Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
What does this mean to you?
Discuss.
Discuss.
Weak-Point Training
- Thread starter the_alcatraz
- Start date
To me, it means training like a beast in the squat rack because I have legs like a giraffe.
If you just re arrange the words, you get "training your weak points", which is self explanatory, and also very general and vague.
I could either write two sentences or write 2 pages on it.
Is there something you had in mind specifically?
I just want to take the thread the direction you want it.
If you just re arrange the words, you get "training your weak points", which is self explanatory, and also very general and vague.
I could either write two sentences or write 2 pages on it.
Is there something you had in mind specifically?
I just want to take the thread the direction you want it.
Giving priority to an underdevelop muscular group... assuming that you already have a solid muscular base. This not for the skinny newbie who wants big bis when his entire body needs size.
You can either give extra work to that weak point, or actually not working it that much at all because it might not grow due to the excessive work volume.
You can either give extra work to that weak point, or actually not working it that much at all because it might not grow due to the excessive work volume.
Exactly. This is for more advanced trainees. Also you have to look at the big picture of your whole routine. If your bis are a true week point most of the time more direct bicep work isn't the answer. Changing your back workout to include close grip chins and underhand BB rows could really push them through that size plateau. This can be true with all muscle groups and their secondary lifts.
Very good input, thank you
The min issue I was trying to address was giving priority to a certain muscle over another because you feel like it is weak or could use the extra work. This is true in instances like when you lack the tear drop are development in your quads, the peak in your biceps, the side delt development, the lower back development, rear delt development, calf development, usually areas that require a little extra special attention.
yes...priority training
Very good input, thank you
The min issue I was trying to address was giving priority to a certain muscle over another because you feel like it is weak or could use the extra work. This is true in instances like when you lack the tear drop are development in your quads, the peak in your biceps, the side delt development, the lower back development, rear delt development, calf development, usually areas that require a little extra special attention.
right, this also brings in the aspect of training for body symmetry.
I for one have shitty symmetry. Seeing as I grew up and lived my whole life up til I was 21 playing baseball as a pitcher who could throw up to as high as 94mph, my right arm has always been much thicker and stronger than my left. It developed this way from 8 years old all the way through puberty, so my body has been stuck with an assymetrical weaker left side. My right arm measures 17" flexed, my left measures barely 16.25. My left forearm and left lat have about the same proportion of assymetry due to the extenet of uninvolvement vs the right side. Since I am just now starting to get a respectable amount of mass for my height, now am I going to start worrying about bringing that up to meet the right side.
The funny thing is, my left isn't any weaker than my right when it comes to lifting with dumbbells.
I will just focus on overall mass and strength gains for now.
Good input guys. Let's keep this rollin!
lol this is the only thing to focus on!!! I quoted you, but I didn't mean to miply that toward you. I have seen your pictures and you are jacked bro. I meant that for Timmy No Neck who spends all his time curling and wonders why he's so small.
weak point training is something that one should only worry about if you have more than 3 lbs. of body mass per inch of height at a respectable bodyfat level (at least an outline of abs showing...so probably 15% or less). Until then you just need more lean mass. So lack of lean mass would be that individual's weak point!
I know you weren't bro. I just said that because I really want to get bigger. Thanks for the compliments.
dark-knight
New member
yes my left bicep was a little weaker than the right. doing a few extra reps on the last set balanced her out.
I put it down to jackin off with my right hand
I put it down to jackin off with my right hand
Scotsman
New member
First you have to define weak point. To me it's whatever the weakest link in the chain of strength in. Used to be my grip as my body could pull more weight than I could hang onto. Now it's pure core strength.
I don't look at it as trying to prioritize an are I just figure out what to change to be more effective. For grip I added in some extra work like grip holds and I stopped using straps except on my heaviest rack pull days.
Cheers,
Scotsman
I don't look at it as trying to prioritize an are I just figure out what to change to be more effective. For grip I added in some extra work like grip holds and I stopped using straps except on my heaviest rack pull days.
Cheers,
Scotsman
I think it's often (read often, not always) next to impossible to get "weak points" up to scratch if a guy has been hitting the weights for many years. How many bodybuilders have we seen who never got their calves or quads up to scratch.
Marcus Ruhl could never get his triceps up to par with the rest of him no matter what he did. Surely training it more or training it less cannot work. The only thing I can think of would be to not train the rest of the body for a while and only the weak part...this is not practical and I doubt anyone would try this.
I think in most cases we are fighting genetic potential that just isn't there for the weak part.
Do you feel like not using straps really makes your grip stronger?
I have felt this in my traps training.
With Dabuggguy, CEO and Scotsman, I feel fuckin tiny...I'm 200 lbs only 
Arnold had weak calves... Larry Scott also claimed he had narrow shoulders and not so impressive biceps at beginning, Franco Columbu cut back on his whole body volume to bring his arms up to pair by working them twice a week, Ronnie Coleman at one point only worked is biceps once a month so they weren't ahead of his body.
All of them Mr Os and like I and SL said this is not for pencil-neck Joe, even though genetics play the major role in the end, priority and specialization routines are valuable tools on bodybuilding.
Markus Ruhl is on bodybuilding because he is a size freak and doesn't matter how ripped and conditioned he is on stage he will never win due to aesthetical matters. he has a decent tricep but his shoulders and pecs are way too overwhelming for that matter.
Larry Scott had narrow shoulders and weak biceps. You believe that? I don't. I always shake my head when I hear this story.
Markus Ruhl has weak triceps in relation to the rest of his physique which is all overwhelming for that matter. His triceps just didn't compare in balance with most of his competitors. Put his triceps next to Kevin Levrones. You obviously don't think much of Marcus Ruhl but you should give him more credit. A 5th, 7th and 8th place at 3 Olympias is pretty good.
Not training one bodypart much to hold it back is pretty easy to do compared to bringing one part up to match the rest. It's a whole different problem if you have one point too strong rather than one point too weak.
Arnold would still have weak calves in today's lineup. He competed with 2 or 3 others at most of his contests and one year went unappossed. Hardly the lineups you have today.
Franco's arms never matched his back and chest IMO. This bow-legged short guy never impressed me and IMO didn't deserve to win the 2 Olympias he won.
With Dabuggguy, CEO and Scotsman, I feel fuckin tiny...I'm 200 lbs only
bro, proportionally you are bigger than I am. If i was proportionally the same size as you at this height, I would weigh like 230.
After this 12 week run with drol and test topped with monsterdrol the last 4 weeks though.....
Scotsman
New member
Actually I'm a big fan of the german giant Markus Ruhl and i was glad he won the 2002 NOC which included a Harley Davidson, if I'm correct, as part of prize.
Larry Scott had indeed narrow shoulder specifically the clavicule. He maximized his width on stage not only through massive delt development (reverse-grip dips, heavy lateral rises and dumbell presses), but also through a great posing routine which his mentor (Vince Gironda) adjusted to him particularly the S pose (side bicep pose) which give the illusion of a smaller waist as well as wider shoulder width. In fact almost any poster you may see of Larry Scott it's doing that pose and Arnold loved it too...
Year after year at olympia and arnold classic you see the critiques of how some competitor has a tighter waist, brought up his calves, has wider shoulders, better glute-ham tie in, fuller quads, etc... Even though some of those evolutions envolve synthol or another crappy oil, others are legit.
The best coach to do it IMO is Charles Glass he alone is responsible bringing up weak points on guys such Gunther Schlierkamp, Silvio Samuel, Flex Wheeler, Chormier and many others.
So like i said before weak point training is viable for some...
Good stuff bro...thnx for sharing
Arnold had weak calves... Larry Scott also claimed he had narrow shoulders and not so impressive biceps at beginning, Franco Columbu cut back on his whole body volume to bring his arms up to pair by working them twice a week, Ronnie Coleman at one point only worked is biceps once a month so they weren't ahead of his body.
All of them Mr Os and like I and SL said this is not for pencil-neck Joe, even though genetics play the major role in the end, priority and specialization routines are valuable tools on bodybuilding.
Markus Ruhl is on bodybuilding because he is a size freak and doesn't matter how ripped and conditioned he is on stage he will never win due to aesthetical matters. he has a decent tricep but his shoulders and pecs are way too overwhelming for that matter.
Arnold had weak calves in his youthful days, and thats why he used to take pictures with his calves in the water...he admitted that in "pumpin iron"
but then his calves improved a great deal...he talked a lot about donkey calf raises and seated calf raises
Absolutely, but weak points on some of these professional bodybuilders are very subtle. So subtle only a very skilled eye could even notice them. Glaring weak points after years and years of neglect or from extremely bad genetics could be another matter entirely.
It might have been possible to succeed with considerable deficiencies over 40 years ago in Larry Scott's time when hardly anyone competed in the sport, but it's a totally different ball game now. For example, how could one bring up a Frank Zane type physique to the level necessary to win the 2008 Mr Olympia?
And sometimes Arnold worked them barefoot, but most of the times with heavy weights like Reg Park teached him.
Yes indeed and that's what distinguishes the elite from the average joe. Nevertheless I must say I've never seen another Mr O displaying such proportion, symmetry and hardness as Zane did even though nowadays competitors would dwarf him.
I hope Dennis Wolf beats Jay this coming Olympia, he is incredible.
Reg Park was his mentor
One of the best of all times I must say! RIP Reg Park!
![[CinnamonBuns]](/forum/data/avatars/m/171/171869.jpg?1674492025){kind=avatar}
[CinnamonBuns]
New member
traz you've had some mighty fine threads as of late
much respect
much respect
...
I'm a Zane fan myself, but don't you think Lee Haney was a larger version of Zane with proportion, symmetry and hardness to match?
It's incredible to think Zane's last Olympia win (1979) was 29 years ago. Time flies!
and look at the difference between the size of Zane and Ronnie / Cutler
I heard Zane is on T3 for life because he fucked up his thyroid so bad, but still don't know if it's true. Aesthetically no one could beat the guy, try to do his pose of ab vacuum with and behind the neck, that's such a sick one, I love it.
Zane is awesome...but what do you think of Steve Reeves?
Similar threads
