[quote]Venks wrote:
Over a cup of coffee this morning, it struck me. Are we doing this wrong?
Sure when compared to the bench press, the skullcrusher/ tricep pushdown won’t cause much anabolic hormone release. But is the Bench Press better than Flyes, front raises and tricep pushdown?
[/quote]
Who the fuck is “we?” “We” already knew the answer to this lol.
[quote]gregron wrote:
[quote]austin_bicep wrote:
I do isolation exercises for every muscle group, every time I train.[/quote]
x 2
I dont understand the “anti isolation movement” that seems to be gaining steam. It just doesnt make sense[/quote]
i was discussing this with a person who approached me in the gym today. He complained that when he got to heavier weights on his compound movements, he didnt feel it as much in the targeted muscle.
I tried to explaining the reasoning to him, and offered possible solutions for him until he grew, namely as a lifter. Ugh
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]plateau wrote:
[quote]Proud_Virgin wrote:
IMO biceps and shoulders are really the only isolation exercises you NEED to do…everything else can generally be targeted with compounds.
[/quote]
I’d probably add calves into the needing iso-work, but agree with the other two![/quote]
YEAH!! No hamstring curls! They suck. No direct forearms work even if yours are tiny. They suck too. No pec deck flyes or anything else but pressing movements! No triceps pressdowns!! No front raises!!!
I have been clearly doing this wrong and will wait for you guys to correct my horrid habit of doing whatever is necessary.[/quote]
Good points, I meant (but clearly didn’t state) in my own experience but in the spirit of a good debate…
hamstrings = mine only grew when I added in RDLs, 3 different types of leg curl did shit for me.
forearms = got nothing out of wrist extensions, pinwheel/hammer/reverse are the only exercises that helped me.
triceps = pressdowns have done little for my tricep strength/size. Through experience size comes better for me with reverse pressing on smith, dips, PJR pullovers, rolling extensions, JM presses.
Front raises I haven’t done for years, must admit to having been stuck in they get enough work from pressing - hell I might start doing these again. But of course front raises hit the SHOULDERS which were stated needed additional iso work…
[quote]BiP wrote:
Here’s a crazy idea - do both.[/quote]
Definitely agree with BiP on this one. We should not neglect either compound or isolation movements, both should be incorporated into anyone’s workout routine.
However, I do feel strongly that compound movements are the bread and butter of a great workout routine and they are the exercises that release the most growth hormone for better muscles gains. Just as anything in life, moderation is key, and mixing both compound movements and isolation exercises will definitely help, not hinder your success.
-John
[quote]WeightTraining wrote:
and they are the exercises that release the most growth hormone for better muscles gains.
-John
[/quote]
Just a heads up, but this statement is largely bullshit. You won’t be releasing enough GH during a workout to cause you to suddenly gain faster. Basing your routine on that idea is a mistake. Do what is necessary…which is both.
No huge fucker is going to tell someone to avoid “compound movements”.
[quote]My lifting at that time was mostly compound exercises for 3 sets in the 15 RM ( I was told that was the range for hypertrophy by the personal trainer). I noticed most of the mass gain during that time went to the chest and back, some to the arms.
[/quote]
This kid is a raw beginner, so the debate over compound vs isolation is pointless. He was doing a complete beginner’s routine. Now he’s ready to do an intermediate beginner’s routine.
There are exercises that will be effective for you, and others that will be less so. Drawing some line in the sand between “compound” and “isolation” will only be effective for starting internet arguments. Not that I wasn’t worrying about all kinds of details when I started out. I think it’s because I found sites like these before I had actually spent a lot of time in the gym, and there was too much info to make sense of right off the bat.
[quote]Quick Ben wrote:
There are exercises that will be effective for you, and others that will be less so. Drawing some line in the sand between “compound” and “isolation” will only be effective for starting internet arguments. Not that I wasn’t worrying about all kinds of details when I started out. I think it’s because I found sites like these before I had actually spent a lot of time in the gym, and there was too much info to make sense of right off the bat.[/quote]
Thanks for the reply, Ben.
I decided there is no “one way” to train. I decided to incorporate a mix of Compounds and Isolation exercises.
[quote]Venks wrote:
[quote]Quick Ben wrote:
There are exercises that will be effective for you, and others that will be less so. Drawing some line in the sand between “compound” and “isolation” will only be effective for starting internet arguments. Not that I wasn’t worrying about all kinds of details when I started out. I think it’s because I found sites like these before I had actually spent a lot of time in the gym, and there was too much info to make sense of right off the bat.[/quote]
Thanks for the reply, Ben.
I decided there is no “one way” to train. I decided to incorporate a mix of Compounds and Isolation exercises.[/quote]
You should read starting strength about basic barbell training and begin with linear progression. When you get into intermediate to advance level, you can then branch out into more isolation workouts. All the other programs are just bullshit and will leave you frustrated and feel like you’re spinning your wheels.
There are legitimate reasons to drop isolation completely for certain beginners and weekend warriors.
If a person approaches me and asks for a routine and he’s only willing to sacrifice about two hours per week, then YES, isolation makes little sense.
Injuries or colossal weaknesses aside, core exercises can be adjusted.
On such a basic level, it’s a simple function of time and impact.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
There are legitimate reasons to drop isolation completely for certain beginners and weekend warriors.
If a person approaches me and asks for a routine and he’s only willing to sacrifice about two hours per week, then YES, isolation makes little sense.
Injuries or colossal weaknesses aside, core exercises can be adjusted.
On such a basic level, it’s a simple function of time and impact.
[/quote]
?
If someone can only devote two hours a week to this, then they aren’t BODYBUILDING which is the name of the forum you and they are posting in.
There is a rather huge freaking difference between bodybuilding and “weekend warrior training”. I would hope that most of the advice given here is actually in the context of someone who plans on making significant changes in how they look…and not someone who is simply going to the gym like the majority of the Planet Fitness population.
This isn’t the forum for that. This is not the place for people who can’t or in most cases won’t put the time in.
Hell, in that case, why even do most “compound movements” if they aren’t committed? Just have them use the damned stack-plate machines for 30min and let them go home. Why lead people on as if they can make huge changes with such limited dedication?
It’s bullshit.
That also doesn’t mean you need to spend your whole life in the gym to make progress…but if someone can’t train upwards of 4 days a week (variable), then they need to accept much lesser progress.
Taking away “isolation exercises” as if that is what is holding them back is retarded.
THEY are what is holding them back.
It’s a strange form of elitism you are cultivating.
Of course this site is for all kinds of athletes or wanna-be athletes.
Do you think the “combat” subforum has a sticky in it which reminds every Karateka that he shouldn’t waste his time pushing the iron just for two hours a week?
Training with weights is in my opinion one of the most versatile forms of GPP.
You are hijacking bodybuilding if you label it a either-or club.
If somebody trains “running” only for two hours a week, should he not consult a “running forum”, because some runners call this “jogging”?
There’s nothing wrong with people having modest aims. For these guys, a simple program without isolation usually works better. And it’s still bodybuilding.
Categorizations abound.
First of all, according to Bodybuilding - Wikipedia
“Bodybuilding is a form of body modification, involving intensive muscle hypertrophy.”
If that’s the consensus, ProX is right, seeing how weekend-warrior-ish training usually doesn’t lead to “intensive hypertrophy”.
Concerning time efficacy, Schwarzfahrer: you can also achieve a nice physique, especially if stripped for time, if you chain ISOs. Or if you combine them with compounds. I don’t like the drawing lines in sand mentalities presented by both of you, in here.
And, for the record: I don’t understand why you’re reacting so defensively, either, ProX. There’s no need for that: either people get it or they don’t.
Also, my definition of bodybuilding deviates from the general consensus (if the wiki entry can be seen as the general consensus): to me, everyone who’s progressively building muscle, no matter how fast/slow, with the aim of looking aesthetically pleasing (V taper, appreciable muscle size, low-enough bf levels in the ‘finished’ package) is a bodybuilder.
In short: bb = body modification by way of increasing muscle mass without (permanently) turning into a fat slob.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
and he’s only willing to sacrifice about two hours per week,
[/quote]
Wow… Am I strange because I look forward to lifting?
[quote]FattyFat wrote:
And, for the record: I don’t understand why you’re reacting so defensively, either, ProX.
[/quote]
Because this forum is largely a joke these days.
Threads and responses that are geared toward GPP and conditioning, should be in the fucking conditioning forum, or on boards where that is the goal.
Imagine that.
Are there threads in the powerlifting forum about “I want a 225 bench, but I’m not willing to ‘sacrifice’ more than that.”
[quote]FattyFat wrote:
Categorizations abound.
First of all, according to Bodybuilding - Wikipedia
“Bodybuilding is a form of body modification, involving intensive muscle hypertrophy.”
If that’s the consensus, ProX is right, seeing how weekend-warrior-ish training usually doesn’t lead to “intensive hypertrophy”.
Concerning time efficacy, Schwarzfahrer: you can also achieve a nice physique, especially if stripped for time, if you chain ISOs. Or if you combine them with compounds. I don’t like the drawing lines in sand mentalities presented by both of you, in here.
And, for the record: I don’t understand why you’re reacting so defensively, either, ProX. There’s no need for that: either people get it or they don’t.
Also, my definition of bodybuilding deviates from the general consensus (if the wiki entry can be seen as the general consensus): to me, everyone who’s progressively building muscle, no matter how fast/slow, with the aim of looking aesthetically pleasing (V taper, appreciable muscle size, low-enough bf levels in the ‘finished’ package) is a bodybuilder.
In short: bb = body modification by way of increasing muscle mass without (permanently) turning into a fat slob.
[/quote]
It isn’t about being defensive. The mentality of “avoid isolation exercises because they just slow you down” is what becomes of trying to dumb all of this shit down for people who can’t or won’t dedicate the time towards it.
No, you won’t make much/optimal progress only training 2 hours or less a week no matter how well you group your exercises.
Yes, it may be better than nothing, but this is a forum dedicated to bodybuilding…which is not the same at all as “go to the gym once a week if that but tell everyone how you did squats so you sound hardcore!!”.
It means all discussion of what actually works well now needs to be blindsided by a bunch of people trying to make it easier for those who won’t ever make that much progress overall anyway.
…and no, it isn’t just “anyone who is progressively gaining muscle no matter how slow” because that definition now includes every grandma who is talking with her blue haired friend while sitting on the leg abductor…but hey, she’s “progressively” adding muscle…so she’s a bodybuilder.
You can call that elitist or whatever, but without making that distinction, you end up with people slowly turning “let’s focus on compound exercises” into “biceps curls equal bad!” all being shouted by people with small arms.
If you want to get optimal results, you do it all. Period. There are no short cuts.
No one is going to look like even an NPC lightweight only training once or twice a week unless they were damn near born that way.
But, of course if your goal is just “to tone”…then by all means, only hit the gym on Mondays…and look the same next year.
There are people using the new Indigo product who have been here for half a decade or more but look like they never saw the inside of a gym.
Wanna guess who might be cutting corners?
I’m guessing they aren’t the “5 day a week without fail” type.
You?
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Are there threads in the powerlifting forum about “I want a 225 bench, but I’m not willing to ‘sacrifice’ more than that.”[/quote]
…or better yet, threads in the Combat Forum about how you want to fight like Bruce Lee but you only have every third Wednesday to dedicate to training.
Bodybuilding isn’t about “better than nothing”…because that gets you nowhere except looking the same or worse over time.
i could overhead press my body weight and still had non existent medial delts. huge triceps and front delts, but no width from the front. until i started doing heavy ass laterals, cable laterals, and machine laterals did i start to get “some” width. wish i never followed a 5x5 compound system in the beginning.
worked up to 110s on flat dumbbell bench and chest still sucked, not until i added flyes and cable crossovers did my chest start to somewhat grow.
i 100% believe in isolation work.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]FattyFat wrote:
Categorizations abound.
First of all, according to Bodybuilding - Wikipedia
“Bodybuilding is a form of body modification, involving intensive muscle hypertrophy.”
If that’s the consensus, ProX is right, seeing how weekend-warrior-ish training usually doesn’t lead to “intensive hypertrophy”.
Concerning time efficacy, Schwarzfahrer: you can also achieve a nice physique, especially if stripped for time, if you chain ISOs. Or if you combine them with compounds. I don’t like the drawing lines in sand mentalities presented by both of you, in here.
And, for the record: I don’t understand why you’re reacting so defensively, either, ProX. There’s no need for that: either people get it or they don’t.
Also, my definition of bodybuilding deviates from the general consensus (if the wiki entry can be seen as the general consensus): to me, everyone who’s progressively building muscle, no matter how fast/slow, with the aim of looking aesthetically pleasing (V taper, appreciable muscle size, low-enough bf levels in the ‘finished’ package) is a bodybuilder.
In short: bb = body modification by way of increasing muscle mass without (permanently) turning into a fat slob.
[/quote]
It isn’t about being defensive. The mentality of “avoid isolation exercises because they just slow you down” is what becomes of trying to dumb all of this shit down for people who can’t or won’t dedicate the time towards it.
No, you won’t make much/optimal progress only training 2 hours or less a week no matter how well you group your exercises.
Yes, it may be better than nothing, but this is a forum dedicated to bodybuilding…which is not the same at all as “go to the gym once a week if that but tell everyone how you did squats so you sound hardcore!!”.
It means all discussion of what actually works well now needs to be blindsided by a bunch of people trying to make it easier for those who won’t ever make that much progress overall anyway.
…and no, it isn’t just “anyone who is progressively gaining muscle no matter how slow” because that definition now includes every grandma who is talking with her blue haired friend while sitting on the leg abductor…but hey, she’s “progressively” adding muscle…so she’s a bodybuilder.
You can call that elitist or whatever, but without making that distinction, you end up with people slowly turning “let’s focus on compound exercises” into “biceps curls equal bad!” all being shouted by people with small arms.
If you want to get optimal results, you do it all. Period. There are no short cuts.
No one is going to look like even an NPC lightweight only training once or twice a week unless they were damn near born that way.
But, of course if your goal is just “to tone”…then by all means, only hit the gym on Mondays…and look the same next year.
There are people using the new Indigo product who have been here for half a decade or more but look like they never saw the inside of a gym.
Wanna guess who might be cutting corners?
I’m guessing they aren’t the “5 day a week without fail” type.
You?[/quote]
Quoted for truths
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
and he’s only willing to sacrifice about two hours per week,
[/quote]
Wow… Am I strange because I look forward to lifting?
[quote]FattyFat wrote:
And, for the record: I don’t understand why you’re reacting so defensively, either, ProX.
[/quote]
Because this forum is largely a joke these days.
Threads and responses that are geared toward GPP and conditioning, should be in the fucking conditioning forum, or on boards where that is the goal.
Imagine that.
Are there threads in the powerlifting forum about “I want a 225 bench, but I’m not willing to ‘sacrifice’ more than that.”[/quote]
Oh, hi, ProX. Didn’t know you’re an accountant, these days.
I’m perfectly aware of the state the forums are in.
And, in most cases, I agree with ProX.
I’d simply use different means, that’s all.
I’ve fared pretty well so far by simply stating my opinion without stepping on the toes of people who don’t agree with me (mostly).
I’ve been using the interwebz since 1997 and have taken part in discussions even before that (BBS, FidoNet). And time and again, I’ve had to accept that discussion dynamics don’t translate 1:1 from real life to e-world.
If people constantly have to be convinced by e-bashing valid points into their skulls, it’s not worth my time. Usually.
Actually, let me rephrase that: if people constantly have to be convinced by e-bashing valid points into their skulls, they’re not worth my time. Yes, that’s more like it 
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]FattyFat wrote:
…
[/quote]
It isn’t about being defensive.
[/quote]
I’m a proponent of ISOs, see my reply to Schwarzfahrer.
In fact, I even think it’s possible to build some serious slabs even as an intermediate or advanced lifter by mainly using ISOs.
And I (at the very least, partly) invalidated Schwarzfahrer’s statement concerning ISOs wouldn’t lend itselves to time efficient training.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
The mentality of “avoid isolation exercises because they just slow you down” is what becomes of trying to dumb all of this shit down for people who can’t or won’t dedicate the time towards it.
[/quote]
Agreed.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
No, you won’t make much/optimal progress only training 2 hours or less a week no matter how well you group your exercises.
[/quote]
Agreed.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Yes, it may be better than nothing, but this is a forum dedicated to bodybuilding…which is not the same at all as “go to the gym once a week if that but tell everyone how you did squats so you sound hardcore!!”.
It means all discussion of what actually works well now needs to be blindsided by a bunch of people trying to make it easier for those who won’t ever make that much progress overall anyway.
…and no, it isn’t just “anyone who is progressively gaining muscle no matter how slow” because that definition now includes every grandma who is talking with her blue haired friend while sitting on the leg abductor…but hey, she’s “progressively” adding muscle…so she’s a bodybuilder.
[/quote]
I presented and tagged this as my personal opinion.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
You can call that elitist or whatever, but without making that distinction, you end up with people slowly turning “let’s focus on compound exercises” into “biceps curls equal bad!” all being shouted by people with small arms.
[/quote]
It’s not elitist.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
If you want to get optimal results, you do it all. Period. There are no short cuts.
No one is going to look like even an NPC lightweight only training once or twice a week unless they were damn near born that way.
But, of course if your goal is just “to tone”…then by all means, only hit the gym on Mondays…and look the same next year.
There are people using the new Indigo product who have been here for half a decade or more but look like they never saw the inside of a gym.
Wanna guess who might be cutting corners?
I’m guessing they aren’t the “5 day a week without fail” type.
You?[/quote]
Agreed.
You know, from all your efforts trying to steer newbies in the right direction it’s clear that you care. A lot, I’d daresay.
It’s just this: you appear to be all black and white about this.
See above, I agree with you.
But I’ve known too many people starting out with lifting, getting interested in bb only to be deterred by this daunting task of putting in max effort year in, year out.
Maybe this black and white approach is too much.
How about laying out the way for both
folks who are ‘harcore’-minded from the get-go and just soak all the essentials in and rinse-repeat the necessary stuff
people who need to be eased in. What is it to you if they need to be brought into the fold by starting out on a 3x TBT / week? Maybe they’ll catch the iron bug and start to want more. And more. And even more.
That way, you might just reap more benefits and get MORE people to go seriously about this.
Your attitude would make much more sense in an elite setting where every participant would fully commit himself to bodybuilding out of his own volition, i.e. accept that it takes time, effort and dedication.
Sorry, dude: that’s NOT this forum.
I don’t see the need for big drama here.
Noone wants to deliberately exclude isolation per se.
Compound movements AND isolation IS the optimal way if you want it all.
But some just want health & looking OK/losing weight.
If these guys are stripped for time, I say there is little to no room for isolation.
40 minute workouts, 3x per week are pretty standard for legions of gymgoers.
I’d be surprised to see a good, sample routine WITH isolation for a person who doesn’t give a crap about beach muscles that cannot be improved by replacing these with multijoint exercises.
However, if looking good is the main motivation for such a client, isolation will in turn BE a good option, even in such a tight timeframe, because you can drastically improve looks through concentrating on certain muscles.
If “bodybuilding” means to someone “the persuit for optimal muscle growth and nothing else”, then we seem to enjoy different definitions, I guess.
Nothing to lose sleep over.