Arm Size of T-Nation Readers

Training Bodybuilding
361

[quote]Professor X wrote:
hawaiilifterMike wrote:
Brother Chris wrote:
hawaiilifterMike wrote:
Ace Rimmer wrote:

I’m not interested in getting big biceps,I was interested from a point of view of answering clients questions.

I think he means that like CT’s clients, his clients may get scared of him if he becomes too big/muscular. He can make more money being medium sized, and that includes his arms. Otherwise if he did direct arm work, he might carry 20"+ arms that negatively affects his income and other negative consequences.

Which I call bull shit. I have medium sized arms 18.5-19" arms, and people come up to me all the time in my gym to ask questions even though I am not even a PT or SC. If I get interrupted as many times as I do working as if I was working, I’d be big baller in the iron jungle.

You, like me are from the USA. He is from England, the client base might be different.

OR he could be talking out of his ass…one of the two.[/quote]

I say he’s talking out of his ass.

I have not been to England, but I have been to other countries over the pond, and if they are anything remotely like England, it is exactly the same as America. Big guys get asked just the same as they do over here, and there is plenty of big guys over there. If anything big guys are more prevalent as I have seen mostly because they are more labor orientated, instead of service orientated like America.

362

5’9
216lbs
17,5"

363

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Professor X wrote:
hawaiilifterMike wrote:
Brother Chris wrote:
hawaiilifterMike wrote:
Ace Rimmer wrote:

I’m not interested in getting big biceps,I was interested from a point of view of answering clients questions.

I think he means that like CT’s clients, his clients may get scared of him if he becomes too big/muscular. He can make more money being medium sized, and that includes his arms. Otherwise if he did direct arm work, he might carry 20"+ arms that negatively affects his income and other negative consequences.

Which I call bull shit. I have medium sized arms 18.5-19" arms, and people come up to me all the time in my gym to ask questions even though I am not even a PT or SC. If I get interrupted as many times as I do working as if I was working, I’d be big baller in the iron jungle.

You, like me are from the USA. He is from England, the client base might be different.

OR he could be talking out of his ass…one of the two.

I say he’s talking out of his ass.

I have not been to England, but I have been to other countries over the pond, and if they are anything remotely like England, it is exactly the same as America. Big guys get asked just the same as they do over here, and there is plenty of big guys over there. If anything big guys are more prevalent as I have seen mostly because they are more labor orientated, instead of service orientated like America.[/quote]

I live in England and if I wanted a trainer they would have to be bigger than me otherwise Id be looking for another, we’re just the same in this country, big guys get asked.

It wouldn’t take too much to be bigger either, arms measured cold this morning, a feeble…

17.25"
@ 5’9", 195lb

364

[quote]Professor X wrote:
hawaiilifterMike wrote:
Brother Chris wrote:
hawaiilifterMike wrote:
Ace Rimmer wrote:

I’m not interested in getting big biceps,I was interested from a point of view of answering clients questions.

I think he means that like CT’s clients, his clients may get scared of him if he becomes too big/muscular. He can make more money being medium sized, and that includes his arms. Otherwise if he did direct arm work, he might carry 20"+ arms that negatively affects his income and other negative consequences.

Which I call bull shit. I have medium sized arms 18.5-19" arms, and people come up to me all the time in my gym to ask questions even though I am not even a PT or SC. If I get interrupted as many times as I do working as if I was working, I’d be big baller in the iron jungle.

You, like me are from the USA. He is from England, the client base might be different.

OR he could be talking out of his ass…one of the two.[/quote]
+

IM GOING WITH OPTION 2

365

5’11’’
213 lbs
18’’

366

[quote]Charles3264 wrote:
5’11’’
213 lbs
18’’
[/quote]

good lookin KOI work on the arm bro…and since pics don’t lie and people insist on calling BS here is my right arm flexed just over 21"

367

5’10
23 years old
230lbs
Arms just under 17"

They’ll prob drop about .5" with the cut. I have pretty high body fat. My goal is 18" lean within about a year.

368

[quote]morepain wrote:
Charles3264 wrote:
5’11’’
213 lbs
18’’

good lookin KOI work on the arm bro…and since pics don’t lie and people insist on calling BS here is my right arm flexed just over 21"[/quote]

Good work, man.

369

[quote]morepain wrote:
good lookin KOI work on the arm bro…and since pics don’t lie and people insist on calling BS here is my right arm flexed just over 21"[/quote]

i think your pic is lying. that looks like your left arm.

370

how often do you guys train biceps and triceps directly? (currently or in the past)

371

[quote]Therizza wrote:
how often do you guys train biceps and triceps directly? (currently or in the past)[/quote]

On average, twice a week currently for biceps and once for triceps. I did biceps once a week for years but that was when I hadn’t figured out how to work around the minor injury I have.

372

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Therizza wrote:
how often do you guys train biceps and triceps directly? (currently or in the past)

On average, twice a week currently for biceps and once for triceps. I did biceps once a week for years but that was when I hadn’t figured out how to work around the minor injury I have.[/quote]

x is gonna hate me for this but i rarely do direct arm work now…maybe 3 or 4 sets for biceps once a week and the same for triceps. I did do god awful amounts of arm work for many years though. its kind of a whatever works for you thing, for me i just don’t need much direct arm work anymore to maintain them, now if for some odd reason i felt they needed to be bigger than i would probably increase the work a little, but more likely the frequency

373

I read somewhere you train mostly by ‘feel’ now X, so do you hit the arms when they are fully recovered from the last time, or something like 85% recovered (if you get what I’m saying by the percentage thing)

374

oh, and the only reason I asked was to get a sense of how you guys train. just trying to gain some insight.

375

20 years old, 6’3", 14.5
freaking embarassing. I have big bi’s, but I had never worked my tri’s until this last year. So like 70% of my arm muscle is bicep.

376

[quote]Therizza wrote:
I read somewhere you train mostly by ‘feel’ now X, so do you hit the arms when they are fully recovered from the last time, or something like 85% recovered (if you get what I’m saying by the percentage thing)[/quote]

They recover faster now that I don’t have that issue with my forearm. I have been known to train arms when they are still SLIGHTLY sore. If there is real pain, I will not train them until they heal.

377

[quote]morepain wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Therizza wrote:
how often do you guys train biceps and triceps directly? (currently or in the past)

On average, twice a week currently for biceps and once for triceps. I did biceps once a week for years but that was when I hadn’t figured out how to work around the minor injury I have.

x is gonna hate me for this but i rarely do direct arm work now…maybe 3 or 4 sets for biceps once a week and the same for triceps. I did do god awful amounts of arm work for many years though. its kind of a whatever works for you thing, for me i just don’t need much direct arm work anymore to maintain them, now if for some odd reason i felt they needed to be bigger than i would probably increase the work a little, but more likely the frequency[/quote]

I don’t think anyone would argue that’s enough to maintain your arm size. But if you were still actively searching for bigger arms, this probably wouldn’t be the way to go about it.

378

[quote]bwhitwell wrote:
Ace Rimmer wrote:
austin_bicep wrote:
Ace Rimmer wrote:
austin_bicep wrote:
Ace Rimmer wrote:
Okay,not everyone is playing fair and listing whether they have read that article (Very interesting by the way,cheers prof X,it confirmed a lot of suspicions I have had with regards to growth AND measurement) and followed the protocol.
yeesh,what a low to my ego.
You mean putting a finger under the tape is not on?
:wink:
Just kidding.
Ok,here’s my stats,(following the strict poliquin protocol)-
31 y/o
102kg/224lbs.
6’2"
14.2" cold
16.0" flexed

Also,is it worth listing the distance or how many fingers you can get in between your biceps and elbow joint? I read this once as a method of determining ggod genetic potential or not,and it ties in with that article.

I can get two fingers in there easily.
Given all this,and the fact that I do hardly any direct bicep work,is this good for my height/weight,or do I need to man the fuck up?

I wouldn’t say that you could determine your genetic potential by doing a finger test of your bicep insertion points.

People with both extremes have had the greatest arms ever. Higher insertion points give an awesome peak and lower give a very full powerful look.

I’ll give you examples of peoples arms that look awesome from all extremes and look them up and tell me about their genetic potential ;).

Albert Beckles-High Insertion Points

Arnold Schwarzenegger-Neither Very High, Nor Very Low

Kevin Levrone-Low Insertion Points

They all have arms I would be extremely proud to wear.

You still haven’t proved anything one way or the other,what you have said is higher insertion points ‘give an awesome peak’ and lower gives a ‘full powerful look’ neither correlates with the method stated here of measuring the diameter of biceps,without including this info.

You have basically ststed how one or the other can give a better APPEARANCE.I feel arm length contributes a lot at least.But you surely cannot argue that a higher insertion makes it EASIER to add muscle,and a lower insertion allows the POTENTIAL for MORE growth?
Other genetic factors come into it too,such as muscle fibre makeup/dominance.

What is there to prove that has not been proven already.

I was giving examples of 3 guys, one who was a 7 time Mr. Olympia, the other a Mr. Olympia runner up for numerous occassions and the other a Mr. Olympia contender.

These guys have the best genetic potential for bodybuilding and there insertion points are at all different extremes. A finger test is not a test worthy of dictating what someones genetic potential is.

You asked if you have good potential and stated that you don’t do direct arm work…your arms are small, cause I consider my arms to be not that large and I have about 2.5 inches on you.

I think your trying to study way too far into this subject, when your accomplishments dictate you shouldn’t be doing so. I think it would benefit you more to stop reading this info and to spend more time eating and lifting big and your arms will grow.

I’m not interested in getting big biceps,I was interested from a point of view of answering clients questions.

Come on now, all bullsh*t aside, you DON’T want big arms? I don’t know anybody, I mean anybody that dosen’t want big arms. Are you a male (MAN). I think you are more intersted in winning a argument than actually training. Sorry if that sounds rude, but this is a BODYBUILDING forum.[/quote]

I do martial arts,my Sensei would kick my ass if he saw me doing direct arm work,unless sparring/padwork,etc.
Some tricep work sure,but biceps work can be counter-productive.
In many traditional martial arts it is avoided or minimized,as the power and ‘snap’ comes from extension of the arm to hit in most strikes.
This may be an outdated view,I don’t know.

379

Yeesh.
You guys have a real small-minded view of PT’s and what they do.

As if 95% of the people that come to us are dudes who want big arms and to look ‘hewge’.

The vast majority,that come to a chain health club?
I’ll give you the breakdown of the people who don’t leave in the first 3 months,in order-
They say they want to get ‘toned’ and they say,‘I don’t want to get TOO big’.
The majority of the rest want to lose some flab,or not injure themselves,or just ‘get healthy’
Others have past injuries and are referred for rehab and corrective exercise.
Others want to improve their performance in sports/hobbies,and prevent injury.
Guys and girls training for a competition or event-5k/10k/marathon/triathlon/tournament,etc.
Some want to enjoy themselves,meet people,do classes,use the pool,spa,jacuzzi,etc.
A few will be referred for weight management,nutrition and lifestyle consultation,fitness assessments,etc. and by a GP (doctor) referral for exercise prescription.

Then there’s bodybuilders,who make up a small minority.
Why do you think if you go to a commercial gym,you are tucked away in the corner,with more than two benches if you’re lucky? It’s damn hard to get rich from a bodybuilding gym,or bodybuilders
Most of BB’ers train with each other,have preconceived negative ideas about PT’s,ask the biggest guy(s) in the gym for free advice anyway,already spend a large part of their disposable income on food,supplements,and steroids or other banned substances,etc.

I know from my experience that the number of PT’s in gyms making a living from peeps who want to get seriously big and strong is damn small,in this country at least.

The vast majority do not give a shit about the size of my biceps,they want someone to come down to their level.Many are intimidated by the bigger guys,who have to be more pushy.

A few PT’s I know are more successful than bigger PT’s intheir gym.They are much smaller than me,but pound for pound,a couple of 'em are pretty damn strong guys.
A couple of them aren’t,but they have good qualifications-BSc (Bachelor Of Science) in Sports Science and a MSc (Master Of Science) in Sport & Exercise Physiology,plus CSCS (Certified Strength and Conditioning Specialist) with the NSCA,plus level 4 PT,to name a few.
But they aren’t lifters,not really,they do marathons,triathlons,etc. they never have to do much selling to get clients-their reputation precedes them.

380

[quote]Ace Rimmer wrote:
bwhitwell wrote:
Ace Rimmer wrote:
austin_bicep wrote:
Ace Rimmer wrote:
austin_bicep wrote:
Ace Rimmer wrote:
Okay,not everyone is playing fair and listing whether they have read that article (Very interesting by the way,cheers prof X,it confirmed a lot of suspicions I have had with regards to growth AND measurement) and followed the protocol.
yeesh,what a low to my ego.
You mean putting a finger under the tape is not on?
:wink:
Just kidding.
Ok,here’s my stats,(following the strict poliquin protocol)-
31 y/o
102kg/224lbs.
6’2"
14.2" cold
16.0" flexed

Also,is it worth listing the distance or how many fingers you can get in between your biceps and elbow joint? I read this once as a method of determining ggod genetic potential or not,and it ties in with that article.

I can get two fingers in there easily.
Given all this,and the fact that I do hardly any direct bicep work,is this good for my height/weight,or do I need to man the fuck up?

I wouldn’t say that you could determine your genetic potential by doing a finger test of your bicep insertion points.

People with both extremes have had the greatest arms ever. Higher insertion points give an awesome peak and lower give a very full powerful look.

I’ll give you examples of peoples arms that look awesome from all extremes and look them up and tell me about their genetic potential ;).

Albert Beckles-High Insertion Points

Arnold Schwarzenegger-Neither Very High, Nor Very Low

Kevin Levrone-Low Insertion Points

They all have arms I would be extremely proud to wear.

You still haven’t proved anything one way or the other,what you have said is higher insertion points ‘give an awesome peak’ and lower gives a ‘full powerful look’ neither correlates with the method stated here of measuring the diameter of biceps,without including this info.

You have basically ststed how one or the other can give a better APPEARANCE.I feel arm length contributes a lot at least.But you surely cannot argue that a higher insertion makes it EASIER to add muscle,and a lower insertion allows the POTENTIAL for MORE growth?
Other genetic factors come into it too,such as muscle fibre makeup/dominance.

What is there to prove that has not been proven already.

I was giving examples of 3 guys, one who was a 7 time Mr. Olympia, the other a Mr. Olympia runner up for numerous occassions and the other a Mr. Olympia contender.

These guys have the best genetic potential for bodybuilding and there insertion points are at all different extremes. A finger test is not a test worthy of dictating what someones genetic potential is.

You asked if you have good potential and stated that you don’t do direct arm work…your arms are small, cause I consider my arms to be not that large and I have about 2.5 inches on you.

I think your trying to study way too far into this subject, when your accomplishments dictate you shouldn’t be doing so. I think it would benefit you more to stop reading this info and to spend more time eating and lifting big and your arms will grow.

I’m not interested in getting big biceps,I was interested from a point of view of answering clients questions.

Come on now, all bullsh*t aside, you DON’T want big arms? I don’t know anybody, I mean anybody that dosen’t want big arms. Are you a male (MAN). I think you are more intersted in winning a argument than actually training. Sorry if that sounds rude, but this is a BODYBUILDING forum.

I do martial arts,my Sensei would kick my ass if he saw me doing direct arm work,unless sparring/padwork,etc.
Some tricep work sure,but biceps work can be counter-productive.
In many traditional martial arts it is avoided or minimized,as the power and ‘snap’ comes from extension of the arm to hit in most strikes.
This may be an outdated view,I don’t know.
[/quote]

Hold on I’ll text Brock Lesnar and we’ll find his take on direct arm work ;). lol