Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

Adding inches to arms

J

Jeremy82587

New member
Hey guys. I was wondering how long it takes to add an inch to your arms. I know it takes proper training and nutrition, and genetics have role to play also. But I am solid in my training and diet, and I'm 17. So how long should I expect it to take to add about an inch, or a half inch?? Thanks PS:
What exercise are best in your opinion for adding mass to the arm?
 
Jeremy82587 said:
Hey guys. I was wondering how long it takes to add an inch to your arms. I know it takes proper training and nutrition, and genetics have role to play also. But I am solid in my training and diet, and I'm 17. So how long should I expect it to take to add about an inch, or a half inch?? Thanks PS:
What exercise are best in your opinion for adding mass to the arm?
Click to expand...
I imagine you're not on gear, tell us how much you weight and your height. My guess, if you train right, half an inch to your arm per year.
 
MsBeverlyHills said:
you will put on about 1" to your arms for every 10-12 lbs of LBM you put on.
Click to expand...

Another thing, if you want big arms...remember the tricep is bigger than the bicep. Too many people concentrate solely on curls for big arms...start doing heavy tricep work...and watch your arms go huuuuge... :)
 
make sure your squatting as well..its good for overall body growth..
post your routine so people here can critique it for ya
 
wnt2bBeast said:
make sure your squatting as well..its good for overall body growth..
post your routine so people here can critique it for ya
Click to expand...

lol. You love squats and deads way to much. I wish i had your enthusiasm for both.




triceps, triceps, and more triceps.
 
yomama said:
I imagine you're not on gear, tell us how much you weight and your height. My guess, if you train right, half an inch to your arm per year.
Click to expand...

I am about 144lbs and I am 5'6" (I'm short as hell!) So i'm not skinny even though I am 144, I am pretty stocky, and have fairly low body fat, because i can still see my abs. Right now my arms are about 14" flexed and 12.5 relaxed. I actually gained about an inch in a matter of 6 months, but thats because I just started seriously lifting and following a diet for those 6 months. Thanks guys. So you think I could aim for about an inch in about 8-10 months with solid diet and training?
 
heres what i do for my tris and right now this is working the best for me
cg bench 5x5
skulls 2x8-10
rope or vbar pushdowns 2x8-10
i have bad tondonitis in the elbow that prevents me from training my bi' hard right now..i do a few sewts of preachers 3x10 with a light weight then hit some cable curls for 2 sets of 20-30..

you need to do cg bench and as someone just suggested to me maybe reverse grip bench..one of those should be your main exercise

for bi's you should do barbell curls and another exercise or 2 and thats all
 
Tom Treutlein said:
Squats don't make your arms grow. Train for specificity. The hormonal release is nominal, contrary to popular belief.
Click to expand...

im not gonna fight with you..you do what works for you ill stick to what works for me
 
That's a pretty bold statement tom. Just how BIG are you and how much can you squat and how long have you been consistently lifting as well as total lifting experience?

I KNOW for a fact that heavy squats make you bigger and stronger "overall", period.

Of course tricep exercises for direct arm work, but if you aren't at least squatting and preferably doing squats and deads then you might as well not even do extra tricep work.
 
"Not only that, but squats do not cause whole body growth. They only have the potential to cause growth in those muscle groups directly involved in the squatting movement. However, because squats involve at least half of the body, you can increase overall bodyweight as a result of so much of the body’s musculature being stimulated to grow. Despite Kraemer’s claims that the miniscule spikes in Test and GH as a result of squatting without resting too much in-between sets is responsible for muscle growth, it isn’t entirely true. Otherwise, if these minute spikes in Test and GH had any significant physiological effect, squatting would put hair on your chest."

One's size and strength has nothing to do with their knowledge of training.
 
It may not entirely Tom, but if you can't back up what you say with a solid level of size and strength then what gives? If one has a great knowledge of training then that person should have results to prove it. Seems reasonable to me.

You can have all the book knowledge in the world, but without some real time and experience with the iron it equates to very little imo.

A guy may know everything their is to know about lifting weights and getting bigger and stronger, but if his results don't speak for themselves then you gotta wonder just how much this person really knows, not what they think they know.
 
Tom Treutlein said:
"Not only that, but squats do not cause whole body growth. They only have the potential to cause growth in those muscle groups directly involved in the squatting movement. However, because squats involve at least half of the body, you can increase overall bodyweight as a result of so much of the body’s musculature being stimulated to grow. Despite Kraemer’s claims that the miniscule spikes in Test and GH as a result of squatting without resting too much in-between sets is responsible for muscle growth, it isn’t entirely true. Otherwise, if these minute spikes in Test and GH had any significant physiological effect, squatting would put hair on your chest."

One's size and strength has nothing to do with their knowledge of training.
Click to expand...

Interesting though contrary to popular belief

where does that come from ?
 
The HST FAQ, the topic titled "exercise selection and related topics" or something of that nature.

I trust Bryan and his sources. He's been accurate with everything I've seen thus far.

Ghetto, how can one have the knowledge but not the results to back it up? I learn fast. Muscles don't grow as fast as one can learn. I picked up a lot of stuff in a short time. Not to mention I'm busy with random shit all the time so I usually have a lackluster effort in my dieting (and to some extents, training), so I fall short of achieving my goals.
 
Well Tom, you sound like a smart guy and I'm sure you've got more knowledge of training than most joe's in the gym, but telling me you are lackluster on your diet and training doesn't help your cause, ya know?

I only bring this up because you seem to be stuck on HST, as if it's the best thing since toast(I hate that sliced bread one). Your amount of training experience doesn't seem to be long enough to make the distiction that there is no best program for any 1 person, at any given time for that matter.

I'm not doggin you man, I used to be just like you back in the day. I'm just pointing out that you might think about that rather then deciding HST is the "only" way or best way because it appeals to you and your sense of logic. Alot of people think the same way about HIT, when those with experience no it isn't true.

Good luck.
 
Well the thing is, HIT doesn't have any physiological principles that tell us why muscle grows. I've yet to see anything decipher the reason for muscle growth, so HST appeals in that light.

Wnt2b...fuck science? No man. Once it's been tested and proven, science is golden. It helps us make strides forward. It's pretty ignorant to say "fuck science". I'll be the science guinea pig, you don't have to. You can say fuck it. I don't want to. I like trying new things, especially those that have a lot of logic behind them. I don't like being irrational and illogical...like a girl. :)
 
Tom Treutlein said:
Well the thing is, HIT doesn't have any physiological principles that tell us why muscle grows. I've yet to see anything decipher the reason for muscle growth, so HST appeals in that light.

Wnt2b...fuck science? No man. Once it's been tested and proven, science is golden. It helps us make strides forward. It's pretty ignorant to say "fuck science". I'll be the science guinea pig, you don't have to. You can say fuck it. I don't want to. I like trying new things, especially those that have a lot of logic behind them. I don't like being irrational and illogical...like a girl. :)
Click to expand...

you obviously did not read the article that i provided..the quote you provided is so unscientific its not funny...

MY SCIENCE LAB IS CALLED A GYM..I HAVE RUN MANY EXPERIMENTS UNDER THE BAR..I HAVE LOADED LOTS OF WEIGHT ON IT AND I PUT IT ON MY BACK!!! I HAVE DONE SOME EXPERIMENTS WHERE I DID NOT DO WHAT WE CALL SQUATS AND YES I GREW BUT I HAVE FOUND OUT THROUGH EXPERIMENTATION THAT WHEN I SQUAT THINGS SEEM TO GROW EASIER..THE HST LAB MAY THINK THIS IS NOT TRUE BUT THEN AGAIN THEY LIVE IN THEIR OWN WORLD AND THINK EVERYONE ELSE WHO RUNS THESE EXPERIMENTS IS BENEATH THEM..I ALSO HAVE A FRIEND ON ANOTHER BOARD WHO IS A COMPETETIVE POWERLIFTER WITH 19 INCH ARMS (NO THOSE ARENT HUGE) BUT THE GUY ALMOST NEVER DOES CURLS OR ANY DIRECT BI WORK..AGAIN PLEASE REFER TO THE ARTICLE I PROVIDED..IM TIRED OF THIS SAME OLD LAME ARGUMENTS..PEOPLE HAVE PROVEN THAT HST SCIENCE IS NOT THE ONLY SCIENCE OUT THERE..WAKE UP GET A CLUE..NOTHING AGAISNT HST BUT NOT EVERYTHING CAN BE EXPLAINED FROM THE HST FAQ..ACCORDING TO THAT WSB HAS NO MERIT? DC HAS NO MERIT?5X5 HAS NO MERIT?WALKINGBEAST SHOULD BE IN A COMA BY NOW BECAUSE HE DOES TOO MUCH VOLUME!!!! WAKE UP HST IS ONE WAY TO CUT THE CAKE..AGAIN PLEASE REFER TO THE ARTICLE I GAVE YOU..TO REIETERATE I DONT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH SCIENCE BUT WAKE UP THERES MORE TO IT THAN HST..

now i have absolutely no problem if you disagree with me but i am tired of cetain people who come on here and pick what thet respond to and dont offer any advice..i simply stated make sure your squatting..i also posted up my tri rotuine and bi's etc..i also asked him to post his routine so that everyone could take a look at it and tweak....no you come along and turn this thread completely upside down!!!!

Other people have done the same with the advice given by B-Fold...no one is saying you cant disagree..but what you told me with your lpost was im full of shit and because hst says so i dont get better growth from squatting..Are you hiding in your own insecurities? do you not squat for some reason? are your legs too big? do you have an injury that prevents you from doing them? again please read the article that i gave you..

I am here to try to offer advice based upon what has and is working for me..it may not be based on hst..i hope this is ok??? :rolleyes:
 
I read the article - so what? His opinion is that people who don't have the "gym experience" shouldn't be talking, basically. That the program used by that person sucks. Well, I've seen it work for tons of people for size in the past. I'll say again - specificity. Go on thinking what you wish. Don't be such a hot-head, by the by. Lose the fucking caps.

Oh, my legs are ahead of the rest of my body. I do squat, but it's getting to the point where upper-body size comes first and I'm thinking of cutting down my lower-body volume so I can remain in good proportion. I want another inch on my quads, roughly. At the same time, I want a few inches more on my upper arms. So, I do squat, no injury (yet, luckily), and I'm not hiding any insecurities. I think I've said it before - I'm by no means huge. Still only seventeen anyway, but I'm not trying to make excuses. I look at people years ahead of me and tell myself I should be that big now. Makes me push myself more. Problem is, I always have things going on in life that hinder my training.

Oh, and don't say anything about quitting training if I don't have the ability to put in 100%. Training isn't my life. I'm not getting paid for it, so I don't need to dedicate everything to it.
 
My entire point was to get off you HST high horse..You cannot look at everything through the eyes of hst..I am not saying hst doesnt work..i am sure it does..but at 17 you have not seen a ton of guys..at 17 your gonna balk at an article written by Tate?? sounds like internet muscles to me!!!

I didnt criticize your training or whatever issues you have that prevent you from being consistent..

Now youre igoring facts for the sake of some science..Ive seen what works with me as well as other poeple..but you wanna stick to science...

BTW i didnt have further info but in last months edition of MD there was some info on scientific data run by NSCA which disputed some of teh premises of HST..that is the science..i dont have a further a link so i didnt make a thread..but since your so closed minded and have all the answers at 17???

Correct me if im wrong but you dont even work out at a gym so where are these tons of people that you have observed? I have trained on and off for 15 years..many of those younger years were spent through trial and error..i have trained with professional athletes as well..

again my goal was to try to help people on here no spit HST at them..go post on the hst board where you can chat with like minded people and you can all agree how great you guys are!!! I base my posts on what has worked and what i learn from other people..

so why dont we do this when someone poses a question and i post my advice instead of you deciding that you need to set us straight why dont you just offer your own advice rather than picking on my posts or anyone elses for that matter? then let the person looking for help decide what he wants to do and how he wants to proceed..Im just tired of having to go through this every couple of weeks..HST (while it is a viable training option) does not and cannot answwer every question why you ask? because we are all built differently so you cannot possibly have a canned routine that "absolutely" works for everyone..if you knew anything about science you would know science deals with statistical probabilities not absolutes!!!
 
this thread has gotten a little away from the subject, but i think i can pull it back in. from my personal experience, squats have helped me with my overall power. even in stuff like pullups and bench, it has helped. how? i think it has more to do with recovery than anything else. the body will adapt to whatever you throw at it. squats force all kinds of rebuilding and recovery on the cns, circulatory, and muscles. therefore- my body is better equiped to handle recovery from adding squats to my workout. better recovery = more workouts = bigger arms faster. thats my science.
 
Tom Treutlein said:
I like trying new things, especially those that have a lot of logic behind them. I don't like being irrational and illogical...like a girl. :)
Click to expand...

Tom...
a. "like a girl"? i happen to be one and i'm far from irrational or illogical. in fact, both of those traits i happen to excell at.
b. sorry, but squats make you stronger and bigger. Most benchers i know, squat or deadlift if able ONLY because it increases their overall strength. AT the very least, and simplistic form, squatting helps your core strength. stronger core will help you in all your lifts, including arms.
 
Sugar, I apologize. I was joking around with a friend of mine as I wrote that post and kind've just let that slip in there - I don't support the idea that women are more illogical or irrational than men - just a greater percentage I've known have been more so, so I tease people about that. Do I actually believe it to hold true all the time? Not at all.

Anyway - wnt2b, I never said I was great or anything, so stop making me out to seem arrogant, 'cause I think I'm far enough from it.

I want to stick to science because I feel secure in it. I like empirical data that comes to solid conclusions as to why something works. Maybe HST will have some of its principles disproven in the future, which will show the science wasn't perfect. Taking the gamble that it is in fact perfect, I stick with it, because once science has been proven...you can't disprove it. Maybe it's not 100%, but after the results I and others have seen on it, it's hard for me to say that it isn't the best method around for size alone.
 
Tom, i totally understand your logic, BUT remember... there is not one set of scientific findings for every question. this happens in medicine a lot- the scientific outcome is directly related to the potential revenue of the pharmaceutical company. Or in law- the prosecution and defense will each come up with a different set of scientific outcomes.

also... you are young, i know. there are times when science can say whatever they want, the truth lies in experience.

johnrobholmes: thanks. :)
 
Tom Treutlein said:
Sugar, I apologize. I was joking around with a friend of mine as I wrote that post and kind've just let that slip in there - I don't support the idea that women are more illogical or irrational than men - just a greater percentage I've known have been more so, so I tease people about that. Do I actually believe it to hold true all the time? Not at all.

Anyway - wnt2b, I never said I was great or anything, so stop making me out to seem arrogant, 'cause I think I'm far enough from it.

I want to stick to science because I feel secure in it. I like empirical data that comes to solid conclusions as to why something works. Maybe HST will have some of its principles disproven in the future, which will show the science wasn't perfect. Taking the gamble that it is in fact perfect, I stick with it, because once science has been proven...you can't disprove it. Maybe it's not 100%, but after the results I and others have seen on it, it's hard for me to say that it isn't the best method around for size alone.
Click to expand...

your posts are very arrogant bro..especially when you dont come on here for a week and then come into a thread and drop a bomb..your buddy debaser does the exact same thing..

HST works never said it didnt..glad your getting results..But there is more than one way to skin a cat..that is the part i am trying to get you to see..i am not asking you to change your training style..

Im actually just tired of this whole thing to the point where i dont wann post here anymore..i mod at another board and post at a few others..and it just isnt worth it for me to have to defend my posts like this...last time i looked this is elitefitness right not the hst board?
 
How are my posts arrogant? Elaborate.

No one said it was the HST board. Doesn't mean I can't talk about HST. You don't have to defend your posts. You could leave it alone. You choose to continue discussing it, and I enjoy that. A debate is fine, so long as it doesn't get heated and become a flame war.

I live a busy life, normally. There are gaps where I have a lot of time free, so I post when I can, then I'll disappear for awhile. So what? Keeping track of when I'm here and when I'm not? Pfft.
 
Jeremy82587 said:
Hey guys. I was wondering how long it takes to add an inch to your arms. I know it takes proper training and nutrition, and genetics have role to play also. But I am solid in my training and diet, and I'm 17. So how long should I expect it to take to add about an inch, or a half inch?? Thanks PS:
What exercise are best in your opinion for adding mass to the arm?
Click to expand...

Adding an inch in a year is a good goal to shoot for IMO.

If I were you, i'd train arms (and everything else) every 4-5 days.

Arms should be like this:
1)Skull crushers 4x6
2)Overhead db extension 4x 10

1) Barbell curls 4x6
2) DB hammer 4x10
 
Tom Treutlein said:
How are my posts arrogant? Elaborate.

No one said it was the HST board. Doesn't mean I can't talk about HST. You don't have to defend your posts. You could leave it alone. You choose to continue discussing it, and I enjoy that. A debate is fine, so long as it doesn't get heated and become a flame war.

I live a busy life, normally. There are gaps where I have a lot of time free, so I post when I can, then I'll disappear for awhile. So what? Keeping track of when I'm here and when I'm not? Pfft.
Click to expand...

dude im done you win..im out
 
wnt2bBeast said:
dude im done you win..im out
Click to expand...

i'll look for you in c&c more. :)
 
Tom Treutlein said:
Sugar, I apologize. I was joking around with a friend of mine as I wrote that post and kind've just let that slip in there - I don't support the idea that women are more illogical or irrational than men - just a greater percentage I've known have been more so, so I tease people about that. Do I actually believe it to hold true all the time? Not at all.

Anyway - wnt2b, I never said I was great or anything, so stop making me out to seem arrogant, 'cause I think I'm far enough from it.

I want to stick to science because I feel secure in it. I like empirical data that comes to solid conclusions as to why something works. Maybe HST will have some of its principles disproven in the future, which will show the science wasn't perfect. Taking the gamble that it is in fact perfect, I stick with it, because once science has been proven...you can't disprove it. Maybe it's not 100%, but after the results I and others have seen on it, it's hard for me to say that it isn't the best method around for size alone.
Click to expand...


Tom,

the difficulty is not with science. Neither I nor any other sound-minded individual would encourage you to forget about the evidence that science offers, but I would ask you to put it in perspective. You need to realize, in the first place, the essentially provisional status that all research from modern science provides, and you need to realize more specifically, that when it comes to exercise science, and especially when it comes to the science of hypertrophy, the results that science has produced have been paltry. To offer, as HST does, an interpretation of the source of muscle growth, and then to claim, as you seem to imply, that this is a.) an interpretation whose analysis can not be extended, or, in other words, an interpretation which does not leave much, for example the indirect effects of squats, open to further analysis within their own model of hypertrophy, and b.) that there could not be entirely different sources of hypertrophy which that model does not take into account, is extremely arrogant. This arrogance, or stupidly high opinion of the results of some limited research, prevents you from seeing the many other accounts of muscle growth which have been made (each of which has its own short-comings) and from experimenting with yourself, trying different programs. One of the things that has become clear about hypertrophy is that it is incredibly complicated: there is a complicated set of interrelated factors (nutrition, power output, force production, workload, time-under-tension, hormonal response, etc.), and b/c they are interrelated, no account of hypertrophy has a chance of being authoritative until it adequately explains precisely how each of these factors relates to the others, and then there would still remain a task of implementing such an account in different individuals. That said, the best policy is one of making personal experiments, or attempts, at acheiving your goals, following the models of science that have been so far created is a good start, but you must keep your attempts open to new possibilites, following where your progress dictates. Finally, I have never met anyone who has made tremendous growth by following a program resembling HST (this could just be b/c I have not met enough people), and, soemone else once quite intelligently told me that the best workout for people like you was A.) to open up your ears to all the suggestions made by successfull people with experience, and B.) multiple heavy sets of SHUT THE FUCK UP!
 
Well first off, let's clear something up: you're more calling me ignorant and close-minded, not arrogant or pretentious. Use the correct term next time.

Secondly, you were doing fine until you tried to pull the "intelligent" quote from someone. The first part isn't so bad, except people can be successful, and their methods can work. Fine. My gripe was the time it takes, and trying to optimize gains in a shorter period, thus reaching their levels earlier than they had. This is why I question old methods and look towards new ones. I'm not saying others don't work. I know they do. It's been proven with results. It's a matter of how well they work. How quick they work. So I can see where you thinking this part of the prescribed workout for "people like me" was intelligent.

As for part two, that should have been left out, as it did nothing constructive at all, but since you wanna play like that: Fuck off, cunt. ;) Maybe it isn't I who needs the "multiple heavy sets of SHUT THE FUCK UP!". Bitch.
 
fellas lets just move on..this isnt going to go anywhere..we all can argue till we're blue in the face..and actually its quite stupid..people whether they be me or TT will believe what they want and will train the way they want whether its optimal or not optimal..

so unless your gonna post your arm routine lets stop slamming each other..ive already posted mine but ill do it again:

i mentioned my problems with elbow tendonitis do my bi's work is limited and i do not go heavy at all in fact my weights are around 50-60%
plate loaded preacher 3x10-15
cable curls 2 x20-30

tris;
CG bench 5x5
skulls 2 x8-10 may add in reverse grip bench
rope or v-bar pushdowns 2x 8-10
 
Tom Treutlein said:
Well first off, let's clear something up: you're more calling me ignorant and close-minded, not arrogant or pretentious. Use the correct term next time.

Secondly, you were doing fine until you tried to pull the "intelligent" quote from someone. The first part isn't so bad, except people can be successful, and their methods can work. Fine. My gripe was the time it takes, and trying to optimize gains in a shorter period, thus reaching their levels earlier than they had. This is why I question old methods and look towards new ones. I'm not saying others don't work. I know they do. It's been proven with results. It's a matter of how well they work. How quick they work. So I can see where you thinking this part of the prescribed workout for "people like me" was intelligent.

As for part two, that should have been left out, as it did nothing constructive at all, but since you wanna play like that: Fuck off, cunt. ;) Maybe it isn't I who needs the "multiple heavy sets of SHUT THE FUCK UP!". Bitch.
Click to expand...

If you could read, you would see precisely why I called you arrogant. Supposing you agree that having too high an opinion of oneself, in this case yourself as a scientist, is arrogance. You have a very shallow interpretation of "closemindedness" if you can not see its essential connection to arrogance. Secondly, your response in no way justifies your stupid statements about muscle growth. Finally you misunderstand my final sentance. That advice adds much and would be good for you or almost any other beginner in general, b/c you are too inexperienced to have much chance of saying anything valuable. The profanity, was not attributed to you, but rather added emphasis to the point.
 
Firstly, the "stupid statements about muscle growth" were not my own. Second, I don't see how you can call them stupid when they are showing a scientific background, and you're just spitting a bunch of bullshit.

Just because one doesn't have the experience in the gym does not mean they can't say anything valuable. You might not agree with some of the stuff behind HST, but let's say WSB. It works. Everyone knows that. So if I got a friend into training, had him read everything on Westside, taught him all he needed to know (or allowed him to teach himself) and learn how to set up routines and when the volume would be deemed too high or low for a beginning or advanced lifter respectively, you're telling me he would have nothing valuable to say? That, to me, sounds like ignorance.

I can see how "closemindedness" :rolleyes::FRlol: has a connection to arrogance. I feel it has a greater one to ignorance, though. That's not my main issue, anyway. Regardless of what you want to call me (the main word you seem to toss at me here is arrogant) - I don't care. You don't really have any solid reason for saying I'm arrogant.

According to you, I'm stubborn and/or closed minded because I refuse to believe anything other than HST is optimal for growth, which, in turn, makes me arrogant. Right. Okay. I see no real correlation there, but maybe it's just me.

I have a high opinion of myself? Not really. I'm pretty insecure, to be honest. One of the reasons I want to train optimally to get bigger and stronger as quickly as possible. You don't even know me, so don't act like you do.

Prick. :)
 
alright you each got your last licks in..no more rebuttles from anyone unless it has something to do with training arms..OK???

Lets get on with life!!!!!
 
Ok Tom, how long have you been training? What is your total training experience time?

What did you start out weighing and what were your measurements then? How much did you lift in the basic exercises?

What are they now? How much do you lift now?

I ask these questions to get a better idea of why you believe HST is the best training for growth, other than you read and believe it is.

How many other methods have you actually tried to make an honest, experienced and unbiased comparison to HST?

And if you haven't at least tried a few other training methods for at least a few months at a time, how can you know HST is better?

The logical answer is you can't. The problem is that you assume that due to some scientific studies that HST is the BEST way. Bro, I'll say it one last time. There is no BEST way for anyone. Everyone is different.

Also, is this so-called scientific HST info peer reviewed?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Feeder workouts
Replies
22
Views
3K
Tiger Salman Khan
Tiger Salman Khan
T
how to build real muscle mass
Replies
19
Views
2K
RoySimpson
RoySimpson
Blackout-
Approved Log Testosterone Anavar EQ Cycle
2
Replies
160
Views
14K
abolone
abolone
Richard Brown
Napsgear Why Your Abs Aren`t Growing (And How to Finally Fix It)
Replies
6
Views
419
ROIDDERS
ROIDDERS
Richard Brown
Napsgear Why Your Abs Aren`t Growing (And How to Finally Fix It)
Replies
6
Views
365
BodyMonster34
BodyMonster34
Top Bottom