i was talking to someone and i asked why they didnt do any lowerbody work. and they said its cause there legs were already massive and theres no point. you know the type the kid who only does bench press curls and crunchs.
anyway i told him that doing lowerbody work will improve his upperbody. and can actually add size to your arms. he said it was bullshit. i know i read that somewhere on T-Nation. so i was wondering why and how exactly will doing lowerbody work add size to your upperbody. thx
Basically, the bigger and more muscle groups your stimulate with an exercise, the more growth hormone is secreted by your body. It’s a fairly well known subject matter, which reinforces the relative stupidity of the “bench/curl/crunch” kinda guy.
Here’s an excerpt for an article about it:
"The benefit for doing leg excercises, appears from research not to be from increasing long term natural levels of testosterone and GH. I believe however the large burst of testosterone and other hormones during leg excercises, are the major reasons why squats and deadlifts are very important for overall muscle building. It�??s the same reason why a bench press is more effective mass builder than a chest flye workout. Why? because the compound bench press is going to release more testosterone and GH in a workout than a chest flye.
The large burst of anabolic hormones resulting from squats and deadlifts, allows most of your muscles to benefit from this release simultaneously. Squats and deadlifts work many muscles simultaneously in the body and will allow most of your body to get some stimulation from the release of the hormones during the workout. The testosterone and GH released, is very crucial for being a catalyst for your muscle growth. It won�??t be released as much in the smaller compound excercises, such as bench press. Therefore doing smaller compound excercises, would not be able to makeup for the benefit of having leg workouts in your routine.
Most experienced bodybuilders know all too well, how important leg excercises are for overall mass. You�??ve probably seen the guys walking in the gym who look like lightbulbs (big upper body, but chicken legs). That has made many bodybuilders question the idea that leg excercises always equals bigger upper body. One must keep in mind we don�??t know if they are using steroids, which would make it a little easier to gain upper body mass without leg excercises. On the flipside, it would also be harder post cycle for a steroid user just to keep his gains. These people probably also have excellent upper body genetics and years of training experience. If they worked harder on leg excercises, they would be even bigger."
bodybuildingweb.net/blog/squats-deadlifts-
and-release-of-testosterone-and-growth-hormone/
Look. Yes it’s true. But if your legs are already huge, why do squats?
Yes squats will help out your upper body, but they’re known as the king of lower body exercises for a reason.
If the guy’s legs are huge, squatting is only going to make them bigger.
[quote]Sxio wrote:
Look. Yes it’s true. But if your legs are already huge, why do squats?
Yes squats will help out your upper body, but they’re known as the king of lower body exercises for a reason.
If the guy’s legs are huge, squatting is only going to make them bigger. [/quote]
I would say work them with really light weight (for the endurance aspect rather than hypertrophy), so that they spit out the good hormones but don’t really get much bigger. Conversely, he could also work them with low reps (for strength) and have the same effect. Just stay away from the more general hypertrophy ranges of 6-15 reps.
It’s not an exact science, but that’s about what we currently know. To me that makes more sense than just ignoring legs completely.
[quote]Dispenser wrote:
Sxio wrote:
Look. Yes it’s true. But if your legs are already huge, why do squats?
Yes squats will help out your upper body, but they’re known as the king of lower body exercises for a reason.
If the guy’s legs are huge, squatting is only going to make them bigger.
I would say work them with really light weight (for the endurance aspect rather than hypertrophy), so that they spit out the good hormones but don’t really get much bigger. Conversely, he could also work them with low reps (for strength) and have the same effect. Just stay away from the more general hypertrophy ranges of 6-15 reps.
It’s not an exact science, but that’s about what we currently know. To me that makes more sense than just ignoring legs completely.[/quote]
I would say that if he dosent already do squats then his legs arent huge, I would then proceed to beat him to death with a 10lb dumbell.
[quote]Uber N3wb wrote:
I would say that if he dosent already do squats then his legs arent huge, I would then proceed to beat him to death with a 10lb dumbell.
[/quote]
I hear one weapon of choice in Prison is stolen 2.5lb plates.
[quote]Dispenser wrote:
Sxio wrote:
Look. Yes it’s true. But if your legs are already huge, why do squats?
Yes squats will help out your upper body, but they’re known as the king of lower body exercises for a reason.
If the guy’s legs are huge, squatting is only going to make them bigger.
I would say work them with really light weight (for the endurance aspect rather than hypertrophy), so that they spit out the good hormones but don’t really get much bigger. Conversely, he could also work them with low reps (for strength) and have the same effect. Just stay away from the more general hypertrophy ranges of 6-15 reps.
It’s not an exact science, but that’s about what we currently know. To me that makes more sense than just ignoring legs completely.[/quote]
Correct me if Im wrong, but I was under the assumption that training legs only stimulated hormone release when they were being trained heavy. In other words, in order for high rep squats to stimulated hormone release, then they would have to be trained in a manner similar to 20 rep squats or DC’s widowmaker (ie, 15 rep max for 20 reps) and this would definitely lead to growth.
[quote]Clifford wrote:
i was talking to someone and i asked why they [/quote]didnt do any lowerbody work.[quote] and they said its cause there [/quote]legs were already massive[quote] and theres no point. you know the type the kid who [/quote]only does bench press curls and crunchs.
[/quote]
I’m sure his legs were like tree trunks.
Tell him squats will work his abs.
I doubt his legs were really “massive”
Why bother? He’s a douche. Let him keep curling and benching and do your own thing in the gym.
If his legs were already huge, they probably wouldn’t get much bigger. There’s a point where the muscle just won’t grow worth a shit.
Maybe it’s waiting for the rest of the body to catch up. Or maybe one has reached a peak or a plateau.
But my legs don’t grow much, even though I train them as much as upper body. They just become stronger with greater endurance, while the rest of me grows at a much faster rate.
So…was this guys legs big or what?
[quote]Sxio wrote:
Look. Yes it’s true. But if your legs are already huge, why do squats?
Yes squats will help out your upper body, but they’re known as the king of lower body exercises for a reason.
If the guy’s legs are huge, squatting is only going to make them bigger. [/quote]
Well…your ab’s, your lower back, your core! Of course we all know squats are the king of all leg exercises, but there not 2 dimensional, they can be more than just a quad wrecker, by using various pieces of equipment you can make them target your calf’s more or your glutes etc. The fact the dudes legs are big already is no excuse not to squat, if he wants to keep on making strength gains as supposed to size in his legs and the areas mentioned above he’d continue to squat…
Sounds lazy to me
It’s called a cross-sectional anabolic effect. Poliquin wrote about it a couple of months ago in his question of strength. Pretty much everybody ignored it because he apparently slayed the sacred cow of planks and deemed them useless. And he was right…
Anyway, the bottom line is that the bigger the stress incurred the greater the over-compensation, i.e. new muscle every where.
I love to work legs so I did… a lot. I got them big (for my frame). I looked like a bowling pin. Sooo, I negated legs in order to bring the balance back…It’s back, so I work legs again…
Hahaha. I knew people would be all ‘you have to squat’
Sure. If you want to.
But I have a client right now whose legs are huge. Great detail, development, the works. And this is just from running every few days.
So I give him a few high rep sets on leg press and that’s it.
There is no need to squat. There are other ways to hit the ‘core’ which are more efficient. I don’t think many people squat for their abs.
It comes down to working right for your frame to create a balanced physique.
Some people don’t need to do certain exercises.
But, but… Sxio, it’s the SQUAT!
On the other hand, you’re totally right.
That aside, the squat should be done by a large portion of trainees because it
-improves posture and the lower back, which is kinda great
-is one of the most demanding exercises and as such teaches to really fire up your nervous system
-has a tremendous anabolic hormone output, thus helping synergetically the other muscles
-is one of the most effective lower body exercises and as such can help you easily build up the wheels, which will let the upper body grow more, because the body likes to be in proportion
-has, along with the deadlift, perhaps the best productive total body result and is therefore a smart exercise selection
[quote]That One Guy wrote:
I doubt his legs were really “massive”
Why bother? He’s a douche. Let him keep curling and benching and do your own thing in the gym.[/quote]
If he doesn’t want to squat, he doesn’t have to squat. Doesn’t make him a douche.
[quote]Sxio wrote:
Hahaha. I knew people would be all ‘you have to squat’
Sure. If you want to.
But I have a client right now whose legs are huge. Great detail, development, the works. And this is just from running every few days.
So I give him a few high rep sets on leg press and that’s it.
There is no need to squat. There are other ways to hit the ‘core’ which are more efficient. I don’t think many people squat for their abs.
It comes down to working right for your frame to create a balanced physique.
Some people don’t need to do certain exercises.
[/quote]
Running will give you big legs?
Is he running up steps with a 100lb weight vest or something?
I seriously never heard of haveing big legs from running. Springint will build your legs sure, but not to the point of big I dont think?
[quote]That One Guy wrote:
I doubt his legs were really “massive”
Why bother? He’s a douche. Let him keep curling and benching and do your own thing in the gym.[/quote]
exactly!
[quote]Uber N3wb wrote:
I seriously never heard of haveing big legs from running. Springint will build your legs sure, but not to the point of big I dont think?[/quote]
Yes, you can build a fairly impressive set of trunks from sprinting. Granted, you’ll be hard-pressed to find many serious sprinters (Olympic and professional) that don’t also include squats in their training; I know Korchemny made all of his trainees squat. But sprinting alone can do quite a bit.
Go try a sprint routine for a few weeks and I guarantee you’ll see a big difference (I don’t mean just run a couple of sprints here and there every other day or so; find an actual sprint routine that a coach has prescribed). It can also be a great way to mix up your leg training.