biceps suck!!!

[go2failure]

oh yeah,

hit your biceps with some synthol - I have no experience with synthol but that will add some size to them.

Like everyone else on this thread has stated, muscle shape is genetic. there's really nothing more to it, if there was a training method to change it then everyone would have biceps like arnold.

Actually you use Arnold, but his bicep peak evolved through all of pictures I've seen of him... Yeah he always had big biceps, but his peak changed. Even arnold supports the idea that muscle shape can change.

But, arnold's beliefs compared to today's standards equated to either 1) overtraining or 2) being genetically blessed.

 

[go2failure]

Well, I gotta go back to work... I'll continue with with you later...

 

[Madcow2]

As mentzer said, "With one who claims to be a expert in all things training, walk away, that person is a fool"....

While I don't dispute the intent behind what he is saying here and I understand and respect your decision to hold your own opinion as to wether a muscle can be shapped or not, IMO - one would be best served not merely walking from Mentzer but running as fast as possible.

 

[super_rice]

his peaks "changed" because they got bigger - a lot bigger.

 

[Tom Treutlein]

Who claimed to be an expert? 'cause I certainly made no such claim. You're not an expert just because you know and preach the basics of something.

 

[go2failure]

While I don't dispute the intent behind what he is saying here and I understand and respect your decision to hold your own opinion as to wether a muscle can be shapped or not,

Thank you for being respectful

IMO - one would be best served not merely walking from Mentzer but running as fast as possible.

Ironically, I found that I had to run towards his philosophies

 

[go2failure]

his peaks "changed" because they got bigger - a lot bigger.

Yes, they did get bigger. They weren't like that in the beggining.


G2F

 

[go2failure]

Who claimed to be an expert? 'cause I certainly made no such claim. You're not an expert just because you know and preach the basics of something.

Do you believe that everyone should follow what you call "basics"?

If you answered yes, then you qualify as a expert because --> everyone would be huge if they knew what you know.

If you answered no, then --> you agree with me that everyone responds differently.

 

[Madcow2]

Thank you for being respectful




Ironically, I found that I had to run towards his philosophies

There was a very lengthy discussion at Fortified Iron that covers HIT and the issues with single factor theory up, down, and sideways. It gets rediculous at times (because gfgomaz is one of the denser individuals on the planet and has never once read anything other than BBing magazines and Heavy Duty and rather than listen to those who are fairly well read and have tried everything - he'd rather hear himself and his very limited knowledge talk) but it's something that is very much worth your while to read simply because there is more at play here than supercompensation and the timing of workouts. There are also a lot of good books referenced and links provided throughout.

It probably best to start on page 4 here. Gfgomaz also doesn't know how to use the damn quotes properly but it's worth pushing through to the end. I think I got involved on page 6 somewhere. But it really is worthwhile reading it until the end because several people go through a lot of pain to try to explain this stuff. Like I said before, believing anything to be the best or possible is fine but it should be in the context of understanding all else that is out there specifically if a method is unequivocably dominant and used worldwide among elite coaches and athletes: http://www.fortifiediron.net/invision/index.php?showtopic=6685&st=75

Here is a condensced explanation of basic dual factor theory in a nutshell: http://forum.mesomorphosis.com/showpost.php?p=48&postcount=3

The main issue with Mentzer is that he didn't know this stuff or anything about it nor does most of BBing which is a sad state of affairs in training and relies almost exclsuviely on drugs. Strict supercompensationg is very sexy and clean from a logical point of view, but unfortunately if that point of view doesn't accurately describe how the body works it doesn't matter how sexy and clean it is. This becomes far more important the more advanced an athelte becomes. Also, if you are aware of Mentzer's life, it isn't exactly out of character for him to cling to something clean and logical - it probably stabalized his mind to some degree to have a BBing parallel to Ayn Rand. Unfortunately, if you poke hard enough there are some major gaps in HIT and they tend to get glossed over with nifty quotes from Mentzer/Jones/or some other guy who's never read a good training book in his life or something about people not wanting to work hard enough. It's fine to use and believe HIT is the best (there are some qualified people who do - i.e. PSU's strength coach), all that said - one can't legitimately claim best unless one is well versed in the other theories.

 

[Tom Treutlein]

Not everyone would be huge. I'm not huge by any means, but that's not 'cause I lack knowledge. Rather, I lack an appetite and consistency in the gym. I know what it is I need to do, I just don't get around to doing it.