[quote]Professor X wrote:
evo2008 wrote:
Seriously, if I’m deadlifting 450lbs and getting stronger (yes ok no world record but hardly light to the average person) then I’m training hard.
Dude, EVERY newbie who logs in claims they can deadlift over 400lbs. Every single one of them. No one is impressed by these numbers anymore as a result.
I know one thing, there is something wrong if so many of you are deadlifting over 400 yet none of you look like you can.[/quote]
Even if they can DL 400+ ONCE, this is still bodybuilding… Lifting something once doesn’t exactly make you huge…
People should worry more about the 5-12 rep range, or 8-20 if you’re rest-pausing at the end of your sets, instead of their ego-1rm.
Otherwise, just post in Strength Sports.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
evo2008 wrote:
Seriously, if I’m deadlifting 450lbs and getting stronger (yes ok no world record but hardly light to the average person) then I’m training hard.
Dude, EVERY newbie who logs in claims they can deadlift over 400lbs. Every single one of them. No one is impressed by these numbers anymore as a result.
I know one thing, there is something wrong if so many of you are deadlifting over 400 yet none of you look like you can.[/quote]
Very true.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Most people aren’t willing to put the effort in…but bodybuilding isn’t for most people.[/quote]
aint that the fuckin truth.
@400 lb deadlifts, last i did them was 405x2 (yea i train BBing but i like to DL for fun) anyway, half these clowns posting thats their number who arent into PL are probaly doing like 315x5 and just estimating that as their 1rm because im at least twice the size of majority who say they lift that and if we both train for BBing then it doesnt make much sense.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
evo2008 wrote:
Seriously, if I’m deadlifting 450lbs and getting stronger (yes ok no world record but hardly light to the average person) then I’m training hard.
Dude, EVERY newbie who logs in claims they can deadlift over 400lbs. Every single one of them. No one is impressed by these numbers anymore as a result.
I know one thing, there is something wrong if so many of you are deadlifting over 400 yet none of you look like you can.[/quote]
Fucking right man. There is the thread on rate my phyique with the french bodybuilder and even he said if he tried to deadlift 400 pounds he would probably hurt his back; and the guy isnt exactly a string bean. I dunno.. I guess it just pisses me off because when I didnt know better I always thouht I was super weak because my numbers werent up to par in comparison to other people on this site. A little while ago I realized 99% of the people on this site lie like a rug about their numbers.
Here we go again - you have no fucking idea what I look like. Fair enough guys, I have no pictures/video content, but neither do many of you. I can lift that much in the deadlift.
Because I asked such a ‘newbie’ question, that clearly makes me a ‘newbie’ to training? Nope, afraid not - just someone who has trained for a number of years without direct calf work (shock horror).
Yes - I was having trouble gaining much more on my arms (despite adding overall lean mass over the past few months). So, I was merely posing a question over body balance and whether anyone thought that may hinder my arm progress.
[quote]evo2008 wrote:
Here we go again - you have no fucking idea what I look like. Fair enough guys, I have no pictures/video content, but neither do many of you. I can lift that much in the deadlift.
Because I asked such a ‘newbie’ question, that clearly makes me a ‘newbie’ to training? Nope, afraid not - just someone who has trained for a number of years without direct calf work (shock horror).
Yes - I was having trouble gaining much more on my arms (despite adding overall lean mass over the past few months). So, I was merely posing a question over body balance and whether anyone thought that may hinder my arm progress.
[/quote]
Hey come on now. I don’t think anybody said anything bad enough to you to warrent this kind of response. I am not sure if my post is part of why you are responding this way but just to let you know I wasn’t saying that you are a liar… just that 99% of people on this site are liars.
PLease note the arbitrary value I placed on that amount of liars on this site. It probably isn’t that high but I was exaggerating to make a point.
[quote]dankid wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
dankid wrote:
I highly doubt there is any correlation what so ever. Ive seen too many average joe’s in the gym with huge biceps and tiny calves.
It would be like saying you cant build big triceps unless you have big quads.
There is a systemic component whereby your entire physiology, all of it, gets the message that you are forcing upon it routine stresses that it is in it’s best interest to adapt to as efficiently as possible.
That extends to EVERY CELL in your body. “Big” is relative. You will not reach your potential anywhere without reaching it everywhere. Stupidly overdeveloping some ares over the others isn’t the same as any one area being as developed as it could be.
Ya, but the OP’s biceps are only 16". He’s likely being held back for lack of full body strength, rather than lack of calf size. And he’s probably not near his max potential either.
[/quote]
I misread his original question. I just now caught that he is asking if there is some kind of private line specifically between the calves and biceps which of course there is not.
My only point was that no single body part will reach it’s potential in a physiological vacuum. In other words as in the old classic example of chest and biceps. They will grow if they’re all you train, but they will not grow the same as they would with a balanced approach.
[quote]
My only point was that no single body part will reach it’s potential in a physiological vacuum. In other words as in the old classic example of chest and biceps. They will grow if they’re all you train, but they will not grow the same as they would with a balanced approach.[/quote]
Fair play and I don’t mean to cause offence so apologies if my post is inflammatory. We’ll see what happens when my calves come up.
I find that internet balls grow by the frequency and intensity of sardonic posts. There have to be a few hyoooooooooge ones here.
OP—no. answer is no.
[quote]evo2008 wrote:
My only point was that no single body part will reach it’s potential in a physiological vacuum. In other words as in the old classic example of chest and biceps. They will grow if they’re all you train, but they will not grow the same as they would with a balanced approach.
Fair play and I don’t mean to cause offence so apologies if my post is inflammatory. We’ll see what happens when my calves come up.[/quote]
Ok, after the arbitrary bitching from my side, let’s see if we can’t help you out a little…
How’s your arm training lately? poundage/rep increase over the time that they haven’t grown ?