[quote]loctite_zexel wrote:
Correct me if I’m wrong but aren’t the pecs just one muscle? (can’t find the ‘upper’ and ‘lower’ chest in my dusty old anatomy book)
[/quote]
You have a pectoralis major and a pectoralis minor. In some people, the pec minor may take up more space or be more developed. I personally believe this may be why Franco Columbo’s chest seemed to split when he flexed along with genetic muscle attachment to the sternum. The pec minor sits behind the pec major closer to the collar bone and is usually more activated during incline movements. Because of that and how much overall space the chest (pec major) occupies, you can work the “upper pecs” just like you can work your “upper traps” (since your traps extend from the back of your skull all of the way down to your mid back).
This is why only doing flat bench will usually not result in decent overall development. I know from experience that my upper chest has grown significantly since I began putting more direct focus on it. It used to actually be a weak point and my collar bones would stand out regardless of lower chest development. Now it isn’t and I doubt you could see my collar bones at all.
[quote]loctite_zexel wrote:
While others say inclines just involve more front delts while declines involve more triceps. And others say declines involve more front delts AND triceps.[/quote]
Also, this is false. Declines would work your lower chest, triceps, and even lats more, not your front delts. Your front delts would get more stimulation if you are doing inclines and your inclination on the bench is set too high.
“Curls are for Girls…” - High School Strength Training Coach.
I was brought up on this mentality too. My coach convinced me that Bicep curls 1) Do nothing to aid the bench press, 2) Do not add strength to compound arm movements, and 3) Are best trained using alternate rigid movements like chin-ups and dips.
Im not answering this question, I just wanted to add I think lack of bicep curl training is due to an ongoing opinion.
I used to split my chest into two different days (upper and lower chest) but now that my chest is pretty filled in on top, I now just train it all in one day.
Correct me if I’m wrong but aren’t the pecs just one muscle? (can’t find the ‘upper’ and ‘lower’ chest in my dusty old anatomy book)
But then again, I have been hearing (And reading) a lot of mixed comments regarding this. For instance:
Some say that incline presses emphasize the ‘upper chest’ while declines emphasize the ‘lower chest’
While others say inclines just involve more front delts while declines involve more triceps. And others say declines involve more front delts AND triceps.
I know I shouldn’t get all caught up in the detail considering I’m still pretty new to this, but it would be great to get this issue straightened out once and for all.
thanks again[/quote]
Like prof x said, pec minor vs major, but also sternal head vs clavicular head.
[quote]BluePfaltz wrote:
If your goal is full body development and bench pressing 2 plates a side isn’t still considered a “lofty fantasy” to you, why avoid biceps curls?
“Curls are for Girls…” - High School Strength Training Coach.
I was brought up on this mentality too. My coach convinced me that Bicep curls 1) Do nothing to aid the bench press, 2) Do not add strength to compound arm movements, and 3) Are best trained using alternate rigid movements like chin-ups and dips.
Im not answering this question, I just wanted to add I think lack of bicep curl training is due to an ongoing opinion.[/quote]
Tell your coach that I don’t know too many girls with 20" arms outside of overweight lunch ladies. You just don’t build them up like that without direct attention. If your goal is only powerlifting, then I suppose it doesn’t matter what they look like.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
BluePfaltz wrote:
If your goal is full body development and bench pressing 2 plates a side isn’t still considered a “lofty fantasy” to you, why avoid biceps curls?
“Curls are for Girls…” - High School Strength Training Coach.
I was brought up on this mentality too. My coach convinced me that Bicep curls 1) Do nothing to aid the bench press, 2) Do not add strength to compound arm movements, and 3) Are best trained using alternate rigid movements like chin-ups and dips.
Im not answering this question, I just wanted to add I think lack of bicep curl training is due to an ongoing opinion.
Tell your coach that I don’t know too many girls with 20" arms outside of overweight lunch ladies. You just don’t build them up like that without direct attention. If your goal is only powerlifting, then I suppose it doesn’t matter what they look like.
[/quote]
Oh trust me, its been a while since ive graduated from HS, but if I ever got to meet him again id give him the 3rd degree.
Not only am I upset that I spent some of my best years - not - doing curls, he shyed me away from Deadlifts and Squats. The Bench record for our High School was 215 in 2000. In 2001 I broke that record by Maxing at 240 x 2. (my HS coach also diddnt believe in 1rp max.)
This was near the end of my Freshman year. I was 15.
Though Ive only not too recently discovered Testosterone, I knew there was something wrong when I blew a Hernia and my intestine dropped into my sac. I was top heavy and I just want to know why my coach only had me doing bench presses as my epitome of strength.
[quote]BluePfaltz wrote:
Professor X wrote:
BluePfaltz wrote:
If your goal is full body development and bench pressing 2 plates a side isn’t still considered a “lofty fantasy” to you, why avoid biceps curls?
“Curls are for Girls…” - High School Strength Training Coach.
I was brought up on this mentality too. My coach convinced me that Bicep curls 1) Do nothing to aid the bench press, 2) Do not add strength to compound arm movements, and 3) Are best trained using alternate rigid movements like chin-ups and dips.
Im not answering this question, I just wanted to add I think lack of bicep curl training is due to an ongoing opinion.
Tell your coach that I don’t know too many girls with 20" arms outside of overweight lunch ladies. You just don’t build them up like that without direct attention. If your goal is only powerlifting, then I suppose it doesn’t matter what they look like.
Oh trust me, its been a while since ive graduated from HS, but if I ever got to meet him again id give him the 3rd degree.
Not only am I upset that I spent some of my best years - not - doing curls, he shyed me away from Deadlifts and Squats. The Bench record for our High School was 215 in 2000. In 2001 I broke that record by Maxing at 240 x 2. (my HS coach also didn’t believe in 1rp max.)
This was near the end of my Freshman year. I was 15.
Though I’ve only not too recently discovered Testosterone, I knew there was something wrong when I blew a Hernia and my intestine dropped into my sac. I was top heavy and I just want to know why my coach only had me doing bench presses as my epitome of strength. [/quote]
That’s horrible. Talk about creating strength imbalances and problems. Bad coach. But you’ve got your head on straight now. So, that’s good.
Prof, would you still happen to remember the program you did when you split chest training into upper and lower? (the upper portion of my chest badly needs to be filled up)
And since I’m sure this program called for a lot of horizontal pressing movements, did you cut out overhead pressing altogether while you were on this program?
[quote]loctite_zexel wrote:
Prof, would you still happen to remember the program you did when you split chest training into upper and lower? (the upper portion of my chest badly needs to be filled up)
And since I’m sure this program called for a lot of horizontal pressing movements, did you cut out overhead pressing altogether while you were on this program?[/quote]
Lower chest day was dumbbell presses, wide grip HS presses and HS flat bench press.
Upper chest day and triceps was incline HS machine, incline Smith machine (or incline free barbell press), and one or two sets of incline dumbbell presses. I then did my regular triceps workout. Soon, I was down to two exercises for upper chest and let the dumbbells slide for that one.
No, I didn’t cut out overhead pressing. Why would I limit shoulder training?
Lower chest day was dumbbell presses, wide grip HS presses and HS flat bench press.
training?[/quote]
Ah… so ‘lower chest’ day was basically ‘regular chest’ stuff (as in flat benches)… at first I was under the assumption that you did incline stuff for upper chest day and decline stuff for lower chest day.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
No, I didn’t cut out overhead pressing. Why would I limit shoulder training?[/quote]
Well I just assumed that you were placing a lot of work on the front delts and thus would not have adequate recovery time to fully maximize overhead pressing.
On a similar topic, say I was focusing on shoulders for a 3-4 week cycle (hitting the shoulders 2-3x a week)… should I limit horizontal pressing to just one day a week or would it be better to cut it out entirely?
[quote]loctite_zexel wrote:
On a similar topic, say I was focusing on shoulders for a 3-4 week cycle (hitting the shoulders 2-3x a week)… should I limit horizontal pressing to just one day a week or would it be better to cut it out entirely?
Thanks for the responses[/quote]
I would never do shoulders 3 times in one week unless I really wanted arthritis and shoulder surgery by the age of 35.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I would never do shoulders 3 times in one week unless I really wanted arthritis and shoulder surgery by the age of 35.[/quote]
LoL, thats quite a picture you paint. However, you’re idea of hitting shoulders in a day is probably a lot more intense than what I was planning on doing. I would probably do 4-6 sets for a total of 30-50 reps/ session. Does that change your opinion in anyway? Or is it still probably a bad idea?
[quote]loctite_zexel wrote:
Professor X wrote:
I would never do shoulders 3 times in one week unless I really wanted arthritis and shoulder surgery by the age of 35.
LoL, thats quite a picture you paint. However, you’re idea of hitting shoulders in a day is probably a lot more intense than what I was planning on doing. I would probably do 4-6 sets for a total of 30-50 reps/ session. Does that change your opinion in anyway? Or is it still probably a bad idea?[/quote]
Yes, it changes my opinion. It makes me think that you are wasting time in the gym by not being very intense with your training. Why would you work a muscle with less inetnsity just so you could train it more often? 4-6 sets of what?
Has it ever occurred to any of you that Prof. X may not be the end all, be all of weightlifting? It’s highly possible that he’s just a vocal guy (albeit big) on some forums. How many posts on here have attributed big, ripped guys to genetics?
[quote]LoneLobo wrote:
Has it ever occurred to any of you that Prof. X may not be the end all, be all of weightlifting? It’s highly possible that he’s just a vocal guy (albeit big) on some forums. How many posts on here have attributed big, ripped guys to genetics?
Like, why the fascination?[/quote]
I’ll leave Prof X to defend himself, as it is one of his best known assets.
On the other hand, have you seen his pics? Its not like he already started with those biceps. Hell, he was a skinny bastard when he started. That ain’t the case now.
He may not be the ultimate weightlifter; no one is. But we are interested on the methods he used to gain so much muscle in just 3 years of training.
How many ppl do you know that have accomplished this? And besides, what’s going of yours if we ask him?
[quote]LoneLobo wrote:
Has it ever occurred to any of you that Prof. X may not be the end all, be all of weightlifting? It’s highly possible that he’s just a vocal guy (albeit big) on some forums. How many posts on here have attributed big, ripped guys to genetics?
Like, why the fascination?[/quote]
Your an ass. Prof. X is the last person on this site that needs anyone defending him, but he has established himself as a very knowledgable sourse of information. The message thread was directed to him from a poster that was interested in what advice he could give. If he was just some vocal guy with great genetics I doubt people would seek his training advice.
[quote]LoneLobo wrote:
Has it ever occurred to any of you that Prof. X may not be the end all, be all of weightlifting? It’s highly possible that he’s just a vocal guy (albeit big) on some forums. How many posts on here have attributed big, ripped guys to genetics?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
loctite_zexel wrote:
On a similar topic, say I was focusing on shoulders for a 3-4 week cycle (hitting the shoulders 2-3x a week)… should I limit horizontal pressing to just one day a week or would it be better to cut it out entirely?
Thanks for the responses
I would never do shoulders 3 times in one week unless I really wanted arthritis and shoulder surgery by the age of 35.[/quote]
Professor,
Is this because of the nature of the shoulders or would you recommend the same approach to any lagging muscle groups?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
NateN wrote:
This has been an interesting read, but I think the more useful question would be:
How did you train while you were building yourself up the fastest?
I’ve trained a lot of ways. My first real routine was from a box of Cybergenics. [/quote]
LOL! Cybergenics, I remember that stuff! The workout it came with was pretty hardcore, considering it was marketed mostly to beginners. I’m sure the majority of peoples’ gains in muscle mass were due more to the workout than any of the supplements that came in that box. I can’t remember off the top of my head what they were but I’d love to be able to read the ingredients of some of that stuff now. Probably be a good laugh. And it was expensive too from what I remember. Well over $100 for what was likely nothing more than vitamins.
The company was also ahead of it’s time in the marketing aspect as well. They were probably the first to do the now ubiquitous ‘Before and After’ photos on the packaging and magazine ads.