# Banging my head against a brick wall



## markymark102102 (Dec 17, 2008)

Hi there i'm a newbie to the forum world....

Could someone please give me a few pointers please..........

Last year i lost 91/2 stone from 22 stone down to 12 stone 7... great you would say and yes i feel 100 times better for it....Done it on lighter life...

O.K problem is i hated being a whimpy skinny bloke so i have since feb tried to bulk up the correct way...

Its been a strange journey since then. i just want a nice size not huge but a good pair of arms and some shoulders....

O.k so its been 1gram of protein per lb of body weight and low gi carbs all the text book things.. i'm not a drinker really and have tried creatine/glutamine/whey... i'm currently using Whey fx and glutamine peps..... My chest is doing o.k but my arms are really slow in groath..

i do Tae kwondo 2x week for cardio and do mainly the compound moves 3-4 sets max 10, bent over rows/squats/deadlift/bench press/lat pull down/dumbell fly/and dumbell curls/tricep pull downs.....

In the gym my muscles look lovely as soon as i come out they look like deflated tyres...

i feel i am doing all the basics.. nutrition/training rest but my arms won't grow...can someone give me some pointers please as to getting bigger arms a fool proff method please... Forever in your debt...


----------



## minilh (Jan 13, 2009)

unfortunately the body is very difficult to build and even more difficult to hang onto any gains that you have made. Train heavy, your routine should be complete in 1 hour or less. then get out of the gym, rest, recover and grow. If you persevere you should see good results. Recovery time is very important, if you are overtraining this could be the reason for lack of growth. RECOVER AND GROW extra rest time is normally all that is required


----------



## crazycal1 (Sep 21, 2005)

are you doing squats and deads matey.

expect to add 10-14lbs over youre entire body to gain an inch on your arms....

sounds odd to squat for big arms but oh so true....

congrats on the massive weight loss..

why not post your training routine up...


----------



## minilh (Jan 13, 2009)

If anybody else is striving for big arms read what crazycal has just posted, it is the best advice that you could ever receive. SQUAT FOR BIG ARMS


----------



## crazycal1 (Sep 21, 2005)

HOW TO SQUAT FOR HUGE ARMS

By Stuart McRobert

Adapted from his best-selling book BRAWN

To build muscle mass, you must increase strength. It�s that simple. You will never get huge arms, a monstrous back, a thick chest, or massive legs without lifting heavy weights. I know that probably doesn�t come as a revelation to anyone. But despite how obvious it seems, far too many people (and not just beginners) neglect power training and rarely make increasing the weights lifted in each successive workout a priority. You must get strong in the basic mass building exercises to bring about a significant increase in muscle size. One of the biggest mistakes typical bodybuilders make is when they implement specialization routines before they have the right to use them.

It constantly amazes me just how many neophytes (beginners), near neophytes, and other insufficiently developed bodybuilders plunge into single-body part specialization programs in the desperate attempt to build big arms. I don�t fault them for wanting big arms, but their approach to getting them is flawed. For the typical bodybuilder who is miles away from squatting 1 � times their bodyweight for 20 reps (if you weigh 180 lbs., that means 20 reps with 270 lbs.), an arm specialization program is utterly inappropriate and useless.

The strength and development needed to squat well over 1 � times bodyweight for 20 reps will build bigger arms faster then focusing on biceps and triceps training with isolation exercises. Even though squats are primarily a leg exercise, they stress and stimulate the entire body. But more importantly, if you are able to handle heavy weights in the squat, it logically follows that the rest of your body will undoubtedly be proportionally developed. It�s a rare case that you would be able to squat 1 � times your bodyweight and not have a substantial amount of upper body muscle mass.

This is not to say that you don�t need to train arms, and squats alone will cause massive upper body growth. You will still work every body part, but you must focus on squats, deadlifts, and rows�the exercises that develop the legs, hips, and back. Once you master the power movements and are able to handle impressive poundages on those lifts, the strength and muscle you gain will translate into greater weights used in arm, shoulder and chest exercises.

In every gym I�ve ever visited or trained in, there were countless teenage boys blasting away on routines, dominated by arm exercises, in the attempt to build arms like their idols. In the �70s, they wanted arms like Arnold Schwarzenegger, in the �80s Robby Robinson was a favorite and currently Mr. Olympia, Ronnie Coleman, has set the standard everyone wants to achieve. Unfortunately the 3 aforementioned men as well as most other top bodybuilders have arm development far beyond the reach of the average (or even above average) weight trainer. But arm size can be increased. However, not in the way young trainers, with physiques that don�t even have the faintest resemblance to those of bodybuilders are attempting to make progress. Thin arms, connected to narrow shoulders, fixed to shallow chest, joined to frail backs and skinny legs, don�t need body part specialization programs. Let�s not have skewed priorities. Let�s not try to put icing on the cake before the cake has been baked.

Priorities

Trying to stimulate a substantial increase in size in a single body part, without first having the main structures of the body in pretty impressive condition, is to have turned bodybuilding upside-down, inside-out and back to front.

The typical bodybuilder simply isn�t going to get much meat on his arms, calves, shoulders, pectorals and neck unless he first builds a considerable amount of muscle around the thighs, hips and back. It simply isn�t possible�for the typical drug-free bodybuilder, that is�to add much if any size to the small areas unless the big areas are already becoming substantial.

There�s a knock-on (additive) effect from the efforts to add substantial size to the thigh, hip and back structure (closely followed by upper body pushing structure-pecs and delts). The smaller muscle groups, like the biceps, and triceps will progress in size (so long as you don�t totally neglect them) pretty much in proportion to the increase in size of the big areas. It�s not a case of getting big and strong thighs, hips, back and upper-body pushing structure with everything else staying put. Far from it. As the thigh, hip, back and upper-body pushing structure grows, so does everything else. Work hard on squats and deadlifts, in addition to bench presses, overhead presses and some type of row or pulldown. Then you can add a little isolation work�curls, calf raises and neck work (but not all of this at every workout).

The �Driver�

The key point is that the �engine� that drives the gains in the small areas is the progress being made in the big areas. If you take it easy on the thigh and back you will, generally speaking, have trouble making gains in the other exercises, no matter how hard you work the latter.

All this isn�t to say just do squats, deadlifts and upper back work, quite closely followed by some upper-body pressing work. While such a limited program will deliver good gains on these few exercises, with some knock-on effect throughout the body, it�s not a year after year program. Very abbreviated routines are great for getting gains moving, and for building a foundation for moderately expanded routines. They are fine to keep returning to on a regular basis. The other training isn�t necessary all in the same workout but spread over the week. This will maintain balance throughout the body and capitalize upon the progress made in the thigh, hip and back structure.

Just remember that the thigh, hip and back structure comes first and is the �driver� (closely followed by the upper-body pushing structure) for the other exercises. These other exercises, though important in their own right, are passengers relative to the driving team.

Big Arms

To get big arms, get yourself on a basic program that focuses on the leg, hip and back structure without neglecting the arms themselves. As you improve your squatting ability, for reps and by say 100 pounds, your curling poundage should readily come up by 30 pounds or so if you work hard enough on your curls. This will add size to your biceps. While adding 100 pounds to your squat, you should be able to add 50-70 pounds to your bench press, for reps. This assumes you�ve put together a sound program and have worked hard on the bench. That will add size to your triceps.

If you�re desperate to add a couple of inches to your upper arms you�ll need to add 30 pounds or more over your body, unless your arms are way behind the rest of you. Don�t start thinking about 17� arms, or even 16� arms so long as your bodyweight is 130, 140, 150, 160, or even 170 pounds. Few people can get big arms without having a big body. You�re unlikely to be one of the exceptions.

15 sets of arm flexor exercises, and 15 sets of isolation tricep exercises�with a few squats, deadlifts and bench presses thrown in as an afterthought�will give you a great pump and attack the arms from �all angles�. However, it won�t make your arms grow much, if at all, unless you�re already squatting and benching big poundages, or are drug-assisted or genetically gifted.

As your main structures come along in size and strength (thigh, hip and back structure, and the pressing structure), the directly involved smaller body parts are brought along in size too. How can you bench press or dip impressive poundages without adding a lot of size to your triceps? How can you deadlift the house and row big weights without having the arm flexors�not to mention the shoulders and upper back�to go with those lifts? How can you squat close to 2 times bodyweight, for plenty of reps, without having a lot of muscle all over your body?

The greater the development and strength of the main muscular structures of the body, the greater the size and strength potential of the small areas of the body. Think it through. Suppose you can only squat and deadlift with 200 pounds, and your arms measure about 13�. You�re unlikely to add any more than half an inch or so on them, no matter how much arm specialization you put in.

However, put some real effort into the squat and deadlift, together with the bench press and a few other major basic movements. Build up the poundages by 50% or more, to the point where you can squat 300 pounds for over 10 reps, and pack on 30 pounds of muscle. Then, unless you have an unusual arm structure, you should be able to get your arms to around 16�. If you want 17� arms, plan on having to squat more than a few reps with around 2 times bodyweight, and on adding many more pounds of muscle throughout your body (unless you have a better-than-average growth potential in your upper arms).

All of this arm development would have been achieved without a single concentration curl, without a single pushdown and without a single preacher curl. This lesson in priorities proves that the shortest distance.


----------



## crazycal1 (Sep 21, 2005)

now this isnt really applicable but as i had back problems and couldnt squat or deadlift the trap bar changed my training life and progress....

without my trap bar i`d still be a 10 stone scrawny(but ripped lol) biatch 

by Stuart McRobert

From Hardgainer #76 - January/February 02'

Priority Issue

The debate over the trap/shrug bar deadlift, and how to name it (both within the pages of HARDGAINER, and elsewhere), runs the risk of steering focus away from the most important issue -- that the exercise has tremendous potential value for many trainees.

On the Name Front

The trap/shrug bar deadlift isn't a squat. But by standing "inside" the bar, using SUFFICIENT leg flexion and not leaning forward excessively, the involvement of the legs is increased and involvement of the back is decreased, relative to a straight-bar deadlift, generally speaking. The deadlift, squat and trap/shrug bar deadlift involve some major common musculature, but the distribution of stress over that musculature, and the ranges of motion involved, vary. The trap/shrug bar deadlift is a deadlift because the bar is held in the hands and not across the upper back, and the shoulders are extended against resistance. The trap/shrug bar deadlift can be done with reduced leg flexion (but increased forward lean) like in a straight-bar regular deadlift, thus reducing quadriceps involvement, but increasing the role of the lower back.

There are multiple types of bars that can yield a trap/shrug bar-like deadlift-like exercise -- rhombus frame, hexagonal, rectangular and square, some specially bent bars which don't actually enclose the trainee, and even a Hammer Strength machine. A pair of dumbbells can mimic a trap or shrug bar, if they are held at the sides of one's legs, using a parallel grip. The dumbbell deadlift has been around a lot longer than the trap bar deadlift, so the trap bar and other devices are, actually, simulations of the dumbbells, for the purposes of deadlifting and shrugging.

The trap bar deadlift isn't an adequate name because a number of bars/devices can be used to produce the same movement. A general-purpose name is needed for the exercise, to prevent confusion and accommodate all the involved bars/devices.

The parallel-grip deadlift reflects both the deadlift-like movement AND the parallel grip that the gripping sites of the trap bar, shrug bar and other related bars/devices permit. The pgdl name isn't my creation, but I put it forward for the first time in HARDGAINER as the best choice since it clearly describes the exercise. The parallel-grip deadlift refers to the bent-legged version, while the parallel-grip stiff-legged deadlift refers to the form that has either straight legs or just slightly unlocked legs.

Individuality

Both the pgdl and the squat can be super exercises, depending on the individual user and the form used. The balance of pros and cons for each exercise, and the precise relative degree of difficulty and worth of the squat and pgdl, will vary among individuals according to body structure, history of injury or accident, technique and equipment availability. Squat afficionados need to accept that the squat isn't as great for everyone as it may be for them; and pgdl afficionados need to accept that the exercise isn't as great for everyone as it may be for them.

You can't change your body structure -- arm length, leg length, the relative proportions of femur length to tibia length, and relative proportions of torso length to leg length, and arm length to leg length. All these factors have substantial influence on deadlifting, pgdling and squatting efficiency. By adjusting your technique and/or exercise selection you can influence the effects of body structure on your training and physique.

Some people who are well built structurally for the squat get tremendous leg development from the squat. Some others, with very different structures, are ungainly squatters and can't avoid leaning over heavily. This turns the movement into more of a lower-back exercise than a leg one, and greatly increases the risk of injury. Of those who can't squat well no matter what flexibility, form, program or poundage progression adjustments they make, and of those who can't squat because of knee or back limitations due to injury or accident, some have found the pgdl a true godsend -- it has enabled them to train their legs safely and productively like the squat never could.

The biggest disadvantage of the pgdl is the lack of universal supply of the required purpose-built equipment, and few gyms have sufficiently large dumbbells for long-term parallel-grip deadlifting. Whereas almost all gyms are set up for the squat, few are set up for the pgdl. Considering the WHOLE weight-training population, very few people have tried the pgdl as compared with the squat -- fewer than 1%. But out of the relatively few users of the pgdl there has been a lot of success, often from folk who previously didn't do well on the squat.


----------



## crazycal1 (Sep 21, 2005)

Matters of Technique

The pgdl is technically simpler to perform than a barbell squat. That's not to say that the pgdl is inherently safe and the squat is inherently dangerous. It should, however, be noted that some trainees consider the difficulty of performing the squat as a positive challenge instead of a negative, even though there's an accompanying increased level of risk. The pgdl is less technically challenging than positioning a barbell near the top of the spine and backing out of the squat stands with the bar teetering somewhat on the upper back, getting the feet into position with the weight bearing down on you, squatting, returning to the rack (perhaps shakily, after a hard set) and then putting the bar back in the saddles. Spotters and/or safety bars are not needed for the pgdl like they are for the squat, and the pgdl doesn't require squat stands or a power rack; and it's much easier to dump a failed pgdl than a failed squat. These are significant advantages, especially for the home trainee on a limited budget.

Everything considered, and generally speaking, the pgdl carries a lower level of risk than the squat, but that isn't to say the pgdl is safe and the squat isn't. It's easy to injure oneself in the pgdl if one doesn't use good form. Good form in the pgdl includes keeping a flat or arched back at all times, keeping forward travel of the knees to the minimum, and avoiding extremes of torso positioning -- neither leaning forward greatly, nor exaggeratedly upright.

Trying to perform the pgdl in an exaggeratedly upright manner, in order to further increase stress on the quadriceps, should be avoided because of the overly limited back involvement and increased knee stress (which may lead to knee problems). A "natural" spread of work between the legs and back produces a more balanced division of the stress. Heavy quadriceps involvement from the pgdl is desirable, but not in a skewed way that distorts the natural form of the movement.

How much lower-back work the pgdl and squat provide varies according to the degree of forward lean that's used, which is related to body structure, stance and form. If you pgdl with substantial leg flexion, hands never forward of your legs, and only moderate forward lean, the exercise would work the quadriceps much more, and the lower back, upper back and hamstrings proportionately less than if you were to pgdl with less leg flexion, hands forward of your legs and substantial forward lean, like in a straight-bar deadlift. But the latter isn't the pgdl I'm referring to in this article, or what the pgdl is typically considered to be.

With a straight-bar deadlift the bar should graze the legs throughout the movement, but in the pgdl the hands should be a little behind the line they would be in during a straight-bar deadlift. A good general guideline to follow, in the pgdl, is for the finger joints to follow a line along the center of your femurs and, further down, along the center of the sides of your calves. If your hands get behind that line you risk being too upright. Your hands can, however, be a tad forward of that line.

It's having to get the straight bar around the knees that produces the increased forward lean and less leg flexion of the regular deadlift as compared with the pgdl. With the pgdl, you're "inside" the bar as against behind it with the straight-bar deadlift. This is what permits the reduced forward lean and increased leg flexion in the pgdl.

You can increase the range of motion in the pgdl by standing on an elevated surface. If you can safely perform elevated pgdls, you can probably also perform squats safely and productively. Squat-disadvantaged trainees may be best off sticking with regular-range-of-motion pgdls, or even reduced-range-of-motion pgdls. The range of motion should never exceed what can be handled with an arched or flat lower back.

Parallel-grip bar design -- specifically the spacing between the gripping sites and "room" inside the bar -- affect stance, and stance can heavily affect form. Adjustments to bar design and form can make a big difference, but in the pgdl you don't have the same stance width freedom as in the squat, since the gripping sites' placement sets the limit on stance width. If you plan to get a parallel-grip bar, check with the manufacturer that the gripping sites will be sufficiently spaced for you -- according to your physical size and stance requirements -- to permit you to take at least a medium-width stance, or otherwise you could be so constrained that you may not be able to pgdl safely and well.

In my exercise technique book I went into great detail on the squat and the pgdl (using the trap bar as the illustration of a parallel-grip bar). While every possible detail isn't there, a tremendous amount of information is -- enough to give trainees the best chance of making one or both exercises work for them. Unless you use impeccable form, not only would you jeopardize the chance of fully exploiting the squat and/or pgdl, but you'd put your body at serious risk of injury that could permanently limit your training. Excellent form in these major exercises is THAT important. There's absolutely no room for compromise on perfect form. Either squat and pgdl with impeccable form, or don't use those exercises at all; and for the squat this includes the use of a power rack/cage with safety bars set appropriately for you, AND preferably spotters too.

Fair Trials

Knees and lower back permitting, both the squat and the pgdl should be experimented with, to give each fair trial. But before you write off the squat, be sure you've given it a genuinely good shot -- that you're flexible enough, have really used good form that has been personalized to suit you, have not overtrained, and have used sensible progression methods (i.e., slow and steady progression, not rapid using big poundage jumps). Many people have given up on the squat simply because they weren't limber enough, didn't use good form personalized to suit them, but added poundage to the bar faster than they could adapt to, and squatted too often for their recovery ability. In such cases, the exercise didn't fail, but the individual user's application of it. The same comments can, of course, be applied to the pgdl. If you don't use the pgdl properly, it will fail for you.

Program Design Concerns

If you're cutting your program right back to absolute bare bones, you would squat OR pgdl OR deadlift as your major lower-body exercise. But if you're not cutting back that far, choose the squat or pgdl AND the deadlift or stiff-legged deadlift or partial deadlift according to which is safe and productive FOR YOU. If none of the straight-bar deadlift variations are practical and safe FOR YOU, I'd recommend you use a back extension (regular or reverse), or a hip-and-back machine, to specifically target your lower back, so long as at least one of those is safe for you. And even if you do use a straight-bar deadlift, a hard set or two once a week of back extensions or a hip-and-back machine would still be valuable, PROVIDING that the additional work is safe for you.

The Wrap-up

The deadlift, pgdl and squat are three different but potentially super exercises from which, through experience, trainees should choose. All three exercises may work well for you, or perhaps only one, or perhaps two. Do your absolute best to be successful at at least one of them, as doing so is a major part of the strategy needed for developing a substantially stronger and better developed physique, especially for hard gainers.

thanks matey jolly nice of you to say so...



> or partial deadlift according to which is safe and productive FOR YOU. If none of the straight-bar deadlift variations are practical and safe FOR YOU


partials are all i could do for 4 years bud and ended up lifting 240kgx1 the week before my back op.

(pic of legs in journal)

read some brawn...learn the basics...learn to grow....then try the fancy stuff dudes :becky:

training like a champion BB`er when you dont know your body is the single biggest mistake i made.

ring a bell with anyone?

lol preacher hat is now back in the cupboard.


----------



## minilh (Jan 13, 2009)

We dont mind being preached at if the advice is good, that was a good read with loads of useful info, I hope the members appreciated that I know I did.


----------



## FAT BOY (Dec 19, 2005)

good post m8


----------



## crazycal1 (Sep 21, 2005)

so why have i got less rep than a paedo round here then pmsl


----------



## FAT BOY (Dec 19, 2005)

you will always be special to me m8


----------



## newboy606 (May 25, 2005)

After several years of reading the preacher mans posts i eventually got round to reading brawn, its a far better read than i expected and dropping the isolations has definitely helped my progress, hard to get your head around but sometimes less sets can give you more gains. Keep preaching dude.

Cal you will probally need to tell a few people what they want to hear to get more rep.

Keep preaching dude.


----------



## CrisR (Mar 26, 2008)

dude wkd set of posts rep power from me:clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2:


----------



## Pikey1466867920 (Apr 24, 2004)

Cal,

I don't agree you need to squat to grow arms but do agree you need to put weight on and squatting is a good overall mass builder. How much weight depends on height, limb length, proportions and body type, cracking post though and it is a bloody good book. If I hammer my legs too much my upper body shrinks! That said I doubt most would engage in the intensity

What most people fail to realise is that it takes years to build a physique even if assisted, natural you're only going get so far, so people shouldn't read xyz glossy bodybuilding magazine and think they can look like that, a very very lucky few can.

then there's those that think a diet of kebab chips and pizza will get you there with some Sus, totally misguided to be kind

That bible of yours is a bloody good guide for an unassisted male to putting some bulk on!!!

I never use rep but will give you some as I don't want you feeling left out lol.

Mark,

I would say 9 1/2 stone loss of bodyweight is fantastic, combat sports are great for fitness and muscle tone but not for mass, as soon as I started bodybuilding competitively I dropped all combat sports, as they rip muscle off which isn't needed - don't forget a bodybuilder is trying to force his / her body to carry around a load of muscle mass the body isn't designed to carry round any more than its designed to carry round 20 stone of fat

Depends what your goal actually is mate but I've always thought the Nigel Benn look is truly the male ideal, even if I am a competitive bodybuilder

Cheers

Chris


----------

