Maki Riddington

When it comes to building muscle is one more superior to the other?

Your thoughts?

------------------
Exercise, my drug of choice

walter

compound is the way to go

Pemburu

I believe if you took two genetically (sp) equal lab rats and gave them a good diet. Then you gave one a compound exercise wheel to run on and the other a isolation wheel exercise.....in the end you would have a heavier compound rat and a better looking (shapelier) isolation rat. IMVHO OCICBW


------------------
On the Down Hill

TheSupremeBeing

Yes, because it eliminates the weak links. I don't think the fact that actin-myosin cross bridges don't allign optimally is enough of a factor that a compound lifts limited by the weak links would be superior (cuz I know you were gonna say sumthin 'bout that ).

------------------
Complex problems have simple, easy to understand, wrong answers.

ALBOB

I remember a similar thread from a day or two ago and don't remember where it is/was. I asked the question of "doesn't being able to use more weight with a compound movement stimulate the muscle more deeply?" (Or something like that) Is that a misconception on my part, faulty logic, truth, I really don't know. I've always been of the opinion that compound movements are far superior to isolation movements for building muscle. My mind is open on this one TSB, so take advantage of the opportunity to educate me. (Try to keep it in laymans terms though, I've only had one cup of coffee today.)


------------------
Life is hard so quit whining and go out there and be alive.

TheSupremeBeing

Elimination of weak links. Your logic is flawed because think about WHY you can use more weight (there's a few reasons, but i'll jsut cover the primary reason). It's becuase more muscles are involved. In a flye, when you reach failure, all available muscle fibers (actually motor units...) are firing to their potential, and the chest is worked to it's momentary max. In a bench press, the only muscle to get trained maximally is the weak link (the muscle that fails)...which is either the shoulders or triceps depending. Thus, only the weak link is trained to the max...not the chest.



------------------
Complex problems have simple, easy to understand, wrong answers.

Prince

I don't think either will "build" more muscle.
Compound exercies bring several muscle into play, thus maximizing the effect of one exercise. The downside of compound movements is that a smaller muscle can get fatigued before a larger muscle. If you're trying to stimulate your chest with a bench press, your triceps and shoulders will fatigue first.
I think that both compound and isolation need to be incorporated for complete muscle development. Compound exercises are great for a beginner to build a foundation. But when you get more advanced you will need to use isolation to fully develop smaller, or lagging muscles.


------------------
Just because the majority believes it, does not make it true!

ALBOB

I'm following you to a point, but I'm still not clear on the weight issue. In the case of the pecs let's put it into simplistic terms and say you're bringing your upper arms together in front of you. With a bench press the lever is the upper arm only (shorter) than a flye where the lever is the entire arm (longer). I could follow a lever length explanation as being the reason for the greater weight handling ability of the bench press, but I'm still not clear on the "removal of weak links" explanation. I'm not disputing your claim, I'm just not following it fully. Aren't you "using" the secondary muscles to more fully hit the target muscle?

------------------
Life is hard so quit whining and go out there and be alive.

TheSupremeBeing

Hmmm....

Ok, say you want to push a car.

You can't do it yourself, so you get 2 weaker friends to help, and it will be quite easy.

You are the chest, your two weak friends are the shoulders and triceps.

Your weaker friends will tire before you are tired. they worked harder.

Or, you casn push a lighter car all by yourself. You do m,ore work, even though the weight was lighter.

Make sense?

------------------
Complex problems have simple, easy to understand, wrong answers.

<FONT COLOR="#000002" SIZE="1" FACE="Verdana, Arial">[Edited 1 time by TheSupremeBeing on 08-24-2001 at 02:20 PM]</font>

ALBOB

The scary part is yes, it does. I'm gonna have to think on this one a while. I'd hate to leave a perfectly good discussion like this just because it's been resolved.

Note to Prince: That's too easy. Use a pre-exhaust or isolation movement after maxing out a compound movement. If it were that easy everyone would be huge. I hear ya' bro, just curious about the explanation as to why one is "better".

------------------
Life is hard so quit whining and go out there and be alive.

Herc

My two cents...

Gosh, what are my two cents?

Let's take the pushing the car example. If all muscles were created equal and doing the same job yes this applies, however each muscle is doing its own unique function to complete the movement. Pecs pulling the entire shoulder girdles together, shoulders rotating (abducting?) the arm and triceps extending the forearm. Since a bench doesn't efficiently recruit the supporting muscles they arn't necessarly getting the maximum workout or reducing the workout the chest gets.

Bench Press is not the same as Flys + Pressdowns + Lateral raises

Bench = Primary muscle+ some % Supporting muscles

The fact is an exercise builds muscles to achieve that exercise. (i.e. bench presses build muscles to do bench presses)

------------------
Three people can keep a secret, so long as two of them are dead.

- Benjamin Franklin

Scotty the Body

Wouldn't it be easier to call a tow truck? lol, j/k

Back to the Q - "When it comes to building muscle is one more superior to the other?
Your thoughts?"

Overall, I'd have to say it depends on what your goals are, if you were looking to build the most amout of muscle in the least amount of time, then Compound for sure, if you were looking to increase muscle size in certain areas then isolation is the way to go.


------------------
Just another day in the gutter

cytrix

so, would you all agree, that we should always do both? i mean, it would be important to make sure you work the muscle to failure somewhere in your workout, which, in the bench press example, would not be accomplished without also adding an isolation movement? that is assuming, that failure is necessary for optimum growth.

Maki Riddington

*** As someone once said, think in terms of movements not muscles eh?


------------------
Exercise, my drug of choice

ALBOB

[quote]Originally posted by cytrix:
so, would you all agree, that we should always do both?

***I would agree with that.***

that is assuming, that failure is necessary for optimum growth.

***I would agree with that too.***




------------------
Life is hard so quit whining and go out there and be alive.

TheSupremeBeing

"Let's take the pushing the car example. If all muscles were created equal and doing the same job yes this applies, however each muscle is doing its own unique function to complete the movement. Pecs pulling the entire shoulder girdles together, shoulders rotating (abducting?) the arm and triceps extending the forearm. Since a bench doesn't efficiently recruit the supporting muscles they arn't necessarly getting the maximum workout or reducing the workout the chest gets.

Bench Press is not the same as Flys + Pressdowns + Lateral raises

Bench = Primary muscle+ some % Supporting muscles

The fact is an exercise builds muscles to achieve that exercise. (i.e. bench presses build muscles to do bench presses)"

Good thinking! Course I got something to say

This isn;'t a factor of the muscles. Muscles cannot differentiate between different exercises. A muscle contracts, or it doesn't. That is all. What you are talking about falls entirely on the nervous system. The nervous system will recruit motor units so that you are "optimized" to perform the bench press, so you will perform better in the bench press. But, the discussion is about muscle growth, not strength.

So, yes, you will get a better bench by benching rather than flyes, pushdowns and side laterals (this is well-accepted in exercise physiology - the principle of specificity), but the muscles themselves will not adapt specific to the movement...they will grow according to the stress placed on them, and a compound lift limits this stress due to the weak link issue.

------------------
Complex problems have simple, easy to understand, wrong answers.

cytrix

so, TSB, how do you workout? let's say training chest, do you do compound and isolation movements? do you maybe always do the isolation one first to preexhaust the chest? i'm talking about optimum muscle growth stimulation of course, not trying to get a high number on the bench press.

TheSupremeBeing

I do both.

Generally, compound then isolation.

------------------
Complex problems have simple, easy to understand, wrong answers.

Prince

I don't think one is "better", I said that both should be incorporated into your work-out. I think that for a beginner they should focus on compound to build a foundation, and a more advanced lifter will need to incorporate more isolation.
As far as everyone being huge, well there are too many variables beyond training, unfortunately genetics is the main variable (IMO).



------------------
Just because the majority believes it, does not make it true!

Prince

I utilize both as well, and I would imagine that most lifters do.

------------------
Just because the majority believes it, does not make it true!

cytrix

that's what i've been doing. what is your opinion regarding preexhaustion? do you use this technique sometimes? i have only tried it a couple of times, because i prefer to do the compound ones first, when i have the most energy.

TheSupremeBeing

I've never liked pre-exhaustion.

Some people do, though. Some people also think you can train your upper chest as a separate muscle, though



------------------
Complex problems have simple, easy to understand, wrong answers.

Maki Riddington

Walter,why?
Explanation?

------------------
Exercise, my drug of choice

<FONT COLOR="#000002" SIZE="1" FACE="Verdana, Arial">[Edited 1 time by Maki Riddington on 08-24-2001 at 12:17 PM]</font>

TheSupremeBeing

Specify, Maki. Overall? For a lagging bodypart? For the biceps or for the chest?

etc etc......

------------------
Complex problems have simple, easy to understand, wrong answers.

Maki Riddington

If you took a person who wanted to build their chest up would a fly or any "isolation" movement be superior than say the bench press?

------------------
Exercise, my drug of choice

The Rose

I don't fully understand one thing. If the chest is the PRIMARY muscle used for bench pressing and the shoulders/triceps are SECONDARY muscles, should not the chest fatigue before the shoulders/triceps because it is performing the greatest percentage of the movement?

Prince

Pecs (major & minor) are a larger muscle group.


------------------
Just because the majority believes it, does not make it true!

The Rose

So Prince, what you are saying is that the chest can handle its greater portion of the movement than the shoulders/triceps can handle their smaller portion of the movement. We are talking about ratios here. Right?

TheSupremeBeing

Rose, read my analogy. The strong dude is the primary mover in pushing the car......

------------------
Complex problems have simple, easy to understand, wrong answers.