their genetics are. Speaking for myself, I could do all the silly variations of biceps work we see in the muscle rags yet never see a 'peak' like certain people, a full biceps muscle like others. Sorry, but the muscle rags and books are filled with so much BS and myth over the last century even when science has shown them to be wrong. There was a triceps cable movement that I saw Larry Scott and Robby Robinson performing in Weider rags -- it "BLASTED" their triceps. Wow, I probably thought...if it worked for those two guys, no doubt it will work for me. Ended up loving the exercise -- a lot safer for me regarding working the triceps. But alas I never ended up with anything close to those two -- don't have the genetics, don't dope. Nice "pump" afterwards, admittedly. But that goes away. "noticeable improvement" What are you calling noticeable improvement? For example, have direct biceps work helped you win Mr Olympia, ? And when did you see the noticeable improvement? I'd venture to guess 100% of us see the most growth when we're starting out and doing the basics. Squats, benches or dips and a pulling exercise -- row, pulldown, chin, deadlift. After that, returns vs. work starts to diminish. A lot of biceps "size" is intramuscular fat -- especially when sarcopenia starts. If you've got 4-pack abs and 18" guns for example, IMHO you've got legit upper arms. At the same time, you can have a 6-pack and 15" arms...still legit. And what is "full development"? Asking as I've seen this in the Weider or Muscle Mag rags...Bill Phillips' late mag alluded to it. The thing is, a muscle is either engaged or it isn't. If you do a deadlift or biceps curl, the fibers of the biceps muscle are engaged in response to the resistance. It isn't either or -- science has shown this. ...then, we add genetics into the mix. You seem awful keen to use genetics as a convenient get out of jail card. Of course genetics are important, but you or I will never know what the genetic limit is for ourselves or anyone else. We can take a stab in the dark and assume we were pretty close at our peak to our limits, but we cant be certain. What gains did I saw when I trained them directly? What a goddamn strange queation. No I did not become Mr Olympia but I had bigger biceps of course, with no visible increase in bodyfat and the same detail under the skin on my inner biceps. You seem to discount the value of anything but the most basic compound exercises for any kind of muscular development, despite decades of people seeing reaults for themselves. You might think they all turned into fatt6 lard arses, but that is a but harsh, shame on you for using such language, Turbanripper. Are you suggesting that as deadlifts engage the biceps, that is all we need to do? My god man, I think you have been out in the Texan sun for too long. Pour yourself a Tizer and sit in the shade man!
|
|
TexasRanger
Caneguru
A little here, a little there...
Posts: 2,223
|
Biceps
Jan 17, 2022 15:40:08 GMT
Post by TexasRanger on Jan 17, 2022 15:40:08 GMT
You seem awful keen to use genetics as a convenient get out of jail card. Of course genetics are important, but you or I will never know what the genetic limit is for ourselves or anyone else. We can take a stab in the dark and assume we were pretty close at our peak to our limits, but we cant be certain. What gains did I saw when I trained them directly? What a goddamn strange queation. No I did not become Mr Olympia but I had bigger biceps of course, with no visible increase in bodyfat and the same detail under the skin on my inner biceps. You seem to discount the value of anything but the most basic compound exercises for any kind of muscular development, despite decades of people seeing reaults for themselves. You might think they all turned into fatt6 lard arses, but that is a but harsh, shame on you for using such language, Turbanripper. Are you suggesting that as deadlifts engage the biceps, that is all we need to do? My god man, I think you have been out in the Texan sun for too long. Pour yourself a Tizer and sit in the shade man! Genetics as get out of jail? Nah. Maybe its healthy objectivity or skepticism after realizing the Weener (Weider in Carlson lingo? ) BS was simply that? Here's another thought from the netherworld of genetics: the late Arthur Jones had side by side photos of the late Mike Mentzer and Richard Baldwin showing the difference genetics make. Both guys were around the same height, age and on steroids. People went crazy but Jones also took it a step further by measuring that "gap" between the triceps or biceps belly and elbow and size...at the end of the day, Jones consistently showed you just ain't overcoming genetics no matter what you do. (That includes drinking a Tizer...?) "You seem to discount the value of anything but the most basic compound exercises for any kind of muscular development, despite decades of people seeing reaults for themselves. You might think they all turned into fatt6 lard arses, but that is a but harsh, shame on you for using such language, Turbanripper. Are you suggesting that as deadlifts engage the biceps, that is all we need to do? My god man, I think you have been out in the Texan sun for too long." Sure! There are plenty of examples of folks that have great upper arms from just doing chins and dips...heck, the some of those guys in the Bar-Barian videos -- push ups and chins -- have arms that I wish I could build!
|
|
Michael
Caneguru
He cuts down trees. He wears high heels, suspendies, and a bra?!
Winner of Twatformetrics Spartan Challenge
Posts: 5,288
|
Post by Michael on Jan 17, 2022 16:22:14 GMT
Serious questions. Pierini and I believe Stuke have been doing chins/pullups and dips for years. Pierini has no arm development. I know of other people in the past that did these exercises with no arm size or development. I've experimented with this myself and actually lost an inch on my arms. I've always felt dips in my chest and pullups/chins in my back. Why do You think this is? Because of my own experience and where I feel the exercises working I always had a hard time believing these are the only two exercises I need. I would say steroids and genetics could make any exercise work. Maybe it's the way the exercise is done?
|
|
TexasRanger
Caneguru
A little here, a little there...
Posts: 2,223
|
Post by TexasRanger on Jan 17, 2022 16:47:51 GMT
Serious questions. Pierini and I believe Stuke have been doing chins/pullups and dips for years. Pierini has no arm development. I know of other people in the past that did these exercises with no arm size or development. I've experimented with this myself and actually lost an inch on my arms. I've always felt dips in my chest and pullups/chins in my back. Why do You think this is? Because of my own experience and where I feel the exercises working I always had a hard time believing these are the only two exercises I need. I would say steroids and genetics could make any exercise work. Maybe it's the way the exercise is done? No slam on Pierini, but from his videos he appears to be an ectomorph. His small calves and upper arms along with wrists seem to support this guess and if that is the case, he's not going to see a whole lot. (Think about Greg Newton complaining weights never developed his upper arms -- well, if you look at his videos, his triceps and biceps were clearly short...what Jones was referring to all those years ago. So it wasn't the weights, it was his genetics....just what you're stuck with thanks to mom and dad. I'm not a lot whole lot better off.) On chins and dips, maybe the exercises didn't work for you based on your build or hand placement? Only guessing as I did V-bar dips for years until we moved and I haven't had a place to re-install the dip rack, but for me it did a great job. But, think it was you who told me about the Skinny-Fat site where that guy dropped his weight training, switched to push ups (diamond/close hand placement) and wide grip chins. Geeze, what a difference that made. And the guy who hosts the Old School Cals website -- IMHO his whole upper body looks way better after he switched from weight training and focused on pushups, dips, chins, etc.
|
|
stuke
Caneguru
Posts: 905
|
Post by stuke on Jan 17, 2022 22:19:57 GMT
Good post TR. I always liked the idea of basing the bulk of my upper body workouts around chins and dips, unfortunately I am no longer able to dip due to health issues, though I have recently started adding some top of movement quarter reps at the end of a workout and if I am careful I can pump out some reps which feel good in the triceps. Bodyweight quarter reps, a far cry from the heavy weighted dips I used to do many years back.
|
|
TexasRanger
Caneguru
A little here, a little there...
Posts: 2,223
|
Post by TexasRanger on Jan 17, 2022 23:16:18 GMT
Good post TR. I always liked the idea of basing the bulk of my upper body workouts around chins and dips, unfortunately I am no longer able to dip due to health issues, though I have recently started adding some top of movement quarter reps at the end of a workout and if I am careful I can pump out some reps which feel good in the triceps. Bodyweight quarter reps, a far cry from the heavy weighted dips I used to do many years back. If you haven't tried them, can I suggest doing dips via isometrics? Call me Captain Obvious, but I picked up a good book several years ago by Dr. Raymond Wu called the One Minute Workout and the focus is isometrics. With this, one of the exercises he advocates is dips, working up to one minute before progressing to a more challenging exercise (or adding resistance). (Another book that has been highly recommended is the new Dragon Door isometric book -- a gentleman (No S-- Sherlock) on the Aging Macho Men site gave it glowing reviews...on Amazon, those who've purchased it said the book's been a life-saver, joint-wise.) Anyway, I'm not too far away from your situation -- heavy weighted dips and benches also took a toll, but a couple of wrist surgeries (not related to weight training) and not being able use the rack any longer probably saved my AC joint. I can still do BW dips below parallel, if I add weight I stop short of parallel. Makes no sense in my case to go too low and other exercises feel better. One of the suggestions from Wu is adopting isometrics sooner rather than later to reduce joint irritation and eventual damage; "Dr Crunch" -- you may remember him from years gone by (?) -- also advocated isometrics based on the fact our joints have less and less synovial fluid once we approach our mid-30s (think that was the number) and beyond. Sorry for the mini-novel.
|
|
stuke
Caneguru
Posts: 905
|
Post by stuke on Jan 18, 2022 6:56:45 GMT
Good post TR. I always liked the idea of basing the bulk of my upper body workouts around chins and dips, unfortunately I am no longer able to dip due to health issues, though I have recently started adding some top of movement quarter reps at the end of a workout and if I am careful I can pump out some reps which feel good in the triceps. Bodyweight quarter reps, a far cry from the heavy weighted dips I used to do many years back. If you haven't tried them, can I suggest doing dips via isometrics? Call me Captain Obvious, but I picked up a good book several years ago by Dr. Raymond Wu called the One Minute Workout and the focus is isometrics. With this, one of the exercises he advocates is dips, working up to one minute before progressing to a more challenging exercise (or adding resistance). (Another book that has been highly recommended is the new Dragon Door isometric book -- a gentleman (No S-- Sherlock) on the Aging Macho Men site gave it glowing reviews...on Amazon, those who've purchased it said the book's been a life-saver, joint-wise.) Anyway, I'm not too far away from your situation -- heavy weighted dips and benches also took a toll, but a couple of wrist surgeries (not related to weight training) and not being able use the rack any longer probably saved my AC joint. I can still do BW dips below parallel, if I add weight I stop short of parallel. Makes no sense in my case to go too low and other exercises feel better. One of the suggestions from Wu is adopting isometrics sooner rather than later to reduce joint irritation and eventual damage; "Dr Crunch" -- you may remember him from years gone by (?) -- also advocated isometrics based on the fact our joints have less and less synovial fluid once we approach our mid-30s (think that was the number) and beyond. Sorry for the mini-novel. Thqnks, some good advice there. My issue is chostochonditris, so I am not even sure being in the dip position ismoetrically will be good or not, will give it a try. Some positions can set it off, poor posture in an armchair for example, or I can go weeks with little trouble. Sometimes chin ups set it off, a couple of weeks back partial deadlifts really kicked it off. 8t may even juat flare up for no apparent reason too. Years back when it was particularly bad over my heart area and we did not know what it was, my GP sent me to A&E and I had a lot of tests done on my heart. A couple of years ago I was on my bike slipped on some ice and managed to stay upright, but really wrenched all my ribs and had to take a couple of days off work. That's the thing with me, it doesnt just get me in the sternum, it can be all over my ribs, even in my back. Back to dips anyway, I used to do them pretty heavy and one day I felt a horrible pop in my sternum and a lot of pain. It lasted weeks but eventually went away. Had this 2 or 3 times over the yeqrs, even from unweighted dips, so I got wise eventually and stopped doing them. I have Googled this many times and a lot of people have had this, but never really found out what it is. I think it is seperate to the chostochonditris. Sorry for the sprawling, definitely off topic post!
|
|
jonrock
Caneguru
Rock-a-hula
Posts: 965
|
Post by jonrock on Jan 18, 2022 11:35:38 GMT
Genetics? There is no way to predict exact measurements, work capacity on different days, structure load-bearing potential, etc... Just look at Maxick, Alan Mead, Billy Ralph, Hack, Zass, etc...they trained and polished each muscle, particularly Maxick, as anyone can read in the Maxalding lessons.
Old timers developed their strength as much as they could. Period. Whatever works, works. If bodypart develops your strength/looks more, then it is good. If isos ala Zass works and you like it, then it is good. The same with every kind of exercise, unless your health is compromised, of course.
Show me anyone shirtless as ripped and well developed as Maxick, as strong as him, then you tell me about "predictions". These guys did not care about such things, they developed themselves with no preconceived idea which determined their own process and fate, they discovered within.
|
|
jonrock
Caneguru
Rock-a-hula
Posts: 965
|
Post by jonrock on Jan 18, 2022 11:46:59 GMT
|
|
stuke
Caneguru
Posts: 905
|
Post by stuke on Jan 18, 2022 13:02:43 GMT
If that first one is a genuine photo, those abs are incredible!
|
|
jonrock
Caneguru
Rock-a-hula
Posts: 965
|
Biceps
Jan 18, 2022 13:37:49 GMT
via mobile
Post by jonrock on Jan 18, 2022 13:37:49 GMT
If that first one is a genuine photo, those abs are incredible! Yes it is, neck and traps are fantastic too. I am disappointed, I wish that carly bronson answered...nevermind
|
|
TexasRanger
Caneguru
A little here, a little there...
Posts: 2,223
|
Biceps
Jan 18, 2022 14:01:09 GMT
Post by TexasRanger on Jan 18, 2022 14:01:09 GMT
Genetics? There is no way to predict exact measurements, work capacity on different days, structure load-bearing potential, etc... Just look at Maxick, Alan Mead, Billy Ralph, Hack, Zass, etc...they trained and polished each muscle, particularly Maxick, as anyone can read in the Maxalding lessons. Old timers developed their strength as much as they could. Period. Whatever works, works. If bodypart develops your strength/looks more, then it is good. If isos ala Zass works and you like it, then it is good. The same with every kind of exercise, unless your health is compromised, of course. Show me anyone shirtless as ripped and well developed as Maxick, as strong as him, then you tell me about "predictions". These guys did not care about such things, they developed themselves with no preconceived idea which determined their own process and fate, they discovered within. Genetics are an excellent tool or foundation to help anyone determine their outcome. Short muscle bellies are one factor...muscle fibers are another. Slow twitch individuals aren't going to do perform as well as those with fast twitch. No different than diet and the affect on your health whether it is heart or cancer. Regarding each of those individuals you named? There were a handful of people, but at the end of the day it was genetics. The other part was -- sorry -- hype and claims rarely validated. Strength historians including David Gentle, Terry Todd and even decades ago Alan Calvert, if I recall, dissected the claims and at the end of the day, we find out they were all about selling their courses -- no different than the snake oil salesmen of the muscle rags (and now websites). Regardless, how many people replicated Maxick's physique? Or any of the others you named? "Old timers developed their strength as much as they could. Period." That is one claim. Remember Gordon Anderson/Andy62's claims? He repeatedly swore up and down Maxick, Bobby Pandour, et al, built their physiques simply by contracting, flicking, twitching their muscles. Then people dug up other documents where they talked about these guys lifting or putting people on their shoulders and going up and down stairs in their gyms. Gyms? What gyms...I thought Maxick did dynamic resistance. Oh, they did gyms to "test" their strength -- same tale we hear from Chuck Atlas. Atlas -- same guy who claimed he casually ran 6:00/mile for ten miles over sand dunes. "Show me anyone shirtless as ripped and well developed as Maxick, as strong as him, then you tell me about "predictions". These guys did not care about such things, they developed themselves with no preconceived idea which determined their own process and fate, they discovered within." Not sure this is what we're talking about. If you enjoy training and want to give strength training a shot, have at it. But being pragmatic about your potential will go a long way in terms of reducing frustration, getting injured. "The Mountain", with his genetics, will never run like an elite marathoner nor will the latter ever stand a chance of getting as strong as the Mountain, even with steroids, HGH, insulin, etc.
|
|