Having to overtrain certain muscles because everyone else is doing it...

Mr. Loverman

I've been working out on and off for about 14 years, and in general would describe myself as a fairly big guy. I've spent most of my years doing compound exercises and haven't spent a huge amount of time doing any bicep or tricep isolation exercises.

As a result of this, people sometimes comment that my arms seem a bit "small" compared to say my legs or shoulders or back. However I don't believe this is because they are undertrained but rather that everyone else overtrains their arms!

So to make myself look "normal" I need to spend more time doing bicep curls, etc.

This isn't a huge deal and doesn't really bother me but I do find it a bit peculiar.

Am I mental or is this an issue which affects any of you guys? :pac:

squod

Missus commented on how muscley some bloked looked, back in summer time. I pointed out that the guy had no back......... true story.

Mr. Loverman

squod wrote: »

Missus commented on how muscley some bloked looked, back in summer time. I pointed out that the guy had no back......... true story.

Yeah that's the thing, people assume someone is really strong because they have big biceps.

I'm probably stronger than most of the guys in my gym, but their biceps would be two or three times bigger than mine.

brianthebard

without isolation exercises you can miss out on training a muscle properly and open yourself up to injury possibilities that are easily avoided by doing a couple of sets of curls. Also it is a very rare individual who can get enough stimulation through rows/chins or bench for biceps or triceps. So again to train a muscle properly isolation is necessary. When I first started training I bought into the no isolation lift thing and my arms did grow slightly from rows/bench but after a short adjustment period that won't continue. Once I added in some decent isolation lifts this year I had a (by my standards at least) very decent growth spurt.
Finally its also important to consider whether a row is really a back lift or a bicep lift. It can be either, at the expense of the other.

jugger0

I dont do curls either but i would have pretty big arms, maybe its all the chinups? TBH id rather have big legs then arms!

Mr. Loverman

jugger0 wrote: »

I dont do curls either but i would have pretty big arms, maybe its all the chinups? TBH id rather have big legs then arms!

I'll swap you half my legs for half your arms!

Colm_OReilly

Does it really matter? I mean, are you happy with your training, progress and physique.

I see this too many times with people obsessing over some part of their anatomy that no one else even worries about.

Just my 2c

Hanley

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

I've been working out on and off for about 14 years, and in general would describe myself as a fairly big guy. I've spent most of my years doing compound exercises and haven't spent a huge amount of time doing any bicep or tricep isolation exercises.

As a result of this, people sometimes comment that my arms seem a bit "small" compared to say my legs or shoulders or back. However I don't believe this is because they are undertrained but rather that everyone else overtrains their arms!

So to make myself look "normal" I need to spend more time doing bicep curls, etc.

This isn't a huge deal and doesn't really bother me but I do find it a bit peculiar.

Am I mental or is this an issue which affects any of you guys? :pac:

Soooooooooooo is this basically you tryna justify your noodle arms?

the drifter

IDIBISHDI was spawned from threads like this :P

BrianD3

I agree to an extent with the OP. But the older I get the less of a crap I give about what somebody thinks of how I look.

Certainly some muscles are more showy that others. I have never heard a woman swooning over some fella's spinal erectors

I do remember a few years ago I told some girl that I was into strength training and got the reaction "ooooh but you're soooo SMALL, I'd never have thought you did that" :mad: Have had other comments from various people implying that I'm weak, that I wouldn't have the physical strength to play GAA or work on a building site, that I'd get my head kicked in in a fight etc. All of the above may be true but from what I've seen, a few months bicep training, presence of a tan and wearing tight t-shirts changes these perceptions.

SpookyBastard

Ah, the 'prison physique'. As someone guilty of doing not nearly enough leg work I can see why people work the arms and chest more. It's not about lifting more weight, just looking more physically strong.
It's just fluffed up feathers. I guess we all like to look strong and some of us forget to be strong too. Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go do some squats

Mr. Loverman

BrianD3 wrote: »

I agree to an extent with the OP. But the older I get the less of a crap I give about what somebody thinks of how I look.

I don't actually care what people think (as in, it doesn't hurt my feelings or anything like that), but at the same time I couldn't be bothered being right if it means most people are looking at me thinking why aren't his arms bigger than the rest of his body - he looks weird!

Do you know what I mean?

It's like when I hear everyone saying now is the time to buy a house. I couldn't be bothered pointing out they are wrong because for whatever reason that makes me the dick.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Hanley wrote: »

Soooooooooooo is this basically you tryna justify your noodle arms?

Nope, he's tell us we're over training our's :P

Degsy

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

I don't actually care what people think (as in, it doesn't hurt my feelings or anything like that), but at the same time I couldn't be bothered being right if it means most people are looking at me thinking why aren't his arms bigger than the rest of his body - he looks weird!

Do you know what I mean?

It's like when I hear everyone saying now is the time to buy a house. I couldn't be bothered pointing out they are wrong because for whatever reason that makes me the dick.

Er..yeah

d'Oracle

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

It's like when I hear everyone saying now is the time to buy a house. I couldn't be bothered pointing out they are wrong because for whatever reason that makes me the dick.

No that makes you a hero.
They are the dicks.

Degsy

d'Oracle wrote: »

No that makes you a hero.
They are the dicks.

True

SanoVitae

d'Oracle wrote: »

No that makes you a hero.

What kind of hero exactly? Rentaghost perhaps?

Zamboni

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

As a result of this, people sometimes comment that my arms seem a bit "small" compared to say my legs or shoulders or back. However I don't believe this is because they are undertrained but rather that everyone else overtrains their arms!

You defo need to build up those noodles

kevpants

I'm the president of the No Arms'n'Calves Club!

The smug cocky blokes with the biceps and the BabyGAP t-shirts aren't half as smug as I am because I know...

I know it's all a front, your time has been wasted and your muscles are useless for anything other than performing the exact movement you did to train them.

*evil laugh*

You are the Hyundai Coupé



I did once get asked

"You wouldn't be as strong as him would you"

about a 10stone 19 year old bicep flaunter with a 26 inch waist. I hung my head in shame, then I saw my awesome quads and I was ok again.

dartstothesea

Haha. Calves would be a guity pleasure of mine. Props to anyone who's built those up.

Lantus

It all depends on what you want and your goals with regards to your body shape.

I think too many men fall into the trap of working the upper body, in particular the chest and biceps (guns...) to look the biz and neglect almost everything else.

I have never had to wait for the leg press, hack squat or leg raise machines in my gym for example.

Yes I do bicep curls, BUT, they are just one small part of a total body strength workoout done over a week.

Personally I want a healthy body and a well rounded look. Having good legs is just as important for the beach as good arms, unless your thinking of keeping your jeans on?

Don't get bullied into fashionable and possibly bad training routines to meet social pressure. Stay focussed on your on goals and work hard to achieve them.

Degsy

Lantus wrote: »

Don't get bullied into fashionable and possibly bad training routines to meet social pressure. Stay focussed on your on goals and work hard to achieve them.

Yes m'am.

COH

Whats wrong with training your arms?

Hanley

COH wrote: »

Whats wrong with training your arms?

It's anti-cool.

Nothing wrong with it like. If you don't want to be cool.

Armedocr

I'd much rather giant triceps than biceps. That's where the size comes from

brianthebard

Armedocr wrote: »

I'd much rather giant triceps than biceps.

Better do some isolation arm exercises so....

Armedocr

Just finished up squat day with some skull crushers

COH

Hanley wrote: »

It's anti-cool.

Nothing wrong with it like. If you don't want to be cool.

I used to be with it, but then they changed what "it" was. Now, what I'm with isn't it, and what's "it" seems weird and scary to me.

d'Oracle

This thread is odd.

It also isn't.

I'm not sure which is worse.

SpookyBastard

COH wrote: »

Whats wrong with training your arms?

I think its training your arms and hardly training anything else really.
Currently my noodley arms are just as noodley as the rest of me :rolleyes:

Brian?

kevpants wrote: »

I'm the president of the No Arms'n'Calves Club!

The smug cocky blokes with the biceps and the BabyGAP t-shirts aren't half as smug as I am because I know...

I know it's all a front, your time has been wasted and your muscles are useless for anything other than performing the exact movement you did to train them.

*evil laugh*

You are the Hyundai Coupé



I did once get asked

"You wouldn't be as strong as him would you"

about a 10stone 19 year old bicep flaunter with a 26 inch waist. I hung my head in shame, then I saw my awesome quads and I was ok again.

You really needed to finish that Hyundai Coupé analogy there.

As in:

"You are the Hyundai Coupé, I am the bulldozer".

Or in my case, dump truck .

Brian?

Hanley wrote: »

It's anti-cool.

Nothing wrong with it like. If you don't want to be cool.

Worse, arm training is not functional and a waste of time. Except if you want big arms that is, then you need to do it in a dark room with the curtains drawn.

Or in a squat rack while your mates watch. Now that's cool.

COH

briankeating wrote: »

Worse, arm training is not functional and a waste of time. Except if you want big arms that is, then you need to do it in a dark room with the curtains drawn.

Or in a squat rack while your mates watch. Now that's cool.

At what point will having bigger/stronger arms take away from any other part of your training?

Brian?

COH wrote: »

At what point will having bigger/stronger arms take away from any other part of your training?

It won't, ever.

Mr. Loverman

briankeating wrote: »

It won't, ever.

I don't fully agree with that. I'll use the example brainthebard mentioned earlier: if you have very powerful arms, how much of your rows will be working out your biceps? Probably more than someone with weak ass arms.

Mr. Loverman

briankeating wrote: »

It won't, ever.

I don't fully agree with that. I'll use the example brainthebard mentioned earlier: if you have very powerful arms, will they take over when you're doing rows so you end up working your biceps more than your back?

COH

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

I don't fully agree with that. I'll use the example brainthebard mentioned earlier: if you have very powerful arms, will they take over when you're doing rows so you end up working your biceps more than your back?

I dont think that was the point he was making, he said he saw some arm development from doing rows, and more from adding in isolation movements.

And to answer your question with a question.. If you do the exercise correctly, then why would your arms 'take over'? Would your deadlift suffer from having stronger hamstrings?

Armedocr

This is gonna be vague as f**k but I remember one powerlifter on elite saying that he never trained arms. Then was doing some kinda lift one day and tore something in his arm, bicep maybe, because they were so much weaker than the rest of his body.

Scuba Ste

Armedocr wrote: »

This is gonna be vague as f**k but I remember one powerlifter on elite saying that he never trained arms. Then was doing some kinda lift one day and tore something in his arm, bicep maybe, because they were so much weaker than the rest of his body.

Was it a deadlift. Can happen using on your supinated arm using a mixed grip, dunno if it has to do with weak biceps though.

Like it or lump it big arms and particularly big biceps are always gonna be a sign that you train. Its what most people notice. And a few curls doesn't take that much effort or that long to do anyway.

brianthebard

Scuba Ste wrote: »

Was it a deadlift. Can happen using on your supinated arm using a mixed grip, dunno if it has to do with weak biceps though.

No he hurt himself doing a curl, after not doing them for ages. don't think he was a powerlifter either, the correct term is dumbass.....

Mr. Loverman

COH wrote: »

I dont think that was the point he was making, he said he saw some arm development from doing rows, and more from adding in isolation movements.

OK I may have misunderstood.

COH wrote: »

And to answer your question with a question.. If you do the exercise correctly, then why would your arms 'take over'? Would your deadlift suffer from having stronger hamstrings?

I remember reading in Schwarzenegger's "bible" that if you are doing an exercise which say uses two muscle groups, and one of the groups of muscles are much stronger than the other, the stronger group will be used a lot more than the weaker group. This assumes of course you are lifting very heavy weight.

rubadub

COH wrote: »

At what point will having bigger/stronger arms take away from any other part of your training?

1. If getting those larger arms meant a lot of time was used up which could have been better used. Some people might just dedicate 30-60mins a week to strength training, if it is 90% of that time spent doing arm training it could be seen as "taking away" from other parts of training.

2. If time was no issue then the added weight could be an issue. e.g. for marathon runners. Gymnasts would be the opposite, some neglecting leg work to have a better strength to weight ratio.

From a gymnastics forum.

PHILIP wrote:

Losing Muscle
I am surprised to not see this question on here already given the nature of the sport.

I was wondering if anyone else had tried to reduce the amount of muscle on their legs to improve their strength to weight ratio. I used to squat full ROM and olympic lift twice a week and sometimes feel I am one lunge away from my legs exploding. I believe I am at the higher end of average size.

Has anyone had any experience with this or tried to reduce leg muscle mass?

One Russian Olympic Champion was not even allowed to ride a bicycle by his coach for fear of excessive hip/leg hypertrophy let alone even glance at a squat rack. On the other hand, a good friend of mine is a former Chinese Olympic Champion who was required to perform full ROM squats (ATG) twice per week with double bodyweight.

An arm wrestler might neglect his legs and his non working arm so he can compete in lower weight classes.

Personally I do proportionately more upperbody work than most here would, I am not competing in lifting contests so train what I feel I benefits me in daily life, I only dedicate so much time to it a week so spend it how I feel is best. The way I also see it is that I am already training my legs all day long, I cycle and walk around. In my work leg strength has never been much of an issue for me, if it was I would train them more, whereas arm strength is often a limiting factor, e.g. yesterday I had to go spend 5 mins finding a spanner to undo a nut some beast had handtightened. And having stronger arms means many tasks are done in a fraction of the time.

People slag "chicken legs", but chickens get around just fine on them! I expect if the average untrained person broke their leg and arm and did not use them for a month that they would lose a higher % of muscle mass from their legs (note I say %). I would expect this because the majority of people are walking about training their legs, so they could expect relatively more atrophy.

COH

rubadub wrote: »

1. If getting those larger arms meant a lot of time was used up which could have been better used. Some people might just dedicate 30-60mins a week to strength training, if it is 90% of that time spent doing arm training it could be seen as "taking away" from other parts of training.

Some people, lets just assume we're talking about the average gym goer here and not olympians, pro athletes or arm-wrestlers. I get the argument in that context.

For example, I'm not saying people should curl instead of deadlift, I'm just saying you can effectively do both. If you have big arms, you can have big legs too, its not necessarily a sign that someone has wasted their time in the gym and doesn't squat ever.

If you deadlift consistently and never do any arm work you'll most likely have a solid deadlift, thats fine. Deadlifting is awesome. If you deadlift consistently and do arm work too you'll most likely have a solid deadlift, and better arms. Given the option between the two I imagine most people would choose the latter thats all.

Brian?

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

I don't fully agree with that. I'll use the example brainthebard mentioned earlier: if you have very powerful arms, will they take over when you're doing rows so you end up working your biceps more than your back?

I don't agree with that at all. If you have stronger arms then you can row more, therefore you're stronger. Isn't being stronger the whole point?

Brian?

COH wrote: »

Some people, lets just assume we're talking about the average gym goer here and not olympians, pro athletes or arm-wrestlers. I get the argument in that context.

For example, I'm not saying people should curl instead of deadlift, I'm just saying you can effectively do both. If you have big arms, you can have big legs too, its not necessarily a sign that someone has wasted their time in the gym and doesn't squat ever.

If you deadlift consistently and never do any arm work you'll most likely have a solid deadlift, thats fine. Deadlifting is awesome. If you deadlift consistently and do arm work too you'll most likely have a solid deadlift, and better arms. Given the option between the two I imagine most people would choose the latter thats all.

I completly agree with that, there is nothing wrong with training your arms, nothing at all. The same goes for ab training.

The problem is when you dedicate too much time to it. For me, a whole day dedicated to arms is a waste of time.

Mr. Loverman

briankeating wrote: »

I don't agree with that at all. If you have stronger arms then you can row more, therefore you're stronger. Isn't being stronger the whole point?

Well my opinion on this is based on what Schwarzenegger said.

Based on my own experience I agree with him. Btw I think everyone's bodies are different. So what works for me may not work for you, and vice versa.

Hanley

Scuba Ste wrote: »

Was it a deadlift. Can happen using on your supinated arm using a mixed grip, dunno if it has to do with weak biceps though.

Like it or lump it big arms and particularly big biceps are always gonna be a sign that you train. Its what most people notice. And a few curls doesn't take that much effort or that long to do anyway.

brianthebard wrote: »

No he hurt himself doing a curl, after not doing them for ages. don't think he was a powerlifter either, the correct term is dumbass.....

This.

And training biceps will stop sore elbows. I train my arms because I want them to be bigger. If you don't want to have you illusions shattered, then I REALLY train them to protect my elbows.

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

I remember reading in Schwarzenegger's "bible" that if you are doing an exercise which say uses two muscle groups, and one of the groups of muscles are much stronger than the other, the stronger group will be used a lot more than the weaker group. This assumes of course you are lifting very heavy weight.

There's WAY too much vagueness in that. What's "very heavy", so what if something "takes over"?

If you're rowing and your biceps take over, you're rowing wrong.

If your biceps take over anyway, do more isolated lat work. Get your lats to a comparable strength level and win all around.

Simples.

Sangre

Very recently starting training biceps specifically twice a weak. They were far too puny compared to my triceps.

Mr. Loverman

Hanley wrote: »

If you're rowing and your biceps take over, you're rowing wrong.

If your biceps take over anyway, do more isolated lat work. Get your lats to a comparable strength level and win all around.

Yeah but all my comments are in the context of this topic. I am talking about a situation where you are purposefully trying to make your arms as strong and big as possible so your physique is unbalanced.

Brian?

Hanley wrote: »

If you're rowing and your biceps take over, you're rowing wrong.

If your biceps take over anyway, do more isolated lat work. Get your lats to a comparable strength level and win all around.

Simples.

What would one do for Isolated Lat work? Straight armed pushdowns?

Hanley

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Yeah but all my comments are in the context of this topic. I am talking about a situation where you are purposefully trying to make your arms as strong and big as possible so your physique is unbalanced.

How is that any better than not training your arms so they're small and weak, and you're physique is unbalanced?