CT,
I’ve read forum members talk about how the success of a bulk is highly dependant on the trainees frame. From what I understand a wide clavicle and a narrow hips is optimal.
Is there anything you change training wise for people with a wide hips or a narrow clavicle? How much actually does a trainees frame play in building muscle?
I’m speaking strictly from a recreational bodybuilder point of view with no interest in competition.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
CT,
I’ve read forum members talk about how the success of a bulk is highly dependant on the trainees frame. From what I understand a wide clavicle and a narrow hips is optimal.
Is there anything you change training wise for people with a wide hips or a narrow clavicle? How much actually does a trainees frame play in building muscle?
I’m speaking strictly from a recreational bodybuilder point of view with no interest in competition.[/quote]
Your frame doesn’t affect the amount of weight you can put on, but rather how it will look.
Someone with a wide clavicle and narrow hips will:
Get a bigger visual impact from the muscle he puts on. 5lbs of added muscle will look more like 10-15lbs more.
Still look good even with some added fat
Someone with a narrow clavicle and wide hips will:
NOT get such a huge visual impact from added muscle compared to the previous body type.
Get a bigger visual impact from the fat he puts on while ‘‘bulking’’. He will look fatter than he is.
So if looking good is your goal and you have a narrow clavicle body type, then you can’t afford to be as aggressive with your bulk because you don’t want to add too much fat.
I also want to say that to some extent, your frame will determine how much muscle you can put on. Someone with a big frame can build more tissue than someone with a frail structure.
If someone has a big structure up top (wide clavicle) and a small structure down (narrow hips) then he will have a tendency to add muscle easily in his upper body and struggle adding muscle in his lower body. Not to mention that narrow hips make it harder to really push some big weights in squats and deadlifts.
If you are of the opposite type (wide hips, narrow clavicle) then it will be easier to gain lower body muscle and harder to build up your upper body.
But generally speaking, a narrow clavicle body type makes it harder to build a visually impressive physique. BUT it is not impossible… I am myself of that body type, so is my partner Nick who recently competed in bodybuilding and so is Kevin Nobert (from the IBB videos). It just takes more time.
I also recommend focusing a lot on your shoulders and back, to give the illusion of a wider upper body.
[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
CT,
I’ve read forum members talk about how the success of a bulk is highly dependant on the trainees frame. From what I understand a wide clavicle and a narrow hips is optimal.
Is there anything you change training wise for people with a wide hips or a narrow clavicle? How much actually does a trainees frame play in building muscle?
I’m speaking strictly from a recreational bodybuilder point of view with no interest in competition.[/quote]
Your frame doesn’t affect the amount of weight you can put on, but rather how it will look.
Someone with a wide clavicle and narrow hips will:
Get a bigger visual impact from the muscle he puts on. 5lbs of added muscle will look more like 10-15lbs more.
Still look good even with some added fat
Someone with a narrow clavicle and wide hips will:
NOT get such a huge visual impact from added muscle compared to the previous body type.
Get a bigger visual impact from the fat he puts on while ‘‘bulking’’. He will look fatter than he is.
So if looking good is your goal and you have a narrow clavicle body type, then you can’t afford to be as aggressive with your bulk because you don’t want to add too much fat.
I also want to say that to some extent, your frame will determine how much muscle you can put on. Someone with a big frame can build more tissue than someone with a frail structure.
If someone has a big structure up top (wide clavicle) and a small structure down (narrow hips) then he will have a tendency to add muscle easily in his upper body and struggle adding muscle in his lower body. Not to mention that narrow hips make it harder to really push some big weights in squats and deadlifts.
If you are of the opposite type (wide hips, narrow clavicle) then it will be easier to gain lower body muscle and harder to build up your upper body.
But generally speaking, a narrow clavicle body type makes it harder to build a visually impressive physique. BUT it is not impossible… I am myself of that body type, so is my partner Nick who recently competed in bodybuilding and so is Kevin Nobert (from the IBB videos). It just takes more time.
I also recommend focusing a lot on your shoulders and back, to give the illusion of a wider upper body.[/quote]
Im reasonably new to this and just from an interested stand point, how can you tell if you have narrow clavicles as i have almost no experience with how different body types, thank you for all info you provide its great being able to learn all these little things along with the major ones like the perfect rep.
[quote]Pat_Butcher wrote:
[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
CT,
I’ve read forum members talk about how the success of a bulk is highly dependant on the trainees frame. From what I understand a wide clavicle and a narrow hips is optimal.
Is there anything you change training wise for people with a wide hips or a narrow clavicle? How much actually does a trainees frame play in building muscle?
I’m speaking strictly from a recreational bodybuilder point of view with no interest in competition.[/quote]
Your frame doesn’t affect the amount of weight you can put on, but rather how it will look.
Someone with a wide clavicle and narrow hips will:
Get a bigger visual impact from the muscle he puts on. 5lbs of added muscle will look more like 10-15lbs more.
Still look good even with some added fat
Someone with a narrow clavicle and wide hips will:
NOT get such a huge visual impact from added muscle compared to the previous body type.
Get a bigger visual impact from the fat he puts on while ‘‘bulking’’. He will look fatter than he is.
So if looking good is your goal and you have a narrow clavicle body type, then you can’t afford to be as aggressive with your bulk because you don’t want to add too much fat.
I also want to say that to some extent, your frame will determine how much muscle you can put on. Someone with a big frame can build more tissue than someone with a frail structure.
If someone has a big structure up top (wide clavicle) and a small structure down (narrow hips) then he will have a tendency to add muscle easily in his upper body and struggle adding muscle in his lower body. Not to mention that narrow hips make it harder to really push some big weights in squats and deadlifts.
If you are of the opposite type (wide hips, narrow clavicle) then it will be easier to gain lower body muscle and harder to build up your upper body.
But generally speaking, a narrow clavicle body type makes it harder to build a visually impressive physique. BUT it is not impossible… I am myself of that body type, so is my partner Nick who recently competed in bodybuilding and so is Kevin Nobert (from the IBB videos). It just takes more time.
I also recommend focusing a lot on your shoulders and back, to give the illusion of a wider upper body.[/quote]
Im reasonably new to this and just from an interested stand point, how can you tell if you have narrow clavicles as i have almost no experience with how different body types, thank you for all info you provide its great being able to learn all these little things along with the major ones like the perfect rep.
[/quote]
While you can take anthropometric measures, it’s fairly easy to assess the width of our clavicle simply with a quick look.
Wide clavicle = naturally wide shoulders
What about narrow clavicle AND narrow hips ? Destined to be weak everywhere with no potential to push big weights ?
[quote]Thy. wrote:
What about narrow clavicle AND narrow hips ? Destined to be weak everywhere with no potential to push big weights ?[/quote]
I wouldn’t say no potential but it will be harder. It’s like a guy who is 6’ tall and plays basketball… it is not impossible for him to become a pro, but it will be harder than if he were genetically suited for that sport by being 6’8".
I’ll take myself as an example. I do have narrow clavicle. And my bench press used to be a weak lift for me. When I was 21 years old I could full squat 585 but only bench 265. Last year I reached my best bench press by doing 440 (200kg). My theoretical potential for the bench is low because of my structure, but with a lot of hard work and patience I was able to build it up to a decent number.
[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
[quote]Thy. wrote:
What about narrow clavicle AND narrow hips ? Destined to be weak everywhere with no potential to push big weights ?[/quote]
I wouldn’t say no potential but it will be harder. It’s like a guy who is 6’ tall and plays basketball… it is not impossible for him to become a pro, but it will be harder than if he were genetically suited for that sport by being 6’8".
I’ll take myself as an example. I do have narrow clavicle. And my bench press used to be a weak lift for me. When I was 21 years old I could full squat 585 but only bench 265. Last year I reached my best bench press by doing 440 (200kg). My theoretical potential for the bench is low because of my structure, but with a lot of hard work and patience I was able to build it up to a decent number.[/quote]
Good to know. If I’m correct, I read here that you made significant jumps in the bench especially when you started using the anaconda protocol.
For me, frail frame + no supplements (in my country very expensive and not much to choose from) + poor eating (I have GI problems my whole life so can’t digest a lot), so I don’t expect to bench more than 120-130 kg in the next 10 years.
[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
[quote]Thy. wrote:
What about narrow clavicle AND narrow hips ? Destined to be weak everywhere with no potential to push big weights ?[/quote]
I wouldn’t say no potential but it will be harder. It’s like a guy who is 6’ tall and plays basketball… it is not impossible for him to become a pro, but it will be harder than if he were genetically suited for that sport by being 6’8".
I’ll take myself as an example. I do have narrow clavicle. And my bench press used to be a weak lift for me. When I was 21 years old I could full squat 585 but only bench 265. Last year I reached my best bench press by doing 440 (200kg). My theoretical potential for the bench is low because of my structure, but with a lot of hard work and patience I was able to build it up to a decent number.[/quote]
585lb at 21??? That’s INSANE. I’m curious, what is your squat now?
CT,
I remeember you saying some where (an older post i believe) that the only thing
you could do to get your upper chest to grow was the Wide Grip Bench to the Neck
on the smith…
do you think having a narrow clavicle is part of the cause of that?
when ever i go heavy with that movement (Wide Grip Bench to the neck) i end up
straining my left-pec - happened twice. it ‘feels’ like its where the clavicular
pec and pec-major come together by the arm pit…
would using DB’s (on a low-incline) with the arms perpendicular to the body be a
good substitute?
THANKS
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
[quote]Thy. wrote:
What about narrow clavicle AND narrow hips ? Destined to be weak everywhere with no potential to push big weights ?[/quote]
I wouldn’t say no potential but it will be harder. It’s like a guy who is 6’ tall and plays basketball… it is not impossible for him to become a pro, but it will be harder than if he were genetically suited for that sport by being 6’8".
I’ll take myself as an example. I do have narrow clavicle. And my bench press used to be a weak lift for me. When I was 21 years old I could full squat 585 but only bench 265. Last year I reached my best bench press by doing 440 (200kg). My theoretical potential for the bench is low because of my structure, but with a lot of hard work and patience I was able to build it up to a decent number.[/quote]
585lb at 21??? That’s INSANE. I’m curious, what is your squat now?[/quote]
It’s actually less than that because I stopped focusing on legs when I stopped competing in olympic lifting. The most I reached was 605 x 1 and 555 x 5… olympic squat with only a cheap nylon belt. My best front squat is 445.
CT,
Both my parents were very skinny. Honestly I could rob a bank, take out a toothpick and stand behind it, and the people would say “He just vanished into thin air!” as I back up out the front door. My bones are very small/thin and after training for about 9 months I have gotten my deadlift up to 190 x 5 which is Grandma-numbers but now my hands really hurt epecially the pinkies. They’ve been hurting for two weeks and it’s not the skin it’s like the bones/nerves hurt. My grip strength is pretty good for a pussy I guess, but I can’t imagine what my fingers will feel like if I ever get up to 350 x 5.
I know I have the worst structure to lift weights but I’m determined to not look like a Concentration Camp Counselor for the rest of my life. In your experience have you seen very small framed people just crash and burn when it comes to weight lifting, as our bodies just cannot take heavy weights, or am I selling short the amazing adaptive qualities of the human body? It’s depressing to think that even if I add 80 pouinds of muscle my wrists will still be that of an 11 year-old girl.
P.S. You’re my favorite author here and your articles are so motivating!
In your expierence, can a bodybuilder’s frame change over time? I’ve been wondering if a man’s hips can get wider even after puberty.
[quote]satan666 wrote:
In your expierence, can a bodybuilder’s frame change over time? I’ve been wondering if a man’s hips can get wider even after puberty.[/quote]
No.
You can change muscle size which can create a visual illusion, but you can’t change your bone structure.
But if someone with a narrow clavicle still has the potential to look like this then that’s very inspiring.
EDIT: I guess I can sorta see how his traps are lagging behind. Due to a narrow clavicle perhaps?
[quote]therajraj wrote:
I gotta say CT, I’m having a hard time seeing his narrow clavicle.
But if someone with a narrow clavicle still has the potential to look like this then that’s very inspiring.
EDIT: I guess I can sorta see how his traps are lagging behind. Due to a narrow clavicle perhaps?[/quote]
Traps size has nothing to do with clavicle length. If anything a narrow clavicle makes it easier to build the traps. The traps are simply hidden during a lat spread.
This pose is made to make you look wider, so it is not a good one to judge clavicle length.
Interesting discussion. I have both wide clavicles and wide hips. I think it would be good to make my shoulders appear even wider, since wide hips are easily noticed with excessive bodyfat and a big ass as it is (me). I was thinking, in addition to the heavy shoulder pressing, maybe some side lateral raises, and get me quads even bigger?.. that is also in addition to getting to sub 10% BF, I’m working on that.
at the cost of sounding dumb, im having a little trouble differentiating between the two…
could some one give an example of a wide clavicle and a narrow clavicle (like two people)?
Coach,
I have narrow shoulders and VERY narrow hips. Is there a certain way i should be training? What I mean is, I train heavy low reps on the big compounds, and high rep assistance stuff for growth, much the same as anyone else.
Should I change the way i workout due to my frame, or should I carry on as normal? I feel like it doesn’t matter all that much seeing as how my shoulders and hips are at least in proportion.
[quote]MAF14 wrote:
at the cost of sounding dumb, im having a little trouble differentiating between the two…
could some one give an example of a wide clavicle and a narrow clavicle (like two people)?[/quote]
I would be interested in this as well. I have both wide shoulders and hips, I think but I am not sure.
I think those are some gigantic clavicles, and this guy is around 5"8’
