mass is good but dont neglect PROPORTION thread.

[b fold the truth]

I understand what you're saying needsleep, but I have to disagree. If a 160 lb guy has perfect proportions, I don't give a crap. He still looks like a scrawny 160 lb guy to me. But, if a 260 lb cut guy has lagging rear delts, I don't say "psshhh, what a wuss, look at those disproportionate rear delts."

If people are training hard to get big, they'd be very foolish to focus on such a small thing as"rear delts" or hams." Grow as big as fucking possible, then worry about that sculpting crap. I believe one of the main reasons people have such slow progress in the gym is because they waste their time focusing on specific body parts when their whole body actually sucks.

Grow until you squek through doors, then worry about proportion

My sentiments exactly.

Too many people focus on looking perfect at 150, 160, 170, and 180...and because of that they NEVER reach 250+. Squats, bench presses, and dead lifts don't build perfect muscles...but they do build big ones.

I've never seen some 170 pound guy and thought...wow doesn't he look proportionate. I do look at 280 pound guys and think...wow that guy is a freak.

The difference...I can say that the 280 pound guy can spend about 4 months and bring up is weak points...

The 170 pound guy can spend the next 6 years getting big.

B True

 

[satchboogie]

im just sayin if i had lagging rear delts, i wouldnt stop training the other heads of the deltoids, i would just do my rear delts exercise first in the workout, when i got the most energy and the traps are fresh, and then move on to the other heads

GYMANLAX7..........

lets get back to this idea above as we have 2 schools of thought on lagging body parts.

1) train them first thing in your workout, then proceed to other muscles.

2) focus on those muscles for 3 consecutive workouts and maybe throw in a few sets on other muscles, and once every few weeks hit up the other muscles hard. then back to the 3 consecutive workouts etc. etc. etc.

 

[TheOak84]

Re: Re: Re: mass is good but dont neglect PROPORTION thread.

You saying that you never train those muscles?

B True

No, he said those were of often neglected muscles...
i forgot to include that when I quoted him, sorry..

but ya, i would never ever think of neglecting my lats or hammies,
thats crazy talk but i do neglect abs, i train them about once or twice a month... i train rear delts directly once a week, and they get hit with dead and rows, so its all gravy

 

[bigbadmadmanD]

i never trained legs when i was in high school, now that i am in college, i finally buckled down and committed to getting my legs up to par.

i do this by "prioritizing legs"
my leg day follows my two days off,
my back day follows legs,
then my chest follows back, etc....

this way my lesser developed "lagging" muscles can catch up, but i am not directly neglecting the other muscle groups

this prioritizing can be done many ways, legs day is followed by my two longest nights of sleep, and as far from any drinking i may do(lets not get into the booze talk)

my disagreement with you is in style and it may not fit your ideology, but hopefully others will find such prioritzing helpful

 

[Baoh]

wrong approach.

are you saying that you are the most powerful on the first exercises of a workout?

that's scientically unproven.

i dont know about you but when my energy level drops i simply end the workout.

by your apporach, you are strongest during the first part of the workout and when you start losing strength you move on to other muscle groups... dude.. that's wrong man!

You're incorrect.

 

[louden_swain]

this thread is common sense.

 

[BlkWS6]

I think you guys have to consider genetics too, and dont be too quick to point the finger at "that guy" we all see in the gym. Some of us are just dealt a bad hand (ie. calves are a problem for a large majority of people) and if the muscle just isnt there to begin with you are going to have a hell of a time bringing it up to be "proportional" to the rest of your body. I'll use my self as an example, I train calves with a ton of intensity, but due to a high insertion they are never going to be my strongest body part, and to some people I may never be considered "proportional." That doesnt mean Im slacking ass in the gym and that Im just neglecting calves, that means Im working with what I got to the best of my ability. So just cause you dont see a guy with perfect measurements, dont assume it is because he is neglecting a body part. We all have strengths and weaknesses, but that doesnt mean our weaknesses exist due to a lack of knowledge or effort. And by this post Im by all means not suggesting one just "gives up" because they felt they were dealt a bad hand on genetics (I will continue to train my calves forever, even though I know they will never win any trophies in aesthetics), Im just saying that not everything is always what it seems and that sometimes we shouldnt be too quick to judge.

 

[Baoh]

I think you guys have to consider genetics too, and dont be too quick to point the finger at "that guy" we all see in the gym. Some of us are just dealt a bad hand (ie. calves are a problem for a large majority of people) and if the muscle just isnt there to begin with you are going to have a hell of a time bringing it up to be "proportional" to the rest of your body. I'll use my self as an example, I train calves with a ton of intensity, but due to a high insertion they are never going to be my strongest body part, and to some people I may never be considered "proportional." That doesnt mean Im slacking ass in the gym and that Im just neglecting calves, that means Im working with what I got to the best of my ability. So just cause you dont see a guy with perfect measurements, dont assume it is because he is neglecting a body part. We all have strengths and weaknesses, but that doesnt mean our weaknesses exist due to a lack of knowledge or effort. And by this post Im by all means not suggesting one just "gives up" because they felt they were dealt a bad hand on genetics (I will continue to train my calves forever, even though I know they will never win any trophies in aesthetics), Im just saying that not everything is always what it seems and that sometimes we shouldnt be too quick to judge.

Good point. However, it's pretty easy to see when it's an insertion issue for an underdeveloped muscle. High calves being a prime example.

 

[needsleep]

I understand what you're saying needsleep, but I have to disagree.

Think you mean someone else, I haven't posted in this thread till now

I just read it occasionally trying to make up my own mind from what I know and other peoples opinions.

Listen/read as much as you can, but don't believe everything, is basically what I try to do.

 

[satchboogie]

GYMANLAX7..........

lets get back to this idea above as we have 2 schools of thought on lagging body parts.

1) train them first thing in your workout, then proceed to other muscles.

2) focus on those muscles for 3 consecutive workouts and maybe throw in a few sets on other muscles, and once every few weeks hit up the other muscles hard. then back to the 3 consecutive workouts etc. etc. etc.

lets look at the bottom line..

if you had a lagging body part, which option would you choose to follow. 1 or 2?