Hamstrings-Not Taken Seriously by Some

Training Bodybuilding
101

[quote]Proud_Virgin wrote:

[quote]Akuma01 wrote:

Yes they do. but with a Goodmorning, you stand with a barbell on your shoulders, and basically bend to where your upper body is parallel with the floor, then return to the starting position. You dont really go low enough to get a stretch in the hams and thusly work them. I mean i suppose you could bend further at the waist to involve the hams, but to me working your lower back and hams on the same day is asking for a wrecked lower back that next day, one that would require a wake up stretching/rolling out session lol[/quote]

I back off the weight and lock my knees and stick my butt waaay out until I feel the stretch in my hamstrings near the knee, usually a little above parallel…I feel that by backing off the weight and focusing on a slow negative it shifts the focus from my lower back to my hamstrings.

I don’t know what you squat, but for reference Dave Tate said that he never went higher than 135 for 10 until he squatted more than 600.

Btw you’ve been adding a lot of life to these forums, keep it up[/quote]

You do that with your Good mornings? Cuz thats how i perform a RDL, except the weight is hanging in front of me, rather than on my back.

As for the Tate reference, do you mean for warmups? And no, im not quite hitting 600, but im close.

102

[quote]David1991 wrote:

[quote]165StateChamp wrote:

If you’re shooting your ass backwards to start the lift, you’ll get more hamstring involvement, just iike you would in an RDL. However, if you’re just bending over it’s going to be a low back movement. Either way, the low back will play a role in moving the weight. [/quote]

hm…[/quote]

What’s your point?

103

[quote]Akuma01 wrote:

You do that with your Good mornings? Cuz thats how i perform a RDL, except the weight is hanging in front of me, rather than on my back.

As for the Tate reference, do you mean for warmups? And no, im not quite hitting 600, but im close.[/quote]

See, I do RDL’s and bend my knees to load the weight up and shift the focus to my whole back, and do my GM’s light and straight-legged for hamstrings…different strokes I suppose.

And what I meant by the Tate reference is that he didn’t find it necessary to exceed 135x10 for his GM work sets until he was squatting more than 600 lbs, which I interpreted as a suggestion to go light(er) and focusing on feeling your hamstrings work rather than loading the weight up

104

There’s also straight-back GM’s and rounded-back GM’s.

Dave Tate was using only 135, while squatting 600, on straight-back GM’s?

I don’t know. I have no information on that. But I’d tend to suspect it was rounded-back, which uses much lighter weights.

105

[quote]165StateChamp wrote:

[quote]David1991 wrote:

[quote]165StateChamp wrote:

If you’re shooting your ass backwards to start the lift, you’ll get more hamstring involvement, just iike you would in an RDL. However, if you’re just bending over it’s going to be a low back movement. Either way, the low back will play a role in moving the weight. [/quote]

hm…[/quote]

What’s your point?[/quote]

Correct me if I’m wrong but it looks like you’re saying if you’re just bending over it’s mostly low back (actually don’t correct me, because you did say that lol) but Thibs basically keeps it straight legged just bending over and says its for hamstring development.

106

[quote]David1991 wrote:
Correct me if I’m wrong but it looks like you’re saying if you’re just bending over it’s mostly low back (actually don’t correct me, because you did say that lol) but Thibs basically keeps it straight legged just bending over and says its for hamstring development. [/quote]

Where did I say that you need to bend your knees at all? If you keep your legs straight while shooting your butt backwards you will feel a stretch and you will feel your hamstrings working. On the other hand, if you just bend over your lower back is going to be the first thing getting hit.

It sounds like you’re trying to find flaws in what I’m saying. Feel free to do whatever you want, I honestly couldn’t care less.

107

Bump! People neglect hammies too much. Although there doesn’t seem to be a whole lot of variety in hammy training readily available (DL variations, curlz, and funny leg placement thingy, and goodmornings?)

Anything else we can squeeze out of y’all?

Also, I recall reading a while back in an article some business about doing low reps on leg curls for hypertrophy (it might have been poliquin). What do you all think about this?

108

[quote]A Ninny Mouse wrote:
Bump! People neglect hammies too much. Although there doesn’t seem to be a whole lot of variety in hammy training readily available (DL variations, curlz, and funny leg placement thingy, and goodmornings?)

Anything else we can squeeze out of y’all?

Also, I recall reading a while back in an article some business about doing low reps on leg curls for hypertrophy (it might have been poliquin). What do you all think about this?[/quote]

Totally agree, too many people neglect Hams.
So to recap- Glute ham raises, Romanian Deadlifts, Lunges, machines, etc

i normally do higher reps from my hamstring training, when it comes to machine work that is (prone leg curl, Upright ham curls, etc), mainly due to the lack of heavy weight. other forms of Ham work i generally stick to 8-12 rep range.

109

[quote]Akuma01 wrote:

Totally agree, too many people neglect Hams.
So to recap- Glute ham raises, Romanian Deadlifts, Lunges, machines, etc

i normally do higher reps from my hamstring training, when it comes to machine work that is (prone leg curl, Upright ham curls, etc), mainly due to the lack of heavy weight. other forms of Ham work i generally stick to 8-12 rep range.[/quote]

Oh, by the way, you’re a pretty cool guy, thanks for doing all this stuff, lol.

Since you’re mentioning lunges, which, AFAIK, you seem to be a fan of, for hammy development you go with a longer step, correct? If not, then what? It’s been a while since I’ve done lunges, but I’m pretty sure stride length makes a pretty big difference.

If you touched on this in the legs thread, then I’m sorry for being a bonehead.

110

[quote]A Ninny Mouse wrote:

[quote]Akuma01 wrote:

Totally agree, too many people neglect Hams.
So to recap- Glute ham raises, Romanian Deadlifts, Lunges, machines, etc

i normally do higher reps from my hamstring training, when it comes to machine work that is (prone leg curl, Upright ham curls, etc), mainly due to the lack of heavy weight. other forms of Ham work i generally stick to 8-12 rep range.[/quote]

Oh, by the way, you’re a pretty cool guy, thanks for doing all this stuff, lol.

Since you’re mentioning lunges, which, AFAIK, you seem to be a fan of, for hammy development you go with a longer step, correct? If not, then what? It’s been a while since I’ve done lunges, but I’m pretty sure stride length makes a pretty big difference.

If you touched on this in the legs thread, then I’m sorry for being a bonehead.[/quote]

On a lunge, the closer your stride is, the more quad you are going to recruit, longer steps, or wide steps will recruit the hamstrings and glutes way more because of the stretch.

Test it out and see how you feel the next day. The difference will be pretty obvious, at least it is for me.

111

[quote]A Ninny Mouse wrote:

[quote]Akuma01 wrote:

Totally agree, too many people neglect Hams.
So to recap- Glute ham raises, Romanian Deadlifts, Lunges, machines, etc

i normally do higher reps from my hamstring training, when it comes to machine work that is (prone leg curl, Upright ham curls, etc), mainly due to the lack of heavy weight. other forms of Ham work i generally stick to 8-12 rep range.[/quote]

Oh, by the way, you’re a pretty cool guy, thanks for doing all this stuff, lol.

Since you’re mentioning lunges, which, AFAIK, you seem to be a fan of, for hammy development you go with a longer step, correct? If not, then what? It’s been a while since I’ve done lunges, but I’m pretty sure stride length makes a pretty big difference.

If you touched on this in the legs thread, then I’m sorry for being a bonehead.[/quote]

Yes, long stride, ensuring that you come all the way down and basically tap knee.

112

Close stance lunges make me want to cry :‘’'(

Edit: Or rather, short stride lunges.

113

Bumping. Some useful information being spread in these threads and itd be a shame for those who havent seen them to not.

*prepare to see this message several times lol

114

I wouldn’t normally chime in during the midst of a bodybuilding argument, but kettle bell swings (especially wide stance) work the hamstrings very well, plus lots of other muscles so perhaps they are difficult to work into a split, especially when you start as they make your hamstrings particularly sore.

just thought I’d throw them in as I hadn’t heard them mentioned, I think it was coach Davies (renegade training guy) included them in an article he wrote on here ages ago called the 5 best hamstring exercises.

Happy hamstring training…

115

A tip for fellow shorter lifters:

If you aren’t feeling anything from RDLs or SLDLs:

Try standing on 25lb plates to increase the range of motion.

I just recently started ‘feeling’ my hamstrings much more with SLDLs because I increased the range of motion.

Of course… the 45lb plates are taller than my calves I’m pretty sure! lol!

116

[quote]krazykoukides wrote:
A tip for fellow shorter lifters:

If you aren’t feeling anything from RDLs or SLDLs:

Try standing on 25lb plates to increase the range of motion.

I just recently started ‘feeling’ my hamstrings much more with SLDLs because I increased the range of motion.

Of course… the 45lb plates are taller than my calves I’m pretty sure! lol![/quote]

When you’re doing these are you maintaining a tight arch in your lower back, pushing your hips back and only going down as far as you can maintain your arch? I’ve noticed a lot of people stand on steps/boxes/plates and do sldl’s/rdl’s and at the bottom position have no arch or worse yet start to round. Most people don’t have the flexibility to go too much past their knees with the barbell without losing the arch and once you do that you’re using more low back and less hamstring. You don’t need to go down as far as you think to really blast the hamstrings, that is unless you’re a gymnast or as flexible as one.

117

[quote]kingbeef323 wrote:

When you’re doing these are you maintaining a tight arch in your lower back, pushing your hips back and only going down as far as you can maintain your arch? I’ve noticed a lot of people stand on steps/boxes/plates and do sldl’s/rdl’s and at the bottom position have no arch or worse yet start to round. Most people don’t have the flexibility to go too much past their knees with the barbell without losing the arch and once you do that you’re using more low back and less hamstring. You don’t need to go down as far as you think to really blast the hamstrings, that is unless you’re a gymnast or as flexible as one.[/quote]

Yes, I sure try to maintain a tight arch. I am not positive if I am since I haven’t recorded video of me or something…

but I figure standing on the 25s probably gives me the equivalent or almost the equivalent of a typical lifter’s range of motion, you know? Because I’m below average height… by quite a few inches :slight_smile:

shrug I’ve never felt it in my hamstrings until I did that.

118

Akuma, im a n00b when it comes to this bodybuilding thing and i wondered if you could give me some pointers on how to see whether hamstrings are lagging in comparison to quads maybe with pictures of someone with good hamstrings in comparison to poor? Also felt this thread should be bumped

119

Seated Good Mornings hit my hammies more than the standing version…

120

[quote]Pat_Butcher wrote:
Akuma, im a n00b when it comes to this bodybuilding thing and i wondered if you could give me some pointers on how to see whether hamstrings are lagging in comparison to quads maybe with pictures of someone with good hamstrings in comparison to poor? Also felt this thread should be bumped[/quote]

Hamstrings can be thought of as the bicep of the leg. in that regards, having them about 1/3 or even 1/2 the size of the quads (looking from a side leg shot) would be a good size to shoot for. At the early levels, say a level in where you dont even have separation between the quad/ham, i honestly couldnt tell you how to tell if you are on the right track. You just have to ensure that you are hitting the hamstring sufficiently. As i stated in the OP, no, 1 compound movement is not enough for the ham, and no, 1 compound + 1 isolation is not enough. it deserves your full attention. I personally do 1 compound, + 2-3 Ham focused movements. Other than that, its just a game of YOU playing. Keep pushing, push hard and push smart, and your endeavors will be rewarded.