[quote]Vegg wrote:
I have 14 inch arms at 5’10 and 190… And a 17 inch neck. 
My torso grows like a weed, but it’s so hard for me to put any size on my arms.[/quote]
No offense, but I would expect 14" arms on someone who did NOT lift weights and participated in absolutely no physical activity if they are much past the age of 16.
Is this common now? Guys weighing damn near 200lbs but with arms smaller than guys who just started lifting 15 years ago?
[quote]AngryVader wrote:
crod266 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
josh86 wrote:
I don’t know about people lying about their numbers or not, and I don’t care either…but seriously to be completely honest for 190lbs you are weak. I’m not trying to be an ass, but you asked. I know many people in real life who don’t even look like they lift at all and are stronger than you have listed in here. And I have seen them lift with my own eyes.
His arms are very small as well for someone of that weight and height. Mine were 15" when I weighed 150lbs.
Just because someone posts better stats than you, it doesn’t mean they were lying. It could just mean you have a lot of work to do.
thats still preety big arms for only 150, what do you say to the guy whos 25 pounds heavier than that at the same hieght with 15 inch arms hah
I’d say they need to do more arm work.[/quote]
For real.
It doesn’t look like that “don’t train arms directly” fad produced too many victories.
[quote]Vegg wrote:
I have 14 inch arms at 5’10 and 190… And a 17 inch neck. My torso grows like a weed, but it’s so hard for me to put any size on my arms.[/quote]
I honestly can’t even believe that without seeing a picture. 14 inches flexed?
Number inflation on T-Nation makes things more interesting. What does it matter anyway? Everyday I know there is someone out there who is stronger, faster and bigger than I am. One day I am going to catch that guy and see what I am made of.
Till then I will train.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Vegg wrote:
I have 14 inch arms at 5’10 and 190… And a 17 inch neck. My torso grows like a weed, but it’s so hard for me to put any size on my arms.
No offense, but I would expect 14" arms on someone who did NOT lift weights and participated in absolutely no physical activity if they are much past the age of 16.
Is this common now? Guys weighing damn near 200lbs but with arms smaller than guys who just started lifting 15 years ago?[/quote]
Yeah, it’s pathetic. I’ve been putting a ton of effort into direct arm training lately though. In fact, I just re-measured and they’re up to 14.5. 
Edit: forgot to mention I’ve only been training smartly for about 8 months. Arms started at about 13 inches.
[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
Vegg wrote:
I have 14 inch arms at 5’10 and 190… And a 17 inch neck. My torso grows like a weed, but it’s so hard for me to put any size on my arms.
I honestly can’t even believe that without seeing a picture. 14 inches flexed?[/quote]
More important than that is the fact that he acts as if it is the fault of his genetics. There shouldn’t be too many grown men on the planet who can’t get their arms to at least 16" with heavy training. If you are damn near hitting 200lbs and they still measure 14", you are doing something really fucking wrong…or not doing anything at all.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Vegg wrote:
I have 14 inch arms at 5’10 and 190… And a 17 inch neck. My torso grows like a weed, but it’s so hard for me to put any size on my arms.
No offense, but I would expect 14" arms on someone who did NOT lift weights and participated in absolutely no physical activity if they are much past the age of 16.
Is this common now? Guys weighing damn near 200lbs but with arms smaller than guys who just started lifting 15 years ago?[/quote]
Holy shit, that HAS to be a relaxed arms down at the sides measurement…I’m hoping. My arms were about 14.5" around 150-160lbs if I’m remembering correctly. At my current weight of 203 they are just over 17" and I’m also 5’10" (and I have a shitty/non-existent peak on my bicep - which I am currently addressing with lots of concentration curls with HARD flexing at peak contraction).
[quote]Professor X wrote:
LankyMofo wrote:
Vegg wrote:
I have 14 inch arms at 5’10 and 190… And a 17 inch neck. My torso grows like a weed, but it’s so hard for me to put any size on my arms.
I honestly can’t even believe that without seeing a picture. 14 inches flexed?
More important than that is the fact that he acts as if it is the fault of his genetics. There shouldn’t be too many grown men on the planet who can’t get their arms to at least 16" with heavy training. If you are damn near hitting 200lbs and they still measure 14", you are doing something really fucking wrong…or not doing anything at all.[/quote]
Read my reply. I never blamed it on genetics. If anything, I blame it on focusing on powerlifting during my eight months of training. But my arms ARE growing. In fact, they’re breaking the 15" mark pumped now. Up from 13" when I first started.
[quote]Vegg wrote:
Professor X wrote:
LankyMofo wrote:
Vegg wrote:
I have 14 inch arms at 5’10 and 190… And a 17 inch neck. My torso grows like a weed, but it’s so hard for me to put any size on my arms.
I honestly can’t even believe that without seeing a picture. 14 inches flexed?
More important than that is the fact that he acts as if it is the fault of his genetics. There shouldn’t be too many grown men on the planet who can’t get their arms to at least 16" with heavy training. If you are damn near hitting 200lbs and they still measure 14", you are doing something really fucking wrong…or not doing anything at all.
Read my reply. I never blamed it on genetics. If anything, I blame it on focusing on powerlifting during my eight months of training. But my arms ARE growing. In fact, they’re breaking the 15" mark pumped now. Up from 13" when I first started.[/quote]
Then keep it up.
However, I used to train around quite a few powerlifters and the ones with big arms…wait for it…TRAINED THEIR ARMS DIRECTLY.
There are way too many of you popping up lately with arms lagging so far behind everything else that it makes me question what the hell you all have been doing in the gym.
14" arms on a grown man would hold him back from any big lifts in powerlifting unless he was extremely short.
I think it is about time for those of you who still think you should avoid direct biceps work to finally admit that the advice was WRONG.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Vegg wrote:
Professor X wrote:
LankyMofo wrote:
Vegg wrote:
I have 14 inch arms at 5’10 and 190… And a 17 inch neck. My torso grows like a weed, but it’s so hard for me to put any size on my arms.
I honestly can’t even believe that without seeing a picture. 14 inches flexed?
More important than that is the fact that he acts as if it is the fault of his genetics. There shouldn’t be too many grown men on the planet who can’t get their arms to at least 16" with heavy training. If you are damn near hitting 200lbs and they still measure 14", you are doing something really fucking wrong…or not doing anything at all.
Read my reply. I never blamed it on genetics. If anything, I blame it on focusing on powerlifting during my eight months of training. But my arms ARE growing. In fact, they’re breaking the 15" mark pumped now. Up from 13" when I first started.
Then keep it up.
However, I used to train around quite a few powerlifters and the ones with big arms…wait for it…TRAINED THEIR ARMS DIRECTLY.
There are way too many of you popping up lately with arms lagging so far behind everything else that it makes me question what the hell you all have been doing in the gym.
14" arms on a grown man would hold him back from any big lifts in powerlifting unless he was extremely short.
I think it is about time for those of you who still think you should avoid direct biceps work to finally admit that the advice was WRONG.[/quote]
Yeah, I used to belong to that school of thought, until I realized I was just being an idiot.
I think direct arm work is necessary for most, but not everyone. If I hammer my arms like most people do they grow way out of proportion to everything else.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I think direct arm work is necessary for most, but not everyone. If I hammer my arms like most people do they grow way out of proportion to everything else.[/quote]
I call bullshit on the “grow out of proportion” part. My arms grow fast as well but if they actually grew “out of proportion” it would mean I was slacking in those other body parts.
Unless your arms are over 19", I am doubting how cartoonish they appear.
it seems everyone on this site after 6-12 months of serious lifting is doing:
bench 250
squat 350
deadlift 450
barbell shoulder press 200
barbell bent-over row 200+
barbell curl 100+
each for 10+ reps at a BW under 200
all of this as noobs with no previous lifting experience or sports experience
now either almost everyone that posts numbers on this site are genetic freaks or they have super secrets for lifting or someone is lying
i see 150 lb skinny-fat noobs in the RMP forum say the 250/350/450 numbers and i ask myself “how the hell is your body supporting that weight without killing you”
When people give a number for arm size, is it generally flexed or unflexed? Flexed I am assuming… There can be quite a discrepancy in that number.
My arms are pathetic as well but decently strong for a lifter of my experience… I bought into the whole “don’t train arms directly” fad from like 185lbs - 205lbs and it shows, big time. Flexed, I’m packing some 16.5 inch CANNONS cold… They look PITIFUL on my torso, it’s rather humorous. And I’m 220, haha.
As far as numbers go… I think some people just understand intuitively how to train with intensity and drive and thus get their lift numbers up much faster than others (i.e. after a lil more than a year of serious training, my bench/squat/dead are in the 3/4/5 range). I deduct this from all the people that have asked ME (of all people) for help and when I watch them lift… well, it’s sad.
Some people just seem to get it, others just… don’t. As Prof X has said many times, this isn’t for everybody.
[quote]cyph31 wrote:
it seems everyone on this site after 6-12 months of serious lifting is doing:
bench 250
squat 350
deadlift 450
barbell shoulder press 200
barbell bent-over row 200+
barbell curl 100+
each for 10+ reps at a BW under 200
all of this as noobs with no previous lifting experience or sports experience
now either almost everyone that posts numbers on this site are genetic freaks or they have super secrets for lifting or someone is lying
i see 150 lb skinny-fat noobs in the RMP forum say the 250/350/450 numbers and i ask myself “how the hell is your body supporting that weight without killing you”[/quote]
Some of that is also likely because people are counting one half assed rep done with a spotter lifting half of the weight as their own “max”.
When I write down what I lift (which I don’t do often), it stands for the amount I do on my last set for SEVERAL reps with no spotter.
I doubt most here are doing the same.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
I think direct arm work is necessary for most, but not everyone. If I hammer my arms like most people do they grow way out of proportion to everything else.
I call bullshit on the “grow out of proportion” part. My arms grow fast as well but if they actually grew “out of proportion” it would mean I was slacking in those other body parts.
Unless your arms are over 19", I am doubting how cartoonish they appear.[/quote]
Just hit 18, so no, I have a ways to go for those qualifications.
But you really would have had to see me before I started training to understand.
Edit: I’d like to point out that I didn’t say I don’t train them at all, just that I don’t hit them as hard as a lot of people recommend. I also don’t consider things like close grip bench direct arm work.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Professor X wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
I think direct arm work is necessary for most, but not everyone. If I hammer my arms like most people do they grow way out of proportion to everything else.
I call bullshit on the “grow out of proportion” part. My arms grow fast as well but if they actually grew “out of proportion” it would mean I was slacking in those other body parts.
Unless your arms are over 19", I am doubting how cartoonish they appear.
Just hit 18, so no, I have a ways to go for those qualifications.
But you really would have had to see me before I started training to understand.[/quote]
Dude, my arms were 18" in that picture of me at 210lbs taken years back. I think that may be in your head. Your arms would literally have to be dwarfing you for them to look too big.
There are a few body parts that simply have to look downright fake in order to look “too big”. Otherwise, they look impressive no matter how big they get.
Biceps are one of those. Shoulders and legs are the others.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
Professor X wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
I think direct arm work is necessary for most, but not everyone. If I hammer my arms like most people do they grow way out of proportion to everything else.
I call bullshit on the “grow out of proportion” part. My arms grow fast as well but if they actually grew “out of proportion” it would mean I was slacking in those other body parts.
Unless your arms are over 19", I am doubting how cartoonish they appear.
Just hit 18, so no, I have a ways to go for those qualifications.
But you really would have had to see me before I started training to understand.
Dude, my arms were 18" in that picture of me at 210lbs taken years back. I think that may be in your head. Your arms would literally have to be dwarfing you for them to look too big.
There are a few body parts that simply have to look downright fake in order to look “too big”. Otherwise, they look impressive no matter how big they get.
Biceps are one of those. Shoulders and legs are the others.[/quote]
That makes me feel pretty good actually, considering I’m about that weight.
I’m a lot bigger than I look.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
I think direct arm work is necessary for most, but not everyone. If I hammer my arms like most people do they grow way out of proportion to everything else.
I call bullshit on the “grow out of proportion” part. My arms grow fast as well but if they actually grew “out of proportion” it would mean I was slacking in those other body parts.
Unless your arms are over 19", I am doubting how cartoonish they appear.[/quote]
only one person has ever gotten his arms out of proportion to his body, thats gregg valentino.