Thread: Banned Exercises ?

Its BS IMO... just a way for the guy to join the fad workout program group... which is really similar to the fad diet group

If bench wasnt effective, it wouldnt be a staple of chest growth as it has been for many years. I'm not sure exactly what the data is behind those charts that he posts or if the research was conducted in an appropriate manner, but that stuff works... so why not use it.

As to preachers, been doing them vertical for a long time now... I definitely like them more that way.

Oh, and if I see someone doing reverse spinal erectors like he suggests... mounting the machine backwards, I'm going to burst out laughing at them looking silly.

Originally posted by Eggs
Oh, and if I see someone doing reverse spinal erectors like he suggests... mounting the machine backwards, I'm going to burst out laughing at them looking silly.

I do reverse hypers all the time. they are an excellent exercise.

I have not read all of it, but I was reading what he said about lunges, and I would like for him to tell Ronnie Coleman what a waste of time lunges are.

Originally posted by Prince
I have not read all of it, but I was reading what he said about lunges, and I would like for him to tell Ronnie Coleman what a waste of time lunges are.

LOL, I was thinking the exact same thing.

I heard that Ronnie likes to walk across the gym parking lot doing dumbbell lunges, what a waste of time, huh? How f'ing big are Ronnie's legs?

Hey guys, sorry for the lack of LONG REPLY .. as i mentioned in another post after reinstalling windows i kinda forgot everything, but yeh... Removing BENCHPRESS as being ILLEGAL??? i cannot laugh any harder, thats like the epitomy of all CHEST development in its incline decline and flat Form... that sites a bit of a joke IMO.

He is right about the bench press though.

To a degree he is Vieope... truth is when you do bench you are going to utilize alot of different muscles. I'd be interested in hearing what he has to say is a superior chest exercise that will stimulate more growth.

I just cant really respect anybody that published on a site and says that all this stuff doesnt work... then he just says to go on and buy his book and doesnt provide any answers. I consider such tricks to be more consistant wit charlatans than those who actually perform

Originally posted by Eggs
I'd be interested in hearing what he has to say is a superior chest exercise that will stimulate more growth.

Yeah me too

I sitll think bench is important though... its an excellent idea for utilizing those muscles and helping them work together very efficiently If there was any other exercise that targetted the chest area better then it would be good to know about it... not to drop chest, but to add that exercise to the routine.

There is no way I am stopping bench press, even if it is proved that it doesn´t work.
I am no kinesiology expert but I guess this exercise is very effective:

I have not read the entire thing yet but I like this kind of "counter intuitive" reasoning. We must always reconsider alternatives if we want to improve. I like the analogy of risk-reward in that some of these exercises can put you into a high risk of serious damage for very little marginal benefit. While it is true that people like Arnold and Ronnie have had phenomenal success in applying the "old school" exercises (which I too have embraced) we will never know how many other men and women could have exceeded or matched their physical achievement if they had not become injured at an early age and dropped out.

I find the whole article interesting. Thanks for posting it.
-OD

Like Funk I also do reverse hyper-extensions...I do it using a stability ball...excellent exercise.

BUT...the majority of that info is BS...IMO of course

I find it interesting that he used an electrical activity study to come to the conclusion that the bench press was ineffective. This is assuming the trainee was doing the movement to perfection, and as we all know, it is entirely possible to do bench press and strongly influence the delts and tri's more then the pecs (i.e. delt pressers).

There was a book out awhile back, sorry I can't remember the name, that did exactly the same comparison. The goal was to find which movements generated the most muscular activity, determined by neuromuscular stimulation, for a given muscle group. Guess what? The decline bench, with the standard flat bench press coming in a very close second, provided the most pectoral stimulation. So as typical, two studies, two sets of results.

Fact is, if you bench with a slight arch, shoulder blades squeezed together, elbows in, and chest high, you will stimulate your pecs just fine. This article was more to generate revenue, then provide earth shattering new ways to train.

Good point JD... research is so often abused that its just plain whacky. Its hard to cite it alot of times as you never know what the exact situation was for the researc hand why they might have arrived at certain results. Ah well! I guess we'll just have to stick with using ourselves as guinea pigs

I guess the gains I've made thus far with those exercises, in terms of strength and mass, are just a fluke and my real world experience means nothing because these studies told me so.

That's alll bullshit. FLEX Magazine had an article simular they said Squats and Deadlifts were too dangerous, and shouldn't be performed by weightlifters haha

Prince: I feel sorry for Ronni Coleman and his training methods.
Ronnie knows his steroids. I don't bring in Coleman and his training methods when discussing upper lower inner outer chest isolation

To say lunges put mass on Colemans legs is like saying bicep curls built his massive legs.

Taken from the article

Lunges
"Lunges is a huge waste of time because while one leg performs, the other is recuperating, and you are basically performing a series of one rep sets in succession. This bypasses the efficiency of continuous muscular tension and alleviates any buildup of muscular tension produced by essentially ratcheting a muscle tighter with successive repetitions"

"Far too little resistance is used to merit working the targeted muscle group. Yes, your legs will seem to be on the edge of spontaneous combustion; so what, that has no relevant benefit beyond making you feel like you have done something. You would do better running up a steep hill or pushing a car"

I agree.... Lunges is waste of time.

Preacher curls
"Watch anyone perform a preacher curl. They have to strain mightily at the bottom of the exercise, but as they move to the top, they actually begin to relax, and even pause to rest at the top. At the top, or peak, of this exercise you have the option of contracting the biceps isometrically or totally relaxing. Muscular contraction is irrelevant to the balanced state of the resistance"

I agree....


Triceps kickbacks

"This exercise can't normally be performed with heavy resistance. The range of motion for this exercise can be duplicated and improved upon by using other exercises that have a greater range, a higher potential for resistance, and the performance of both arms simultaneously."

I agree....

Upright rows

"A lateral raise is superior to this exercise because it requires exclusion of the traps and biceps when performing it efficiently, making it a better isolation exercise for the shoulder.

I agree


Military press

"The main drawback to performing this overhead press is that the shoulder joint is twisted to its rear extreme where the bones tendons and ligaments are forced to rotate. This is called impingement. It is a potentially damaging situation. When the exercise is performed with heavy resistance, the impinged friction of the joint is enormous"

It's a fact


Hyperextensions:
Reverse hypers rock!


Straight Bar Curls:
Dumbells rock!

Bench press:
Old news. We all know the delts and triceps get pounded as well as the chest

I see you dont have any pics in your gallery Quad... since you're able to criticize Ronnie, I'd appreciate it if you posted some pics so we can see where you're coming from.

Originally posted by Eggs
I see you dont have any pics in your gallery Quad... since you're able to criticize Ronnie, I'd appreciate it if you posted some pics so we can see where you're coming from.

Ditto.

In fact I would appreciate that anyone who runs off at the mouth post their pics.

Originally posted by Quadsweep
Prince: I feel sorry for Ronni Coleman and his training methods.
Ronnie knows his steroids. I don't bring in Coleman and his training methods when discussing upper lower inner outer chest isolation

To say lunges put mass on Colemans legs is like saying bicep curls built his massive legs.

Yeah, I feel sorry for Ronnie Coleman as well. He is now 40 years old, the biggest bodybuilder to ever walk on stage (287 shredded lbs at the last Olympia), and has 6 consecutive Mr. O wins.

But you're correct, it must be due to his steroid use.

Yeah Prince.. those guys who use steroids obviously know nothing about lifting... its all steroids and we know it!

Speaking of Ronnie, he is guest posing at a show here in Colorado in a few months. I am very excited to see him, I also plan on buying his video. His lifts are supposed to be amazing! I believe he reps out with around 550lbs on benchpress 5 weeks out from the Olympia! (of course this is all due to steroids)

"The actual movement does not require the chest to move the resistance. An overhead shoulder press is the exact same movement done in a different direction. The chest isn't involved in that movement, because it is not an integral part of the process. The anterior and medial deltoids, along with the triceps are the primary movers, as their electrical activity blatantly shows."

This is the statement that gets me. To simply dismiss the bench press as an inferior chest exercise because "the overhead shoulder press is the exact same movement done in a different direction" is absurd. So, does that mean Weighted Dips are inferior chest developers too? They're the same movement done in a different direction too.

Professional bodybuilders use steroids? Do you think maybe powerlifters use'em too? Gosh, I thought it was all creatine, vitamins, and good, clean living...

Originally posted by JerseyDevil
Professional bodybuilders use steroids? Do you think maybe powerlifters use'em too? Gosh, I thought it was all creatine, vitamins, and good, clean living...

I even heard that some pro athletes use them, i.e. football & baseball players.

No way! No one on my favorite team I'm sure.

Well, I for one am willing to listen to alternative exercises when the science seems to suggest that the conventional wisdom is not as effective as we think. I keep having to ask how many other people out there could have had much better results if they were more effective with their technique and exercise. For every Ronnie Coleman there are probably 10,000 or so other young men and women who have dropped out due to injury or frustrated results. For most of us that are not %100 professional body builders and still slug it out in the gym routinely and that have other obligations I am personally all for getting more stimulus for less time in the gym. Just wish someone would take the bait and find out what the author is proposing as alternatives and let the rest of us know before we commit real for-gosh money to it. Wait, a sec… I can afford to pay real for-gosh money. Why am I worried about spending a few bucks for? Hmm, I am thinking that a lot of us in BB have a tendency to be cheapskates when we would rather put down $50 bucks to try a totally bogus product like NO2 but hesitate to put down $20 bucks to read a few new ideas. And this is coming from a traditionalist guys. Shame on you others.


-OD