Quitting Curls

[Professor_X]

[quote]GhostNtheSystem wrote:

Actually, that provides some insight. But if 3500 isn’t enough yet it’s causing me to gain fat, how do I go about losing the fat? Am I suppose to do this in stages where I go some time eating and building muscle and then go some time just burning off fat? And if so, then wouldn’t the muscle just burn off along with the fat? I’m rather unclear as to how to achieve both goals. [/quote]

If you are so unclear…why aren’t you LISTENING? He isn’t telling you anything countless others haven’t written to you in this thread. What exactly did you think my previous p[ost was referring to? Everyone with any experience can see you are “unclear”. Apparently, you want to stay that way.

[Sentoguy]

Hi GhostNtheSystem,

First let me say that I’ve been working on the planche and front lever for a while now, so I know how difficult these moves are.

However, you really should listen to the advice that a lot of guys on here are giving you. Yes, it’s true that gymnasts don’t train specifically for increased muscle mass. However, look at any really good gymnasts and very few if any of them would be considered to have very little muscle.

What I’ve found from my experience (I am in no way an expert on the subject) is that one really needs to practice these movements a lot to get the coordination, balance, and joint strength required to hold them.

In other words your body must learn to maximally contract all of the necessary muscle fibers in a coordinated manner to perform these holds.

However, once your body has mastered this maximal motor unit recruitment, there is only two ways that you can improve.

1. Gain more muscle mass. No, I doubt someone the size of Ronnie could ever even dream of doing a planche. But, there is definetely some truth to the notion that a muscle’s ability to generate force is related to it’s cross sectional area. Basically the larger a muscle, the more force it can generate. Therefore, gain more muscle, and you will be stronger.

2. Lose adipose tissue. The less non functional (at least non functional in this case) mass you have to overcome, the easier these moves will be to achieve. I would really suggest that you stop doing long duration, low intensity cardio though. This isn’t really helping you achieve your goals, and may even be hindering your progress.

Finally, in regards to your wanting to quit curls. Honestly I think that you are a little misinformed and/or confused as to why one would want to quit utilizing an exercise.

Curls will add mass to your elbow flexors (provided a correct progression/rest/nutrition is in place), so will pulling motions. Neither is necessarily better or worse than the other. I would honestly suggest using both. That will give you the best results when it comes to gaining mass.

Good luck and good training,

Sentoguy

[n3wb]

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I’m starting to envision some of these guys standing on a chair with a bat, flailing away at this lean muscle mass that’s been chasing them around the room. As if it were so easy to grow that positive measures must be taken to avoid it.

Trust me friend, you will have more than enough fair warning before you ever get too big, whatever exactly that means. You won’t wake up one morning weighted down with 100 new pounds of sneaky muscle.[/quote]

to funny

[HardcoreHorn]

Not too important, but I thought I’d point out to some of the posters that the singular form of “biceps” is still “biceps.” For example, “I do one biceps curl, then I do two biceps curls.”

[GhostNtheSystem]

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
Hi GhostNtheSystem,

First let me say that I’ve been working on the planche and front lever for a while now, so I know how difficult these moves are.

However, you really should listen to the advice that a lot of guys on here are giving you. Yes, it’s true that gymnasts don’t train specifically for increased muscle mass. However, look at any really good gymnasts and very few if any of them would be considered to have very little muscle.

What I’ve found from my experience (I am in no way an expert on the subject) is that one really needs to practice these movements a lot to get the coordination, balance, and joint strength required to hold them.

In other words your body must learn to maximally contract all of the necessary muscle fibers in a coordinated manner to perform these holds.

However, once your body has mastered this maximal motor unit recruitment, there is only two ways that you can improve.

1. Gain more muscle mass. No, I doubt someone the size of Ronnie could ever even dream of doing a planche. But, there is definetely some truth to the notion that a muscle’s ability to generate force is related to it’s cross sectional area. Basically the larger a muscle, the more force it can generate. Therefore, gain more muscle, and you will be stronger.

2. Lose adipose tissue. The less non functional (at least non functional in this case) mass you have to overcome, the easier these moves will be to achieve. I would really suggest that you stop doing long duration, low intensity cardio though. This isn’t really helping you achieve your goals, and may even be hindering your progress.

Finally, in regards to your wanting to quit curls. Honestly I think that you are a little misinformed and/or confused as to why one would want to quit utilizing an exercise.

Curls will add mass to your elbow flexors (provided a correct progression/rest/nutrition is in place), so will pulling motions. Neither is necessarily better or worse than the other. I would honestly suggest using both. That will give you the best results when it comes to gaining mass.

Good luck and good training,

Sentoguy[/quote]

Thanks for the input regarding the planche. The problem I was having with some of the advice I’ve been given is that it’s incomplete. I’m being told ‘eat more eat more’ with no more direction to it than that. I don’t mind gaining muscle mass and I expect that it will be necessary, but I don’t want to gain all the extra fat that comes with eating more. So what I’m looking for is advice on how to build muscle and also to lose fat. I know this is not an impossible task.

The cardio I’ve been doing is mainly to try to keep the extra fat down. Perhaps I should replace it with sprints or interval training for maybe 20 minutes?

[StevenF]

[quote]GhostNtheSystem wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
Hi GhostNtheSystem,

First let me say that I’ve been working on the planche and front lever for a while now, so I know how difficult these moves are.

However, you really should listen to the advice that a lot of guys on here are giving you. Yes, it’s true that gymnasts don’t train specifically for increased muscle mass. However, look at any really good gymnasts and very few if any of them would be considered to have very little muscle.

What I’ve found from my experience (I am in no way an expert on the subject) is that one really needs to practice these movements a lot to get the coordination, balance, and joint strength required to hold them.

In other words your body must learn to maximally contract all of the necessary muscle fibers in a coordinated manner to perform these holds.

However, once your body has mastered this maximal motor unit recruitment, there is only two ways that you can improve.

1. Gain more muscle mass. No, I doubt someone the size of Ronnie could ever even dream of doing a planche. But, there is definetely some truth to the notion that a muscle’s ability to generate force is related to it’s cross sectional area. Basically the larger a muscle, the more force it can generate. Therefore, gain more muscle, and you will be stronger.

2. Lose adipose tissue. The less non functional (at least non functional in this case) mass you have to overcome, the easier these moves will be to achieve. I would really suggest that you stop doing long duration, low intensity cardio though. This isn’t really helping you achieve your goals, and may even be hindering your progress.

Finally, in regards to your wanting to quit curls. Honestly I think that you are a little misinformed and/or confused as to why one would want to quit utilizing an exercise.

Curls will add mass to your elbow flexors (provided a correct progression/rest/nutrition is in place), so will pulling motions. Neither is necessarily better or worse than the other. I would honestly suggest using both. That will give you the best results when it comes to gaining mass.

Good luck and good training,

Sentoguy

Thanks for the input regarding the planche. The problem I was having with some of the advice I’ve been given is that it’s incomplete. I’m being told ‘eat more eat more’ with no more direction to it than that. I don’t mind gaining muscle mass and I expect that it will be necessary, but I don’t want to gain all the extra fat that comes with eating more. So what I’m looking for is advice on how to build muscle and also to lose fat. I know this is not an impossible task.

The cardio I’ve been doing is mainly to try to keep the extra fat down. Perhaps I should replace it with sprints or interval training for maybe 20 minutes?[/quote]

So you want to quit curls but build your biceps, now you want to gain muscle without gaining any fat? In the immortal words of Billy Bob Thornton, “ARE YOU FUCKING WITH ME???”

[jsbrook]

[quote]GhostNtheSystem wrote:
Sometimes one hits a plateau and would like alternative exercises. Luckily even if there is a shortage of alternative exercises, the cup overfloweth with smart-ass commentary.[/quote]

While, I haven’t looked at this thread unitl today this caught my eye. The thing is that you should ALREADY be doing all the ‘alternative’ exercises. Maybe not close-grip pull-ups. But I don’t think they’re a substitute for curls. My own take on it is this: if you arms are less than say 16 inches, curls are not necessarily the best use of your time and energy in a workout. They’re more icing on the cake. The bigger you get the more of a disservice you’re doing yourself by ignoring direct isolation work.

[Christian_Thibaudeau]

This is what HueyOT means… I’m not in a drawing mood but that still gives you a decent idea.

Obviously in all pulling movement there will be some elbow flexion. BUT to emphasis the back muscles you should have MORE movement at the shoulder joint and LESS movement at the elbow joint.

[Christian_Thibaudeau]

[quote]GhostNtheSystem wrote:
So what I’m looking for is advice on how to build muscle and also to lose fat. I know this is not an impossible task.[/quote]

For a natural trainee past the beginner stage, it almost is an impossible task. At least it is to do both at the same time to any significant extent. You CAN build a little muscle and lose a little fat at the same time (and even that is pretty hard to do) but unless you are using performance-enhancing drugs or are a genetic greak it will be impossible to:

1. Add a lot of muscle while losing fat
2. Losing a lot of fat while gaining a significant amount of muscle

Now, some genetic freaks can do both, but trust me if you were such a freak you wouldn’t be asking questions BTW because anything you did would give you great results.

The fact is that for 90% of the population, gaining muscle and losing fat are somewhat contradictory goals since:

a) building muscle requires you to consume more calories and nutrients than you use every day

b) losing fat requires you to consume less calories than you use each day

Now, it IS possible to attain both goals at the same time under special circumstances:

• if you have always relied on a shitty diet (fast food, junk, etc.) and suddenly switch to a clean diet. In this case you can lose fat even if you are consuming more calories than you use. But that benefit can only last for a short period of time

• if you are a total beginner with little, if any muscular development

• if you are a genetic freak

But most peoples will need to accept a slight fat gain to add on a significant amount of muscle mass. I’m NOT saying that you should gain a lot of fat… in fact I’m particularily leaning toward the “staying lean” side of things. But if you want to add a lot of muscle you will have to accept a slight fat loss.

That’s why muscle gain and fat loss phases should be separate.

[Professor_X]

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
GhostNtheSystem wrote:
So what I’m looking for is advice on how to build muscle and also to lose fat. I know this is not an impossible task.

For a natural trainee past the beginner stage, it almost is an impossible task. At least it is to do both at the same time to any significant extent. You CAN build a little muscle and lose a little fat at the same time (and even that is pretty hard to do) but unless you are using performance-enhancing drugs or are a genetic greak it will be impossible to:

1. Add a lot of muscle while losing fat
2. Losing a lot of fat while gaining a significant amount of muscle

Now, some genetic freaks can do both, but trust me if you were such a freak you wouldn’t be asking questions BTW because anything you did would give you great results.

The fact is that for 90% of the population, gaining muscle and losing fat are somewhat contradictory goals since:

a) building muscle requires you to consume more calories and nutrients than you use every day

b) losing fat requires you to consume less calories than you use each day

Now, it IS possible to attain both goals at the same time under special circumstances:

• if you have always relied on a shitty diet (fast food, junk, etc.) and suddenly switch to a clean diet. In this case you can lose fat even if you are consuming more calories than you use. But that benefit can only last for a short period of time

• if you are a total beginner with little, if any muscular development

• if you are a genetic freak

But most peoples will need to accept a slight fat gain to add on a significant amount of muscle mass. I’m NOT saying that you should gain a lot of fat… in fact I’m particularily leaning toward the “staying lean” side of things. But if you want to add a lot of muscle you will have to accept a slight fat loss.

That’s why muscle gain and fat loss phases should be separate. [/quote]

This is also what many people, including me, have been trying to say throughout this thread. I even wrote this in a way that should have made it obvious by using that “conversation” style of writing earlier that you claimed was a “flame”, GhostNthesystem.

It seems you are ignoring people who have been doing this for years. I hope the simple fact that one of the authors here has spelled it out again will finally allow it to sink in.

As far as the back exercises and using less flexion of the elbow, I was guided early on by one competitor to mentally think of the contraction when doing seated rows as your shoulders moving backwards as the first part of the movement.

While many people seem to be using their biceps as the primary mover, it should feel more like a chain of action from rear delts…to the backwards movement of the arms with very little elbow flexion at all. The drawing you drew, CT, illustrates that well. Back exercises should not be “biceps movements”.

It bothers me that so many people are now using them that way now just to avoid direct biceps works.

[Professor_X]

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
GhostNtheSystem wrote:
Sometimes one hits a plateau and would like alternative exercises. Luckily even if there is a shortage of alternative exercises, the cup overfloweth with smart-ass commentary.

While, I haven’t looked at this thread unitl today this caught my eye. The thing is that you should ALREADY be doing all the ‘alternative’ exercises. Maybe not close-grip pull-ups. But I don’t think they’re a substitute for curls. My own take on it is this: if you arms are less than say 16 inches, curls are not necessarily the best use of your time and energy in a workout. They’re more icing on the cake. The bigger you get the more of a disservice you’re doing yourself by ignoring direct isolation work. [/quote]

I disagree with this completely. Direct biceps work should be some part of training from the beginning. They possibly don’t need their own day like some more advanced trainers do, but to act as if they should be ignored is also a mistake. I just don’t see why people act as if adding some curls in on back day is such a big deal. It isn’t.

Let’s stop this shit because it just doesn’t make sense and most of the guys you see with great arm development DID NOT avoid training them directly in the beginning or any other time.

[Tiribulus]

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
GhostNtheSystem wrote:
So what I’m looking for is advice on how to build muscle and also to lose fat. I know this is not an impossible task.

For a natural trainee past the beginner stage, it almost is an impossible task>>>

<<<That’s why muscle gain and fat loss phases should be separate. [/quote]

Can we get an amen on this whole post?

[quote]Professor X wrote:
<<<It bothers me that so many people are now using them that way now just to avoid direct biceps works.
[/quote]

I don’t know if it bothers so much as I just don’t understand it. It’s not like a few sets of curls are going to kill anybody. Why the aversion?

[Christian_Thibaudeau]

[quote]Professor X wrote:

While many people seem to be using their biceps as the primary mover, it should feel more like a chain of action from rear delts…to the backwards movement of the arms with very little elbow flexion at all. The drawing you drew, CT, illustrates that well. Back exercises should not be “biceps movements”.
[/quote]

Definetly.

I think it was Tom Platz who talked about using full “MUSCLE” range of motion, not full range of motion. The objective is to full stretch and contract the targeted muscle group in an exercise… it should not be to take the bar/weight/handle from point A to point B.

[mertdawg]

Prof, you wrote a year or so ago that you train your biceps (or maybe it was chest?) 1 day a week, but that when they were a weakness, you prioritized by training the weak bodypart 2x/week.

In retrospect, do you think that if biceps (or another bodypart) is a particular weakness, that training it MORE OFTEN is a good way to go, or are you more into the “increase intensity” and “full recovery” approach now?

[quote]Professor X wrote:
GhostNtheSystem wrote:
Alright, I’ve decided not to quit curls. Even if I am at a plateau apparently there’s no better option. So worst case scenario I keep curling and never get any stronger, but at least I won’t get weaker.

If you aren’t getting stronger, unless you are some decade long veteran at the peak of his potential, it is a much greater chance that you are either not eating enough, not allowing your body enough time to grow in between workouts, or you are completely clueless about how to train.

For most of these guys, I would bet food is the primary issue and why you are making no progress.

How much weight have you gained? how much have you increased in strength and size in your legs, chest, or back? You are just getting gigantic all over except for your biceps?

You weigh how much?[/quote]

[StevenF]

hmm I learned a bit from this thread thanks guys.

[der_FrostBack77]

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
Professor X wrote:

While many people seem to be using their biceps as the primary mover, it should feel more like a chain of action from rear delts…to the backwards movement of the arms with very little elbow flexion at all. The drawing you drew, CT, illustrates that well. Back exercises should not be “biceps movements”.

Definetly.

I think it was Tom Platz who talked about using full “MUSCLE” range of motion, not full range of motion. The objective is to full stretch and contract the targeted muscle group in an exercise… it should not be to take the bar/weight/handle from point A to point B. [/quote]

Christian or Prof X,

Would you guys recommend against starting a cable row with your arms locked out?

[Professor_X]

[quote]mertdawg wrote:
Prof, you wrote a year or so ago that you train your biceps (or maybe it was chest?) 1 day a week, but that when they were a weakness, you prioritized by training the weak bodypart 2x/week.

In retrospect, do you think that if biceps (or another bodypart) is a particular weakness, that training it MORE OFTEN is a good way to go, or are you more into the “increase intensity” and “full recovery” approach now?

[/quote]

Whenever I am trying to bring up a lagging body part I train it more often. I have done the same for shoulders and now they stand out pretty significantly whereas they used to be much less developed in relation to everything else.

Your own ability to recover from a workout is also a factor considering some guy who takes much longer to recover shouldn’t do that. Injury prevention is another factor which comes from knowledge of the human body, knowing the difference between real pain that could lead to injury and discomfort that simply means you are working hard. The latter can be trained through.

For instance, I was doing dips last night after having trained shoulders the day before. My shoulder started hurting when I went heavier. I know the difference between minor discomfort and pain that means if I push further I won’t be able to train shoulders for weeks. Therefore, I backed off and went home instead of finishing dips as my last exercise.

As far as training frequency, possibly the only body part I wouldn’t train like that is legs because I have had knee ‘issues’ for years and training legs takes a lot out of me.

I remember for about a year me and guys I used to train with would start every training session, no matter what we were training, with pull ups. Why? because I was weak in that movement. I soon wasn’t and I never “overtrained” them.

None of these concepts are written in stone like you see so many newbies repeating…like you can’t train six days a week or that training any body part more than once leads to overtraining. Much of that is bullshit as most cases of true “overtraining” can be directly related to food intake and overall training knowledge.

Just like the guy who started this thread, you can’t expect your body to make DRASTIC changes in strength and size by barely feeding it enough to just maintain your body weight. That is possibly the most basic concept.

It is also one that too many newbies overlook because they expect to get strong and big while also losing tons of body fat as if this is some doctored DISALLOWED ad. Real life doesn’t work that way.

[Professor_X]

[quote]der FrostBack77 wrote:

Christian or Prof X,

Would you guys recommend against starting a cable row with your arms locked out? [/quote]

Why would your arm ever be locked out? I can’t think of ANY exercise I would need to lock my arm straight out for. NONE. I don’t even do that on bench press. depending on the movement, I may go to full extension, but that doesn’t require me to put my joint in an injury prone position by locking it out.

[Professor_X]

[quote]Professor X wrote:

It is also one that too many newbies overlook because they expect to get strong and big while also losing tons of body fat as if this is some doctored DISALLOWED ad. Real life doesn’t work that way.[/quote]

LOL @ “HustleFleck” being “disallowed”. Clearly this website is either trying to avoid a lawsuit…or one is still pending.

[Modi]

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:
This is what HueyOT means… I’m not in a drawing mood but that still gives you a decent idea.

Obviously in all pulling movement there will be some elbow flexion. BUT to emphasis the back muscles you should have MORE movement at the shoulder joint and LESS movement at the elbow joint. [/quote]

CT, trust me, I get the concept, and was not trying to argue that point, I was questioning his comprehension of anatomical terminology. I may have misunderstood what he was trying to say. My perception was that he was in fact confusing the term flexion for activation.

That is why I started my post of with something along the lines of ‘either I don’t understand what you are trying to type, or your terminology is wrong’.

To Huey, If your original intent was to point out that less flexion at the elbow joint and therefore of the biceps would lead to greater activation of the intended muscle group (lats, rhomboids, etc.) I apologize for my harsh reaction.

If that is the case, I retract my statement, and do not wish to get into a name calling argument with you.

EDIT
PS Nice diagram by the way.