Bicep training should be part of a weightlifting routine?

TJ Cline · 09-06-2005, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dAMvN

CowPimp, if you swear that by doing low volume and not targeting your bicep directly you could sculp big lean biceps, how come you dont have em?

Good point.

I have never met in the 25 years I have trained 1 person with great arms who didnt train them once to twice a week with direct work.....and 95% of the time 6+ sets of direct work.

MuscleM4n · 09-06-2005, 04:08 PM

I think cowpimp said he doesn't want to get any bigger and is happy the way he is.

Remember reading that under one of his pictures.

HardTrainer · 09-06-2005, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

Good point.

I have never met in the 25 years I have trained 1 person with great arms who didnt train them once to twice a week with direct work.....and 95% of the time 6+ sets of direct work.

the other 5 %

MuscleM4n · 09-06-2005, 04:30 PM

what is his name hardtrainer?

**CowPimp** · 09-06-2005, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dAMvN

CowPimp, if you swear that by doing low volume and not targeting your bicep directly you could sculp big lean biceps, how come you dont have em?

First of all, your arms are no bigger than mine. Second, my arms suck genetically, and they were even smaller before I started cutting out the volume. Third, I haven't been training that long, but I have made good progress for the time that I have been training. Finally, I haven't attempted to gain weight in quite a while. This isn't to say I will never try to gain weight again, but not right this moment, especially considering rehabbing my shoulder is top priority.

HardTrainer · 09-06-2005, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MuscleM4n

what is his name hardtrainer?

Mike Mentzer

**CowPimp** · 09-06-2005, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MuscleM4n

what is his name hardtrainer?

Mike Menzter; Mr. HIT himself.

MuscleM4n · 09-06-2005, 04:52 PM

Ok, thank you.

dAMvN · 09-06-2005, 04:58 PM

CowPimp, not only are my arms better than yours but my whole body is better than yours. If thats what you wanted to hear from me with that lame comment. All i'm saying is shut up with the simplyfied shit that you dont need to train biceps directly because its trash. and FYI ive only been trainin 2months consistently. and im 17. Ive got bigger arms than you in my 15 year old pic than in that pic u got there.

**CowPimp** · 09-06-2005, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dAMvN

CowPimp, not only are my arms better than yours but my whole body is better than yours. If thats what you wanted to hear from me with that lame comment. All i'm saying is shut up with the simplyfied shit that you dont need to train biceps directly because its trash. and FYI ive only been trainin 2months consistently. and im 17. Ive got bigger arms than you in my 15 year old pic than in that pic u got there.

Actually, you're the one who tried to insult me. I wasn't trying to insult you. I just stated the fact that your arms are about the same size as mine, and you do lots of direct work I assume. My arms are just shy of 16".

Oh yeah, and physiques are subjective. I'm happy with mine, so your insults don't hurt me.

Squaggleboggin · 09-06-2005, 05:32 PM

You need to stop acting like an immature, ignorant fool. Cowpimp is right. Direct arm work is not necessary and some respond better to indirect work only. There is no arguing with results. He's not saying that direct arm work can't be beneficial or that it doesn't have its place for some. You are wrong to say that it doesn't work. It's that simple. Oh, and did you ever think that arms aren't what really counts? Or that, perhaps, he's not even going for size? I'm with him all the way - recovering from an injury is way more important than spending time on a forum telling someone you don't even know that you have bigger arms. Wow, that's really impressive.

god hand · 09-06-2005, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MuscleM4n

Hey it's not a big deal but just wondering anyway, would like to hear your views on the subject. Here is my view on bicep training:

In my opinion bicep training is not important - They are a small muscle group.
Besides they get hit ALL the time.

Just loading up a bar trains your arms. So why overcompensate and do extra bicep training with noneffective curls?
Sure first few months of training, curls grow your arms but after that you are flogging a dead horse.

Approximately every 10lbs weight gain = 1 inch on arms

I have found this correlation to have some truth in it because in the last month i have gained 7lbs and gained +0.5inch on my arms.

Another reason i don't train biceps is because doing curls in the gym makes me feel like a bicep boy (people who come in the gym, think they are great, and only train biceps and chest).

Your biceps will grow fine from everything else you do, extra bicep training is 'in my opinion' a waste of energy.

Do you agree or not?

Please let's keep this on topic

Thank you for any replies

I think your a damn fool! If u dont workout your biceps directly, then like any other muscle they will not be able to reach full potential.

**CowPimp** · 09-06-2005, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squaggleboggin

You need to stop acting like an immature, ignorant fool. Cowpimp is right. Direct arm work is not necessary and some respond better to indirect work only. There is no arguing with results. He's not saying that direct arm work can't be beneficial or that it doesn't have its place for some. You are wrong to say that it doesn't work. It's that simple. Oh, and did you ever think that arms aren't what really counts? Or that, perhaps, he's not even going for size? I'm with him all the way - recovering from an injury is way more important than spending time on a forum telling someone you don't even know that you have bigger arms. Wow, that's really impressive.

Exactly. I already said that "intelligently implemented arm work can be of great benefit." The main reason I always tout low or no volume arm routines is because most people have already tried the high volume approach, and most others will recommend that they continue to do so. I just want people to try something different. The results may surprise you. If high volume works better for you, then no sweat off my back. At least you tried something different. A successful training career has much to do with trial and error.

I love how when people are wrong they try to insult my physique. "Oh yeah, well my arms are bigger!" Okay... That doesn't make you right.

Squaggleboggin · 09-06-2005, 05:42 PM

Okay then, let's take another muscle group as an example - the traps. Mine have grown at an alarming rate since I've started lifting, and guess what? I've never done shrugs before in my life. I do heavy deadlifts and they get worked indirectly, and thus grow in size and strength. You can't tell me that it doesn't work. Many people have seen the results. It's also like saying that doing squats won't work the core just because it's not the main targeted area. Your core will become much more develope from squats, even if you don't work your back and abs directly. Will that be optimal for every person with every different kind of goal? Of course not. Will it be good enough for some people with certain goals? Yes.

Squaggleboggin · 09-06-2005, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CowPimp

Exactly. I already said that "intelligently implemented arm work can be of great benefit." The main reason I always tout low or no volume arm routines is because most people have already tried the high volume approach, and most others will recommend that they continue to do so. I just want people to try something different. The results may surprise you. If high volume works better for you, then no sweat off my back. At least you tried something different. A successful training career has much to do with trial and error.

I love how when people are wrong they try to insult my physique. "Oh yeah, well my arms are bigger!" Okay... That doesn't make you right.

That's a very good point. Even if he did have bigger arms, it has no bearing on his knowledge. There are plenty of huge people who have absolutely no idea how to train, and plenty of smaller guys that know how to train smart but just don't have good enough genetics to get that big.

god hand · 09-06-2005, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kicka19

i train biceps about once every 2 weeks directly, i think they get trained enough indirectly and its overtraining to target them constantly

Another bastard throwing the word overtraining around again.

god hand · 09-06-2005, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CowPimp

Yes. For the average routine, and I mean moderate volume/moderate intensity, I would say 0-5 sets of bicep work for the week is plenty.

god hand · 09-06-2005, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CowPimp

You're wrong. You can, and will, get bigger arms without training them directly.

You can also get even bigger arms by training them!

MuscleM4n · 09-06-2005, 06:17 PM

he is right..

5 sets of bicep training a week + your arms are being used for everything else (even setting up equipment to use, you use your arms) Sounds logical to me that it is enough.

God hand you act like a little kid, grow up.

Originally Posted by CowPimp
"You're wrong. You can, and will, get bigger arms without training them directly."

This is also correct, and i agree with cowpimp. Your biceps will still get stimulated from all the other exercises done. Also weight gain will be spread generally evenly around the body, so te arms will put on size.

I added bicep work in recently however.

Ok i await your flaming and spamming God Hand.

god hand · 09-06-2005, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CowPimp

Who cares what other people do, particularly bodybuilders? Bodybuilders can get away with more volume all around because they are on steroids.

You make it sound like there Greek Gods and were just mere humans.

god hand · 09-06-2005, 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squaggleboggin

Okay then, let's take another muscle group as an example - the traps. Mine have grown at an alarming rate since I've started lifting, and guess what? I've never done shrugs before in my life. I do heavy deadlifts and they get worked indirectly, and thus grow in size and strength. You can't tell me that it doesn't work. Many people have seen the results. It's also like saying that doing squats won't work the core just because it's not the main targeted area. Your core will become much more develope from squats, even if you don't work your back and abs directly. Will that be optimal for every person with every different kind of goal? Of course not. Will it be good enough for some people with certain goals? Yes.

Well u are right on this one bastard

god hand · 09-06-2005, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MuscleM4n

he is right..

5 sets of bicep training a week + your arms are being used for everything else (even setting up equipment to use, you use your arms) Sounds logical to me that it is enough.

God hand you act like a little kid, grow up.

Originally Posted by CowPimp
"You're wrong. You can, and will, get bigger arms without training them directly."

This is also correct, and i agree with cowpimp. Your biceps will still get stimulated from all the other exercises done. Also weight gain will be spread generally evenly around the body, so te arms will put on size.

I added bicep work in recently however.

Ok i await your flaming and spamming God Hand.

Your avatar makes me think of Holocaust victims!

Yanick · 09-06-2005, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dAMvN

CowPimp, not only are my arms better than yours but my whole body is better than yours. If thats what you wanted to hear from me with that lame comment. All i'm saying is shut up with the simplyfied shit that you dont need to train biceps directly because its trash. and FYI ive only been trainin 2months consistently. and im 17. Ive got bigger arms than you in my 15 year old pic than in that pic u got there.

Hey dipshit, if you were bigger than him before training it proves his point completely. your genetically more gifted and your results don't reflect your knowledge of training or diet. Almost all of my buddies have better physiques than me (they're not bigger, but more muscular because of genetically low BF) and get asked questions all the time cause they lift in wife beaters and tight ass shirts. but guess what? they don't know jackshit about training and come to me for advice.

**CowPimp** · 09-06-2005, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by god hand

You make it sound like there Greek Gods and were just mere humans.

The difference is pretty astronomical. In fact, you would be surprised how many pro bodybuilders perform lackadaisical workouts on a regular basis. I'm not saying all of them, not by any stretch of the imagination. My point is, they have a huge advantage. In fact, studies have shown that you can increase the amount of LBM on your body by taking steroids and not even working out.

09-06-2005, 04:08 PM	#62
MuscleM4n Registered User Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: London Posts: 1,280 Photos: 9	I think cowpimp said he doesn't want to get any bigger and is happy the way he is. Remember reading that under one of his pictures.
	Age 19, Weight 132lbs , height 5'4", 8% bodyfat, 100% natural. Deadlift - 274lbs (NEW PB 9/8/2005) Squat - 274lbs (NEW PB 19/8/2005) Bench press - 154lbs Total - 702lbs @ 132lbs My Website Full Body Pictures 26/9/2005 My Journal! - Progress pictures 28/8/2005 Paint bodybuilder "Bodybuilding is a marathon not a sprint". Originally Posted by P-funk: "eat for size, train for strength".

09-06-2005, 04:30 PM	#64
MuscleM4n Registered User Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: London Posts: 1,280 Photos: 9	what is his name hardtrainer?
	Age 19, Weight 132lbs , height 5'4", 8% bodyfat, 100% natural. Deadlift - 274lbs (NEW PB 9/8/2005) Squat - 274lbs (NEW PB 19/8/2005) Bench press - 154lbs Total - 702lbs @ 132lbs My Website Full Body Pictures 26/9/2005 My Journal! - Progress pictures 28/8/2005 Paint bodybuilder "Bodybuilding is a marathon not a sprint". Originally Posted by P-funk: "eat for size, train for strength".

09-06-2005, 04:52 PM	#68
MuscleM4n Registered User Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: London Posts: 1,280 Photos: 9	Ok, thank you.
	Age 19, Weight 132lbs , height 5'4", 8% bodyfat, 100% natural. Deadlift - 274lbs (NEW PB 9/8/2005) Squat - 274lbs (NEW PB 19/8/2005) Bench press - 154lbs Total - 702lbs @ 132lbs My Website Full Body Pictures 26/9/2005 My Journal! - Progress pictures 28/8/2005 Paint bodybuilder "Bodybuilding is a marathon not a sprint". Originally Posted by P-funk: "eat for size, train for strength".

09-06-2005, 04:58 PM	#69
dAMvN Go Bench... Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Miami, Florida Posts: 310 Photos: 1	CowPimp, not only are my arms better than yours but my whole body is better than yours. If thats what you wanted to hear from me with that lame comment. All i'm saying is shut up with the simplyfied shit that you dont need to train biceps directly because its trash. and FYI ive only been trainin 2months consistently. and im 17. Ive got bigger arms than you in my 15 year old pic than in that pic u got there.
	Age: 19

09-06-2005, 05:32 PM	#71
Squaggleboggin Functional Lifting = Life Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 3,540 Photos: 3	You need to stop acting like an immature, ignorant fool. Cowpimp is right. Direct arm work is not necessary and some respond better to indirect work only. There is no arguing with results. He's not saying that direct arm work can't be beneficial or that it doesn't have its place for some. You are wrong to say that it doesn't work. It's that simple. Oh, and did you ever think that arms aren't what really counts? Or that, perhaps, he's not even going for size? I'm with him all the way - recovering from an injury is way more important than spending time on a forum telling someone you don't even know that you have bigger arms. Wow, that's really impressive.
	Push yourself. Enjoy yourself. Be yourself. Knowledge is power. Obsessed with functional strength. Journal

09-06-2005, 05:42 PM	#74
Squaggleboggin Functional Lifting = Life Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 3,540 Photos: 3	Okay then, let's take another muscle group as an example - the traps. Mine have grown at an alarming rate since I've started lifting, and guess what? I've never done shrugs before in my life. I do heavy deadlifts and they get worked indirectly, and thus grow in size and strength. You can't tell me that it doesn't work. Many people have seen the results. It's also like saying that doing squats won't work the core just because it's not the main targeted area. Your core will become much more develope from squats, even if you don't work your back and abs directly. Will that be optimal for every person with every different kind of goal? Of course not. Will it be good enough for some people with certain goals? Yes.
	Push yourself. Enjoy yourself. Be yourself. Knowledge is power. Obsessed with functional strength. Journal

09-06-2005, 06:17 PM	#79
MuscleM4n Registered User Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: London Posts: 1,280 Photos: 9	he is right.. 5 sets of bicep training a week + your arms are being used for everything else (even setting up equipment to use, you use your arms) Sounds logical to me that it is enough. God hand you act like a little kid, grow up. Originally Posted by CowPimp "You're wrong. You can, and will, get bigger arms without training them directly." This is also correct, and i agree with cowpimp. Your biceps will still get stimulated from all the other exercises done. Also weight gain will be spread generally evenly around the body, so te arms will put on size. I added bicep work in recently however. Ok i await your flaming and spamming God Hand.
	Age 19, Weight 132lbs , height 5'4", 8% bodyfat, 100% natural. Deadlift - 274lbs (NEW PB 9/8/2005) Squat - 274lbs (NEW PB 19/8/2005) Bench press - 154lbs Total - 702lbs @ 132lbs My Website Full Body Pictures 26/9/2005 My Journal! - Progress pictures 28/8/2005 Paint bodybuilder "Bodybuilding is a marathon not a sprint". Originally Posted by P-funk: "eat for size, train for strength".