[quote]rrjc5488 wrote:
Why dont you want big glutes? If you have big glutes you dont need a belt.[/quote]
It’s true. Partially because of work, My waist has gone to 31 inches, and my trousers are all size 34. Fortunately, my ass keeps comedy from occurring.
[quote]lostinthought wrote:
Todd S. wrote:
Smith machine???
Are you a chick??
Where oh where did he mention the Smith Machine? [/quote]
He didn’t, The smith machine is to take the glutes and hams out of the movement and thus not develop them. That was my suggestion, with a ??? because I don’t understand the question.
Thanks for all the feedback, even the comments reflecting the insecurities or other personality deficits of the authors.
For those of you who commented that I should simply be proud of my muscular ass, and not attempt to attain a more balanced and aesthetically pleasing physique:
Wouldn’t you concede that, even though a muscular ass can be nice, there can also be too much of a good thing? Take your favorite male or female muscular ass… imagine it now with 10% more muscle mass… still diggin’ it?? Okay, then try 20% more mass, or 30% more mass… wouldn’t you agree there is a point when it starts to be too much? That’s my point!!!
I agree that a muscular ass can look great, but I also like balance.
Since you haven’t seen my ass and the rest of my physique, are you in any position to judge if I am being excessively preoccuppied or not?
I do not apologize for aiming to attain a physique that is not only strong and healthy, but also balanced and aesthetically pleasing… I’ll never be mistaken for a physique model, but I enjoy the pursuit of my own personal best.
I’m currently about 10% bodyfat, maybe less… 5’11", and about 205 pounds. I’m at a point where I don’t care much about adding bulk, but I do wish to balance out what I have.
TO ALL THOSE WHO SENT HELPFUL TIPS: THANK YOU MUCH, MY T-BROTHERS!!!
[quote]Sxio wrote:
Keep the feet low on the leg press to more hit the quads… it’s still gonna activate hammies and glutes as soon as you go low though.
Lunges on a step activate the quad well too.
Maybe it’s your genetic destiny to have a big butt. If so, don’t you want the best big butt you can have???
Keep doing the squats. Try to add more calf and hamstring mass to even out your butt development.
As someone above mentioned, if you are overweight, try to lose the excess, that will make a big visual difference as well. Good luck![/quote]
[quote]azwypio wrote:
Thanks for all the feedback, even the comments reflecting the insecurities or other personality deficits of the authors.
For those of you who commented that I should simply be proud of my muscular ass, and not attempt to attain a more balanced and aesthetically pleasing physique:
Wouldn’t you concede that, even though a muscular ass can be nice, there can also be too much of a good thing? Take your favorite male or female muscular ass… imagine it now with 10% more muscle mass… still diggin’ it?? Okay, then try 20% more mass, or 30% more mass… wouldn’t you agree there is a point when it starts to be too much? That’s my point!!!
I agree that a muscular ass can look great, but I also like balance.
Since you haven’t seen my ass and the rest of my physique, are you in any position to judge if I am being excessively preoccuppied or not?
I do not apologize for aiming to attain a physique that is not only strong and healthy, but also balanced and aesthetically pleasing… I’ll never be mistaken for a physique model, but I enjoy the pursuit of my own personal best.
I’m currently about 10% bodyfat, maybe less… 5’11", and about 205 pounds. I’m at a point where I don’t care much about adding bulk, but I do wish to balance out what I have.
TO ALL THOSE WHO SENT HELPFUL TIPS: THANK YOU MUCH, MY T-BROTHERS!!! [/quote]
Sorry, I was just picturing this with 30% more ass…
Look sideways in the mirror, I am betting your pelvis is tilted to the rear a bit. If so, you need to strengthen your abdominals to balance out your lower back strength. Do pelvic tilts on the floor. After a while you rear won’t be sticking back as much.
azwypio, maybe you don’t have a big butt, maybe it’s just the skirt you wear to the gym. Get another one of the girls at your gym and ask her if your bum looks big in this.
I have somewhat of the same problem (prolly genetics). I still do squats and romainian deads because of the other benefits associated with them. I do have one question…Im cutting now, to not make the glutes grow any further, and possibly just tighten the area…other than diet/cardio…what would be the best rep scheme to do. For example, Im doing 5x5 now for everything to preserve muscle while hypocaloric. Should I do the same for squats and romainian deads, or should I do say 4 sets of 12-15 for the burn (I know this word is garbage but Im using to illustrate my point). In other words, what rep scheme will tighten the area best, without causing much hypertrophy?
Also, someone mention pelvic tilts on the floor. Can someone explain how to do these? Thanks.
Well it appears I’m in the minority here, but I agree that MAS is nappy. On a man, anyway. It’s all about volume and sequencing. If you want your cake and eat it too (without your caboose looking the part) then do squats and deads first in your leg day but keep the volume to about 15 reps or fewer on these movements.
3x3, 3x4, 3x5
4x3, 4x4
5x2,5x3 etc…
This will stimuate the FF and FFR MU’s for strength and density. Then, hit some isolation moves with the quads and hams to take the booty out of the motion. Use these moves in a supplementary fashion to get the volume up to a sufficient level to get the legs to grow.
You’ll keep your strength, power, and can then selectively stimulate the legs for greater hypertrophy.
It’s all about volume, and that volume being well placed.
Firm with shape is the goal, not a trunk full of tires. No woman I’ve met likes “two dogs fighting under a blanket”. But hey that’s just me. ;-).
If you like your big bum, then have at it. Just buy some pants that fit though.
I like the way you think. Of course, that @ss is so perfect, that it could be 20% smaller or 30% bigger and it would still be exactly what it is … perfect. It is a mathematic anomaly. In fact, it is an assymptotic relationship. No matter how perfect it is, it can always be more perfect, and yet no matter what you do to it, it will never not be perfect. Or something …