read this (please)

[Liberator]

Ok

Ive read countless opinions on the fact that benching with the barbell is the king mass builder scientifically, but from opinions in the archives many say that it doesnt do anything for size compared to isolation exercises. Ive talked to people who say they never use the bar anymore for chest as its just ego.

So what is the score with the bar, is it just a macho tool or does it really build your pecs more so than dumbells or is it case of mixing them up again. Every person I have read that has problematic pec development does flat bb bench first and next to no dbell work.

Can someone answer this question or is it always going to be a case of 50/50 split between the two

I'm talking from bodybuilding point of view, I dont care how much weight you can lift, all I care about is which is the fastest muscle builder.

 

[natural-mike]

Flat barbell bench serves its purpose, but I never understand why people start with it.

The monsters in my gym always start with Incline Dumbbell, occasionally they use Incline Barbell.

The combo of Incline Dumbell and Flat barbell usually blitzes the chest just fine. And to destory your pecs, simply end with weighted dips, your chest should be toast after that.

But then again, who am I to listen to, they usually flame the shit out of me on this board for being a HITter.

Peace,
The Natural ONe

 

[Liberator]

Yeah

I agree with you about the monsters, same here.

Ive seen some people doing flat bench first, but theyve been lifting the same weight since I started working out

Exactly the same, the people with most impressive chests always seem to start with inclines, and its nearly always dumbells

 

[natural-mike]

Besides, I think most if not everyone is weaker on the incline, focus on getting that stronger, and although technically a chest is a chest and you cannot exactly zero in on an area, the upper chest is what gives the appearance of having a huge chest. But that point is debatable.

Peace,
Mike

 

[Cleaner]

To each his own.
Find what works for you.
I don't use DB's that much do to a bummed wrist.

No matter what use a combination of lifts.

 

[natural-mike]

Spokern like a true "Olympian"

I agree completely,
Mike

 

[Liberator]

There is that opinion (to each his own) but i was just trying to get some constructive feedback

the incline comment is a definate, as I said, all the big guys do inclines first, guaranteed (well all that i have seen) and they look at the people that do flat bench first smiling to themself!!!!

 

[da big thinker]

i am a bench press advocate...they all serve their purpose,whether it's flat,incline and decline.for myself,i noticed a great improvement in my chest development,by staying w/ low reps(6) and using the heaviest weight,making sure i fail on the 6th rep.i have never gotten anything by doing crossovers,flyes,etc.presses and dips all the way for me,to maximize overload...hence,a BIGGER AND STRONGER CHEST!!!

 

[BigAndy69]

Replace your flat barbell bench with incline barbell bench and incline db flyes with flat db flyes.

 

[GenetiKing]

I'm talking from bodybuilding point of view, I dont care how much weight you can lift

GOOD! I'm glad you are getting to the essence of BB instead of ego-feeding. I see too many go astray this way.

JMO but...incline DB presses are the best pressing motion for chest. The inclined angle forces you to recruit more chest than shoulders (as opposed to flat bench) and the dumbbells allow for a further range of motion and a superior peak pec contraction at the top of the movement.

As far as flyes go, I prefer cables or pec deck over DB flyes. With DB flyes, the resistance dies at the top. But this is irrelevant if you are a newbie (I don't know if you are or not). I don't have any scientific evidence to back this up, but just from what I've witnessed in my years of training in various gyms is that newbies cannot seem to get as much out of flye/crossover exercises as opposed to a season lifter with a little more meat on their chest. Just an observation.

 

[Liberator]

Thanks for all your input fellas

 

[LeviathanX]

Stick to compound movements. It doesn't really matter if you do incline or flat bench first, that isn't going to significantly effect your growth as long as you are progressively increasing your lifting weight and maintaining a healthy diet.

Flat bench, incline bench, decline bench, and dips are the compound exercises for the chest. Although I occasionally use flys, you should be working hard enough on those first 4 exercises that you won't have anything left for flys.

Go check out the Max-OT routine at www.ast-ss.com for more info.

 

[natural-mike]

Personally, I feel that is too much, unless you only do 1 set of each.

But then again I am a (s)HIT advocate as many people on this board like to refer to me as.

Mike

 

[LeviathanX]

My problem with HIT and especially (s)HIT (as I'll call it here ) is that I think it is most directly aimed at people who already have built themselves up to a certain point and are hitting a plateau phase in their training. When you are young (late teens and early twenties), I think you should be lifting 4 days a week, and doing cardio the rest of the days as long as you get enough food and sleep. Even at absolute full intensity, I'm recovered the next day and feel as if I could do another all-out routine. Too much of HIT training is based on the individual body type (mesomorphic, ectomorphic, etc.). I personally stick to compound exercises, but I do them 4 times/week (chest/triceps, rest, back/traps, rest, shoulders/biceps, legs/grip).

My $.02.

 

[natural-mike]

Levianthan,

Even at absolute intensity you are recovered the next day.? and you can go all out again?

Hmmmm I honestly think what you refer to as intense and what I refer to as intense are 2 very very different things.

Or perhaps you are a genetic mutant with uncanny recoverability.

Thanks for your 2 cents,...but you can keep the change.

Peace,
Natural "Flame the fucking shit out of me, I really care" Mike

 

[LeviathanX]

No... I merely think that you have been brainwashed by HIT advocates that full-intensity workouts are going to incapacitate you for days on end. That simply IS NOT the case. Think about the heavy and intense exercises that old railroad workers or construction workers would endure day-in day-out over the years, do you think they would have a job if they weren't able to perform the next day? All I'm saying is that if you get enough rest, and eat enough healthy foods. You should be recovered enough to perform every other day, if not every day. As I pointed out in my routine schedule, I always give myself one day rest between heavy upper body training - anymore than two days rest is bordering on lazy in my book. I have made gains using this method, and I did not make as much in gains when I tried the HIT method - that is where my distaste for HIT comes from. It may work for some, but it doesn't work for everyone.

 

[JB3]

I have to agree with Leviathan. I've tried a HIT routine in the past. Yes, it made me sore, but I didn't make any better progress than with a more "sensible" routine. I'm not a high volume advocate, but I think you need more than one or two sets per exercise. This isn't a race to see who can get out of the gym faster. I have no problem spending 45 min hitting the iron.

I've found that my upper-body recovers much faster than my lower-body. This is probably the case because: A) Lower-body muscle are much larger B) I'm walking around all day on the same muscle I just demolished in the gym. I like running as well, so that doesn't help recovery either. My point is, my upper-body if fully recovered in 2-3 days, in which case I should punish them again. Just because your lower-body may take a week to heal fully, don't become lax about training your upper-body to its full capacity.

 

[natural-mike]

Point well taken,

And per your point, you must undertsand some people are termed "recovery midgets" their system just cannot handle , I respond phenomenally to HIT, and I have not been brainwashed I tried every routine, every concept, every exercise, I conducted self experiments with myself for years, and I found what works best.

We also may lead very different lifestyles, you mention you feel lazy if you do not hit the gym a certain amount of times during the week.

I work 15 hour shifts in the IT tech field, I'm married, I play in a Basketball league during the week and a Softball League on the weekends, if I can grab 6 hours of sleep at night I consider that lucky. I would give anything, I would pay anything to have the feeling you mentioned as "lazy"

When I am in the GYM most people are all snuggly in bed watching Seinfeld re-runs. And mother fuck my work and life schedule I would be in there 95 times a week if it worked for me, but HIT works, and babe, it works wonders for me. And I promise you , I'll die knowing that concept.

I think we can end this topic now, its boring me.

But seriously you bring up some excellent well - taken points, I appreciate it.

Natural Mike

 

[natural-mike]

But JB3.... I make upper body gains every week. I progress in weight and/or reps almost every week. Granted the increments are small, but there is progression.

Were you doing HIT right? Copying the routine from paper doesn't justify using HIT.

Acquiring the ability to get the job done in 1 or 2 sets is HIT. You must teach the body this, it doenst happen in 1 workout. Did you learn how to do your job in a day? When you were in school, did you learn the semesters lessons in 1 day?

What I am saying is yes you tried it and you didnt make gains, but who's fault is it? The program? The concept?