[quote]Professor X wrote:
One thing that finally helped me focus on them was wearing shorts all of the time when I train. You can’t ignore them if you see them in the mirror everyday. They still aren’t shaped like diamonds but at least I don’t stress about wearing shorts.
[/quote]
If I’m not mistaken; Arnold cut all of his pants from the knee down to expose his lagging calves.
He did this to purposely embarress himself so that he would feel motivated to train them.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
t-ha wrote:
As for fore-arms (I got the genetic short-straw on both calves and fore-arms) I found that lifting heavy and using wraps or foam to do thick-bar training will add size. I have yet to see someone with big fore-arms doing wrist curls, you’re forearms will take more of a hammering doing heavy dumbell work.
I agree completely. If you want big forearms, get rid of the wrist wraps and lift heavy.[/quote]
I second that.
If you have a good shoulder workout plan,then that should add size to your forearms.
One of my friends (who’s got HUGE calves) when asked about his training method, said… I do as many reps as I can… and when they do not want to move, I do 30 more!
I know it’s insane… but it works for him.
I am a envious bastard! Mine do not seem to want to grow either! 
Not that I care anymore! 
My thighs make anything small anyhow, so why bother
[quote]Tin Can wrote:
I plan on getting a bicycle to try to give them some extra stimulation. Some see this as a solution because some bikers have big calves, however many don’t. I kinda think the guys who get the growth from biking and only biking were predisposed to the growth. [/quote]
I was a bike courier for many years and trained on a road bike in addition - and went to the gym; too bad I didn’t know how to eat. It did make a difference, I believe.
If you do bike what is important is the set-up of the bike. Make sure the seat is high enough so that you can get a good extension. Check the net for guidelines. Some cyclists like Bernard Hinault and Greg LeMond liked a little higher seat, but do it gradually. Also, try climbing long hills and doing interval sprint work. When you climb you can try pushing your heel down on the downstroke, stretching the calf.
Another suggestion is getting clipless pedals - the Shimano type are fine. When you are clipped in you get a much better connection - it’s the difference between gripping the bar and a false grip - and can pull back on the upstroke which works your hamstrings - one image is to imagine cleaning mud of the bottom of your shoe. Think of pedalling in circles and keep the reps up.
Take a look at the sprinters - track cyclists. A Canadian top sprinter regularly squatted 600 for reps, I believe. These guys could wreck their bikes by pedalling too hard.
Course, you could always take a spinning class.
I train strongman so I carry heavy shit which trains both. Farmers carry, Stone lift, Africa, Husafel, or chili pepper stone carry, You get the picture. Forearms seem to really respond to static training. Like load up a thick bar and hold it for time. Curl with a thick bar. Pinch plates. I’ll do jump rope for 3x300 and usually after that my calves are sore. Don’t know if that means they are gonna grow but probably. When your bouncing up and down on your foot and you weight 240+ lbs that would seem a good growth stimulant!
I started wrapping a towel around the barbell while doing wrist curls. The bigger grip makes it much more fatiguing. I noticed my hands got a little bigger shortly after also.
I think forearms and calves should be worked in a similar rep range to everything else. I never understood why someone would suggest to do 25 to 30 reps with wrist curls or calf raises.
I think 10 reps, a long range of motion and hitting them 3 times a week should give you regular progress.
I’m just wondering what is the big deal about trying to get big calves?
Maybe this may seem like a stupid question to ask but when i look at some one i hardly notice their calves.
I dont judge how ‘big’ they are on the size of their calves, rather their arms,shoulders, etc. and i’m sure many other people are the same.
So unless someone is entering competitions and stuff is there a point to try gain huge calves?
[quote]Dilligaf wrote:
I’m just wondering what is the big deal about trying to get big calves?
Maybe this may seem like a stupid question to ask but when i look at some one i hardly notice their calves.
I dont judge how ‘big’ they are on the size of their calves, rather their arms,shoulders, etc. and i’m sure many other people are the same.
So unless someone is entering competitions and stuff is there a point to try gain huge calves?[/quote]
I can tell you why. I think the only thing worse than a physique with all upper body and no legs is one with big quads and tiny calves. It’s very odd looking. Another reason would be ego. Most people here are trying to bring up their entire body. I want my calves to be bigger than Prof. X’s chest.
[quote]wenzi wrote:
Tin Can wrote:
I plan on getting a bicycle to try to give them some extra stimulation. Some see this as a solution because some bikers have big calves, however many don’t. I kinda think the guys who get the growth from biking and only biking were predisposed to the growth.
I was a bike courier for many years and trained on a road bike in addition - and went to the gym; too bad I didn’t know how to eat. It did make a difference, I believe.
If you do bike what is important is the set-up of the bike. Make sure the seat is high enough so that you can get a good extension. Check the net for guidelines. Some cyclists like Bernard Hinault and Greg LeMond liked a little higher seat, but do it gradually. Also, try climbing long hills and doing interval sprint work. When you climb you can try pushing your heel down on the downstroke, stretching the calf.
Another suggestion is getting clipless pedals - the Shimano type are fine. When you are clipped in you get a much better connection - it’s the difference between gripping the bar and a false grip - and can pull back on the upstroke which works your hamstrings - one image is to imagine cleaning mud of the bottom of your shoe. Think of pedalling in circles and keep the reps up.
Take a look at the sprinters - track cyclists. A Canadian top sprinter regularly squatted 600 for reps, I believe. These guys could wreck their bikes by pedalling too hard.
Course, you could always take a spinning class.[/quote]
That’s some good advice. Thanks. I just plan on getting a very basic used bike so I guess the special pedals will have to wait. But the sprinting up and down hills sounds good and there are a ton of places to do them here. Seriously it must be about 13 years I haven’t been on a pedal bike. It should be fun plus now I will be able to avoid public transportation for the summer.
[quote]mdragon wrote:
I train strongman so I carry heavy shit which trains both. Farmers carry, Stone lift, Africa, Husafel, or chili pepper stone carry, You get the picture. Forearms seem to really respond to static training. Like load up a thick bar and hold it for time. Curl with a thick bar. Pinch plates. I’ll do jump rope for 3x300 and usually after that my calves are sore. Don’t know if that means they are gonna grow but probably. When your bouncing up and down on your foot and you weight 240+ lbs that would seem a good growth stimulant! :)[/quote]
Actually you gave me a good idea. I could wear an X vest and skip rope with it. Just need to get me an X vest now!
[quote]Dilligaf wrote:
I’m just wondering what is the big deal about trying to get big calves?
Maybe this may seem like a stupid question to ask but when i look at some one i hardly notice their calves.
I dont judge how ‘big’ they are on the size of their calves, rather their arms,shoulders, etc. and i’m sure many other people are the same.
So unless someone is entering competitions and stuff is there a point to try gain huge calves?[/quote]
Well the first thing I actually look at on anyone is their calves. Even chicks. I am fully aware though that the general public dosen’t give the equivilent value wise of the peanut in my shit thought whether my calves are 16 or 18 inches. If that mattered to me, I wouldn’t strive to make them bigger. I’m sure no one would even notice the 2 inch increase. It’s just that big legs and small calves look stupid. And I’ve been at this for so long if I was to give up now, who knows maybe in 1-2-3 whatever many years I would have them.
[quote]Tin Can wrote:
wenzi wrote:
Tin Can wrote:
I plan on getting a bicycle to try to give them some extra stimulation. Some see this as a solution because some bikers have big calves, however many don’t… Course, you could always take a spinning class.
That’s some good advice. Thanks. I just plan on getting a very basic used bike so I guess the special pedals will have to wait. But the sprinting up and down hills sounds good and there are a ton of places to do them here. Seriously it must be about 13 years I haven’t been on a pedal bike. It should be fun plus now I will be able to avoid public transportation for the summer.[/quote]
i rode over 10,000 mi/yr for nearly 10 yrs, much of it climbing, and my legs are chicken stix.
what’s worked for me is, in addition to regular work, adding sprints and incline treadmill walking on off days, ala Waterbury’s skinny leg syndrome program.
that and constantly working them, going up onto toes when warming up/repping squats and deads for example, has finally brought some response.
i bet an x-vest is a great idea. especially for the incline walking.
[quote]Tin Can wrote:
However what you say about people not being able to make their calves grow are not putting enough hard work is just plain whack. This is the weakest part on many bodybuilers. Do you think we have this weakness by choice? Of course not. Sure many give up too soon, but not all. Many pro’s have weak calves and it’s their job to make them grow, but still, the stubordness is still there. So you still think that people with weak calves are not putting in the work? Ah fuck it, I’ll just get some pump n’ pose and fill those suckers with oil!!![/quote]
weakness is a relative term especially when it comes to bodybuilding. As far as my statement goes, i stand by it. Just look at arnold as an example, supposedly he had crappy calves, so what did he do? he started training them properly giving them priority and he got results. you can’t attribute it to the drugs cause he was already on stuff. calves are the worst trained body parts in the gym. people do quarter reps, use their legs to push weight, and one that i am always guilty of: doing them last in the routine. But i don’t care my calves are as big as my arms and i’m satisfied with their strength.
And think how weird it would look if you had bigger oil filled calves but you still could not lift appreciable weight for their size. This goes totally against the concept of getting stronger.
laters pk
Here’s something I like to use:
First and foremost, how you do the reps is more critical than any exercise. The Achilles tendon stores a lot of energy because of the stretch reflex, so it’s key to use at least a 2-4 count at the bottom of the motion to dissipate that energy. This is crucial on any calf exercise, otherwise you’re just rebounding that energy.
With that in mind, I typically do the following when I’m trying to build them up –
Day 1
GM or RDL - 5-6 sets of 3-5 - make sure to do the move explosively and come up on your toes
Leg Press Calves - 5-8 sets of 6, as heavy as possible, then a backoff set of 8-10 done very slowly.
Day 2
Standing Calf Raise - 5-8 sets of 10-20
Seated Calf Raise - 5-8 sets of 10-20
If you’re using the pauses, this should be very difficult. But it will also make them grow. If you’re really brave, repeat day 1 for a total of three sessions a week.
[quote]MytchBucanan wrote:
I think forearms and calves should be worked in a similar rep range to everything else. I never understood why someone would suggest to do 25 to 30 reps with wrist curls or calf raises.
[/quote]
Excellent point, Mytch. After doing fatigue testing on my various muscle groups a few years ago, I was surprised (at least at first) to find that my forearms tested very much fast-to-fatigue (FTF) compared to my biceps and triceps, which tested quite STF.
Prior to that time, I had followed the atypical advice found in the BB mags of training the forearms with higher reps — like the 12-15 range (compared to 6-10 for upper arms).
After the fatigue testing, I switched to lower reps/TUL and reduced the frequency of forearm blasting. My usual upper body split was chest/back one day and delts/arms another. Instead of working my forearms on both back day AND arms day, I put them AFTER back and only worked my upper arms on the other day.
I see results immediately and was able to increase reps and or weight nearly every workout, after having stagnated for some time. Within months my size was up 1/2".
In addition, I concentrated much of my focus on the extensors. They may not contribute as much to forearm size as the flexors, but they sure look impressive when well developed.
In addition, I believe the flexors get plenty of work holding the bar for deadlifts, shrugs, and moves like that. Some might argue that this is static work, though I heard and interesting arguement that your grip actually undergoes a slow negative as your grip inevitably “gives” a bit during these exercises.
If you do any specialization routines for forearms, may I suggest hitting them for only a couple of weeks and then dropping direct forearm work for at least a couple of weeks. This is a good way to put on size in bits and pieces.
Scott
O.K. I know this thread has been going for a while, but why is it that that people like to compare themselves to Arnold so much? The way I see it, he is not one to give advice on training. Yeah, yeah he won the olympia 7 times so I understand me doing a critic on his training may not make sense to any of you. Just bare with me for a second here. Someone who goes through 2 2hours trainings a day 6 days a week is from another planet. We’ve all heard that he would go through new partners all the time because he would burn them out.
Now when I am told “Look at Arnold, he did it” is nowhere near an argument on how calves are built. He used a shotgun approach with all his workouts. And I hate to say it but fuck he must have used alot of drugs. As a matter of fact with the shitty nutrition they had back in thoses days it really surprises me they built the body’s they did. Drugs guys, it was the drugs. Did you guys see the typical mass or cutting nutrition logs in that encyclopedia of his?
It’s like Arnold can do no wrong no matter what he does. Something I see alot is where someone asks for advice on something then either 2 answers can come out with the “Arnold factor.” It’s either "Oh yeah Arnold had a huge fuckin’ chest you better do what he did. Or some say “He did a shit load of drugs and sometimes passed out because he took so much dianabol.” I also have no trouble beleiving that he’s been on the sauce since his teenage years. That side chest of his just screams the juice. Again with the nutrition they had and the overtraining they did, I challenge any of you to take it for a spin then tell me how great his training methods are. Sorry for the rant but this Arnold comparision has been in me for a while and needed to get it out. He did have one of the most pleasing body’s to look at of all time.
[quote]Tin Can wrote:
O.K. I know this thread has been going for a while, but why is it that that people like to compare themselves to Arnold so much? The way I see it, he is not one to give advice on training. [/quote]
Excellent point.
Someone talked good about his calves, but what about his forearms? To me they always looked small compared to his upper arms.
yeah prof sarcoplasmic muscle growth, increases the fluid volume in the muscle and usually in the higher rep range, and sarcomere lower rep range is an increase in muscle fiber mostly, both have cross overs
(im just getting this from all the stuff ive read over the past months, if im wrong or confusing what ive read please let me know X)
[quote]john-lennon wrote:
yeah prof sarcoplasmic muscle growth, increases the fluid volume in the muscle and usually in the higher rep range, and sarcomere lower rep range is an increase in muscle fiber mostly, both have cross overs
(im just getting this from all the stuff ive read over the past months, if im wrong or confusing what ive read please let me know X)[/quote]
You are wrong and confused. The myth of bodybuilders somehow blowing up with nothing but “sarcoplasmic hypertrophy” is just that…a myth. It helps sell books. That is all it does. We actually talked about that in detail here:
http://www.T-Nation.com/readTopic.do?id=910872
[quote]Tin Can wrote:
Well the first thing I actually look at on anyone is their calves. Even chicks. I am fully aware though that the general public dosen’t give the equivilent value wise of the peanut in my shit thought whether my calves are 16 or 18 inches. If that mattered to me, I wouldn’t strive to make them bigger. I’m sure no one would even notice the 2 inch increase. It’s just that big legs and small calves look stupid. And I’ve been at this for so long if I was to give up now, who knows maybe in 1-2-3 whatever many years I would have them. [/quote]
Wow! I’m the exact same way! They’re the first thing I notive about somebody’s physique in the gym, first thing I notice about a girl’s legs… I didn’t know there was more than one of us.
Except I’ve even recognized people’s calve muscles, and not their face. Thats weird.
But yea, I too am obsessed with building my calves. Damn genetics. I have to work them so hard to get any reaction at all…