Elite Fitness Bodybuilding, Anabolics, Diet, Life Extension, Wellness, Supplements, and Training Boards
Anabolic Discussion Board WHICH IS HARDER TO BUILD, LARGER MUSCLES OR SMALLER MUSCLES?
|
Author | Topic: WHICH IS HARDER TO BUILD, LARGER MUSCLES OR SMALLER MUSCLES? | ||
Elite Bodybuilder Posts: 868 |
DON'T MEAN TO SOUND IGNORANT, BUT ARE SMALL MUSCLES LIKE BICEPS AND CHEST HARDER TO BUILD THAN LARGER ONES LIKE BACK AND LEGS AND GLUTES. | ||
Amateur Bodybuilder Posts: 109 |
Muscles that get used alot, such as calves, are harder to build because they're used to alot of stress. Genetic wonders are an exception. It may seem that the larger muscles grow better, but talking percentage its closer than most think. Its all about the individual, once you get to know your body, lifting becomes almost textbook, you start to know exactly what you need to do to get the results you want. | ||
Pro Bodybuilder Posts: 312 |
genetics can play a big role in growth. But it also depends on the juice you using sometimes. Smaller muscles would appear to grow slower because of the lack of fiber density. ------------------ MustangRacer27 | ||
Amateur Bodybuilder Posts: 204 |
Take a look around your gym next time. You will see that genetics plays a huge role. You ever notice how most Asian guys can build massive arms but a disproportionally small chest? And white guys the opposite? That is just one general example, especially since my Asian friends all are jealous of my chest, but I'd rather have their arms. So it is all individual. ------------------ | ||
Amateur Bodybuilder Posts: 190 |
I echo what the others have said. Genetics are the main factor in determining how quickly a particular muscle group grows. For instance, my chest and shoulders blow up from very little work, whereas I still haven't figured out the right combo to make my bis grow. |
All times are ET (US) | |