Pain in Arm

Moderators: Ironman, Jungledoc, darshana, stuward

Matt Z

Post by Matt Z » Wed Apr 19, 2006 1:39 pm

You may see some results from curls alone, especially if you have good genetics, but you'll get much better results from a combination of pulldowns, rows and curls. Also, even if you could build big arms without a big back, chest and delts, why would you want to? Wouldn't you rather be proportional?

Eric
Novice
Novice
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2006 9:02 am

Post by Eric » Wed Apr 19, 2006 8:11 pm

Anonymous wrote:i'm not doing any back exercises
well that is a problem but do what you will

Mog16
Apprentice
Apprentice
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 5:26 pm
Location: Corvallis, OR
Contact:

Post by Mog16 » Wed Apr 19, 2006 8:34 pm

I tend to question Stephen's assertion that you can't spot grow a muscle group, this is just based on the numerous roid heads in my gym that work upper 4 times a week and look like inverted pyramids (shoulders too big to fit through doors but legs that look like they would be at home on a 150 kid).

Matt Z

Post by Matt Z » Wed Apr 19, 2006 9:08 pm

I've seen a lot of guys like also, but there is a bit of a difference between developing your entire upper body and developing just one muscle like the biceps.

Mog16
Apprentice
Apprentice
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 5:26 pm
Location: Corvallis, OR
Contact:

Post by Mog16 » Thu Apr 20, 2006 12:08 am

If you can't spot grow, then there isn't much difference between a big upper body/tiny lower body and just one/a few big muscles in the upper body IMHO. But, I've also seen guys who really like shoulders for some reason and spend most of their time doing shoulder work without much else and they end up being super wide at the shoulders but have absolutely no depth.

Anyway, I recall reading a research article sometime back that stated that if you lifted one side of the body (one arm/leg/whatever) the other side would show 40% of the gains actualized by the other. This has me think that while it would be impossible to do, say, curls exclusively without showing some sort of development in the rest of the body but, you would have disproportionately large biceps compared to the rest of your body. A possible counterexample/partial counterexample might be a sprinter, their entire body often exhibits a large amount of muscular hypertrophy when they probably spend a minimal amount of time on muscles that aren't essential to the process of sprinting. Thoughts?

Matt Z

Post by Matt Z » Thu Apr 20, 2006 3:04 pm

A lot of sprinters do olympic lifts, which are really full body exercises.

Matt Z

Post by Matt Z » Thu Apr 20, 2006 5:17 pm

Also, it was Stephen who said the spot growth was a myth, not me. All I said was that it would be very difficult to develop really big arms without also developing the chest, back and delts to some extent.

DELETED

Daniel

Post by DELETED » Tue Nov 02, 2010 5:53 am

DELETED

Locked