Quote:
|
Originally Posted by LAM
to say the least. I would love to see the level of intensity that is used to perform 36 sets.
 |
| --> |
|
Originally Posted by live2pump
Does anyone do pullovers or am I in the minority?
|
|
Originally Posted by live2pump
Does anyone do pullovers or am I in the minority?
|
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
Flat bench DB x 5
Incline DB x 4 Flat bench x 4 Incline bench x 4 Incline Flys x 3 Flat bench Flys x 3 Decline bench x 3 Decline Flys x 3 Cable Crossovers x 4 Pec Deck x 3 Every Monday. Keeps me sore for 6 days every time. Usually I change the order of those exercises around in order to keep my body guessing. |
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
Flat bench DB x 5
Incline DB x 4 Flat bench x 4 Incline bench x 4 Incline Flys x 3 Flat bench Flys x 3 Decline bench x 3 Decline Flys x 3 Cable Crossovers x 4 Pec Deck x 3 Every Monday. Keeps me sore for 6 days every time. Usually I change the order of those exercises around in order to keep my body guessing. |
|
Originally Posted by min0 lee
Holy overtraining!
|
|
Originally Posted by LAM
to say the least. I would love to see the level of intensity that is used to perform 36 sets.
|
|
Originally Posted by min0 lee
Holy overtraining!
|
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
Not really. That's what my regimen evolved to over 8 of 10 years to break through about 5 plateaus. Just a month ago I added those decline exercises on that list to add some emphasis to the lower pec line and gained 1 lb so far which is good for me. Took me 10 years to gain 30 ~ 40 lbs on my skinny frame.
Think about it this way, I basically structure that regimen like some people do for single exercises...dropping weight on the way down in sets. Naturally at the exercises at the top of the list are my primaries where I use the most weight. The bottom 3 and half the exercises in general are for isolation and shaping the muscles anyway. If I was overtraining I wouldn't be making gains every week in reps and more weight. Plus when I overtrain my body starts to shut down and I get fevers at night, get nightmares, and recuperation time doubles. As for intensity, it takes me 2 hours to get through that work out but I usually can hardly walk afterwards and am close to puking from the effort. If you think that's such an extreme workout you either don't push yourself enough or aren't at that stage with your own body's genetic limit. Now last month I definately was overtraining. For 3 months I didn't make any strength gains on chest. Why? Well I was doing 25 sets of that routine I posted twice a week, split between flat chest and upper, mondays and wednesdays. After I joined them back into one day, despite using 5~10% less weight in some exercises, I started making gains again thanks to the extra two days of recuperation time. When I hit another plateau I'll change it up again but for now this is working great for me. |
|
Originally Posted by min0 lee
If it works for you then the best of luck, thats just too much for me.
|
|
Originally Posted by P-funk
declines for the lower pec line??
interesting. I should try that. Never even thought of it!! |
|
Originally Posted by PreMier
Shaping muscles? 2 hours in the gym? Amazing..
|
|
Originally Posted by P-funk
declines for the lower pec line??
interesting. I should try that. Never even thought of it!! |
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
Looking at your shapeless upper chest there, it's no wonder you're amazed. I'm sure you do 25 sets of flat bench.
|
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
Page 330, Encyclopedia of Modern Bodybuilding, 1998. Read it sometime. Rumor has it the author actually knows a bit about the subject.
|
|
Originally Posted by PreMier
You obviously know nothing about the human body, and how it works(read physiology). Otherwise you wouldn't make such an asinine statement. I do less than 10 sets btw.
|
|
Originally Posted by P-funk
who is the author??
I guess i need to do more reading. |
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
I'm sorry you completely missed the sarcasm in my post.
|
|
Originally Posted by PreMier
The sarcasm of my 'shapless upper chest' or the '25 sets on flat bench'?
Just because you have been training X amount of years, doesnt mean you know what your doing.. and by the posts I have seen so far, I think you should read more and post less. |
|
Originally Posted by Leatherface
What does your chest routine typically look like guys and gals?
|
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
I am truly amazed at the ignorance on display regarding "shaping" of muscles, ie sculpting, ie weak point training, ie bringing out definition, separation, and striations through isolation training. And you people are criticizing my routine?
"...focusing on your weak points, so having as complete a physique as possible becomes essential. In my case, this meant doing a greater proportion of higher-rep isolation training, making sure I sculpted each muscle and acheived the greatest amount of definition and separation possible." p. 146 Encyclopedia of Modern Bodybuilding by Arnold Schwarzenegger "Isolation training involves focusing your efforts on a specific muscle or muscle group or even part of a muscle in isolation from other muscles. ... An exercise like Dumbbell Flys, on the other hand, works the pecs in isolation and lets you hit them with maximum intensity. As a further step, you can do Incline DB Flys as a way of isolating the upper pecs. Carrying this to an even further extreme, you can perform Incline Cable Crossovers, making special effort to cross your hands and get a maximum Peak Contraction of the test. This would isolate and develop the inner area of the upper pecs. Isolation training can allow you to develop every part of your physique completely, bringing up an weak areas and helping to acheive the degree of muscle separation and definition necessary for that sculpted, champion look." P.190 Encyclopedia of Modern Bodybuilding by Arnold Schwarzenegger "The bodybuilder's physique is a carefully balanced combination of many factors, including shape, proportion, and symmetry. Bodybuilding has been compared to sculpture, with the bodybuilder creating and shaping a physique the way the artist sculpts a statue from marble or granite. For the bodybuilder, the only material he has to work with is muscle. The exercises and training principles you learned in Basic Trainig Program are not enough to give you total control over your body that is needed to develop a sculpted, championship physique. You need more and different kinds of exercises, a knowledge of how to design your workouts to get very specific results, and an ability to generate sufficient intensity so your body will continue to grow and change. You can't leave any muscle groups out. You must include everything -- the forearms, the two major calf muscles, the lower back, the rear delts, the serratus, and the intercostals. And it isn't enough to have big muscles. For the chest, for example, you need upper, lower, and middle pecs, inner and outer fullness and development. ... Summing up, the specific goals you will be working toward in Advanced Training Technique workouts will include: 1. Develop extra mass and, eventually, muscle shape. 2. Focusing not just on muscle mass but on the details of each muscle group as well. 3. Creating a physique with the aesthetic qualities of balance, proportion, and symmetry. 4. Working on the separation between muscles and the major muscle groups. 5. Learning to totally control your physical development so that you are able to correct imbalances, weak points, and problem areas. P.201 Encyclopedia of Modern Bodybuilding by Arnold Schwarzenegger I think I'll listen to a seven-time Mr. Olympia over some jokers on a forum, thanks. |
|
Originally Posted by pumpthatiron
6-9 extremely intense sets for me...
|
|
Originally Posted by PreMier
You are one dumb mother fucker Johnnny. You stick out like a sore thumb. You cant shape a muscle, its not possible sorry. Your right though, everyone here is a joker, you cant be wrong, can you? Read this, courtesy of belial.
|
|
The existence of the so-called "upper", "lower", "inner" and "outer" pectorals along with the assertion.... ....  .... .... .... |
|
Originally Posted by pumpthatiron
naw hardgainer, that's just because your screen name is kinda whining that you don't grow as fast as most people. That's why we are trying to help you out with where your problems lie. 36 sets is insanely high.
|
|
Originally Posted by V Player
Yup. Thats johnny alright. Lower pec line....asinine routines....immediate slams on PreMier, whom we all know he hates almost as much as Duncan..... defensiveness right off the bat......and references to his idol, Arnold.
|
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
I am truly amazed at your ignorance on display regarding "shaping" of muscles, ie sculpting, ie weak point training, ie bringing out definition, separation, and striations through isolation training.
|
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
Riiight. A 245 lb endo-mesomorph trying to give a 165 lb ectomorph advice on what works best for his body
|
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
Premier probably gets picked on because he's an abrasive prick. You know, that same tool you meet in every gym who gives you unwanted training advice when you didn't ask for it.
As for your schizophrenia, ask the moderator to publish my IP. You have a lot of military readership from Japan? Doubt it. But if it makes you feel better, do carry on, I insist. |
|
Isolating the upper, middle and lower pecs (chest) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is a very common question and debated topic, personally I believe that it is not possible to isolate any part of a single muscle, i.e. the pectorial major. The following "article" explains in great detail why this is not possible. Credit goes to Belial from another board (I do not know his real name). Quote: The existence of the so-called "upper", "lower", "inner" and "outer" pectorals along with the assertion that it is possible to isolate one or more of these to the relative exclusion of the others in training, are among the most firmly entrenched myths in Strength Training and Bodybuilding circles. In fact none of these truly exist as either separate and distinct muscles or regions in a functional sense. Even though it could be argued that there appears to be a structural distinction between the upper and lower pectorals (and some anatomy texts do in fact support this distinction though not all do) because the pectoralis-major does originate from both the sternum and the proximal or sternal half of the clavicle along it’s anterior surface (it also has connections to the cartilages of all the true ribs with the frequent exception of the first and seventh, and to the Aponeurosis of the external oblique muscle), this is considered to be a common (though extensive) origin in terms of the mechanical function of the muscle. Thus the pectoralis-major is in fact for all practical purposes one continuous muscle with a common origin and insertion, and functions as a single force-producing unit. The terms upper, lower, inner and outer are imprecise and relevant only in order to make a vague subjective distinction between relative portions of the same muscle for descriptive purposes. They are vague and imprecise terms because there is no clearly delineated or universally defined border between them. Further it is not physically possible either in theory or practice to contract one region of a single muscle to the exclusion of another region or regions (as a Biomechanics Professor of mine once demonstrated to a bunch of us smart-ass know-it-all’s taking his course, using EMG analysis). When a muscle contracts it does so in a linear fashion by simultaneously reducing the length of its constituent fibers and thus its overall length from origin to insertion. Even where a single muscle is separated into multiple functional units that are clearly defined such as the triceps (which are referred to as “heads” by Anatomists and Biomechanists), because they share a common point of insertion in order for one head to shorten all must shorten. This only makes sense if you think about it because otherwise there would be “slack” in one when the other shortened, which as we know does not occur. Note that there are some special cases where one head of a muscle must actually lengthen when the other shortens (e.g. the posterior head of the deltoid in relation to the anterior head during the positive stroke of fly’s), the point however is that even in these special cases there is no “slack” because there is in fact contractile activity (whether concentric or eccentric) throughout the muscle. That is not to say however, that all fibers in different areas, or heads are necessarily shortened to the same degree during a particular movement. Depending on the shape of the muscle, the joint geometry involved, and the specific movement being performed, fibers in one area of a muscle or head may be required to shorten more or less than in others (or even to lengthen) in order to complete the required movement. For example during a decline fly though muscle fibers in all regions of the pectoralis-major must shorten as the upper arm is drawn towards the median plane of the body, because of the angle of the arm in relation to the trunk the fibers in what we commonly refer to as the lower pecs will have shortened by a greater percentage of their overall length than those in the upper region of the muscle by the completion of the movement. Conversely when performing an incline fly there is greater shortening in the fibers towards the upper portion of the muscle than in the lower. Many proponents of the so-called “isolation” approach to training claim that this proportionally greater shortening of the fibers equates to greater tension in the “target” region than in others, and therefore stimulates greater adaptation; but this is completely at odds with the cross-bridge model of muscle contraction which clearly shows that as fiber length decreases tension also declines due to increasing overlap and interference in the area of the cross-bridges. Some also contend that the fibers called upon to shorten to a greater degree tend to fatigue faster than others and that therefore there is greater overall fiber recruitment in the region where this occurs, and thus a greater stimulus to growth; but there is no evidence to suggest that a fiber fatigues faster in one position than in another in relation to other fibers in the same muscle. In fact it has been shown that Time Under Tension (TUT) is the determining factor in fatigue and not fiber length. In fact fiber recruitment tends to increase in a very uniform fashion throughout an entire muscle as fatigue sets in. The ability to “isolate” a head, or region of a muscle to the exclusion of others by performing a particular movement, or by limiting movement to a particular plane and thus develop it to a greater degree, is a myth created by people who wish to appear more knowledgeable than they are, and has been perpetuated by trade magazines and parroted throughout gyms everywhere. It is pure non-sense and completely ignores the applicable elements of physiology, anatomy, and physics in particular. Quite simply the science does not support it, and in most cases is completely at odds with the idea. Regardless of the science however, many people will remain firmly convinced that muscle isolation is a reality because they can “feel” different movements more in one region of a muscle than in others. This I do not dispute, nor does science. There is in fact differentiated neural feedback from motor units depending on the relative length of the component fibers, and this feedback tends to be (or is interpreted by the brain as) more intense when the fibers in question are either shortened (contracted) or lengthened (stretched) in the extreme. However this has to do with proprioception (the ability to sense the orientation and relative position of your body in space by interpreting neural feedback related to muscle fiber length and joint position) and not tension, fatigue, or level of fiber recruitment. Unfortunately it has been seized upon and offered up as “evidence” by those looking to support their ideas by any means available. Muscle shape is a function of genetics and degree of overall development. As you develop a muscle towards its potential, it does change in appearance (generally for the better) but always within the parameters defined by its inherent shape. A person who tends to have proportionately more mass towards the upper, lower, inner or outer region of his or her pectoralis-major will always have that tendency, though it may be more or less apparent at various stages in their development, and in most cases appears less pronounced as overall development proceeds. That is not to say that training a muscle group from multiple angles is totally without value. In fact we know that even subtly different movements can elicit varying levels of fiber recruitment within a muscle in an overall sense (i.e. in terms of the percentage of total available fibers) due to differences in joint mechanics, and neural activation patterns, as well as varying involvement of synergistic and antagonistic muscle groups involved. So by all means experiment with different angles in your training, but don’t expect to be able to correct so-called “unbalanced” muscles this way, or to target specific areas of a particular muscle. Work to develop each of your muscles as completely as possible and shape will take care of itself. If you want to worry about “shaping” you should pay more attention to the balance between different muscle groups and work to bring up any weak groups you may have in relation to the rest of your physique. |
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
Looking at your shapeless upper chest there, it's no wonder you're amazed. I'm sure you do 25 sets of flat bench.
|
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
Page 330, Encyclopedia of Modern Bodybuilding, 1998. Read it sometime. Rumor has it the author actually knows a bit about the subject.
|
|
Originally Posted by stu21Ldn
Im truely amazed at your ignorance basing all your knowledge on one source. Just because you've revised every page of "Encyclopedia of Modern Bodybuilding by Arnold Schwarzenegger" (which by the way was written in 1998 making it pretty dated in terms of science) does not make you an expert.
its strange you posted the following in the brad pitt thread in refference to LAM And yet here you are in another thread reeling off quotes from a book written by a guy with probably some of the best genetics ever seen in bodybuilding and whos off-season weight was 250-260lbs |
|
Originally Posted by cfs3
Thanks.
I was just going to tell him to take his ball and go home. Or... "Begun, the Johnnny Clone Wars, has." |
|
Originally Posted by CancerNV
What are "pullovers" and/or "flys"?
I do Bench, Incline Bench, Decline Bench, Peck Deck Machine, and Narrow Grip Bench. Im not too hot on the narrow grip bench so Im very interested in a new excersize. |
|
Originally Posted by CancerNV
What are "pullovers" and/or "flys"?
I do Bench, Incline Bench, Decline Bench, Peck Deck Machine, and Narrow Grip Bench. Im not too hot on the narrow grip bench so Im very interested in a new excersize. |
|
Originally Posted by min0 lee
I prefer to use narrow (close) grip bench press for triceps.
|
|
Originally Posted by CancerNV
So does anything hit the middle chest area at least a little bit?
|
|
Originally Posted by MonStar
Nice post Jake, I remember that thread back from when Belial posted that.
|
|
Originally Posted by min0 lee
Whose Jake?
|
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
Aw. Someone just can't take what they dish out. Did I really get to you that much? Are you going to take me off your buddy list now? What a big baby you are.
You hear that Arnold? You're a know-nothing amateur! I want my $25 back! |
|
Originally Posted by V Player
Calling PreMier a prick..... just like johnny calls everyone a prick.... then accusing me of a disease whose symptoms dont even begin to resemble I did....
Johnny. Ok, Damnhardgainer. Its really simple. You want the feuding to stop? You want to be taken seriously? (you obviously do if you keep coming back here or else you wouldnt give a flip) Post a picture with a sign saying you're DHG from IronMagazine. |
|
Originally Posted by PreMier
I knew you wouldnt have the sense to read that article. You obviously cant comprehend its complexity. If you could, you would have realised that Arnolds book is weak when trying to debate such an issue.
You know, you were banned for a reason. |
|
Originally Posted by min0 lee
I really disagree with his routine but if he thinks that works for him fine, but if I you hard gainer when you change your routine try doing less and see if you make more gains.
I always change my routines every now and then, the human body adapts very well. |
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
That's it? I thought you'd have a more spirited rebuttal but instead I'm left disappointed. When the author of that article looks like Arnold did and achieves his level of success, perhaps I consider it more than just one more piece of pointless rhetoric over an issue that is better "debated" by the proof of results. After all, there are still articles out there that claim creatine is a sham. I'm sure they can also be found in your personal library under "fiction".
As for being this guy or that guy, come on, run my IP. I've been stationed in Japan since 2002. It's real simple. I doubt anyone else in the history of this forum was quite as witty and eloquent as myself anyway. |
Also, you think creatine is a sham? Since you dont agree with me, and they are in my 'fictional library' I am led to believe you do. Your ignorance is starting to ooze from your posts now John boy.|
Originally Posted by min0 lee
He seems pretty big to me.
He must be doing something right. |
|
Originally Posted by PreMier
I cant believe you base what you listen to, or even read on what someone looks like. Thats extremely ignorant IMO. If you would have read what I posted, then you would have realized that the individual that wrote it, is very well educated on the matter. Also, how do you know that he is not more successful that Arnold? You dont. But instead, you base your petty knowledge off of someone who had good genetics and juiced their brains out. Do you pop your dbol with a swig of beer too?
Also, you think creatine is a sham? Since you dont agree with me, and they are in my 'fictional library' I am led to believe you do. Your ignorance is starting to ooze from your posts now John boy.As for the IP. Anyone can get a spoofer, any 12 year old with an internet connection knows that. The only way to prove otherwise, is like V Playes suggested. Prove us wrong, and I'll apologise.. but no one is as redundant, and thick headedly stupid as Johnnny.. and your starting to fit the bill nicely. |
|
Originally Posted by V Player
Ok, Damnhardgainer. Its really simple. You want the feuding to stop? You want to be taken seriously? (you obviously do if you keep coming back here or else you wouldnt give a flip) Post a picture with a sign saying you're DHG from IronMagazine.
|
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
You are really quite lacking in reading comprehension. First off, I compared your article to those silly back-and-forth scientific duels that include whether creatine is a sham. NOT that I believe that, though that should have been obvious from the context. Must I spoon feed you every thing I type in small chewable portions?
Second, any site admin can see through proxies by examining the packets, contacting the proxy admin, etc. I know this as an information systems major, but you apparently do not. You're simply avoiding this because you know I am right. I already invited your site mods to publish my IP or investigate it. Would you like to call Misawa AFB? I bet you're not confident enough to do so because you'll get proven wrong, which of course you know you are. Lastly, how do I know he's not more successful than Arnold? Gee...could it be because there are about 10 people on this planet that are? Nah. |
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
I already posted earlier or maybe on the brad pitt thread that I'll get some pics up when I get to Florida. I fly in next week from Japan so as soon as I find a gym membership there I should be able to do so.
|
| But I must decline on the sign. How about: "Premier wishes he looks like me"? Ha! |
|
Originally Posted by V Player
But you might want to think about getting along with PreMier, he knows his shit and his body proves it. We have yet to see yours so......feel my drift?
|
|
Originally Posted by PreMier
Maybe if you decided to educate yourself on certain aspects of the sport(read training), then you wouldn't be such a hardgainer.
|
| You should also know, that the site admin wont release your IP information to the public. I'm not avoiding anything, tell me your full name, rank, and IP address, along with a number to contact the base at. |
| The simple fact that you base your ideology on training off of someone who trained in the 70's is perplexing. |
| Just think about it, you have been training for 10 years, and you have gained 40 lbs? I've done far better in less than the two I have been training |
|
Originally Posted by V Player
Eh, well....thats up to you how you want to identify yourself as "not johnny". But you might want to think about getting along with PreMier, he knows his shit and his body proves it. We have yet to see yours so......feel my drift? See Im also like you in a way in that people think my own personal training is overtraining or just plain retarted. I do 100 rep sets, light weight high reps and......oh, never mind. You know the drill; I dont "fit a category". Yet my training still works for me.
|
|
Originally Posted by myCATpowerlifts
How come everytime a new person comes, who is not an amateur, who has knowledge on BB subjects....etc
How come someone always has to jump on them as soon as they state their opinions?? This is fucking pathetic! DHG, Just forget them and go on with your business, you seem like a decent guy and you need not waste your time here arguing, because it never goes anywhere. |
|
Originally Posted by myCATpowerlifts
How come everytime a new person comes, who is not an amateur, who has knowledge on BB subjects....etc
How come someone always has to jump on them as soon as they state their opinions?? This is fucking pathetic! DHG, Just forget them and go on with your business, you seem like a decent guy and you need not waste your time here arguing, because it never goes anywhere Some of the meatheads on this site need to get a clue and stop badgering, if you dont agree with someone else's opinions, then stop reading them Dont act childish and argue with them over and over He said he would have pics, so just wait and see and STFU. |
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
Then you would agree that everyone is different. Everyone's body responds differently to various training techniques.
|
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
It really doesn't matter to me who anyone thinks I am.
|
|
Originally Posted by V Player
Isnt this exactly what maybe you need to do on this thread? I mean, you're also coming on here and doing the same thing in a manner of speaking. I mean...Im just sayin.
|
|
Originally Posted by V Player
And on that note........Folks, he's starting to sound less and less like johnny now. Johnny does not have the extended vocabulary that DHG seems to have, nor the reasoning capabilities either.
|
|
Originally Posted by myCATpowerlifts
Actually, it's much different. I wasn't jumping on people for their OPINIONS on BODYBUILDING.
I was jumping on people because they are a dick. |
|
Originally Posted by myCATpowerlifts
Im suprised it took someone this long to figure that out.
|
|
Semi-decline chest presses: 200 x 6 210 x 6 230 x 5 Strict two minute rest instead of three minutes this week. I went from 210 to 230 and felt I could even do 240, but my hands went numb at 5 reps on 230 so the point was moot anyways. 180 x 10 190 x 10 One minute rest 80 x 20, no rest between the 10 reps set. Cable crossovers: 70 x 6 50 x 6 50 x 6 Two minute rest again. But hands went numb after the first set and I had to lower the weight. But I held the contraction for a full 3 count. 30 x 10 40 x 10 One minute rest Bodyweight chest dips for 20, no rest after 10 rep sets. |
|
Originally Posted by V Player
And on that note........Folks, he's starting to sound less and less like johnny now. Johnny does not have the extended vocabulary that DHG seems to have, nor the reasoning capabilities either.
|
|
Originally Posted by cfs3
min0, if you don't mind me asking, how did you break your collarbone?
Oh yeah, and the concept of you actually doing bodybuilding is starting to kinda freak me out. |
|
Originally Posted by V Player
Everyone IS different, and even PreMier knows that, but its hard to take anyone seriously when we think its johnny, thats all. If you indeed are not him, I dont care if you do 10000 sets per body part. If you're getting results, then you are very welcome here as far as Im concerned and Im sure some people will at least not slam you.
|
|
Originally Posted by min0 lee
Flat bench press
12 x 135 for warm ups 10 x 225 8 x 235 6 x 245 4 x 255 4 to 8 x225 I wish I had a spotter. Incline bench press 10 x 135 8 x 185 6 x 195 6 x 205 6 x 215 Decline bench press 8 x 185 6 x 195 6 x 205 6 x 215 I alternate dips with declines every now and then, but ever since I broke my collar certain exercises like dips and uprights hurt so I shy away from them If I have time I do 10 sets of flyes or pec deck. This is what I do for the winter bulking season for a month I hit the chest twice a week. On Mondays I go heavy and on Thursdays I go real light. Go ahead criticize me....I'm bullet proof |
|
Originally Posted by P-funk
why can't you get a spotter?? i thought you train at balley? isn't there someone working out that can give you a spot for a sec?
|
|
Originally Posted by min0 lee
I don't like to ask anyone for a spot for several reasons
1- I hate to trouble people, dunno I have alway's been that way. |
|
Originally Posted by V Player
If you're going for a beach physique, you're probably not johnny. He was always going for super mass and his "decent power and condition". Gotta hand it to ya, you put up a not so good pic, but at least you put up. Props.
|
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
Super mass on me is impossible. I have to stick with what within what's realistic for my body.
|
|
Originally Posted by ihateschoolmt
Why don't you take gear?
|
|
Originally Posted by min0 lee
It's not for everyone.
|
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
Super mass on me is impossible. I have to stick with what within what's realistic for my body. I always thought Mark Wahlberg had a great physique, particularly in movie's where he doesn't diet down...such as Basketball Diaries, Perfect Storm, and Three Kings.
|
|
Originally Posted by ihateschoolmt
I was really asking him, it wasn't retorical.
|
|
Originally Posted by min0 lee
|
I didn't mean it like that, I just ment I wanted to know the exact reason he has for not taking them.
|
Originally Posted by ihateschoolmt
I didn't mean it like that, I just ment I wanted to know the exact reason he has for not taking them. |
|
Originally Posted by ihateschoolmt
Why don't you take gear?
|
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
I think it's unnatural, potentially dangerous, and nothing but a shortcut in lieu of hard work and dedication for anyone that isn't a pro bodybuilder.
|
|
Originally Posted by DamnHardGainer
I don't believe in steroid use. I think it's unnatural, potentially dangerous, and nothing but a shortcut in lieu of hard work and dedication for anyone that isn't a pro bodybuilder.
|
|
Originally Posted by pampotch
whats the use of dumbell pullovers??? i just hit my chest but forgot to include it.
|
|
Originally Posted by V Player
So at least educate yourself on them, if not for anything but to understand the misconceptions. Some of which you have. Knowledge and truth hurts nothing.
|
|
Originally Posted by ihateschoolmt
I am in a sim |