? about Bill Starr 5X5

[n1232]

[ QUOTE ]

You already do curls. I thought you did no direct bicep work?



[/ QUOTE ]

No I said I do very little bicep work in my new routine. In the past I would hit them very hard doing probably 9 sets of 8 (3 diff109 once a week. Quite a drop. Yes I am doing more back work now, and judging by the responses the general consensus is this will lead to the same if not better results. So perhaps I should quit worrying.

[Thremp]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Genetics isn't kind to everyone in this department. I agree that your arms will grow even if you dont work them directly, but not everyone is going to get 20 inch guns without ever performing a curl.

[/ QUOTE ]

The irony is that often the guy who never does curls will still get bigger arms than the guy who does a lot of curls, even if genetics are equal.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not true at all. A lot of lifting is changing things up. I made great gains on a machine based program with very high volume and low intensity and a ton of failure training. You need to be willing to try different things.

[Efourdee]

Up the intensity on your 3 sets of curls.

[slickpoppa]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Genetics isn't kind to everyone in this department. I agree that your arms will grow even if you dont work them directly, but not everyone is going to get 20 inch guns without ever performing a curl.

[/ QUOTE ]

The irony is that often the guy who never does curls will still get bigger arms than the guy who does a lot of curls, even if genetics are equal.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not true at all. A lot of lifting is changing things up. I made great gains on a machine based program with very high volume and low intensity and a ton of failure training. You need to be willing to try different things.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have nothing against doing high volume, low intensity work, provided that more of the volume is focused on compound back movements, and bicep exercises are secondary.

[n1232]

[ QUOTE ]
Up the intensity on your 3 sets of curls.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure what this means? Are you saying do more reps or do more weight?

[Efourdee]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Genetics isn't kind to everyone in this department. I agree that your arms will grow even if you dont work them directly, but not everyone is going to get 20 inch guns without ever performing a curl.

[/ QUOTE ]

The irony is that often the guy who never does curls will still get bigger arms than the guy who does a lot of curls, even if genetics are equal.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not true at all. A lot of lifting is changing things up. I made great gains on a machine based program with very high volume and low intensity and a ton of failure training. You need to be willing to try different things.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is my point exactly, I guarantee you can get huge biceps by solely training biceps...hes taking his observation off of the fact that the guys that do only curls have no idea how to lift properly.

[thirddan]

n1232, intesity = percent of 1rm...increase the weight...

[Thremp]

Efourdee,

No, I totally disagree. You'll never get the loading solely doing isolating movement. Its like saying you'll develop huge rhomboids by only training rhomboids or huge quads only training quads. If you have amazing genetics, they might be considered "huge", but will never big as without.

Slick,

The point I was trying to make is that continually doing the same stuff isn't going to work. People should be open to trying new things and seeing what works for them. I almost always do a high intensity barbell workout with just 3 compound movements. I still almost always move back to that program for probably 8-9 months of the year. (Or 75% of the time I spend lifting depending on travels etc).

Once you hit the intermediate stage of the world, you should try different programs and see how you respond to them. People are all different, perhaps you'll discover something that you respond to very well, worst case you've completed a volume-intensity cycle and can resume your periodization.

[slickpoppa]

[ QUOTE ]
Efourdee,

No, I totally disagree. You'll never get the loading solely doing isolating movement. Its like saying you'll develop huge rhomboids by only training rhomboids or huge quads only training quads. If you have amazing genetics, they might be considered "huge", but will never big as without.

Slick,

The point I was trying to make is that continually doing the same stuff isn't going to work. People should be open to trying new things and seeing what works for them. I almost always do a high intensity barbell workout with just 3 compound movements. I still almost always move back to that program for probably 8-9 months of the year. (Or 75% of the time I spend lifting depending on travels etc).

Once you hit the intermediate stage of the world, you should try different programs and see how you respond to them. People are all different, perhaps you'll discover something that you respond to very well, worst case you've completed a volume-intensity cycle and can resume your periodization.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, I'm pro mixing it up when it comes to volume, intensity, which exercises you do, etc. But I do believe that there are certain things that should remain constant, and doing more compound back exercises than pure biceps exercises is one of them. Thats all I'm saying.

[Efourdee]

Working quads by isolation would be pointless and inefficient but you can get big quads this way.

Im sure there is some science behind your body not allowing itself to get too far out of proportion, but someone can put many inches on his arms through solely isolation exercises. Again its totally pointless to do so, but its possible.