[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
What he doesn’t need is a whole entire “arm day.”[/quote]
No one told him that, no one is going to tell a newb to have an arm day. You are taking things to an extreme.
I had a 4/3/5 with 15" arms, so all your book theory is bunk. I’m 6’ tall…
Thanks to advice like yours I had to play catch up. Hense my posts
Wow, if the main lifts are first in your session…they are the main focus. Then you do the “arbitrary” assistance lifts (curls included) after the main ones.
Main lifts then assistance lifts=More balanced physique and better understanding of your body…while getting that base from your main lifts. Winning?
This site is getting ridiculous.
most guys with a big bench, overhead press and row dont do starting strength
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:
One thing i never understood is,
why are only the big three the measurements of strength?
Since the OP wants to get big everywhere, shouldn’t he be strong everywhere?
Shouldn’t he be trying to get to 50lb lateral raises, 80lbs curls AND 700lbs squats, not one or the other?
When people say you need to get stronger they almost always mean on the big 3+rows, overhead press and chin ups. [/quote]
I agree, he should get strong everywhere. Here’s the thing: doing the big 3 + rows, overhead press and chin ups WILL get him strong everywhere. The idea that you can have a big bench and do chin ups with added weight while having skinny arms is ridiculous. Sure, I bet you can go to a powerlifting meet and see a guy in one of the lower weight classes bench 300+ with skinny arms. But if that guy is trying to stay in a lighter weight class then he is training to avoid gaining mass on purpose. Someone benching heavy while eating to support weight gain will probably not have skinny arms.
Not necessarily, and it involves more physiology stuff. There is some evidence to suggest that going heavy on compound lifts, and especially the squat, causes a large release in testosterone. Now, whether natural hormone levels can be manipulated to any significant degree through weight training has been debated, but it obviously won’t hurt and it might even help. And the suggestion by countingbeans to do some curls after squats actually makes sense - take advantage of the natural boost in hormone levels from the squats and use it to build some biceps.
And this increase in hormones is another reason why it makes sense to focus on the big lifts and strength first.
Fine, do some curls, no big deal. What I don’t like to see is kids doing leg extensions who then complain that their legs are too small. Answer: Get your ass under a bar and squat.[/quote]
True, a kid who complains that his legs are small and only does leg extensions is dumb.
The kid who does squats will have bigger legs nearly everytime.
But what about the kid who does squats AND leg extensions; he’ll have even bigger legs. and the extensions won’t really hurt his recovery but instead increase work capacity especially local muscular endurance.
The kid who does only curls will have small arms.
The kid who only does chin ups, rows and presses will have big arms.
But the kid who does everything will have the biggest arms.
And bodybuilding is how to get the biggest muscles…
i only did starting strength for a little while when i started, but added some curls and push downs it didnt effect recovery at all
So, starting strength is effective because it incorporates increasing loads and manages recovery times. It is a good guide to weight training. Bottom line is, training works. Do it without patience, you’ll get hurt. Take the time to find out where you are weak and then fixing those weaknesses (by getting strong) is pretty much the basis of training. Size, as the resident accomplished useless skinny fuck, is a matter of priorities. Therefore, you can get strong without needing to gain weight, but gaining weight by getting stronger isn’t against the rules either.
[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:
One thing i never understood is,
why are only the big three the measurements of strength?
Since the OP wants to get big everywhere, shouldn’t he be strong everywhere?
Shouldn’t he be trying to get to 50lb lateral raises, 80lbs curls AND 700lbs squats, not one or the other?
When people say you need to get stronger they almost always mean on the big 3+rows, overhead press and chin ups. [/quote]
I agree, he should get strong everywhere. Here’s the thing: doing the big 3 + rows, overhead press and chin ups WILL get him strong everywhere. The idea that you can have a big bench and do chin ups with added weight while having skinny arms is ridiculous. Sure, I bet you can go to a powerlifting meet and see a guy in one of the lower weight classes bench 300+ with skinny arms. But if that guy is trying to stay in a lighter weight class then he is training to avoid gaining mass on purpose. Someone benching heavy while eating to support weight gain will probably not have skinny arms.
Not necessarily, and it involves more physiology stuff. There is some evidence to suggest that going heavy on compound lifts, and especially the squat, causes a large release in testosterone. Now, whether natural hormone levels can be manipulated to any significant degree through weight training has been debated, but it obviously won’t hurt and it might even help. And the suggestion by countingbeans to do some curls after squats actually makes sense - take advantage of the natural boost in hormone levels from the squats and use it to build some biceps.
And this increase in hormones is another reason why it makes sense to focus on the big lifts and strength first.
Fine, do some curls, no big deal. What I don’t like to see is kids doing leg extensions who then complain that their legs are too small. Answer: Get your ass under a bar and squat.[/quote]
True, a kid who complains that his legs are small and only does leg extensions is dumb.
The kid who does squats will have bigger legs nearly everytime.
But what about the kid who does squats AND leg extensions; he’ll have even bigger legs. and the extensions won’t really hurt his recovery but instead increase work capacity especially local muscular endurance.
The kid who does only curls will have small arms.
The kid who only does chin ups, rows and presses will have big arms.
But the kid who does everything will have the biggest arms.
And bodybuilding is how to get the biggest muscles…
[/quote]
The fuck. Leg extensions may have a great degree of value when it comes to definition. Do me a favour and get some research on Paul anderson. Find a sample workout, see how many leg extensions he does. I honestly don’t know the answer yet.
Weights are a tool, it can help build but they are never the only way, even if evidence proving otherwise is lacking
Mike the bear, its not that confusing. Food plus training will get you bigger. Utilizing additional weights to load certain movement patterns will make you stronger. Eating will help you grow.
my point is u not goin to build big arms by only focusing on bench,rows and chin
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
When OP comes back with a block torso, no delts, and a 500lbs pull with 15" arms, YOU can help him. I’m fucking done. [/quote]
Seriously? Do you not know basic physiology?
Here’s a True or False quiz:
The triceps contribute to bench pressing.
The triceps contribute to overhead pressing.
The deltoids are used in both bench pressing and overhead pressing.
The biceps contribute to rows.
I should note here that Rippetoe’s program recommends both overhead pressing and rowing (for those who don’t power clean).
Show me a guy with a big bench, overhead press, and row who has skinny arms and no delts.
If 4 sets of curls will make you and the OP happy, that’s fine, throw in some curls. What he doesn’t need is a whole entire “arm day.”[/quote]
That’s where the faulty logic shows up ^
Your body doesn’t “know” that you are training pecs when benching, or upper back when doing pullups. It will use whatever muscles are available, which means that you may develop bigger triceps/front delts vs. pecs with just the bench press, or vice versa. Same with other basic exercises.
One muscle will always fatigue before the other
There will always be weak links, that’s why powerlifters strengthen their triceps for benching. If it all developed equally there’d be no point in “assistance exercises”.
That’s why form gets really crappy when reaching near failure on the deadlift (other muscles are trying to take over).
Don’t get me wrong, MOST advanced bodybuilders with plenty dense muscle will advocate the basics, with the addition of some single joint movements (like the cherry on top). But that’s the difference between bodybuilding and performance sports; you optimally train every bodypart. Some stimulation is not good enough, total stimulation is what they’re after.
If you can still make strength gains on your biceps via curls or whatever, you are tapping into “untapped” size gains. If that weren’t the case, every person who can row 250lbs would automatically be able to curl 120lbs for the first time ever…but that doesn’t happen.
Having said all that though, I seriously wouldn’t feel guilty about telling the OP to focus on general strength and weight gains, considering his size/weakness. I don’t think 6 months of gaining 25lbs is going to make a huge difference long term to “lagging” body parts. But, it wouldn’t be a blanket statement to all people seeking size etc.
There’s absolutely nothing wrong with doing 2 sets of pushdowns/curls or whatever twice a week
OP, on the topic of strength before size:
Bodybuilders use strength gains as the measuring stick.
No long term strength gains = no size
For optimal strength gains, the lifter usually keeps time under tension as low as possible so that muscle breakdown is lower (thus speeding up recovery and potential strength boosting).
For optimal size gains, it doesn’t matter as much (bodybuilders use all sorts of ranges and mix it up now and then). As long as the load is over 60% of 1RM and total time under tension is large enough (which depends more on frequency/total bodypart volume versus just reps per set)
Having said that, my favourite rep range is 6-8, and usually 2-3 sets/exercise (bodyparts trained with 2-3 exercises, twice a week) 
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]deadliftgoal500 wrote:
One thing i never understood is,
why are only the big three the measurements of strength?
Since the OP wants to get big everywhere, shouldn’t he be strong everywhere?
Shouldn’t he be trying to get to 50lb lateral raises, 80lbs curls AND 700lbs squats, not one or the other?
When people say you need to get stronger they almost always mean on the big 3+rows, overhead press and chin ups. [/quote]
I agree, he should get strong everywhere. Here’s the thing: doing the big 3 + rows, overhead press and chin ups WILL get him strong everywhere. The idea that you can have a big bench and do chin ups with added weight while having skinny arms is ridiculous. Sure, I bet you can go to a powerlifting meet and see a guy in one of the lower weight classes bench 300+ with skinny arms. But if that guy is trying to stay in a lighter weight class then he is training to avoid gaining mass on purpose. Someone benching heavy while eating to support weight gain will probably not have skinny arms.
Not necessarily, and it involves more physiology stuff. There is some evidence to suggest that going heavy on compound lifts, and especially the squat, causes a large release in testosterone. Now, whether natural hormone levels can be manipulated to any significant degree through weight training has been debated, but it obviously won’t hurt and it might even help. And the suggestion by countingbeans to do some curls after squats actually makes sense - take advantage of the natural boost in hormone levels from the squats and use it to build some biceps.
And this increase in hormones is another reason why it makes sense to focus on the big lifts and strength first.
Fine, do some curls, no big deal. What I don’t like to see is kids doing leg extensions who then complain that their legs are too small. Answer: Get your ass under a bar and squat.[/quote]
I HATE this fucking logic because I got caught up in it. No need to do tricep isolation work I told myself, a big bench press will take care of that. Well then my bench fucking stalled at the point where the triceps take over on the bench press about half way up. Introduced tricep isolation work (the horror the horror) and my bench press is moving again.
Fuck I can nearly pull 500 pounds and my arms are just 15 inches, and they were barely 14 until I started doing curls. And I can chin up with weight till the cows come home.
I got told not to do specific leg work, just squat and deadlift, which was fine until form issues specifically due to imbalances caused injuries. Started doing more leg work such as gasp leg press and leg curls* and I can squat as much or more as I was doing before but actually hit my quads rather than making it a lower back exercise.
Train fucking EVERYTHING because otherwise you get an imbalanced physique and imbalanced physiques cause injuries
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]GorillaMon wrote:
I personally think it’s just a question of emphasis (as opposed strength Vs size), typical bb’er type rep ranges can be good for building mass (especially if you are already reasonably strong, though, they aren’t very efficient for a total beginner who can barely rep 60kgs on bench press).
Also, with greater overall strength, you’ll get much more out of the smaller isolation movements which can be focussed on with far more weight a little down the line.
[/quote]
Answer this:
What is better a year from now, given OP’s goals?
a) A kid with a 5 rep max of 275
b) A kid with a 5 rep max of 275, an 8 rep max of 245 and a 12 rep max of 225
The second is obviously better, though, I’d gladly wager most people would be able to hit those kinda numbers faster NOT using traditional bbing rep ranges.
Also, with regards example ‘b’, if you can hit 275x5, hitting 245x8 & 225x12 is going to be too tough.
Honestly, some of you guys when debating these kinda things seem to be thinking that when someone recommends ‘starting strength’ or any other really basic, strength building regime (to a newby), we are recommending that everyone should do it indefinitely. Like I said before, ‘emphasis’.
[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:
my point is u not goin to build big arms by only focusing on bench,rows and chin[/quote]
It depends. Some arm dominant people can.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
This isn’t the BBing forum.[/quote]
Really? I hadn’t noticed. What I did notice on the other hand is the fucking topic of the thread, which is more in line with BB’ing than how big your snatch is.
[/quote]
The question was about getting big. There are lots of ways to just get big. And I never claimed snatching was important for anything, I don’t know where you go that idea.
Yes, strength and size aren’t mutually exclusive chasing one generally gets you the other, which was my stance.
[quote]
Wow, I know you are smarter than this. [/quote]
Just for the record, I’m not agreeing specifically with anyone else. But an o-lifter can contribute to and have an opinion on getting big if they want.
This was my opinion on the subject:
"I’ve said this before, but you “train for strength” really just means that you focus on strength progression as your method of keeping/logging progress. It is easier to keep and measure progress in strength terms than it is size terms, ESPECIALLY for a beginner. It is much easier to follow a program and advance your delt raise strength than to try to progress based on your delt growth.
As a beginner keep track of weights and try and make progress on lifts (get stronger). Size will follow."
Please note that I didn’t even mention the big movements or the snatch or anything. I even used delt raises as my example.
[quote]GorillaMon wrote:
The second is obviously better, though, I’d gladly wager most people would be able to hit those kinda numbers faster NOT using traditional bbing rep ranges. [/quote]
So you are going to “wager” that someone will increase their 12 rep max by training exclusively in multiple sets of 5 faster than if they actually trained in their 12 rep max range as well as their 5 rep max range?
If I’m reading you correct I completely disagree. While training in the 8-12 range will increase your 1RM, there are more factors involved in going from 5 to 12 than there are in going from 12 to 5.
This is another head scratch-er. I know when I’ve been training in low rep ranges, if I don’t toss in a drop set now and again, when I do, there is a huge “holy shit” factor around rep 9.
But then again, maybe all these newbs that can’t recover from adding curls in after their 17th squat session of the week can just rip out 12 rep sets no problem. Maybe I’m just weird.
No the typical recommendation goes something like this: Train this way until you hit some arbitrary line in the sand on these 3 arbitrary lifts, THEN and only then can you start working towards your goals.
90% of people aren’t ever going to hit those arbitrary numbers, especially the 150lbs kid that is 5’6", when he isn’t seeing the results he wants in the first place because he isn’t training for it. They just sit their and think to themselves: “Wow I have a 2x BW squat now, but I still have to tell people I lift, and I want to look the part too.”
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]GorillaMon wrote:
The second is obviously better, though, I’d gladly wager most people would be able to hit those kinda numbers faster NOT using traditional bbing rep ranges. [/quote]
So you are going to “wager” that someone will increase their 12 rep max by training exclusively in multiple sets of 5 faster than if they actually trained in their 12 rep max range as well as their 5 rep max range?
Yup, in relation to beginners, yes I am.
If I’m reading you correct I completely disagree. While training in the 8-12 range will increase your 1RM, there are more factors involved in going from 5 to 12 than there are in going from 12 to 5.
This is another head scratch-er. I know when I’ve been training in low rep ranges, if I don’t toss in a drop set now and again, when I do, there is a huge “holy shit” factor around rep 9.
I get what you are saying, I’ve experienced the: ‘OH SHIT, I’VE DEVELOPED POWERLIFTERITIS’…<<I don’t find it takes very long to overcome this though.
But then again, maybe all these newbs that can’t recover from adding curls in after their 17th squat session of the week can just rip out 12 rep sets no problem. Maybe I’m just weird.
If you are training 3 times a week, yes, I believe adding in isolation movements can hinder recovery, often negating the effictiveness of such low volume, high frequenct training.
No the typical recommendation goes something like this: Train this way until you hit some arbitrary line in the sand on these 3 arbitrary lifts, THEN and only then can you start working towards your goals.
90% of people aren’t ever going to hit those arbitrary numbers, especially the 150lbs kid that is 5’6", when he isn’t seeing the results he wants in the first place because he isn’t training for it. They just sit their and think to themselves: “Wow I have a 2x BW squat now, but I still have to tell people I lift, and I want to look the part too.”
[/quote]
^^Exaggerate much, lol^^
I’m pretty sure most people that can squat 200% bw don’t need to tell people they lift.
[quote]GorillaMon wrote:
I’m pretty sure most people that can squat 200% bw don’t need to tell people they lift. [/quote]
You are ASSuming quite a bit, and are very very wrong.
What about pulls? Does a 2xBW pull make you look like you lift in a Tee Shirt?
That is the whole fucking point. SOme arbitrary lift number does not = looks like a jacked up beast. It doesn’t work that way. Sorry, but real life isn’t an article on the internet.
[quote]alexus wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]alexus wrote:
a whole bunch of stuff
[/quote]
[/quote]
Which clearly you didn’t bother to read. I stated (quite clearly, I thought) that there are also many effective bodypart split programs that could be found on the ‘do this routine instead of that dumb one’ thread. I agree with you that Ripptoe’s program isn’t the ONLY thing that works.
Once we have narrowed things down to a decent bloody program (instead of, say, a pec, bicep, calf split) then the most important thing is that you have FAITH in the program, you work HARD on your program, and you EAT ENOUGH FOR YOUR MUSCLES TO GROW. Maybe someone just can’t get enthusiastic about a movement program, they want to do a bodypart split. Okay, then, pick something non-stupid and get to work!
Often when people aren’t growing they either aren’t eating as much as they think they are or they need to eat more than they think they do. If you train hard on your non-stupid program and you aren’t growing (as a beginner) then you either need to eat more or you need to get your ass to the doctor because something is not right with you.
I didn’t mean to be demoralizing, I meant to be motivating…
Seriously, I’m one of the weakest chicks over on the PW compound…
What fucks me off about this is that the OP could be more than 2x as strong as me with less than half the work.
Now that’s not fair.
I’ll try not to kill myself…
[/quote]
I think what CB is trying to say is SS is not really well rounded program for bodybuilding and if u add other “accessory” excerises to that routine it wouldnt be SS anymore. As such one could be better off just doing a routine that focus on every part of the body. Coincidentally, most of these excerise happens to be compound excerises (whether its machine or free weights)
[quote]GorillaMon wrote:
If you are training 3 times a week, yes, I believe adding in isolation movements can hinder recovery, often negating the effictiveness of such low volume, high frequenct training.
[/quote]
So, your stance is teh following:
Squat your 5RM for 3 sets 3 times a week - you’ll recover fine. Shit add in benching, powercleaning and pulling once a week too. Recovery? No problem.
All of the above plus 6 sets of curls twice a week? FUCK NO MAN, you can’t recover from that.
So, curling. Not the game played on ice in Canada, the act of curling a fucking dumbbell is going to hinder recovery for your 18th squat session? really?
Maybe if the trainee is 60 years old, but if a healthy 20 something year old’s recovery is effected by a god damn curl, he is, without a doubt, a giant fucking pussy or eating like one.