# Stop Worrying About Arms



## camarosuper6 (Dec 24, 2006)

Ive been a member of this board for a little over three years, and quite honestly  joining this board back in 03 literally opened my eyes and caused a dramatic change in the way I trained forever.

There are a lot of good stickies, great information and quite a few good guys who have accumilated a lot of good knowledge and experience over the years.

However, one thing that never fails to amaze me, after all the stickies and information Robert and crew have provided for new people and veterans alike, is the amount of time people spend worrying about bringing up their arms.

Obviously everyone wants big arms... seeing that they are probably the prime showoff muscle other than abs, and big arms seem to define a highschoolers "cool" factor in PE class.

What lots of new guys and even some veteran guys dont realize is that arms are involved in virtually every upper body movement you can do (save a select few), and are usually the most overtrained bodypart by FAR.

People read the magazine articles about multiple sets, reps, rest-pauses, high volume, iso tension, flexion, twist the wrist 30 degrees right, so on and so on for "huge" arms.  What most people dont realize is that they are so terribly weak in their prime compound movements, they not only do not have the strength or neuro-coordination to yet have large arms, but their POTENTIAL for much larger arms is being hampered by their lack of total body strength in heavy compound movements.

Take a look at yourself.  What are your bodybuilding goals?  Have you acheived them yet?  Answer is almost surely no, and if your like me, your probably not even close to being where you want to be.  Let me share with you my thought proccess when I see where I want to be...


My goal is to because bascially as strong and massive as I can, using minimal supplments and other products.  I would like to achieve the 275 lb mark this year at a bodyfat level under 14 percent.  What is the fastest and most logical way to get there..... doing bicep curls and tricep extension for 10 sets twice a week?

No.

Heavy squats, deadlifts, rows, dips, presses, etc, etc, etc.  Show me a person who rows over 350 lbs and presses two times his bodyweight and I will show you a person who doenst worry about direct arm movements or lying tricep pullovers.

Because your arms are directly involved in all upper body compound movements, why waste your time on curling a measly 100lbs when you could be working on rowing or chinning 250 plus?  Which do you think is going to build stronger, bigger triceps.... 80lb extensions, or weighted dips with 100 lbs strapped to your waist?

Not that I am saying direct arms work is BAD... its not.  I do believe that for OPTIMAL arm size a very small amount of direct arm work is probably needed, although with minimal volume..... probably less than half most people do now.
( I do one direct bicep and one direct tricep movement on my upper days.. my arms arent suffering one bit)

Unless you are a very advanced trainee who is well into their upper strength limits or are completely satisfied with your current status...(I would sure hope nobody is completely satisfied with themselves).. then quit worrying about pumping your guns, and worry about increasing your total body strength, and watch your arms take care of themselves.

Good day


----------



## plewser2006 (Dec 24, 2006)

agreed...

but coming from my scronny ass maybe i should just shut up...
[12 inch arms]


----------



## Gazhole (Dec 24, 2006)

This got a standing ovation from me, lol.

The next step is to get people to believe it.


----------



## TheCurse (Dec 24, 2006)

i dont train anything but arms.


----------



## juggernaut (Dec 24, 2006)

I am guilty of wondering about arms, as far as asking for some arm routines. 
However, I am a competitive bodybuilder and have a thing for being very symmetrical. If I ask about arms, or if i am willing to specialize, its only because I want to bring them up so that i feel more confident or want to present a better overall package on stage and not because I'm vain. I should also mention that my workouts are surrounded by compound exercises because they are simple and they work.


----------



## camarosuper6 (Dec 24, 2006)

A few things Ive noticed....


Rack deads and pulls do much more for my traps than shrugs... Ill never do shrugs again.

Chins destroy my biceps...even more than heavy barbell curls.  I rotate three bicep exercises... barbell curls, one arm dumbell curls and closegrip chins.


Military Pressreally hammers my triceps... along with heavy dips for my  and close grip bench on a smith machine for safety.

Overhead pressing movements are all I need for shoulders.  I no longer do laterals....although I do see the validity for using them.  I do believe they cap the shoulders well.

I do not hate machines... as long as the weight is heavy, I use free weights, smith and hammer strength.  Granted free weight being my first choice, I see nothing wrong with using smith and hammer for saftey puposes.  As long as your overload is progressive... you will get larger.

Squats and deadlifts period.

If your doing all the above exercises.... your core gets very strong, so doing direct core work should be kept at minimal volume, or if will effect your other lifts.


----------



## AKIRA (Dec 24, 2006)

Weighted or even BW Chinups do give my biceps a unique burn not felt in direct bicep movements.

I did arms today!  After 1 incline DB Press, 1 Stading Overhead Press, 1 Wide Grip Pullup, and 1 Bent Over Row.  Hah, but I did 2 sets of light curls and 2 sets of light extensions.  Only 2 exercises total.


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Dec 24, 2006)

One-arm BB benches, overhead Bulgarian squats and Turkish get ups work the shoulders and triceps quite a bit. It's hard to force your body to stabilize more than that. They're definitely not very popular exercises, but damn do they work, as only a few other examples.


----------



## zl214 (Dec 24, 2006)

bicep curls worked quite well for me, i now can curl as much as deadlift....


----------



## Arnold (Dec 24, 2006)

just get arm implants.


----------



## vortrit (Dec 24, 2006)

plewser2006 said:


> agreed...
> 
> but coming from my scronny ass maybe i should just shut up...
> [12 inch arms]



Yay! I've got bigger arms than somebody (13). Personally, when the get to about 15 or maybe less it's all maintenance for me.


----------



## zl214 (Dec 24, 2006)

BTW, can anyone explain waht core strength is?


----------



## juggernaut (Dec 24, 2006)

Prince said:


> just get arm implants.


----------



## juggernaut (Dec 24, 2006)

zl214 said:


> BTW, can anyone explain waht core strength is?


----------



## Triple Threat (Dec 25, 2006)

zl214 said:


> BTW, can anyone explain waht core strength is?



Center of the body strength.  For me that means abs, obliques, lower back, hips, and glutes.


----------



## juggernaut (Dec 25, 2006)

core strength is kind of overrated; whenever you do compounds your core is utilized, as well as several other exercises. I believe that "core strength" got its popularity from the fatasses that merely sit on their fat fucking asses looking for the latest gadget found on tv that will work their core strength or in their pencilneck minds burn the fat while building abs. We as BBers and fitness enthusiasts alike work our core most of the time when we pick a weight up. 
I actually FUHHHHCKING hate saying those two words. It makes me think of a really bad movie called Perfect with when Jamie Lee Curtis was actually hot, or those dumb fucking Tony Little commercials.


----------



## KarlW (Dec 25, 2006)

Ahhh..... dips with several pounds of weight dangling between your legs. There's no better feeling.


----------



## zl214 (Dec 25, 2006)

Triple Threat said:


> Center of the body strength. For me that means abs, obliques, lower back, hips, and glutes.


 



juggernaut said:


> core strength is kind of overrated; whenever you do compounds your core is utilized, as well as several other exercises. I believe that "core strength" got its popularity from the fatasses that merely sit on their fat fucking asses looking for the latest gadget found on tv that will work their core strength or in their pencilneck minds burn the fat while building abs. We as BBers and fitness enthusiasts alike work our core most of the time when we pick a weight up.
> I actually FUHHHHCKING hate saying those two words. It makes me think of a really bad movie called Perfect with when Jamie Lee Curtis was actually hot, or those dumb fucking Tony Little commercials.


 

I dont do direct ab workout at all, but i do other compound exercises such as front squating, DL, Power clean. can these compound exercises replace direct ab exercises?


----------



## Witchblade (Dec 25, 2006)

zl214 said:


> I dont do direct ab workout at all, but i do other compound exercises such as front squating, DL, Power clean. can these compound exercises replace direct ab exercises?


No need to do direct ab work then. You could do some leg raises or reverse crunches once a month or something if you have some time left.


----------



## CowPimp (Dec 25, 2006)

camarosuper6 said:


> A few things Ive noticed....
> 
> 
> Rack deads and pulls do much more for my traps than shrugs... Ill never do shrugs again.
> ...



I agree with a lot of those selections.  I pretty much never do shrugs, except once in a while with dumbbells for some challenge to my grip.  Deadlift variations, good mornings, farmer's walks, and good ol' rows take care of the traps.

I also like the mention of overhead pressing being great for triceps.  Triceps always seems to make or break my overhead pressing; it's pretty much always a question of locking out.

Do I do direct arm work?  Yes, sometimes.  Do I think direct arm work, and isolation work all around is bad?  No, but as stated, a lot of people overdo it.  Get a good balanced base of compound movements down, and throw in some beach/extra shit for your weak points and call it a day.


----------



## zl214 (Dec 25, 2006)

interesting enough, This is something i came across today.

i was laughing my head off when i saw this pic.


----------



## KarlW (Dec 25, 2006)

> Deadlift variations, good mornings, farmer's walks, and good ol' rows take care of the traps.


 
Not to mention power cleans


----------



## CowPimp (Dec 25, 2006)

juggernaut said:


> core strength is kind of overrated; whenever you do compounds your core is utilized, as well as several other exercises. I believe that "core strength" got its popularity from the fatasses that merely sit on their fat fucking asses looking for the latest gadget found on tv that will work their core strength or in their pencilneck minds burn the fat while building abs. We as BBers and fitness enthusiasts alike work our core most of the time when we pick a weight up.
> I actually FUHHHHCKING hate saying those two words. It makes me think of a really bad movie called Perfect with when Jamie Lee Curtis was actually hot, or those dumb fucking Tony Little commercials.



There are some very intense core exercises.  I'm not talking about doing stability ball overhead extensions.  Have you ever tried core statics with a band?  Wow, those are fucking hard.


----------



## Strongwarrior (Dec 25, 2006)

Arms are very important! Show me a bodybuilder with small arms, and I'll automaticaly think he is pathetic! It's also about proportion too, you can't just have huge legs, chest and back, and have spaggetii arms, it just looks bad


----------



## StanUk (Dec 26, 2006)

zl214 said:


> interesting enough, This is something i came across today.
> 
> i was laughing my head off when i saw this pic.



Wow, that guys arms are huge compared to his chest, that just doesnt look right at all!


----------



## zl214 (Dec 26, 2006)

Strongwarrior said:


> Arms are very important! Show me a bodybuilder with small arms, and I'll automaticaly think he is pathetic! It's also about proportion too, you can't just have huge legs, chest and back, and have spaggetii arms, it just looks bad


 
the original post was about the redundancy of direct arm exercise,  not about the actual arm size.  

i think the point of this post is that if you have a huge back/chest/legs, you will have huge arms. that is why excessive direct arm workout (which many people are using) is not necessary.


----------



## Strongwarrior (Dec 26, 2006)

zl214 said:


> the original post was about the redundancy of direct arm exercise,  not about the actual arm size.
> 
> i think the point of this post is that if you have a huge back/chest/legs, you will have huge arms. that is why excessive direct arm workout (which many people are using) is not necessary.



Not necessarely, you can have big back/chest/legs, and still have underdeveloped arms...Sad but true...It even happens sometimes with professional bodybuilders, although is rare. Dorian Yates, for example, was often critisized for having ''small'' arms compared to the rest of his body...He had big arms in fact, but yes, it's true, he could've added an inch or two to match up with the rest of his body, and that's just my opinion.
Other professional bodybuilders, like Flex Wheeler and Lee priest had huge arms, but a relatively underdeveloped torso...Someone with good proportions, in my opinion, would be Arnold Scharzzenegger, huge arms but also huge chest and great back


----------



## Strongwarrior (Dec 26, 2006)

StanUk said:


> Wow, that guys arms are huge compared to his chest, that just doesnt look right at all!



I've seen some ''most muscular'' poses by Lee Priest in which it looked just like that, tiny chest, huge shoulders and arms, it's almost ridiculous, but if they are placing high, I guess the judges are ok with it...


----------



## ALBOB (Dec 26, 2006)

KarlW said:


> Ahhh..... dips with several pounds of weight dangling between your legs. There's no better feeling.



It's even better after I strap on a couple of plates too.


----------



## JimSnow (Dec 26, 2006)

Hell, forget the rest of your body... just get the doc to implant bowling balls into your biceps and bowling pins into your triceps.

You'll look like a super hero!


----------



## Double D (Dec 26, 2006)

I would have to say after a day of heavy chins, rows, and more rows, 2-3 sets of curls may help, but they are not a must. If i got anything left in the tank I throw em in there, otherwise its just time to eat, sleep, and grow. 

Good post Cam.


----------



## juggernaut (Dec 26, 2006)

Strongwarrior said:


> Other professional bodybuilders, like Flex Wheeler and Lee priest had huge arms, but a relatively underdeveloped torso...Someone with good proportions, in my opinion, would be Arnold Scharzzenegger, huge arms but also huge chest and great back


But arnold had terrible legs. Although he was symmetrical, he still didnt have better legs (and overall better package) than lou ferrigno, a bber who didnt get half the credit he deserved. Dont get me wrong, Arnold was great, but there were better physiques out there.


----------



## Arnold (Dec 26, 2006)

by today's standards Arnold's legs were weak, however back in the 70's they were fine.


----------



## Double D (Dec 26, 2006)

^^ True ^^


----------



## camarosuper6 (Dec 26, 2006)

I know very very few people who need more than one or two sets of direct work for biceps or triceps per workout.


----------



## Double D (Dec 26, 2006)

I can agree with that^^^


----------



## Strongwarrior (Dec 27, 2006)

juggernaut said:


> But arnold had terrible legs. Although he was symmetrical, he still didnt have better legs (and overall better package) than lou ferrigno, a bber who didnt get half the credit he deserved. Dont get me wrong, Arnold was great, but there were better physiques out there.



Do you really believe Ferrigno was better than Arnold? I'm Italian, and still, I feel Arnold was better, although Ferrigno was great too


----------



## Strongwarrior (Dec 27, 2006)

Prince said:


> by today's standards Arnold's legs were weak, however back in the 70's they were fine.



This is very true...How big were his legs? I know his arms were 22''
He had great calves though, but I feel he could've added a couple of inches to his legs


----------



## KarlW (Dec 27, 2006)

Arnold v Ferrigno. An old debate, and although both were great my personal opinion is that Arnold had a more pleasing physique. His wide lats tapered into a tiny waistline without bulging abs, and his pecs covered such a large area like slabs.










Lou was more blocky. Although in some shots he didn't do too bad either.


----------



## Strongwarrior (Dec 27, 2006)

^^
They were both great, that's for sure!


----------



## plewser2006 (Dec 27, 2006)

lou=massive, powerfull, gigantic... 310 pounds

arnald= symetrical, perfect physique... 250pounds?


but im a fan of arnald

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLdU4Lc-g2M


----------



## Arnold (Dec 27, 2006)

Strongwarrior said:


> This is very true...How big were his legs? I know his arms were 22''



his legs were probably about 22" as well!


----------



## zl214 (Dec 28, 2006)

Sorry, this may a little bit off the arnold vs Lou topic, but i didnt want to start another post

it is funny that in my gym, most people think that DL, squating, power clean, are more advanced exercises that beginners should keep off of.

i think this is true becasue you need to be lifting or playing enough sport to develop sufficient neuro-coordination and strength to perform a lot of these compound exercises. for example, when i started lifting, i couldnt do a full rep of deadlift until i developed enough strength on the lower back and the hammies by doing back hyperextension and leg-curl. and i can still remmeber when i started doing bench press with an empty bar, it was all shaky and i couldnt lower tha bar to my chest because my triceps were too weak.

what i am try to say is not everyone in the gym is strong enough or coordinated enough to do compound exercises and it is probably safer for them to wait until they develops enough strength/coordination through isolation exercises.


----------



## Double D (Dec 28, 2006)

I totally disagree. Start by doing compound exercises. Your muscles will strengthen faster this way than they would doing 3 sets of tricep kickbacks and 3 sets of preacher curls supersetted with 3 sets of cable crossovers and a abductor machine.


----------



## jasone (Dec 28, 2006)

I agree with this post.  My last trainer dedicated one day a week to training arms.  During the year with the trainer everything improved except arms.  It's been six months on my own and my arms have grown 1/2 inch while I've been leaning out.  I do two sets of triceps on sholder day and two sets of biceps on back day.  My elbow feels a lot better during raquetball now.  
Normal guys like me don't need as much work as a druged up professional bodybuilder.


----------



## zl214 (Dec 28, 2006)

Double D said:


> Start by doing compound exercises. Your muscles will strengthen faster this way than they would doing 3 sets of tricep kickbacks and 3 sets of preacher curls supersetted with 3 sets of cable crossovers and a abductor machine.


 

Yes, i agree, if you are a highschool jock.

say if you are training a 5'9 100bl guy who cant curl 30lb of weight and says"i dont get big no matter how much i eat". what coumpound exercise do you expect him to do other than push-ups?

and dont forget newbies can grow with doing anything.


----------



## Double D (Dec 28, 2006)

So you are suggesting isolation exercises only?


----------



## CowPimp (Dec 28, 2006)

zl214 said:


> Sorry, this may a little bit off the arnold vs Lou topic, but i didnt want to start another post
> 
> it is funny that in my gym, most people think that DL, squating, power clean, are more advanced exercises that beginners should keep off of.
> 
> ...



It depends on the individual.  To an extent you have the right idea.  However, the way I would get someone performing a solid rep on the bench would not be with kickbacks, machine flys, and lateral raises.  That isn't going to do much for intermuscular coordination.  It might strengthen the individual muscles in a very general way, but that isn't going to make for a pretty bench press the first time out.

I start people off with pushup variations and progress from there.  Usually that gives them a good prerequisite level of strength and stabilizer control to allow them to bench press without being too shaky.  Still, the first time you bench isn't going to be poetry in motion; you have to get used to the movement specifically, and open chain exercises like that in general, before it will be entirely smooth.


----------



## Double D (Dec 28, 2006)

CowPimp said:


> It depends on the individual.  To an extent you have the right idea.  However, the way I would get someone performing a solid rep on the bench would not be with kickbacks, machine flys, and lateral raises.  That isn't going to do much for intermuscular coordination.  It might strengthen the individual muscles in a very general way, but that isn't going to make for a pretty bench press the first time out.
> 
> I start people off with pushup variations and progress from there.  Usually that gives them a good prerequisite level of strength and stabilizer control to allow them to bench press without being too shaky.  Still, the first time you bench isn't going to be poetry in motion; you have to get used to the movement specifically, and open chain exercises like that in general, before it will be entirely smooth.



What I said but a much longer version. Mine was in a nut shell.


----------



## zl214 (Dec 28, 2006)

zl214 said:


> what i am try to say is not everyone in the gym is strong enough or coordinated enough to do compound exercises and it is probably safer for them to wait until they develops enough strength/coordination through isolation exercises.


 
 

and sorry for the caricature in the previous post if that offened anyone.


----------



## Double D (Dec 28, 2006)

And what CP said will suit me just fine. I dont disagree that someone should start off with something like pushups, however isolation exercises really arent going to do much for someone trying to increase overall strength. 

I remember years ago whenever I first got onto a bench press. I didnt do anything to lead up to it, I simply just did it. Given I was an athelete, however I had guys lifting with me who was not. And the ones who couldnt do the bar were the ones who used very light Db's. Or resorted to pushups until they could go to the bar. 

Oh and no offense.


----------



## zl214 (Dec 28, 2006)

CowPimp said:


> It depends on the individual. To an extent you have the right idea. However, the way I would get someone performing a solid rep on the bench would not be with kickbacks, machine flys, and lateral raises. That isn't going to do much for intermuscular coordination. It might strengthen the individual muscles in a very general way, but that isn't going to make for a pretty bench press the first time out.
> 
> I start people off with pushup variations and progress from there. Usually that gives them a good prerequisite level of strength and stabilizer control to allow them to bench press without being too shaky. Still, the first time you bench isn't going to be poetry in motion; you have to get used to the movement specifically, and open chain exercises like that in general, before it will be entirely smooth.


 

also, it is different to start with a trainer compared to start all on your own. it is much safer with someone who knows what to do. if you start by yourself, the net is basically the only place that a newbie can turn into (talking to the big guys can be very intimidating for some), which can be very confusing becasue you dont necessarily get all the information in the right order. I think this board is definitely one of the better place to start with and i dont want beginners on this site get put off by not being able to do coumpound exercises and feel inadequate or anything. 

or is it me being condescending?


----------



## Double D (Dec 28, 2006)

I think your heart is in the right place. From what I posted a few minutes ago, I said I believe (as well as you do to) people have to work up to a bench press, if they can already do it. However the place for that imo is not in isolation exercises. Its in exercises like pushups. And maybe assisted dips and things of that nature. So I say you are headed in the right direction, but are missing it by a little.


----------



## Stewart14 (Dec 28, 2006)

CowPimp said:


> It depends on the individual.  To an extent you have the right idea.  However, the way I would get someone performing a solid rep on the bench would not be with kickbacks, machine flys, and lateral raises.  That isn't going to do much for intermuscular coordination.  It might strengthen the individual muscles in a very general way, but that isn't going to make for a pretty bench press the first time out.
> 
> I start people off with pushup variations and progress from there.  Usually that gives them a good prerequisite level of strength and stabilizer control to allow them to bench press without being too shaky.  Still, the first time you bench isn't going to be poetry in motion; you have to get used to the movement specifically, and open chain exercises like that in general, before it will be entirely smooth.




when I began lifting way back when, I started doing a bunch of pushups every night before bed.  then I progressed to pushups using pushup bars, and assorted curls.  Then I progressed to the bench press, plus other movements you can perform with just a barbell like shoulder presses and tricep extensions.

So it's funny you mention that, cause I began the same way


----------



## zl214 (Dec 28, 2006)

god.... i am such a mum.

how do you delete a post?


----------



## Double D (Dec 28, 2006)

Why would you want to delete a post?


----------



## zl214 (Dec 28, 2006)

Stewart20 said:


> when I began lifting way back when, I started doing a bunch of pushups every night before bed. then I progressed to pushups using pushup bars, and assorted curls. Then I progressed to the bench press, plus other movements you can perform with just a barbell like shoulder presses and tricep extensions.
> 
> So it's funny you mention that, cause I began the same way


 

you how far you have come! congrat. 

you must have hated those freaks started bench at 200LB, too.


----------



## zl214 (Dec 28, 2006)

zl214 said:


> god.... i am such a mum.
> 
> how do you delete a post?


 
i was joking, i wanted to destroy the evidence.


----------



## Double D (Dec 28, 2006)

Now Stew's a freak who benches about 370!


----------



## CowPimp (Dec 28, 2006)

zl214 said:


> also, it is different to start with a trainer compared to start all on your own. it is much safer with someone who knows what to do. if you start by yourself, the net is basically the only place that a newbie can turn into (talking to the big guys can be very intimidating for some), which can be very confusing becasue you dont necessarily get all the information in the right order. I think this board is definitely one of the better place to start with and i dont want beginners on this site get put off by not being able to do coumpound exercises and feel inadequate or anything.
> 
> or is it me being condescending?



You have a good point with regard to not having a trainer.  Still, as you mentioned before, you need to develop a certain level of neuromuscular coordination to perform compound exercises with any kind of proficiency.  You are going to get a very limited improvement in neuromuscular coordination by doing a bunch of isolation exercises.

Furthermore, the issue a lot of people have isn't a lack of strength, but a lack of proper knowledge of technique.  Sorry to say, but doing leg curls and extensions before your first squat isn't going to do diddly if your technique is still garbage.  Most people can do a squat with their bodyweight, they just don't know how to do it properly.  Now, there are certainly cases where more remedial work is warranted, but that is not the norm.


----------



## zl214 (Dec 28, 2006)

i hate you stew!


j/k

i still cant bench my BW  after lifting for two year.


----------



## Double D (Dec 28, 2006)

Dont we all.


----------



## juggernaut (Dec 28, 2006)

CowPimp said:


> You have a good point with regard to not having a trainer.  Still, as you mentioned before, you need to develop a certain level of neuromuscular coordination to perform compound exercises with any kind of proficiency.  You are going to get a very limited improvement in neuromuscular coordination by doing a bunch of isolation exercises.
> 
> Furthermore, the issue a lot of people have isn't a lack of strength, but a lack of proper knowledge of technique.  Sorry to say, but doing leg curls and extensions before your first squat isn't going to do diddly if your technique is still garbage.  Most people can do a squat with their bodyweight, they just don't know how to do it properly.  Now, there are certainly cases where more remedial work is warranted, but that is not the norm.


Agreed.


----------



## zl214 (Dec 28, 2006)

this is really getting into a chicken/egg conversation.

I do agree with fact that compound exercises are better than isolation exercises. 

on the other hand, there are two reasons that lead to the relative low popularity of many of the compound exercise in reality.

1. people are not informed about the benefit of compound exercise, which is not likely to be the case on this site, thanks to the constant effort from moderators and many members

2. people simply cant do them.

just want to remind that possibility 2 do exist and there is nothing wrong with not being able to perform those lifts.


----------



## depaul (Dec 28, 2006)

camarosuper6 said:


> Chins destroy my biceps...even more than heavy barbell curls.


----------



## Double D (Dec 29, 2006)

juggernaut said:


> I dont think its a good idea to get into a pissing match with me.



I dont think I can piss farther, but I bet my farts stink worse. I just got done with some eggs......


----------



## juggernaut (Dec 29, 2006)

Beat cauliflower with chili-HOT chili. Bammm!!!! 
Took it up a notch...BITCH.


----------



## Double D (Dec 29, 2006)

Well my wife says there is no way anything can be any more rancid than this. And this is stamped with the wifes approval, check mate.


----------



## juggernaut (Dec 29, 2006)

funny my wife says the same thing. And I clear rooms!


----------



## AKIRA (Dec 29, 2006)

zl214 said:


> this is really getting into a chicken/egg conversation.
> 
> I do agree with fact that compound exercises are better than isolation exercises.
> 
> ...




Or more to the point, dont WANT to do them.

I remember not wanting to squat at all cuz of the pain.  Benching was the only compound movement I did and thats cuz of ego.  Rows?  Deads?  OH Presses?  That was all German to me.  Just goes to show how stupid and brainless some of us can be when we first start.

Curls?  Pressdowns?  Theyre pretty easy to figure out, plus the DOMS that comes with it is bearable.  Form is usually off, but its not as disastrous as it could be compounds.

I guess what I would simply put it as, people who do lots of isolation movements are pussies who dont want to work harder with compounds...even though in total, its more weight.

Doesnt more weight = more ego?


----------



## zl214 (Dec 29, 2006)

AKIRA said:


> I guess what I would simply put it as, people who do lots of isolation movements are pussies who dont want to work harder with compounds...even though in total, its more weight.


 
thats why i love my gym, because there are so many pussies around me i can check out. they put their hands around poles,squeezing, screaming and moaning.


----------



## Double D (Dec 29, 2006)

Have we made the point that arm days suck yet? 

What do you think Cam?


----------



## Strongwarrior (Dec 30, 2006)

Double D said:


> I totally disagree. Start by doing compound exercises. Your muscles will strengthen faster this way than they would doing 3 sets of tricep kickbacks and 3 sets of preacher curls supersetted with 3 sets of cable crossovers and a abductor machine.



Lmfao!


----------



## camarosuper6 (Dec 31, 2006)

Its ludicrous to start with isolation exercises.

ANYONE can do basic compound movements.  I would say ditch isolation completely the first year of training.


----------



## Double D (Dec 31, 2006)

camarosuper6 said:


> Its ludicrous to start with isolation exercises.
> 
> ANYONE can do basic compound movements.  I would say ditch isolation completely the first year of training.



Agreed, 100%!


----------



## camarosuper6 (Dec 31, 2006)

Unless they want to have a ton of imbalances that could lead to injury.


----------



## juggernaut (Dec 31, 2006)

camarosuper6 said:


> Its ludicrous to start with isolation exercises.
> 
> ANYONE can do basic compound movements.  I would say ditch isolation completely the first year of training.


where's the science behind that statement? I'd love to drop the isolation movements, but I need facts.


----------



## P-funk (Jan 1, 2007)

juggernaut said:


> where's the science behind that statement? I'd love to drop the isolation movements, but I need facts.



the science behind it is that nothing is in isolation.  Muscles work synergystically to produce movement.  When you do a 'pull', you are always contracting your biceps.  It isn't like we can make this up.  It is fact.  It is the biomechanics of the human body....the proof is in the pudding.


----------



## juggernaut (Jan 1, 2007)

P-funk said:


> the science behind it is that nothing is in isolation.  Muscles work synergystically to produce movement.  When you do a 'pull', you are always contracting your biceps.  It isn't like we can make this up.  It is fact.  It is the biomechanics of the human body....the proof is in the pudding.


I agree up to a point-I'm a HUGE believer in barbell curls and close grip bench presses; However, if you don't work your arms to some degree with a small amount of isolation, aren't you missing out on the small details?


----------



## P-funk (Jan 1, 2007)

juggernaut said:


> I agree up to a point-I'm a HUGE believer in barbell curls and close grip bench presses; However, if you don't work your arms to some degree with a small amount of isolation, aren't you missing out on the small details?



I am not saying that you shouldn't do any arm training at all.  In general, I think that a little bit of arm training is fine.  Also, if you are trying to compete in BBing (like yourself), you are going to want to do some arm training to make sure you get the needed volume for those muscles to spark the hypertrophy you are looking for.  Some isolation lifts are okay.  I don't think that they are totally neccessary for those of us training for general fitness or functional athletics....in most cases, you get enough arm work from your compound lifts AND you are just wasting time on those small muscle exericses.  Time that could be spent doing other things...conditioning, circuits, complexes, etc....But, as a BBer (or even a general gym rat trainee), i think some arm work is fine.  Do I think that you should be doing a full day of bi's and tri's?  Absolutely not.  You may do a pull work out and do a pull up movement, two different rowing exercises and then three sets of one bicep exercise and call it day.  I think that would be better time well spent then if you were to go in and do 3-4 bicep exercises with 3-4 reps each.


----------



## Double D (Jan 1, 2007)

P-funk said:


> Steroid abuse can be discussed anytime you mention how BBers train (or any other athlete as it is prevelant in most sports).



Most bodybuilders are on a one way track to an early grave. Some practice steroids the right way, but for the most part as far as pro's go, they have been dieing off early for years. Well atleast todays bb'ers anyways. I see nothing good about someone like Ronnie Coleman. I think he looks like hell and if I had to inject all that crap that he does, then I wouldnt want to look like him. I do think there shouldnt be bodybuilding mags in the first place. BB'ers have gotten carried away and this sets a bad example for the youth of today and society as a whole. In my opinion this helps contribute to steroid use. You see a guy this size and automatically you think, "steroids". And this is what it takes to get that big. Young kids then decide to start injecting whatever the corner supplier tells him (which is to much because he is awaiting him to come back for more). And they either suffer an injury (from growing much to fast), burn themselves out, do well and lead a life full of steroid abuse (eventually messing something up before getting to the big show), doing one cycle then stopping (and we all know how easy it is to get fat after a cycle), the very unlucky ones will die, then theres that less than 1% that will actually make it to be a pro-bb'er. 

So P I go with you on this one. There is no reason to preach arms arms arms for the simple fact that the majority of people here arent on steroids, but rather high off of life. This is a good honest community. We have a few guys here who use steroids, but they are older fellas and are simply trying to keep they levels up or very experienced in which they know their shit (mudge). The majority of people here dont think that a arm routine of 20 sets will get them anywhere than stuck in a larger rut than they have already dug for themselves. A final look at this would be if you would simply have a hard ass back routine and follow it with a few sets of biceps that is all you need if you are a natural bb'er (in which most here are).


----------



## AKIRA (Jan 1, 2007)

Hah, surprisingly, I like the turn this thread went.

What if an arm day was applied, but it was low volume?  2 exercises for both bis and tris, 8-12 reps, 2-3 sets?  The rest of the day would be worked on conditioning, core, grip, etc..

Of course, then again, I guess I couldnt ask that unless I said that this person had lacking arm size...  (so again, were back to a person's goal)


----------



## camarosuper6 (Jan 1, 2007)

IainDaniel said:


> Maybe you could talk, if we could decipher your spelling mistakes.



lol


ow3ed


----------



## juggernaut (Jan 2, 2007)

IainDaniel said:


> Maybe you could talk, if we could decipher your spelling mistakes.


----------



## juggernaut (Jan 2, 2007)

Double D said:


> Most bodybuilders are on a one way track to an early grave. Some practice steroids the right way, but for the most part as far as pro's go, they have been dieing off early for years. Well atleast todays bb'ers anyways. I see nothing good about someone like Ronnie Coleman. I think he looks like hell and if I had to inject all that crap that he does, then I wouldnt want to look like him. I do think there shouldnt be bodybuilding mags in the first place. BB'ers have gotten carried away and this sets a bad example for the youth of today and society as a whole. In my opinion this helps contribute to steroid use. You see a guy this size and automatically you think, "steroids". And this is what it takes to get that big. Young kids then decide to start injecting whatever the corner supplier tells him (which is to much because he is awaiting him to come back for more). And they either suffer an injury (from growing much to fast), burn themselves out, do well and lead a life full of steroid abuse (eventually messing something up before getting to the big show), doing one cycle then stopping (and we all know how easy it is to get fat after a cycle), the very unlucky ones will die, then theres that less than 1% that will actually make it to be a pro-bb'er.
> 
> So P I go with you on this one. There is no reason to preach arms arms arms for the simple fact that the majority of people here arent on steroids, but rather high off of life. This is a good honest community. We have a few guys here who use steroids, but they are older fellas and are simply trying to keep they levels up or very experienced in which they know their shit (mudge). The majority of people here dont think that a arm routine of 20 sets will get them anywhere than stuck in a larger rut than they have already dug for themselves. A final look at this would be if you would simply have a hard ass back routine and follow it with a few sets of biceps that is all you need if you are a natural bb'er (in which most here are).


Great statement, although i dont agree with "most bodybuilders" .


----------



## Doublebase (Jan 2, 2007)

I'll take.......none of it.


----------



## Double D (Jan 3, 2007)

juggernaut said:


> Great statement, although i dont agree with "most bodybuilders" .



I guess I mean most bodybuilders who use and abuse their AS.


----------



## plewser2006 (Jan 8, 2007)

anyone else think this thread had been drawn out way to long?


----------



## Doublebase (Jan 8, 2007)

plewser2006 said:


> anyone else think this thread had been drawn out way to long?



You, should not be doing direct arm work.


----------



## plewser2006 (Jan 8, 2007)

i knew that was comming...

is it my avatar?

seriously?


----------



## juggernaut (Jan 8, 2007)

plewser2006 said:


> anyone else think this thread had been drawn out way to long?


now........why...............would..........you.......................say..........................that?


----------



## Doublebase (Jan 8, 2007)

plewser2006 said:


> i knew that was comming...
> 
> is it my avatar?
> 
> seriously?



Yes, seriously.  Eat and squat.


----------



## juggernaut (Jan 8, 2007)

plewser2006 said:


> i knew that was comming...
> 
> is it my avatar?
> 
> seriously?


No, seriously. We just don't like you.


----------



## Double D (Jan 8, 2007)

plewser2006 said:


> i knew that was comming...
> 
> is it my avatar?
> 
> seriously?



Your little title that says young and dumb user says it all for me.... 

If it means what I think....


----------

