I am in no way dissing chad. I am just asking, the people with big arms probably know all kinds of things about arm training. Christian Thibideuas arms look like canteloupes. I bet he know a little. I have never seen Chad’s arms, they may be enourmous. Who knows.
In some of the old articles, there is an incredibly small asian dude. He is pictured lifting large amounts of weights. I would read an article of his on how to be strong, but not how to be massive.
I am not claiming that anyone doesn’t know what the hell they are talking about. I just find that results and experience are more convincing then education. I learn more from my criminal justices classes when the teacher is/was a policeman.
I agree with Prof X, the “no direct arm training” is a huge fad nowadays.
Many of the coaches are correct that chin-ups and rows are sufficient for growth, but only for a beginner, in my opinion.
Your arms will grow no matter what from doing squats, deads, and compound exercises, as long as you’re eating enough. But even though arm size is increasing slowly as you gain weight, the arms will always lag behind the muscles you are ACTUALLY working.
[quote]Boondoggler wrote:
I’ve found myself facing a similar situation. I’m half way considering doing curls once a week…[/quote]
With due respect.
Curls once a week would cost you, oh, about ten minutes or so of time weekly, if that? I don’t think they are going to make you become overtrained either any time soon. So is it really something that you should be considering, or something you should just do? Do you think about taking a crap for several hours before you decide too? Is it hard for you to get dressed in the morning.?
Another thing to remember is that I don’t think Chad Waterbury ever said no direct arm work. Alot of his programs include this(TBT just to name one) ABBH is a beginners program. Its the first program he tells people to use out of all the programs he writes. Most new trainees can’t even squat,deadlift and bench press correctly.
We’ve all seen some of the outrageous programs newbies put up on this site asking for a critique. I mean good christ there was one where someone was doing forearm curls but not even training their fucking legs. I think most would agree no matter how many degrees a coach has that a newbie should get down the basics before he starts worrying about how big his arms are.
I can definitely see the value of starting a beginer on a serious program without direct arm training. It’s important for the foundation, but I think it’s also useful to teach them to appreciate the compound movements as the core of their program in the future. They don’t need isolation to grow just because the bodybuilders they see in the magazines do. After the initial period though it becomes necessary to add the arm work to keep everything balanced.
I’ve noticed from working with friends though that if I give them a little bit of isolation or “beach muscle” work mixed in to a larger program, they will run with the beach stuff and neglect the rest. The habit needs to be broken before it can be properly learned.
Arms will not grow the way you want them to without isolation. There’s something called development. It’s the overall shape or look of your arm. You may get the bulk of your general arm growth from compounds but they will still have the same ‘non-trained-only bigger’ look to them. They’ll lack development because there will be imbalances within the same muscle groups. Underdeveloped parts of the biceps and triceps will halt growth on the overdeveloped ones to prevent further imbalance. With isolation there’s an untapped well of muscle that makes a huge difference. It’s very difficult achieving the same development using a compouns-only without taking away from their effectiveness on the larger muscle groups.
Some people have the genes for arms that stand out whatever the training. And most likely you’re not one of those people. I know I’m not.
I just finished the first week. It’s based on the fact that imbalances in the core, shoulders, back lead to small arms. It’s supposed to correct the imbalances. I know I definitely have internal rotation of the humerus as well as rounded shoulders, so I think that’s why my arms are not growing. Hopefully this program will fix all that.
Yeah but you need to have at least some brains to get that first degree. Your optimistic view of the human race is refreshing but there are a lot of dumb people out there who lack the basic intelligence to pass school exams never mind degrees.
Good point about Chads programs - they work so nuff said!!
[quote]comedypedro wrote:
Professor X wrote:
comedypedro wrote:
Good point about Chads programs - they work so nuff said!!
What specifically does not “work”?
What do you mean? I said they work, not that dont work?[/quote]
What specific training program or strategy does NOT “work”?
The point is, everything works to some degree for some amount of time. As long as the key factors (significant resistance training, food intake and rest) are covered, what doesn’t work? You made a statement as if it is amazing that something works. There are people who go against many of the concepts held on this board and still make amazing progress. How could that possibly be if they aren’t following a trainer who claims 3 or 4 degrees? It is because everything works. the largest factor…the most important aspect…is hard work and dedication, not what specific program you are on.
[quote]brucevangeorge wrote:
Would direct arm work be useful for a newbie? Or should it be used to correct imbalances and proportions in more experienced lifters?[/quote]
Yes, direct arm work is “useful”. Most bodybuilders didn’t avoid direct arm work when they started. That includes most pro’s. This is something new that just popped up over the last few years. Everyone agrees that no newbie should begin ignoring legs in favor of arms, but the opposite extreme is equally ridiculous. Train your WHOLE BODY. That is what should be drilled in these guys’ heads.
[quote]Ryu13 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Why the hell is ANYONE avoiding direct arm work? Is this the new fad or something? It’s stupid.
This IS the new fad. People seem to think since rows and chins put more overall weight on them, they make them grow more. I’m a firm believer in isolating the shit out of any and all muscle im training.[/quote]
I think there was so much emphasis on isolation for awhile that a lot of less experienced lifters were wasting a lot of time… and as always happens, when the pendulum swings, it swings wide. I think striving for a balance of compound movements and isolation work probably works best for most people.
Obviously, personal goals will influence a program - if someone really wants huge arms and that’s it, they really don’t need to squat, ever. If someone just wants to be able to ‘lift a car’ and that’s it, who needs direct tricep work? But most bodybuilders want to be strong, all over, AND have a great-looking, well-balanced and evenly muscled physique.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
comedypedro wrote:
Professor X wrote:
comedypedro wrote:
Good point about Chads programs - they work so nuff said!!
What specifically does not “work”?
What do you mean? I said they work, not that dont work?
What specific training program or strategy does NOT “work”?
The point is, everything works to some degree for some amount of time. As long as the key factors (significant resistance training, food intake and rest) are covered, what doesn’t work? You made a statement as if it is amazing that something works. There are people who go against many of the concepts held on this board and still make amazing progress. How could that possibly be if they aren’t following a trainer who claims 3 or 4 degrees? It is because everything works. the largest factor…the most important aspect…is hard work and dedication, not what specific program you are on.[/quote]
Ok I meant that Chad’s programs work WELL as in better than say a bodypart split with never changing parameters. And no the degrees thing isnt the deciding factor in whether a trainer is any good - an understanding of the basic principles and the ability to experiment and observe results are worth more than academic qualifications.
My point was that he hasent just thrown together a random program for the sake of it, he’s put a lot of thought into it including addressing the arm isolation issue.
I think there was so much emphasis on isolation for awhile that a lot of less experienced lifters were wasting a lot of time… and as always happens, when the pendulum swings, it swings wide. I think striving for a balance of compound movements and isolation work probably works best for most people.
Obviously, personal goals will influence a program - if someone really wants huge arms and that’s it, they really don’t need to squat, ever. If someone just wants to be able to ‘lift a car’ and that’s it, who needs direct tricep work? But most bodybuilders want to be strong, all over, AND have a great-looking, well-balanced and evenly muscled physique.
[/quote]
Im NOT speaking from personnal experience here cos Ive always squated but the general opinion these days seems to be that you do need to squat to increase arms because your body seeks to be balanced. Same with the lifting a car thing, after a certain point your body wont let your bi’s get any bigger until the tri’s are brought up because of balance. Like I said this is the general opinion, Ive always worked everything so its not personnal experience.
Coaches constantly remind folks that the big lifts are the biggest part of the game. They put an emphasis on improving those lifts, keeping things balanced, and on the whole getting stronger. They remind folks of this so much here that readers have gotten some crazy idea that you should avoid direct arm/isolation work.
Any good coach will tell you to use what’s needed to get the job done. If you need some direct arm/isolation work for aesthitics or performance, go for it. The isolation work is the cherry on top instead of the whole sundae. Just be reasonable with how this effects your overall training stress. Most folks don’t need or get much benefit out of an 18 sets of curls bicep day. The pendulem is so far out of whack in the isolation/volume direction among the underdevoloped populace that it’s no wonder you see coaches and posters stressing compound lifts.
[quote]comedypedro wrote:
Ok I meant that Chad’s programs work WELL as in better than say a bodypart split with never changing parameters. [/quote]
Who would never change “parameters”? I do a “bodypart split” if this is what working each body part individually on seperate training days is called. The changing “parameter” is either the weight lifted or the rep scheme. Why even make this that complicated?