[quote]danmaftei wrote:
If I ever look in the mirror and say “Hmm, my biceps make me look like a FF7 character,” then I’ll go do some curls.[/quote]
Why would you even do them then? Why are “bodybuilders” now pretending they aren’t?
Well, I don’t know, since I’m not a bodybuilder. The only reason I would do curls (as of now, things change), is if somehow my body became disproportional, a la the FF7 comment (sorry for being a geek, =P, the characters have huge delts and forearms and tiny biceps and triceps).
I have nothing wrong with people doing curls. I think not doing them and expecting to get huge biceps is a weird thing to think. I just don’t require them for my goals…
[quote]Professor X wrote:
trap_builder wrote:
Your squat example really supports the people who favor compounds over isolation exercises since one of the big positive aspects of squats is the growth it causes “all over the body.”
It’s not the same to say “i dont want to do barbell curls” vs. “i dont want to squat”.
Which seems more similar to the squat, the barbell row or the barbell curl?
I also don’t agree with your statement about “ignoring certain muscle groups” because if you are doing more rows, you are actually doing more work for your arms, not ignoring them.
I dont think curls are bad, I think they are a good option to use rarely on days when you aren’t feeling very energetic enough to do only compounds.
You are one anal retentive moron. quote]
and you are one small eyed pea carrier.
so there’s a lot of people saying that curls are useful if not down right important, but nobody supporting the use of tricep kickbacks while balancing upside down on a stability ball.
I find this interesting, especailly since triceps are a hefty portion of arm size.
OK, I am sold. The argument was won with the facts. It is impossible to build big arms without curls. It must therefore hold true that you cannot build big thighs without extentions and curls either. PS. Please don’t call the lower body “my legs”. The legs are the portion of the body between your knee and ankle.
[quote]CU AeroStallion wrote:
so there’s a lot of people saying that curls are useful if not down right important, but nobody supporting the use of tricep kickbacks while balancing upside down on a stability ball.
I find this interesting, especailly since triceps are a hefty portion of arm size.[/quote]
Different monster.
Many guys who don’t do curls will do direct tricep work in order to help their bench lock out. Floor presses, rack presses and board presses and the like. They don’t view it as a tricep exercise; it’s more of an assistance exercise for bench.
[quote]jp_dubya wrote:
OK, I am sold. The argument was won with the facts. It is impossible to build big arms without curls. It must therefore hold true that you cannot build big thighs without extentions and curls either. PS. Please don’t call the lower body “my legs”. The legs are the portion of the body between your knee and ankle.[/quote]
Have you been smoking bat shit? This post made no sense.
Have you been smoking bat shit? This post made no sense.
[/quote]
“In common usage, a human leg is the lower limb of the body, extending from the hip to the ankle, and including the thigh, the knee, and the cnemis. In human anatomical terms, the leg is the part of the lower limb that lies between the knee and the ankle.”
I choose not to be common.
The other part, why would it be accepted that it is impossible to build biceps size without curls, and not accepted that it is impossible to build thigh size without single joint exercises, namely knee curls and knee extensions??
[quote]jp_dubya wrote:
Have you been smoking bat shit? This post made no sense.
“In common usage, a human leg is the lower limb of the body, extending from the hip to the ankle, and including the thigh, the knee, and the cnemis. In human anatomical terms, the leg is the part of the lower limb that lies between the knee and the ankle.”
I choose not to be common.
The other part, why would it be accepted that it is impossible to build biceps size without curls, and not accepted that it is impossible to build thigh size without single joint exercises, namely knee curls and knee extensions??
[/quote]
You’re a dumbass. Squats are a basic movement for legs. They work the quads, and if low enough, also work the hamstrings. There is no equal movement for arms. Not only that, but you would have to compare the biceps with the HAMSTRINGS to even make an accurate analogy. Curls are a basic movement for biceps. They work the muscle through its natural Range of motion, including supination. Back exercises alone won’t do that.
[quote]Massif wrote:
CU AeroStallion wrote:
so there’s a lot of people saying that curls are useful if not down right important, but nobody supporting the use of tricep kickbacks while balancing upside down on a stability ball.
I find this interesting, especailly since triceps are a hefty portion of arm size.
Different monster.
Many guys who don’t do curls will do direct tricep work in order to help their bench lock out. Floor presses, rack presses and board presses and the like. They don’t view it as a tricep exercise; it’s more of an assistance exercise for bench.[/quote]
But wouldn’t those excercises be a specialization for the bench press?
In which to help bust through sticking points by training that portion of the movement more frequently, and not necessarily to get “big guns”
wether it is or not, it’s still a compound movement, and not isolating the tricep completely.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a bodybuilder doing a 3 board press or even so much as drag a bench into a power rack to do specific portions of their bench (set the pins to different heights and press it up, working specific portions of the ROM). All this despite people like CT even talking about pin presses in a power rack to increase pectoral development…
As you said, that’s a completely different monster…
[quote]CU AeroStallion wrote:
But wouldn’t those excercises be a specialization for the bench press?
In which to help bust through sticking points by training that portion of the movement more frequently, and not necessarily to get “big guns”
wether it is or not, it’s still a compound movement, and not isolating the tricep completely.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a bodybuilder doing a 3 board press or even so much as drag a bench into a power rack to do specific portions of their bench (set the pins to different heights and press it up, working specific portions of the ROM). All this despite people like CT even talking about pin presses in a power rack to increase pectoral development…
As you said, that’s a completely different monster…[/quote]
I haven’t seen any bodybuilders doing board presses either, but I have seen heaps do close grip bench, which is also seen as a tricep exercise.
Board presses and the like are also counted as Powerlifter movements by much of the bodybuilding world. With the disrespect that the two parties have shown each other of the decades, it doesn’t suprise me that they haven’t been keen to take up each other’s training techniques. I believe this is changing (for the good), however.
You also have to look at the way an exercise builds the muscle. Eg, Dave Tate believes that board presses and the like build more muscle around the lower end of the tricep (near the elbow) than in the “horseshoe” of the upper arm. Bodybuilders are usually looking to have thick looking muscle bellies, and having thick muscle near the elbow will detract from this look.
so prof, you then also do only dumbbell presses for chest and somehow find a way to have resisted internal rotation of the shoulder? I made analogies to both major components to the upper arm. Same for lats. That you brought up the one sidedness of my analogy, tell me, in your finite wisdom, do you contend that you can train the triceps without single jointed work, but the biceps require it?
Someone please point me to the controlled study with identical twins that shows either side of the must/must not use (primarily) single joint exercises.
Professor, your class was dismissed when you logged on.
[quote]jp_dubya wrote:
so prof, you then also do only dumbbell presses for chest and somehow find a way to have resisted internal rotation of the shoulder?[/quote]
What?
[quote]
I made analogies to both major components to the upper arm. Same for lats. That you brought up the one sidedness of my analogy, tell me, in your finite wisdom, do you contend that you can train the triceps without single jointed work, but the biceps require it?[/quote]
Did I write that biceps aren’t activated except by curls or did I write that curls are the only exercises that work the biceps through the full range of motion including supination?
Do you even know what you are arguing? Hell, is English even your first language? Maybe you should stop worrying about what classes are dismissed and actually attend a few.
[quote]Massif wrote:
CU AeroStallion wrote:
But wouldn’t those excercises be a specialization for the bench press?
In which to help bust through sticking points by training that portion of the movement more frequently, and not necessarily to get “big guns”
wether it is or not, it’s still a compound movement, and not isolating the tricep completely.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a bodybuilder doing a 3 board press or even so much as drag a bench into a power rack to do specific portions of their bench (set the pins to different heights and press it up, working specific portions of the ROM). All this despite people like CT even talking about pin presses in a power rack to increase pectoral development…
As you said, that’s a completely different monster…
I haven’t seen any bodybuilders doing board presses either, but I have seen heaps do close grip bench, which is also seen as a tricep exercise.
Board presses and the like are also counted as Powerlifter movements by much of the bodybuilding world. With the disrespect that the two parties have shown each other of the decades, it doesn’t suprise me that they haven’t been keen to take up each other’s training techniques. I believe this is changing (for the good), however.
You also have to look at the way an exercise builds the muscle. Eg, Dave Tate believes that board presses and the like build more muscle around the lower end of the tricep (near the elbow) than in the “horseshoe” of the upper arm. Bodybuilders are usually looking to have thick looking muscle bellies, and having thick muscle near the elbow will detract from this look.[/quote]
It’s funny you should say that, I have a friend with really relatively small bone structure and fairly short muscle bellies in the upper arms, the funny part is, he’s got what appears to be a huge horseshoe shape in his triceps, even though when pumped and flexed the biggest they are is about 14.5 inches. (talk about illusion).
As for growing the tricep towards the elbow or more towards the U, I think that’s sort’ve hogwash. If a muscle is connected to a tendon that is a specific length, why would training one way or another shorten the tendon or lengthen it, and the same with the muscle?
from all my experience, and all the knowledge I’ve tried to absorb… It simply won’t.
The muscle can only grow larger around where it already exists, as opposed to propogating down a tendon. Then again, I’m not an expert and if I could be proven otherwise, I’m sure there’s a lot of people whou would like to know how to do this.
Do you even know what you are arguing? Hell, is English even your first language? Maybe you should stop worrying about what classes are dismissed and actually attend a few.[/quote]
I’d like to go to the one with which you are struggling. Is there room on the short bus and enough fat chalk for everyone?
Isn’t it fun when you argue with the arguer and not the contents of the arguement?
Google “contolled study”.
Back to the point, there isn’t anything that one camp is going to say to change the mind of the other camp.
[quote]jp_dubya wrote:
Do you even know what you are arguing? Hell, is English even your first language? Maybe you should stop worrying about what classes are dismissed and actually attend a few.
I’d like to go to the one with which you are struggling. Is there room on the short bus and enough fat chalk for everyone?
Isn’t it fun when you argue with the arguer and not the contents of the arguement?
Google “contolled study”.
Back to the point, there isn’t anything that one camp is going to say to change the mind of the other camp.
[/quote]
Would you mind answering, “[quote]Did I write that biceps aren’t activated except by curls or did I write that curls are the only exercises that work the biceps through the full range of motion including supination? [/quote]”?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
You’re a dumbass. Squats are a basic movement for legs. They work the quads, and if low enough, also work the hamstrings. There is no equal movement for arms.[/quote]
Overhead presses, much? They work the biceps as stabilizers, same way as squats work the hamstrings.
[quote]Kailash wrote:
Professor X wrote:
You’re a dumbass. Squats are a basic movement for legs. They work the quads, and if low enough, also work the hamstrings. There is no equal movement for arms.
Overhead presses, much? They work the biceps as stabilizers, same way as squats work the hamstrings.[/quote]
Overhead presses do not work the biceps like squats work the hamstrings. Hamstrings aren’t just “stabilizers” at the base of the movement during squats.
This thread has gotten stupid fast. I thought it had potential to at least be somewhat intersting, but now people are scraping for an argument. Go curl – or don’t. I don’t care.
I still don’t understand why this is even an argument. Read the stuff by the Westside guys over at Elite. What do they constantly hammer on? Supplemental posterior chain exercises like like the reverse hyper, GHR and plate drag that are essentially isolation exercises for the glutes or hamstrings. Do they say, “To get big powerful legs, all you need to do are squats and deadlifts?” No, they say, “Do your SQ/DL ME and DE days, then add in accessory lifts that the posterior chain or specific parts of it.”
Why are people so against isolation? If you want to get big biceps, why WOULDN’T you do curls? It’s not like they are going to trash your CNS for days, leaving you unable to work the compound lifts. I don’t get why anybody, except maybe a competitive athlete who is in-season and truly does have to eliminate as much training stress as possible, would NOT do curls.