How to get a six pack.

[I2ancid]

Alot of people still believe that doing "20 minutes a day" on some ab rocker is going to give them visable ab's. Muscle size doesent come from working a muscle group straight for 20 minutes or even anything over 15 reps, You are only working to make your muscles able to last longer during the next workout through oxygen efficiency, not to get size.

To get size, your max repetitions on a muscle group should be around 6-8 reps. AB's are not different. I know alot of people who do 200 situps or so a day and wonder why they can't see their six pack. The secret to a six pack is low body fat and working them for size, not oxygen efficiency.

This is the ab routine I do once a week; I lay on my back and I place a 45lb dumbell on my chest and hold it in place with my arms. I then put my feet straight down on the floor. As I do my first crunch I raise my legs to the top slowly in unison with my slow yet hard crunch. When I go to lay back from the crunch I slowly lower my legs back down all the way and repeat. If you can do more than 6-8 reps then just increase the weight on your chest. This will help give your abs size. instead of wasting your time doing 200 situps a day, just do 3 sets of this excersise once a week.

And REMEMBER Ab's are made in the kitchen too. If you have a high body fat level you wont see those ab's no matter how hard you workout.

 

[Cobin]

Alot of people still believe that doing "20 minutes a day" on some ab rocker is going to give them visable ab's. Muscle size doesent come from working a muscle group straight for 20 minutes or even anything over 15 reps, You are only working to make your muscles able to last longer during the next workout through oxygen efficiency, not to get size.

To get size, your max repetitions on a muscle group should be around 6-8 reps. AB's are not different. I know alot of people who do 200 situps or so a day and wonder why they can't see their six pack. The secret to a six pack is low body fat and working them for size, not oxygen efficiency.

This is the ab routine I do once a week; I lay on my back and I place a 45lb dumbell on my chest and hold it in place with my arms. I then put my feet straight down on the floor. As I do my first crunch I raise my legs to the top slowly in unison with my slow yet hard crunch. When I go to lay back from the crunch I slowly lower my legs back down all the way and repeat. If you can do more than 6-8 reps then just increase the weight on your chest. This will help give your abs size. instead of wasting your time doing 200 situps a day, just do 3 sets of this excersise once a week.

And REMEMBER Ab's are made in the kitchen too. If you have a high body fat level you wont see those ab's no matter how hard you workout.

I bet your abs are pretty big, thanks for the tip next time I cut i will do that.

 

[WarriorPL]

My gym has a machine like that.... you can rack up to 180 pounds .
What you do is sit down like in a normal chair and theres a pad at your chest level and you just crunch down, but you don't use your legs like you do in your excercise.
I'll be sure to try it on monday!

 

[skaman607]

thats not as hard as doing a weighted crunch though

 

[DanielBishop]

I dunno, man....

.... you can't say one thing works perfectly and another thing doesn't work at all.

I've never trained my abs with any weight at all, and they're pretty good. Some elite athletes who do ab exercises in the 100+ range have amazing abs too.... and don't use weight. It all depends.

If that works for you, great. But it won't necesarilly work for everyone.

I train my abs with about 15-25 reps usually. I always start with lower abs.... beginning with hanging knee raises, with my thighs parallel to the floor in the starting position, and up against my chest (or as close as possible) in the top position. My thighs never go down past parallel. That's my best abs exercise. I also do decline knee raises.... I straighten my knees at the bottom, but have them semi-bent by the top of the movement and then curl my spine a bit to lift my entire legs into the air.

Also cross-over situps, oblique sit-ups and standard cruches. All 15-25 reps. Some go beyond 30-35 reps. And I'm quite happy with my abs.

So try I2ancid's way.... but not everything works for everyone.

One thing I do agree on wholeheartedly.... abs come from the kitchen (and the treadmill)....

 

[Mr.X]

BEST WAY TO SEE ABS: A GOOD CUTTING DIET/CARDIO/WEIGHTS AND MORE CARDIO.......

YOU CAN DO ABS W/ 100LBS. FOR ALL I CARE, BUT IF YOU'RE 15-30%BODYFAT, IT WONT MAKE A DIFFERENCE.....

UNTIL I WAS 22, I ONLY TRAINED ABS 2 TIME (MY WHOLE LIFE UNTIL THEN)...MY ABS WERE HUGE! AND RIPPED! WHY, BECAUSE I LIFTED HEAVY AND HARD, HIGH VOLUME HIT TRAINING.....I'M A DORIAN PHILOSOPHY FAN; IF YOU TRAIN HEAVY, THERE IS NO NEED FOR AB WORK.


Mr.X

 

[I2ancid]

Indeed, some people don't even need to work them out at all. They just come out after a good cutting cycle but if you're going to work them out, you should know how. your ab's will become visable around the 8% bfat mark. My routine works both upper and lower ab's at the same time. btw- The lower ab's should have some extra emphasis as they are harder to bring out than the top 2.

I never really worked my ab's in the past because they were coming along nicely by themselves, but after I did start working them they became alot more visable within weeks. (My bfat fat was still lowering at a phenominal rate at the time so it's hard to say what extent it helped)

anyways, if you are a serious lifter your ab's get enough working out just from other lifting routines, just focus on the diet and cardio.

 

[DrBones]

your ab's will become visable around the 8%

Your abs should be visible long before 8%... just not all of them...
Mine personaly, usually start to become visible around 12%..

 

[Mr.X]

Your abs should be visible long before 8%... just not all of them...
Mine personaly, usually start to become visible around 12%..

Depending on your genetics and the size of your abs; I don't see abs until I'm 5%bf, so you can see the difference.

Mr.X

 

[Cuts]

What about 6 Winny spot injections... one in each ab? You'll have the biggest friggin abs you could ever dream of! Then you can win ab powerlifting contests.

 

[Mr.X]

What about 6 Winny spot injections... one in each ab? You'll have the biggest friggin abs you could ever dream of! Then you can win ab powerlifting contests.

#1) winstrol DOES NOT cause localized growth
#2) the WORST thing you can do is inject into the abs, it's such a bad idea that I don't even want to talk about it
#3) abs don't get that big, in fact "abs" is just one muscle w/ fibers pulling them back in separation

Mr.X

 

[Kid Dynamite]

Depending on your genetics and the size of your abs; I don't see abs until I'm 5%bf, so you can see the difference.

Mr.X

That makes me feel better (and worse), as I was at 7% and could only see a good outline when I flexed in good lighting. I'm not alone, but I wish my fat was ditributed more evenly.

 

[DanielBishop]

Depending on your genetics and the size of your abs; I don't see abs until I'm 5%bf, so you can see the difference.

I wonder if that's due to you not training your abs?

 

[Mortin]

That makes me feel better (and worse), as I was at 7% and could only see a good outline when I flexed in good lighting. I'm not alone, but I wish my fat was ditributed more evenly.

trust me... you weren't 7% BF

 

[Mr.X]

trust me... you weren't 7% BF

Mortin, did you read my post? I do not see my abs until 5%bf, at 7A% I see an ouline like he does. Not everyone works the same, and I get my bf measured in a hydro tank.

Mr.X

 

[Kid Dynamite]

I wonder if that's due to you not training your abs?

Unlikely, but possible (I did them, just not often enough). I think my main reason was that my caliper readings were about twice as much in my abdomen as in the rest of my body (ex: chest was 5, abs were 14mm). Also, I lost alot of weight over the past few years, so my skin isn't tight at all. The top 2 abs are always visible, then you can't see anything unless I flex em.
Mortin-
I might not have been at 7%, but I had 2 different people do a caliper test and they were almost identical. But, accuracy in these tests isn't perfect, so you never know.

 

[Cuts]

#1) winstrol DOES NOT cause localized growth
#2) the WORST thing you can do is inject into the abs, it's such a bad idea that I don't even want to talk about it
#3) abs don't get that big, in fact "abs" is just one muscle w/ fibers pulling them back in separation

Mr.X

I'd disagree with your first point but that discussion's for another board at another time. And I was joking about injecting directly into the abs.

 

[juiceheadnyc]

Well i have to totally diagree with that..In my opinion and from what ive done and seen work best i have to say this...I think abs first of all should be worked out every day, and even then unless u are at a low % of body fat u wont see shyt..heres what i do for abs daily and my abs are ripped to shreads.....

Leg raises for the bottom...4 sets of 40

crunch machine for the top....4 sets of 100

side crunches for the sides....4 sets of 40 each side

i have tried many many defferent types of ab workouts during my years training and hae found this to be the most effective..But like i said if ur not at a low percentage of body fat u wont see shyt theyll be there but underneath ur layer of fat..
Try this ab work out for just 1 month and if ur at low % body fat already ull see what i mean.....good luk and later.

 

[Mr.X]

I'd disagree with your first point but that discussion's for another board at another time. And I was joking about injecting directly into the abs.

Some people make that claim of localized growth, but to date I have not seen any science behind it.

Mr.X

 

[Cuts]

Some people make that claim of localized growth, but to date I have not seen any science behind it.

Mr.X

That's very true... it definitely hasn't been proven. My opinion, although not scientifically sound by any means, is based purely on empirical data.

 

[Mr.X]

That's very true... it definitely hasn't been proven. My opinion, although not scientifically sound by any means, is based purely on empirical data.

To agree w/ you, when I run fina ED and do delt shots, I do notice localized growth from the muscle fiber streching; just as you would w/ pum-n-pose. I think fina is by far superior in localized growth, but, again, that's a statement not highly backed by science.

Mr.X

 

[FreakMonster]

Well i have to totally diagree with that..In my opinion and from what ive done and seen work best i have to say this...I think abs first of all should be worked out every day, and even then unless u are at a low % of body fat u wont see shyt..heres what i do for abs daily and my abs are ripped to shreads.....

Leg raises for the bottom...4 sets of 40

crunch machine for the top....4 sets of 100

side crunches for the sides....4 sets of 40 each side

i have tried many many defferent types of ab workouts during my years training and hae found this to be the most effective..But like i said if ur not at a low percentage of body fat u wont see shyt theyll be there but underneath ur layer of fat..
Try this ab work out for just 1 month and if ur at low % body fat already ull see what i mean.....good luk and later.

So is that 40 reps or 10 reps for every set?

 

[oneandthesame]

That's very true... it definitely hasn't been proven. My opinion, although not scientifically sound by any means, is based purely on empirical data.

I think you mean anticdotal data, as empirical is the same as scientific.

 

[Cuts]

I think you mean anticdotal data, as empirical is the same as scientific.

I think you mean anecdotal, as there is no such word as anticdotal ...

From a dictionary.com search for the word "empirical"...

1. Relying on or derived from observation OR experiment: empirical results that supported the hypothesis.
Verifiable or provable by means of observation OR experiment: empirical laws.

2. Guided by practical experience and not theory, especially in medicine.

You're probably right though... "anecdotal" would have probably been a better word, although I don't think "empirical" was entirely wrong either. later

 

[oneandthesame]

I think you mean anecdotal, as there is no such word as anticdotal ...

From a dictionary.com search for the word "empirical"...

1. Relying on or derived from observation OR experiment: empirical results that supported the hypothesis.
Verifiable or provable by means of observation OR experiment: empirical laws.

2. Guided by practical experience and not theory, especially in medicine.

You're probably right though... "anecdotal" would have probably been a better word, although I don't think "empirical" was entirely wrong either. later

LOL

 

[Mr.X]

I think you mean anecdotal, as there is no such word as anticdotal ...

From a dictionary.com search for the word "empirical"...

1. Relying on or derived from observation OR experiment: empirical results that supported the hypothesis.
Verifiable or provable by means of observation OR experiment: empirical laws.

2. Guided by practical experience and not theory, especially in medicine.

You're probably right though... "anecdotal" would have probably been a better word, although I don't think "empirical" was entirely wrong either. later

It's anecdotal, and it's a joke because no studies back it up. PERIOD. Empirical date is only applicable, as one learns in graduate school, to people en-mass and not individual experiments. Overall, the idea might be good, but, until further proof and science, it is only a "myth".

Mr.X

 

[Cuts]

Overall, the idea might be good, but, until further proof and science, it is only a "myth".

Mr.X

O.k... so I propose a scientifically rigourous study on spot injections and their effect or non-effect in inducing local growth. Let's get together 100 Elite members who advocate Vitamin S use, and do it. I'll volunteer as a participant if I get free Winny !