Posted by Unique on February 08, 1997 at 16:17:25:
Oh boy here we go,
I'm going to stir a bees nest here I know. I've had a theory for awhile that leg work is not all that important.
First, let me clarify something. If you have sticklegs then yes by all means build your legs. But, I've seen many
people with very large legs and not proportionate upper bodies. This happened to me. I had chickenlegs many years
ago (actually skinny all over) and I started blasting my legs--to point where I could hardly walk. My legs blew up
and become quite large. I started theorizing at this time a few things--firstly a large part of a person's bodyweight
is in their legs and when this is blasted is causes cortisol to rise skyhigh. Also, with such a large portion of a
person's musclemass being worked that it might "suck" a large portion of the nutrients into the lower body keeping them
from being utilized in the upper body. Well, I stopped working out my upper legs and as theorized I started putting on
much more mass in my upper body. Also, the muscles in my upper leg really did not get any smaller. I haven't worked
them for several years now and they still look really good. A big thing here is that I'm talking about natural--A.S. may
very well change how all of this works. Look at someone like Bill Phillips. It seems to me his legs are REALLY big but
his upper body is not as proportionately big. I guess if you just want to put on weight its ok. But I really don't think
that big legs without a proportionately large upper body looks good. In my case, cutting out the upper leg work has
worked wonders. I know everyone responds differently, etc and I know this goes against everything that you hear but I
just thought that I would throw this out and see what others think about it.
Keep up the fight
Unique