Am I working out properly? Should I gain more weight.

[Jitterbug]

Isolations are for very strong lifters targeting their weak spots.

For the rest of us, especially the beginners & novices, our entire bodies are the weak spot. It's dumb to do isolations.

CarlitosWay's lifts qualify him as a novice lifter at best.

 

[CarlitosWay]

Isolations are for very strong lifters targeting their weak spots.

For the rest of us, especially the beginners & novices, our entire bodies are the weak spot. It's dumb to do isolations.

CarlitosWay's lifts qualify him as a novice lifter at best.

The notion that isolations are just for very strong lifters, doesn't make sense at all. All lifters should be doing compound exercises that work for them and isolation exercises that do also. I'm not saying a newbie should be doing crazy amounts of volume and 20 sets of concentration curls everyday or some bs like that.

A great compound exercise for example seated Barbell shoulder press followed by db side laterals and maybe another isolation exercise. Is essential for the average/below average person to building nice well rounded shoulders. No matter if beginner or advanced.

 

[CarlitosWay]

That's nice, but I don't care how INTENSE you are and how hard you BRING IT, if your routine sucks nothing is going to happen. I see lots of guys who are INTENSE on their curls + bench program, they either look like Popeye or they're the same size/strength they were when I first saw them in the gym a year ago.



Weeks upon weeks? Or you could just get Starting Strength, read it, learn all the lifts within 2 workouts, then send your form videos to Rippetoe for critique.



No, this is exactly the last thing a newbie should be doing. He doesn't need to be doing front squats, rack pulls, incline bench presses and machine isolation work if he's a beginner. The law of diminishing return applies to strength training. You can't constantly gain strength in a linear manner. If you're weak, it's very easy to get stronger. If you're a beginner, there's no point in doing anything except the basic lifts because you can make progress in the basic lifts by simply doing them. Why waste time with isolation/accessory work at this point?

And I don't care how long you've been training, if you've never trained properly (exhausted the limits of linear progression with the basic lifts) you're still a beginner. There is no need for a beginner to make things so complicated. Just learn how to do the important lifts (squat, deadlift, presses) and do them in a simple linear progression fashion.



I'm not sure why you keep implying that someone working on the important lifts will not be "balanced". What could be more balanced than simply taking natural movements from real life and adding weight to them? That's what the squat, deadlift and overhead press are.

Unless you're a Popeye bench monkey who curls more than he squats and thinks his arms should be bigger than his legs, you'll be fine on a basic program. If you want to bodybuild, do a basic program until your entire body isn't a weak link anymore and then work on your weak links with beach work. Nobody here is saying that you shouldn't ever do a bodybuilding program. If you want to put on a thong, slather yourself with oil, and pose on stage for other men, you certainly should. But you should build a base first.

I'm never going to compete (don't have the genetics for it really). I just want to get pretty strong, but really want to get BIG and look good naked. =).


Christ going to get rid of this ****in' dogma about beginners and isolation exercises SMH...ok Dave Tate is going to better EXPLAIN exactly what I'm trying to get across.....

So is one of the downfalls of the average trainee in this situation that he's focusing too much time on things like isolation exercises and not putting enough time in on the compound movements? Or should they be putting an equal amount of time into both?

I bring this up because most "average" trainees I know have horrible control of their muscles. They just "lift" stuff and have no idea what is going on. If you watch their form, no two reps look the same and in many cases the muscle they are working is barely contracting. If I asked the average trainee to flex their pecs (that stupid thing you do to make your pecs bounce), they can. They can also do this fairly well with their biceps. Now if I asked them to do this with their triceps, traps, calves and so on they could not do it. They have no idea how to flex these muscles.

One thing isolation work will do is teach them how to flex and control these muscle groups. This is important for both groups. For the bodybuilder it will bring greater focus to the area they are training because they will be able to flex what they are trying to stimulate. For the powerlifter this comes into play for weak point training. Let's say a lifter is weak off the chest in the bench press and the elbows always kick out first. One solution would be to teach them to flex with there triceps first off the chest and not the pecs. This will technically fix the problem but can't be done if the lifter has no idea how to flex his triceps.

So my answer is yes isolation work is important during the early phases of training and how much depends on the skill of the trainee.

The main work still should be done with basic compound movements such as the squat, bench, and deadlifts.

Pretty much what I've been trying to say compound+isolation work is the best way to go no matter if you're a beginner/advanced.

Most T-Nation members aren't competitive lifters or bodybuilders, but are chasing the goals of strength and hypertrophy simultaneously. What are the biggest mistakes that people make in trying to get big and strong at the same time?

Let me explain, if you train for max strength, then size (much easier to say than "hypertrophy") will be a side effect. In turn if you train for max size, then strength will be a side effect. If you train for both at the same time then you'll have the results of two side effects instead of one full effect.

In other words, if you try to do both, you'll see strength results, but they won't be as great as if you trained for strength alone. The same holds true if you trained solely for size.

So my advice is to pick either strength or size as a goal, stop "working out," and start training.

This is my exact mind set.

another quote from another trainer/coach who knows his ****

The main problem I've observed in the conundrum of achieving both size and strength is that trainees focus their training style too much on one goal at the expense of the other. A trainee who is influenced by bodybuilders (whether at the gym or via magazines) has the tendency to train too much like a bodybuilder by performing a higher volume, more isolation exercises, and using a lighter load. I also suspect that they tend to equate the holy pump to productivity.

On the contrary, a trainee who is influenced by power lifters or athletes who perform Olympic lifts tend to focus excessively on how much weight they can move while failing to properly utilize the target muscle. They often neglect isolation exercises or even direct arm work. Being married to either style of training is detrimental. Who says you can't do hanging cleans and presses for 5 x 5 and behind-the-back cable lateral raises for 3 x 15 in the same workout?

On an even simpler note, I believe that one of the biggest flaws being made by 99% of the training population is not recording their workouts. How can you get stronger if you don't know precisely what weight you used and how many reps you did of each and every exercise? You can't know if you have surpassed a performance if you don't have a record of it! In regards to strength, it's crucial to slowly but steadily increase the load used for a given number of reps. When aiming for hypertrophy, performance must still be improved by either increasing the weight or reps or performing the exercise in a manner that better stimulates the target muscle.

When performing dumbbell curls, I may note in my journal "strong supination with slight pause at the top, good squeeze". If in the next workout I did the same weight and reps as the previous time I did dumbbell curls but paused longer in the contracted position, I've improved my "performance" and therefore elicited an adaptation response. In aiming to achieve both strength and hypertrophy, keeping detailed performance records and steadily improving various facets of that performance is of utmost importance!

 

[ATP]

Isolations are for very strong lifters targeting their weak spots.

For the rest of us, especially the beginners & novices, our entire bodies are the weak spot. It's dumb to do isolations.

CarlitosWay's lifts qualify him as a novice lifter at best.

I don't think it's that easy. It's not really all that fun to get to really heavy weights and then discover that one bodypart is lagging behind like crazy. Tossing in an isolation exercise along with the big lifts when you are novice is pretty good imo. The big execises do not work all the muscles equally. For example, I used to believe the notion of ignoring arm work alltogether because if you can do heavy rows, squats and bench presses then the arms will grow by themselves. Well the bench presses went up, the rows, deadlifts and squat as well but my arms grew very slowly. Adding in biceps isolations was one of the best things I've done.

Some people got the same problem with say calves or forearms while those areas grow like crazy for me by just doing the heavy work. It's down to genetics imo. Adding in isolations as supplement to the big exercises is good imo but focusing on them while being a novice is very bad.

 

[Jitterbug]

If you're not getting big calves from squatting alone, it's not genetics, it's likely you're not squatting deep enough. Your calves get a huge workout from deep squat, more than any isolation could. The calf raise machine at my gym has a limit of 125kg. When my squat was only 105kg, I had to add 2 extra 25kg plates to the handles, making it 175kg, for a semi-decent workout.

As for biceps, my bicep routine is to do chin-ups. My biceps are 17" on the right and 16.5" on the left. Let me know when you see someone good at chin-ups yet has tiny biceps relative to the rest of his body. I'm not even good at chins.

I really don't think you can deadlift heavy without your forearms growing in size and strength to match. What was your deadlift before you decided to do isolations?

Now, like I said, isolations are good for working on your weak spots. I did some gripping work to get my grip strength to catch up with the rest of my body. I simply don't believe most people have weak biceps or weak chests when the rest of their bodies are strong. That's not genetics, that's psychological.

 

[CarlitosWay]

If you're not getting big calves from squatting alone, it's not genetics, it's likely you're not squatting deep enough. Your calves get a huge workout from deep squat, more than any isolation could. The calf raise machine at my gym has a limit of 125kg. When my squat was only 105kg, I had to add 2 extra 25kg plates to the handles, making it 175kg, for a semi-decent workout.

As for biceps, my bicep routine is to do chin-ups. My biceps are 17" on the right and 16.5" on the left. Let me know when you see someone good at chin-ups yet has tiny biceps relative to the rest of his body. I'm not even good at chins.

I really don't think you can deadlift heavy without your forearms growing in size and strength to match. What was your deadlift before you decided to do isolations?

Now, like I said, isolations are good for working on your weak spots. I did some gripping work to get my grip strength to catch up with the rest of my body. I simply don't believe most people have weak biceps or weak chests when the rest of their bodies are strong. That's not genetics, that's psychological.

doing only Chin-ups for bis? lol :rock:

Last time I did deadlifts off the floor I did 350X5@ 170 lb body weight.

I'm guessing you have some fat arms or genetically had decent sized arms to begin with (17 inch arms lean is very different then 20+%bf and 17 arms). It's preposterous to think a newbie trying to go from 15 inch arms to 17-18 is going to do it with chin ups. Especially if genetically they got screwed with crappy insertions/size. Chinups are a BACK exercise, the bis/forearms are only secondary muscles working.

As for calves....mine are inserted real high. Like most black peoples. You rarely every see a black person with pretty big calves. Except for Phil Heath LOL or unless I get obese then diet back down.

 

[EFFORT]

If your goal is size/hypertrophy a combination of machines/compounds will be extremely effective ....DC training.

 

[Fuglydude]

doing only Chin-ups for bis? lol :rock:

Last time I did deadlifts off the floor I did 350X5@ 170 lb body weight.

I'm guessing you have some fat arms or genetically had decent sized arms to begin with (17 inch arms lean is very different then 20+%bf and 17 arms). It's preposterous to think a newbie trying to go from 15 inch arms to 17-18 is going to do it with chin ups. Especially if genetically they got screwed with crappy insertions/size. Chinups are a BACK exercise, the bis/forearms are only secondary muscles working.

As for calves....mine are inserted real high. Like most black peoples. You rarely every see a black person with pretty big calves. Except for Phil Heath LOL or unless I get obese then diet back down.

My arms are around 15"... I routinely do pull ups w/ 90-100+ around my waist for 8-10 reps. Today I did 22 x BW, personal best is 27 x BW @ around 165-170 lbs. When I was 170 I was doing DLs: 5 x 405 off the floor raw w/ a 1 RM of around 435. I do bicep curls too put feel like a big pu$$y when I do them cuz I only do like 25-30 lb dumbells. I think chin ups should be a core movement for newbies trying to build overall strength and definitely help w/ bicep growth, but it would be smart to add extra isolation work as well. I do get reasonable bicep pumps from doing sets of 20+ reps w/ chins though. Definitely agree on chins being a predominantly back movement.

Arm growth seems to be fairly genetic... my arms don't grow at all (then again I don't really care about having big arms). Anytime I put on weight its all in my upper back and shoulders.

 

[Jitterbug]

I was half-joking with my arm size & chin-up comment. I don't give a sh1t how big my arms are, as long as they're strong. Sure, I want to look good, but strength is higher than looks in my priorities. If for some stupid reason, I have a gun at my head and have to pick one out of two, I'd pick strength without hesitation. Looks without the strength to back it up makes one a poser.

I'd rather have smaller arms with the strength of Fugly for example.

 

[ATP]

I really don't think you can deadlift heavy without your forearms growing in size and strength to match. What was your deadlift before you decided to do isolations?

Now, like I said, isolations are good for working on your weak spots. I did some gripping work to get my grip strength to catch up with the rest of my body. I simply don't believe most people have weak biceps or weak chests when the rest of their bodies are strong. That's not genetics, that's psychological.

My forearms have always been big. They grow like crazy, same with my calves. Now a friend of mine who is very strong got small calves and small forearms and deads about 190-200 kgs for reps. He just can't get them to grow. His lats however just explode and he will blow me out of the water in lat development even if we do the exact same thing. My legs, calves and forearms blow his out of the water. Or at least did, I got injured :/

I don't agree with its being psychological. Chest is one of the harder muscles to train properly and my arms have become a lot better since I incorporated isolation work.

 

[EFFORT]

I was half-joking with my arm size & chin-up comment. I don't give a sh1t how big my arms are, as long as they're strong. Sure, I want to look good, but strength is higher than looks in my priorities. If for some stupid reason, I have a gun at my head and have to pick one out of two, I'd pick strength without hesitation. Looks without the strength to back it up makes one a poser.

I'd rather have smaller arms with the strength of Fugly for example.

Everyone has different goals. The same way you want to be very strong other people want to focus on size/hypertrophy and could careless about strength.

If the gun a to your head/life defense type situation is something you really wanted to be prepared for you'd be better off taking firearms training then slowly adding in knife/other weapon training. Having a big dead/squat/bench doesn't translate into being a good fighter or being able to defend yourself. a gun shoots through all of those maxes.

 

[Drum&Bass]

and....If you all want to be strong at some point in time you had better be trying to get big !! Its rare to find LITTLE strong guys..When your BIG you will have better leverages and better contraction potential.

Don't let the hype about body building vs. powerlifting make you believe that size isn't important. A 5'9, 220 pound all muscle weight lifter that HAS BIG EVERYTHING will have a much easier time getting stronger than a 5'9 175 pound all muscle weight lifter that has little arms but can deadlift really really good.

p.s. think about some of the reasons why everyone on the forums keeps preaching to beginners about getting good and strong with basic compound movements...so newbies will become BIGGER at a faster pace !!! so yes, SIZE most definitely is important !!

Bigger muscles will have an easier time with heavier loads than smaller ones.

Also I'd like to add...You won't ever have a BIG bench press, strict over head press or any strong upper body movement UNLESS YOU GET YOUR ARMS BIG !!! So to all you hardcore weight lifters that wanna have a complete lifting resume, including squat, deadlift and BENCH PRESS, you better start training those arms directly because weak arms wont be able to support 315 + pounds above your chest.

 

[Jitterbug]

Certainly. The name of the game is "bigger, stronger, faster"!

The thing is, most guys who concentrate on arm workout often have small arms AND small everything else. The ones who have big arms doing those things are big all over.

Focusing on strength (and increase in strength often equals increase in size on the same person) is better than just pure looks. Why?

Because if you're a guy capable of the below:

SQUAT DOUBLE BODYWEIGHT
SQUAT 1.5 TIMES BODYWEIGHT X 20
BENCH PRESS 1.5 TIMES BODYWEIGHT
BENCH PRESS BODYWEIGHT X 10
DEADLIFT 2.5 TIMES BODYWEIGHT
POWERCLEAN 1.2 X BODYWEIGHT
15 DEAD HANG WIDE GRIP CHINS
CLEAN & PUSH PRESS BODYWEIGHT X 5
STRICT STANDING MILITARY PRESS BODYWEIGHT

You're strong (I get the list of a local coach). And if you happen to have too much extra fat, you can diet it off in 12~16 weeks for that beach bod.

You can't get that strong in the same time.

I have the same goals as everybody else - getting bigger, stronger, faster and looking better. I prioritise strength above everything else because it gives me the rest.

ATP: your friend is a strong guy. Now when an already strong guy wants to work on his weakness via isolation exercises, I won't argue with that. My argument is with weak newbies getting recommended the same thing.

Most gyms everywhere are full of weak lightweight guys curling in front of the mirrors, who never seem to get stronger nor bigger.

 

[CarlitosWay]

I'm training for size and strength just comes secondary. Trying to train for both at the same time is like trying to ride two horses with one ass. Just doesn't work out to great in the end=).

I'll worry about maximizing my strength when I'm 200+ lbs and like my size. Cause you cannot deny a bigger muscle has more potential for strength in the long run.

LOL@ the all looks with out strength makes you look like a poser comment! Most of my buddies who look the part, are aslo lifting big weights for reps on machines , compound movements and isolation exercises like it's nobodies business.

Show me a guy loaded up with synthol....now that's what you call a poser.

You're body doesn't give a **** if it's lifting a barbell, using a machine or isolation exercise. It just knows if there's a huge enough resistance being placed on it's muscles, it's going to break down muscle and rebuild it bigger or stronger for next time it encounters that same resistance.

It doesn't say "Hey wait stop this guy is still a newbie/novice he shouldn't be doing this machine or isolation exercise, HALT all muscle/strength gaining progress immediately"

 

[EFFORT]

Everyone has different goals. The same way you want to be very strong other people want to focus on size/hypertrophy and could careless about strength.

Wanted to just clarify here. When I say don't "care" about strength i mean not caring about pulling heavy maxes on everything. Progressive overload is obviously a must though.