Horse shoes..
|
|
07-30-2008, 12:43 PM
|
|
Rank: Member
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: california
Posts: 227
|
|
close grip bench, skull crushers and weighted dips...
|
07-30-2008, 12:51 PM
|
|
Rank: Middleweight
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: 7th layer.. or DC.
Posts: 2,329
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew.cook
Well, telling someone they can't do anything until they can bench and squat and deadlift is a little like telling your kids they can't play with their christmas toys until they walk the dog and put away clean clothes and empty the dishwasher.
|
I'm missing something here but nobody has said that they can't do anything until they do the big 3. Soooo I don't know where this is coming from.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew.cook
Lighten the F*CK UP! Seriously, ....
|
I'm sorry but I find this to me a little much. What's with the emotion?......
"Why so Serious??"
|
07-30-2008, 01:01 PM
|
Rank: Heavyweight
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,314
|
|
This reminds me of a recent thread/argument I had. I'll see if I can find it.
Here's the thing, everybody overgeneralizes. I think these abitrary big numbers are ridiculous as well. This is one of the reasons I've disagreed with the notion, time and time again, with directing every newbie to the stickies to answer their questions.
When it comes down to it, though, everybody, or at least the person who trains them, should have a very concrete and specific reason for every exercise they do. Should be able to explain pretty well why it's done in a specific programming environment for a specific trainee. It doesn't matter whether it CAN be done, or whether it's convenient or not, only that if you can't expain it, then you are just lobbing stones.
It's a funny thing that overgeneralizing from various statements taken out of context tends to lead to extremes. So you get the 4, 5, and 6, thing or you get the other end where beginning trainees are are doing training "weak points". LOL, I could probably say one definition of a novice is they don't yet have weakpoints in the way most people think of weak points. Do they have baggage? Yes. But if you give me a guy attempting deads for the first time who discovers he's "weak" at lockout, then there's a guy who has taken more than nececessary. But there are other reasons to include certain things for sure.
There is a REASON people say pick some big primary movements when your first start and concentrate on improving those for a while. Very good reasons. But some big preconcieved numbers is putting the cart before the horse.
I don't think that has to be the same movements for everyone and I believe that the powerlifting world as positive as it is has sort of introduced some misleading notions about strength and size as opposed to having a big squat, dead, and bench at whatever cost (which is what PL'ing is really).
However, I don't think that anyone is really saying that you don't do any specific tricep work until you've reached a certain number! What they mean is that if you concentrate on bringing up strength one big compound movements in a more general sense for a while then size as a goal will be easier to come by later.
Andrew, a lot of times you are dealing with a person, as I think may be true in this case, who pays attention to "size" in terms of progress more than "strength". We can't go assuming that "strength" is a foregone conclusion (at least not yet). So a lot of times the guys here are just saying to newbies "bring up your compounds" and not to worry about a bunch of isolation stuff. They are not saying never do anything else until you reach some imaginary line in the sand. As Dave was saying.
Here you have a guy who is doing squats and deads twice a week and adding weight each workout. Now it's not a lot of info to go on but judging by what we have he's really not at a place where any of us can say he needs this or that without a lot more to go on. Although I think there are certain things that everyone should be doing...
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. or To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
If you act sanctimonious I will just list out your logical fallacies until you get pissed off and spew blasphemous remarks.
|
07-30-2008, 01:02 PM
|
Banned
Rank: Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Lancaster, Ohio
Posts: 353
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by iron_worker
Well I know dips are great for your tris but you're not going to get far if you're only training your tris. What I was trying to say was train the big movements to get your body in the growing mode and then throw in some extra tri work if you feel thats what you need to really focus on.
IronWorker
|
Not to pick on you IW...
But stuff like this. I see it a lot. Not sure where the idea came from that you should start with such a bare bones setup. I recognize that most people start on the 90% isolation routines that muscle mags put out there, but going 90% compound isn't necessarily the answer either.
Why so serious? Oh, you know... my time of the month, my parents didn't love me enough, I got sand in my vagina... you pick, they all make me crabby.
|
07-30-2008, 01:06 PM
|
Rank: Heavyweight
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,314
|
|
The idea came from people like Rippetoe, Starr, about a million others. I don't necesarily agree with setups being quite as bare-bones as some of these guys although I wouldn't get into the arugment of how much compound versus isolations.
Andrew, didn't you just quote Rippetoe in another thread? He's the definition of barebones.
The reason I made that comment was to illustrate how some of these arguments get started unecessarily. Instead of responding to anything specifically said in this thread I brough up an off-hand comment AC made in another thread. In other word, I find that many times people are not responding to what people say specifically but to what said comments SEEMS to illustrate about their philosophy in general. I.E. what AC said about Rip in another thread has nothing much to do with this one (just an example, AC) and saying "concentrate" on big compounds" does not have to be taken as a manifesto of someone's overall perspective.
Here is the thread I was thinking of. http://www.bodybuilding.net/training...read-9185.html
I'm including that so you know I see where you're coming from, in general, AC.
|
07-30-2008, 02:58 PM
|
|
Rank: Light Heavyweight
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Saskatoon, Sk, Canada
Posts: 3,272
|
|
I never said "just do the big 3!" That is not at all what I was getting at. What I was trying to say what that you will probably need to incorporate these lifts in order to gain significant size.
But anyways, I always seem to end up arguing back and forth with you andrew because you seem to have a contrary point to everything I say.
IronWorker
|
07-30-2008, 03:13 PM
|
|
Rank: Light Heavyweight
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,713
|
|
Quote:
But stuff like this. I see it a lot. Not sure where the idea came from that you should start with such a bare bones setup. I recognize that most people start on the 90% isolation routines that muscle mags put out there, but going 90% compound isn't necessarily the answer either.
|
You have pinpointed exactly where it comes from in your own statement. The bare bones philosophy is a direct response to the b.s. you see in every magazine.
do you need a 400lb bench to have big tri's ... no
if you have a 400lb bench are your tri's big ... yup
I'm not saying its the only way to go, but most people will improve greatly overall by improving the big 3. I myself have seen the most growth from my arms when I cut isolation down to nearly nothing, and row and press till they simply have to grow.
__________________
I don't do this for my family, my friends, women, accolades, pride, or ego. I do it for me and no one else, its just part of who I am.
|
07-30-2008, 03:38 PM
|
|
Rank: Light Heavyweight
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Saskatoon, Sk, Canada
Posts: 3,272
|
|
Thank you HrdGain. You put into words what I obviously could not.
I was assuming this guy is a relative new-comer to the sport of BB'ing/PL'ing...whatever. If this is the case then I think it would be to his benefit to just focus on getting a strong base all around. Wether you use dips as your main upper lift then w/e. It will probably activate more tri work but I think overall you're hitting less muscle groups then the bench. I think hitting as many muscle groups as possible (with fewer movements) is an excellent way for beginner to go about gaining some size and just generally getting stronger/more fit.
Am I the biggest guy around? Nope. But I have done my fair share of reading and watching other people's journals (as well as my own experimentation with my training) to know a thing or two. Anyways, that is neither here nor there. You know what I think now.
IronWorker
|
07-30-2008, 03:45 PM
|
Rank: Heavyweight
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,314
|
|
You guys do realize I was agreeing with you as well right?
|
07-30-2008, 03:47 PM
|
|
Rank: Light Heavyweight
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: NC
Posts: 3,268
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric3237
You guys do realize I was agreeing with you as well right?
|
I did if that's any consolation although I wasn't part of the conversation, so I don't think it matters...
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
| |
|