PDA

View Full Version : MASS: Higher weight, less reps VS. Lower weight, more reps.


Justin Morton
October 2nd 04, 08:11 PM
Is there documentation to support that this will result in more
significant mass gains? I am concerned especially for bicep
hypertrophy. Not strength or endurance.

Sometimes I feel I get a better bicep workout if I use less weight and
more reps, than if I use extremely heavy weight and 6-8 rep sets.

No matter the weight or the reps, I am doing 2 sets each of barbell
curls, concentration curls and hammer curls.

With a lighter weight, I can work until the burn is just killing me and
"failure" occurs from lactic acid PAIN and muscle failure. With a heavy
weight, I never get "the pain", only muscle failure. I want "the pain",
but with heavy weights I just get to a point on my failure set that I
can not get the weight up.... and the burn is really not there yet!

To top it off, I am more concerned about building "mass" in the bicep as
opposed to strength or endurance. I am having the exact same issue with
tricep kickbacks. What say you?

TIA,
Justin

--
"When in doubt, deadlift."
- Author unknown

"He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man."
- Hunter S. Thompson

Anna Martelli Ravenscroft
October 2nd 04, 10:06 PM
Justin Morton wrote:
> Is there documentation to support that this will result in more
> significant mass gains? I am concerned especially for bicep
> hypertrophy. Not strength or endurance.
>
> Sometimes I feel I get a better bicep workout if I use less weight and
> more reps, than if I use extremely heavy weight and 6-8 rep sets.
>
> No matter the weight or the reps, I am doing 2 sets each of barbell
> curls, concentration curls and hammer curls.
>
> With a lighter weight, I can work until the burn is just killing me and
> "failure" occurs from lactic acid PAIN and muscle failure. With a heavy
> weight, I never get "the pain", only muscle failure. I want "the pain",
> but with heavy weights I just get to a point on my failure set that I
> can not get the weight up.... and the burn is really not there yet!
>
> To top it off, I am more concerned about building "mass" in the bicep as
> opposed to strength or endurance. I am having the exact same issue with
> tricep kickbacks. What say you?
>
> TIA,
> Justin
>

I suspect you're about to get massacred.

Please go read www.stumptuous.com/weights.html. Read the mfw FAQ. Read
http://www.exrx.net/Bodybuilding.html if you're interested in
bodybuilding. Read other areas of exrx if you're interested in other
stuff. In fact, everything on exrx is pretty kewl.

Just to give you a few hints:
- the "pain" isn't a good indication of properly working the muscle to
achieve your goal...
- working your arms to death isn't going to give you a decent build
and even if you do accidentally manage to build some decent arms, people
here will still give you **** for not working your chest, back, legs...
- if you're just an endorphin junkie, admit it - and don't confuse
that with building mass.

HTH
Anna

Hugh Beyer
October 2nd 04, 10:39 PM
Justin Morton > wrote in news:93D7d.189451$3l3.94749
@attbi_s03:

> Is there documentation to support that this will result in more
> significant mass gains? I am concerned especially for bicep
> hypertrophy. Not strength or endurance.

OK. Pretty-boy on the beach. Gotcha.

> Sometimes I feel I get a better bicep workout if I use less weight and
> more reps, than if I use extremely heavy weight and 6-8 rep sets.

OK. You're wrong, but OK.

> No matter the weight or the reps, I am doing 2 sets each of barbell
> curls, concentration curls and hammer curls.

OK. Moronic routine, but OK.

> With a lighter weight, I can work until the burn is just killing me and
> "failure" occurs from lactic acid PAIN and muscle failure. With a heavy
> weight, I never get "the pain", only muscle failure. I want "the pain",
> but with heavy weights I just get to a point on my failure set that I
> can not get the weight up.... and the burn is really not there yet!

Separate your goals, please. If you want pain, Mistress Lyla's Dungeon can
help . If you want good biceps, train them properly. Lactic acid burn is
totally irrelevant to your goals. 6-8 reps, *not* to failure. No more sets
than you're doing.

>
> To top it off, I am more concerned about building "mass" in the bicep as
> opposed to strength or endurance. I am having the exact same issue with
> tricep kickbacks. What say you?

I say that somebody doing that moronic bicep work *would* be doing tricep
kickbacks.

Hugh


--
One puppy had its dewclaws removed in the creation of this post, but for
reasons of hygene and it really doesn't hurt them at all.

John M. Williams
October 2nd 04, 11:11 PM
Justin Morton > wrote:

>Is there documentation to support that this will result in more
>significant mass gains? I am concerned especially for bicep
>hypertrophy. Not strength or endurance.
>
>Sometimes I feel I get a better bicep workout if I use less weight and
>more reps, than if I use extremely heavy weight and 6-8 rep sets.

I hear that you feel pleasant and sleepy right before you die from
hypothermia. "Feel" doesn't mean anything. Do you want to accomplish
something or "feel" like you accomplished something?

For hypertrophy, using a weight that will put your maximum repetitions
in the 8-12 range has been shown to be effective.

>No matter the weight or the reps, I am doing 2 sets each of barbell
>curls, concentration curls and hammer curls.

That's plenty; I wouldn't do any more, and you could probably do less,
depending on how often you train biceps.

>With a lighter weight, I can work until the burn is just killing me and
>"failure" occurs from lactic acid PAIN and muscle failure. With a heavy
>weight, I never get "the pain", only muscle failure. I want "the pain",
>but with heavy weights I just get to a point on my failure set that I
>can not get the weight up.... and the burn is really not there yet!

What do you think you are accomplishing by doing this?

>To top it off, I am more concerned about building "mass" in the bicep as
>opposed to strength or endurance. I am having the exact same issue with
>tricep kickbacks. What say you?

The fact that you are doing tricep kickbacks is an issue in and of
itself. You need to re-think a lot of things … after you learn some
effective weight training.

Kevin J. Coolidge
October 3rd 04, 01:15 AM
"Justin Morton" > wrote in message
news:[email protected]_s03...
> Is there documentation to support that this will result in more
> significant mass gains? I am concerned especially for bicep hypertrophy.
> Not strength or endurance.
>
> Sometimes I feel I get a better bicep workout if I use less weight and
> more reps, than if I use extremely heavy weight and 6-8 rep sets.
>
> No matter the weight or the reps, I am doing 2 sets each of barbell curls,
> concentration curls and hammer curls.
>
> With a lighter weight, I can work until the burn is just killing me and
> "failure" occurs from lactic acid PAIN and muscle failure. With a heavy
> weight, I never get "the pain", only muscle failure. I want "the pain",
> but with heavy weights I just get to a point on my failure set that I can
> not get the weight up.... and the burn is really not there yet!
>
> To top it off, I am more concerned about building "mass" in the bicep as
> opposed to strength or endurance. I am having the exact same issue with
> tricep kickbacks. What say you?
>
> TIA,
> Justin
>
> --
> "When in doubt, deadlift."
> - Author unknown
>
> "He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man."
> - Hunter S. Thompson
>

Tricep kickbacks? You mean there's still people that do these waste of time?

Justin Morton
October 3rd 04, 01:27 AM
Hugh Beyer wrote:

> Justin Morton > wrote in news:93D7d.189451$3l3.94749
> @attbi_s03:
>
>
>>Is there documentation to support that this will result in more
>>significant mass gains? I am concerned especially for bicep
>>hypertrophy. Not strength or endurance.
>
>
> OK. Pretty-boy on the beach. Gotcha.

OK so understand that I am a beginner and not a pro so spare me the
smart ass remarks "pretty boy on the beach".

And please tell me what is *moronic* about kickbacks, hammer curls and
concentration curls?

Whatever happened to helpful advisors and not flamers? Sheesh. I am
asking questions not offering advice.

TIA,
Justin

Justin Morton
October 3rd 04, 01:32 AM
Anna Martelli Ravenscroft wrote:

> Justin Morton wrote:
>
>> Is there documentation to support that this will result in more
>> significant mass gains? I am concerned especially for bicep
>> hypertrophy. Not strength or endurance.
>>
>> Sometimes I feel I get a better bicep workout if I use less weight and
>> more reps, than if I use extremely heavy weight and 6-8 rep sets.
>>
>> No matter the weight or the reps, I am doing 2 sets each of barbell
>> curls, concentration curls and hammer curls.
>>
>> With a lighter weight, I can work until the burn is just killing me
>> and "failure" occurs from lactic acid PAIN and muscle failure. With a
>> heavy weight, I never get "the pain", only muscle failure. I want
>> "the pain", but with heavy weights I just get to a point on my failure
>> set that I can not get the weight up.... and the burn is really not
>> there yet!
>>
>> To top it off, I am more concerned about building "mass" in the bicep
>> as opposed to strength or endurance. I am having the exact same issue
>> with tricep kickbacks. What say you?
>>
>> TIA,
>> Justin
>>
>
> I suspect you're about to get massacred.
>
> Please go read www.stumptuous.com/weights.html. Read the mfw FAQ. Read
> http://www.exrx.net/Bodybuilding.html if you're interested in
> bodybuilding. Read other areas of exrx if you're interested in other
> stuff. In fact, everything on exrx is pretty kewl.
>
> Just to give you a few hints:
> - the "pain" isn't a good indication of properly working the muscle to
> achieve your goal...
> - working your arms to death isn't going to give you a decent build and
> even if you do accidentally manage to build some decent arms, people
> here will still give you **** for not working your chest, back, legs...
> - if you're just an endorphin junkie, admit it - and don't confuse that
> with building mass.
>
> HTH
> Anna

OK, suppose I should have been more clear. I deadlift, squat, cleans,
etc. This post is specifically addressing the bicep.

Hope I don't get "massacred". WTF? I am a newbie asking questions.
Nice group.

Thanks,
Justin

--
"When in doubt, deadlift."
- Author unknown

"He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man."
- Hunter S. Thompson

Lee Michaels
October 3rd 04, 01:44 AM
"Justin Morton" wimpered
>
> Hope I don't get "massacred". WTF? I am a newbie asking questions.
> Nice group.
>
Read this. It should help.

http://home.comcast.net/~mfw/

Justin Morton
October 3rd 04, 01:47 AM
Ahhhhh I see, this is a "fitness" group and not a "bodybuilding" group.
Sorry for being "OT".

My bad.

Hypertrophically yours,
J

--
"When in doubt, deadlift."
- Author unknown

"He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man."
- Hunter S. Thompson

Hugh Beyer
October 3rd 04, 03:09 AM
Justin Morton > wrote in news:bIH7d.157870$MQ5.65875
@attbi_s52:

> Hugh Beyer wrote:
>
>> Justin Morton > wrote in news:93D7d.189451
$3l3.94749
>> @attbi_s03:
>>
>>
>>>Is there documentation to support that this will result in more
>>>significant mass gains? I am concerned especially for bicep
>>>hypertrophy. Not strength or endurance.
>>
>>
>> OK. Pretty-boy on the beach. Gotcha.
>
> OK so understand that I am a beginner and not a pro so spare me the
> smart ass remarks "pretty boy on the beach".
>
> And please tell me what is *moronic* about kickbacks, hammer curls and
> concentration curls?
>
> Whatever happened to helpful advisors and not flamers? Sheesh. I am
> asking questions not offering advice.


Y'always gotta get kicked around a bit first. House rules. There's a FAQ
on it somewhere. It's a kindly clue that the answer you are getting does
not address the question you should be asking.

Nothing wrong with the pretty-boy on the beach bit. I'd be going there
myself, except these days it's more pretty-bald-guy-on-the-beach, and that
doesn't have the same ring to it.

Doing lots of different isolation routines for the same bodypart is
probably not a good way for a beginner to start. You're better off with a
whole-body routine done 3 times a week focusing on compound lifts. The
isolation work is really to bring up a lagging bodypart and when you're
starting you don't have anything but lagging bodyparts. And there are lots
of better exercises for triceps than kickbacks.

The "workouts" tab at http://www.stumptuous.com/weights.html has some good
beginner's full-body workouts (Ignore the "for women" stuff). There are
also some splits. The reps are high in these routines so you can work on
form and to give your connective tissue a chance to figure out what's
going on. You may be more comfortable with that, but to maximize
hypertrophy you should eventually lower them to the 6-10 range.

Hugh



--
One puppy had its dewclaws removed in the creation of this post, but for
reasons of hygene and it really doesn't hurt them at all.

Hugh Beyer
October 3rd 04, 03:14 AM
Justin Morton > wrote in news:l_H7d.309237$Fg5.194809
@attbi_s53:

> Ahhhhh I see, this is a "fitness" group and not a "bodybuilding" group.
> Sorry for being "OT".
>
> My bad.
>
> Hypertrophically yours,
> J
>

Don't get all ****y, now.

BTW, I notice your actual question was "Is there documentation to support
that this [higher weight, less reps] will result in more significant mass
gains?"

The answer to THAT is "yes".

I'm not going to google it for you but Fred Hatfield's site (Dr. Squat)
would be a good place to start.

Hugh

--
One puppy had its dewclaws removed in the creation of this post, but for
reasons of hygene and it really doesn't hurt them at all.

Justin Morton
October 3rd 04, 04:52 AM
Hugh Beyer wrote:

> Justin Morton > wrote in news:bIH7d.157870$MQ5.65875
> @attbi_s52:
>
>
>>Hugh Beyer wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Justin Morton > wrote in news:93D7d.189451
>
> $3l3.94749
>
>>>@attbi_s03:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Is there documentation to support that this will result in more
>>>>significant mass gains? I am concerned especially for bicep
>>>>hypertrophy. Not strength or endurance.
>>>
>>>
>>>OK. Pretty-boy on the beach. Gotcha.
>>
>>OK so understand that I am a beginner and not a pro so spare me the
>>smart ass remarks "pretty boy on the beach".
>>
>>And please tell me what is *moronic* about kickbacks, hammer curls and
>>concentration curls?
>>
>>Whatever happened to helpful advisors and not flamers? Sheesh. I am
>>asking questions not offering advice.
>
>
>
> Y'always gotta get kicked around a bit first. House rules. There's a FAQ
> on it somewhere. It's a kindly clue that the answer you are getting does
> not address the question you should be asking.
>
> Nothing wrong with the pretty-boy on the beach bit. I'd be going there
> myself, except these days it's more pretty-bald-guy-on-the-beach, and that
> doesn't have the same ring to it.
>
> Doing lots of different isolation routines for the same bodypart is
> probably not a good way for a beginner to start. You're better off with a
> whole-body routine done 3 times a week focusing on compound lifts. The
> isolation work is really to bring up a lagging bodypart and when you're
> starting you don't have anything but lagging bodyparts. And there are lots
> of better exercises for triceps than kickbacks.
>
> The "workouts" tab at http://www.stumptuous.com/weights.html has some good
> beginner's full-body workouts (Ignore the "for women" stuff). There are
> also some splits. The reps are high in these routines so you can work on
> form and to give your connective tissue a chance to figure out what's
> going on. You may be more comfortable with that, but to maximize
> hypertrophy you should eventually lower them to the 6-10 range.
>
> Hugh

Thank you Hugh... some very helpful advice here. I do need to re-think.
MY bad for not reviewing the FAQ.

I suppose I am going to look into a split with compound exercise for
now. Chins, deadlifts, squats, cleans, bench. Thank you for your help.

Justin

--
"When in doubt, deadlift."
- Author unknown

"He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man."
- Hunter S. Thompson

John M. Williams
October 3rd 04, 05:19 AM
Justin Morton > wrote:

>Ahhhhh I see, this is a "fitness" group and not a "bodybuilding" group.

I decided to be nice and responded to you in a manner which was more
polite than my usual. Now you're just being ignorant. So if you fancy
yourself a "bodybuilder," then know that tricep kickbacks are not
significant lifts for bodybuilders; they're lifts for pansies.

>Hypertrophically yours

Somehow, many here doubt that.

Justin Morton
October 3rd 04, 05:28 AM
John M. Williams wrote:

> I decided to be nice and responded to you in a manner which was more
> polite than my usual. Now you're just being ignorant. So if you fancy
> yourself a "bodybuilder," then know that tricep kickbacks are not
> significant lifts for bodybuilders; they're lifts for pansies.

No sir, but I do fancy myself an "aspiring" bodybuilder. It is YOUR
expertise that I need right now.

I have no shame in admitting that I have only been lifting (very)
seriously for 10 months, I am yet a baby. Learning what I can, how I can.

As far as the "kickbacks", I just read an article about Lee Haney in
FLEX magazine and he was just PRAISING kick backs. So, I am a product
of what I have read. I see that is not good, and do not confess to
being a pansy :-)

Thank you for your patience and advice!
Justin

--
"When in doubt, deadlift."
- Author unknown

"He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man."
- Hunter S. Thompson

John M. Williams
October 3rd 04, 05:34 AM
Hugh Beyer > wrote:
>Justin Morton > wrote:
>
>> Ahhhhh I see, this is a "fitness" group and not a "bodybuilding" group.
>> Sorry for being "OT".
>>
>> My bad.
>>
>> Hypertrophically yours,
>
>Don't get all ****y, now.
>
>BTW, I notice your actual question was "Is there documentation to support
>that this [higher weight, less reps] will result in more significant mass
>gains?"
>
>The answer to THAT is "yes".
>
>I'm not going to google it for you but Fred Hatfield's site (Dr. Squat)
>would be a good place to start.

Hell, I can quote the actual literature, but if he's going to be a
bitch about it, why bother?

Jeff Finlayson
October 3rd 04, 05:46 AM
Justin Morton wrote:

> Ahhhhh I see, this is a "fitness" group and not a "bodybuilding" group.
> Sorry for being "OT".

Think again. It's bodybuilding, powerlifting, olympic lifting, etc.

elzinator
October 3rd 04, 06:03 AM
On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 04:28:39 GMT, Justin Morton wrote:
>John M. Williams wrote:
>
>> I decided to be nice and responded to you in a manner which was more
>> polite than my usual. Now you're just being ignorant. So if you fancy
>> yourself a "bodybuilder," then know that tricep kickbacks are not
>> significant lifts for bodybuilders; they're lifts for pansies.
>
>No sir, but I do fancy myself an "aspiring" bodybuilder. It is YOUR
>expertise that I need right now.
>
>I have no shame in admitting that I have only been lifting (very)
>seriously for 10 months, I am yet a baby. Learning what I can, how I can.
>
>As far as the "kickbacks", I just read an article about Lee Haney in
>FLEX magazine and he was just PRAISING kick backs. So, I am a product
>of what I have read. I see that is not good, and do not confess to
>being a pansy :-)

More appropriately, kickbacks are relatively ineffective. They are
mostly done by women and men who are starting out and don't know any
better. 'Pansy' is neither effective or informative. But bullies often
resort to name calling.

You might try what are commonly referred to as 'skull crushers'.
Third exercise down on this web page:
http://www.moleculegirl.com/wtmovements3.htm

They are beneficial for several reasons:
1. although there is some room to cheat (not using correct form in
execution of the exercise) in any exercise, SC have less propensity
for cheating than in kickbacks.

2. they have more crossover (specificity in movement) to other lifts,
such as bench presses.

3. You can use more weight and maintain correct form.

You can then progress to other tricep exercises such as floor triceps
with dumbbells (tough), etc. But if you are doing bench presses, you
don't really need much tricep isolation work.

Hope that helps.


Beelzibub

"Modern man must rediscover a deeper source of his own spiritual life. To do this,he is obligated
to struggle with evil, to confront his own shadow, to integrate the devil."
- Carl Jung

John M. Williams
October 3rd 04, 06:08 AM
Justin Morton > wrote:

>John M. Williams wrote:
>
>> I decided to be nice and responded to you in a manner which was more
>> polite than my usual. Now you're just being ignorant. So if you fancy
>> yourself a "bodybuilder," then know that tricep kickbacks are not
>> significant lifts for bodybuilders; they're lifts for pansies.
>
>No sir, but I do fancy myself an "aspiring" bodybuilder. It is YOUR
>expertise that I need right now.
>
>I have no shame in admitting that I have only been lifting (very)
>seriously for 10 months, I am yet a baby. Learning what I can, how I can.
>
>As far as the "kickbacks", I just read an article about Lee Haney in
>FLEX magazine and he was just PRAISING kick backs. So, I am a product
>of what I have read. I see that is not good, and do not confess to
>being a pansy :-)

If you have a cable machine, try some tricep pressdowns. Do then
kneeling so it won't be as easy to use your whole body in "cheating"
the movement.

Even better, do some skullcrushers; EZCurl bars are good for these,
and tricep bars are even better.

Or use dumbbells for doing seated tricep presses: smaller dumbbells
for single-arm presses, or with a heavy dumbbell held at one end with
both hands.

Justin Morton
October 3rd 04, 06:22 AM
John M. Williams wrote:
> But if he's going to be a "bitch" about it, why bother?

It's all about Pascal's triangle.

Justice Without Strength Is Helpless
- Blaise Pascal, Pensées (c. 1670)

--
"When in doubt, deadlift."
- Author unknown

"He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man."
- Hunter S. Thompson

John M. Williams
October 3rd 04, 07:15 AM
Justin Morton > wrote:
>John M. Williams wrote:
>> But if he's going to be a "bitch" about it, why bother?
>
>It's all about Pascal's triangle.
>
>Justice Without Strength Is Helpless
> - Blaise Pascal, Pensées (c. 1670)

<golf clap> Very good, lad.

>"He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man."
> - Hunter S. Thompson

And HST, too, eh?

Anna Martelli Ravenscroft
October 3rd 04, 10:05 AM
Justin Morton wrote:
> Anna Martelli Ravenscroft wrote:
>
>> Justin Morton wrote:
>>
>>> Is there documentation to support that this will result in more
>>> significant mass gains? I am concerned especially for bicep
>>> hypertrophy. Not strength or endurance.
>>>
>>> Sometimes I feel I get a better bicep workout if I use less weight
>>> and more reps, than if I use extremely heavy weight and 6-8 rep sets.
>>>
>>> No matter the weight or the reps, I am doing 2 sets each of barbell
>>> curls, concentration curls and hammer curls.
>>>
>>> With a lighter weight, I can work until the burn is just killing me
>>> and "failure" occurs from lactic acid PAIN and muscle failure. With
>>> a heavy weight, I never get "the pain", only muscle failure. I want
>>> "the pain", but with heavy weights I just get to a point on my
>>> failure set that I can not get the weight up.... and the burn is
>>> really not there yet!
>>>
>>> To top it off, I am more concerned about building "mass" in the bicep
>>> as opposed to strength or endurance. I am having the exact same
>>> issue with tricep kickbacks. What say you?
>>>
>>> TIA,
>>> Justin
>>>
>>
>> I suspect you're about to get massacred.
>>
>> Please go read www.stumptuous.com/weights.html. Read the mfw FAQ. Read
>> http://www.exrx.net/Bodybuilding.html if you're interested in
>> bodybuilding. Read other areas of exrx if you're interested in other
>> stuff. In fact, everything on exrx is pretty kewl.
>>
>> Just to give you a few hints:
>> - the "pain" isn't a good indication of properly working the muscle
>> to achieve your goal...
>> - working your arms to death isn't going to give you a decent build
>> and even if you do accidentally manage to build some decent arms,
>> people here will still give you **** for not working your chest, back,
>> legs...
>> - if you're just an endorphin junkie, admit it - and don't confuse
>> that with building mass.
>>
>> HTH
>> Anna
>
>
> OK, suppose I should have been more clear. I deadlift, squat, cleans,
> etc.


That would have been useful to know, since the biceps and tris get
worked some in many compound moves.

> This post is specifically addressing the bicep.
>
> Hope I don't get "massacred". WTF? I am a newbie asking questions.


Actually, you got off pretty light. Only a little mild ribbing and a
fair bit of good info.

> Nice group.

No. But knowledgable, useful, and often incredibly helpful to people who
do their homework, pay attention, and don't whine.

Welcome to the Jungle baby.

Anna

spodosaurus
October 3rd 04, 12:33 PM
elzinator wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 04:28:39 GMT, Justin Morton wrote:
>
>>John M. Williams wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I decided to be nice and responded to you in a manner which was more
>>>polite than my usual. Now you're just being ignorant. So if you fancy
>>>yourself a "bodybuilder," then know that tricep kickbacks are not
>>>significant lifts for bodybuilders; they're lifts for pansies.
>>
>>No sir, but I do fancy myself an "aspiring" bodybuilder. It is YOUR
>>expertise that I need right now.
>>
>>I have no shame in admitting that I have only been lifting (very)
>>seriously for 10 months, I am yet a baby. Learning what I can, how I can.
>>
>>As far as the "kickbacks", I just read an article about Lee Haney in
>>FLEX magazine and he was just PRAISING kick backs. So, I am a product
>>of what I have read. I see that is not good, and do not confess to
>>being a pansy :-)
>
>
> More appropriately, kickbacks are relatively ineffective. They are
> mostly done by women and men who are starting out and don't know any
> better. 'Pansy' is neither effective or informative. But bullies often
> resort to name calling.
>
> You might try what are commonly referred to as 'skull crushers'.
> Third exercise down on this web page:
> http://www.moleculegirl.com/wtmovements3.htm
>
> They are beneficial for several reasons:
> 1. although there is some room to cheat (not using correct form in
> execution of the exercise) in any exercise, SC have less propensity
> for cheating than in kickbacks.
>
> 2. they have more crossover (specificity in movement) to other lifts,
> such as bench presses.
>
> 3. You can use more weight and maintain correct form.
>

Just a note of caution: many people have elbow troubles with this
exercise. I love this exercise, but I can't do it because it
irritates/injures my elbows (usually sooner rather than later).

> You can then progress to other tricep exercises such as floor triceps
> with dumbbells (tough),

What are these?

> etc. But if you are doing bench presses, you
> don't really need much tricep isolation work.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
>
> Beelzibub
>
> "Modern man must rediscover a deeper source of his own spiritual life. To do this,he is obligated
> to struggle with evil, to confront his own shadow, to integrate the devil."
> - Carl Jung


--
spammage trappage: replace fishies_ with yahoo

elzinator
October 3rd 04, 02:41 PM
On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 19:33:14 +0800, spodosaurus wrote:
>elzinator wrote:

>> You might try what are commonly referred to as 'skull crushers'.
>> Third exercise down on this web page:
>> http://www.moleculegirl.com/wtmovements3.htm
>>
>> They are beneficial for several reasons:
>> 1. although there is some room to cheat (not using correct form in
>> execution of the exercise) in any exercise, SC have less propensity
>> for cheating than in kickbacks.
>>
>> 2. they have more crossover (specificity in movement) to other lifts,
>> such as bench presses.
>>
>> 3. You can use more weight and maintain correct form.
>>
>
>Just a note of caution: many people have elbow troubles with this
>exercise. I love this exercise, but I can't do it because it
>irritates/injures my elbows (usually sooner rather than later).

Using an EZ curl bar helps reduce elbow irritation, but not always.
Some find that cable pushdowns are more irritating than SCs. It's
highly individual. Sometimes altering hand placement or elbow angle
can reduce or eliminate irritation.

>> You can then progress to other tricep exercises such as floor triceps
>> with dumbbells (tough),
>
>What are these?

They are a tricep exercise commonly used as an assistant in
powerlifting training, but not relegated to.

Lay on back on mat/floor. Have two dumbbells placed perpendicular on
floor (standing on end) above your head within arms reach (with bent
elbow). Much in the same manner as skull crushers, grasp the DBs and
extend the elbow.

In the same manner as rack bench presses, although the floor is the
'rack'.

They are not easy, but very effective with tremendous cross-over to
bench presses.


Beelzibub

"Modern man must rediscover a deeper source of his own spiritual life. To do this,he is obligated
to struggle with evil, to confront his own shadow, to integrate the devil."
- Carl Jung

DRS
October 3rd 04, 03:49 PM
"Hugh Beyer" > wrote in message
42
> Justin Morton > wrote in
> news:93D7d.189451$3l3.94749 @attbi_s03:

[...]

>> Sometimes I feel I get a better bicep workout if I use less weight
>> and more reps, than if I use extremely heavy weight and 6-8 rep sets.
>
> OK. You're wrong, but OK.

Define wrong. Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy matters too.

--

"Self-delusion as a coping tool has always been a fairly useful strategy for
me."
Dally

Keith Hobman
October 3rd 04, 04:01 PM
In article >, nospam.net wrote:

> On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 04:28:39 GMT, Justin Morton wrote:
> >John M. Williams wrote:
> >
> >> I decided to be nice and responded to you in a manner which was more
> >> polite than my usual. Now you're just being ignorant. So if you fancy
> >> yourself a "bodybuilder," then know that tricep kickbacks are not
> >> significant lifts for bodybuilders; they're lifts for pansies.
> >
> >No sir, but I do fancy myself an "aspiring" bodybuilder. It is YOUR
> >expertise that I need right now.
> >
> >I have no shame in admitting that I have only been lifting (very)
> >seriously for 10 months, I am yet a baby. Learning what I can, how I can.
> >
> >As far as the "kickbacks", I just read an article about Lee Haney in
> >FLEX magazine and he was just PRAISING kick backs. So, I am a product
> >of what I have read. I see that is not good, and do not confess to
> >being a pansy :-)
>
> More appropriately, kickbacks are relatively ineffective. They are
> mostly done by women and men who are starting out and don't know any
> better. 'Pansy' is neither effective or informative. But bullies often
> resort to name calling.

I wonder about the 'ineffective' part.

Most bodybuilders I've read about use more basic exercises (exactly as you
suggest) for building bulk, then different exercises for 'ripping'.

The rigorous diet required to get to extremely low bodyfat levels doesn't
leave the person with much energy. So is it possible that kick-backs,
cable cross-overs, etc. allow the person dieting to use as little energy
as possible while still working bodyparts? IOW - given the diet they
really don't have the energy to do the more demanding bulking exercises?
But they still want to keep working out and the exercises also help them
to focus on contracting each individual muscle.

I'm no expert on this, but I'm trying to develop a broader perspective. It
would seem to me there is some utility in these exercises at a particular
stage of pre-competition training.

Now, if I can just figure out why anyone would consider standing on stage
in a bikini a worthwhile endeavour I'll really have broadened
perspectives...

:^)

elzinator
October 3rd 04, 04:35 PM
On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 09:01:30 -0600, Keith Hobman wrote:
>In article >, nospam.net wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 04:28:39 GMT, Justin Morton wrote:
>> >John M. Williams wrote:
>> >
>> >> I decided to be nice and responded to you in a manner which was more
>> >> polite than my usual. Now you're just being ignorant. So if you fancy
>> >> yourself a "bodybuilder," then know that tricep kickbacks are not
>> >> significant lifts for bodybuilders; they're lifts for pansies.
>> >
>> >No sir, but I do fancy myself an "aspiring" bodybuilder. It is YOUR
>> >expertise that I need right now.
>> >
>> >I have no shame in admitting that I have only been lifting (very)
>> >seriously for 10 months, I am yet a baby. Learning what I can, how I can.
>> >
>> >As far as the "kickbacks", I just read an article about Lee Haney in
>> >FLEX magazine and he was just PRAISING kick backs. So, I am a product
>> >of what I have read. I see that is not good, and do not confess to
>> >being a pansy :-)
>>
>> More appropriately, kickbacks are relatively ineffective. They are
>> mostly done by women and men who are starting out and don't know any
>> better. 'Pansy' is neither effective or informative. But bullies often
>> resort to name calling.
>
>I wonder about the 'ineffective' part.

True, 'ineffective' is relative. The term used was more in reference
to the fact that most people who do this use sloppy or incorrect form,
which tends to render the movement largely ineffective.

>Most bodybuilders I've read about use more basic exercises (exactly as you
>suggest) for building bulk, then different exercises for 'ripping'.
>
>The rigorous diet required to get to extremely low bodyfat levels doesn't
>leave the person with much energy. So is it possible that kick-backs,
>cable cross-overs, etc. allow the person dieting to use as little energy
>as possible while still working bodyparts? IOW - given the diet they
>really don't have the energy to do the more demanding bulking exercises?
>But they still want to keep working out and the exercises also help them
>to focus on contracting each individual muscle.
>
>I'm no expert on this, but I'm trying to develop a broader perspective. It
>would seem to me there is some utility in these exercises at a particular
>stage of pre-competition training.

Sure, but the question should also be asked of the original poster if
he is considering competition, or just bodybuilding for general
appearances and fitness. The processes can be very different depending
on the desired outcome and intent.

>Now, if I can just figure out why anyone would consider standing on stage
>in a bikini a worthwhile endeavour I'll really have broadened
>perspectives...

I did it only because I was dared to by my 'peers' in the gym. It was
a challenge and I arise to challenges. :)


Beelzibub

"Modern man must rediscover a deeper source of his own spiritual life. To do this,he is obligated
to struggle with evil, to confront his own shadow, to integrate the devil."
- Carl Jung

freddy
October 3rd 04, 04:50 PM
> I did it only because I was dared to by my 'peers' in the gym. It was
> a challenge and I arise to challenges. :)

Can one of elzi's 'peers' please dare her to get me a date with her
daughter? ;-)

Proton Soup
October 3rd 04, 05:04 PM
On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 00:03:17 -0500, elzinator
> wrote:

>You might try what are commonly referred to as 'skull crushers'.
>Third exercise down on this web page:
>http://www.moleculegirl.com/wtmovements3.htm

I think I see tupperware in those pics. What may I ask are you
munching on during your workouts?

-----------
Proton Soup

"Homo sapiens non urinat in ventum."

elzinator
October 3rd 04, 05:07 PM
On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 15:50:44 GMT, freddy wrote:
>> I did it only because I was dared to by my 'peers' in the gym. It was
>> a challenge and I arise to challenges. :)
>
>Can one of elzi's 'peers' please dare her to get me a date with her
>daughter? ;-)

She is her own person. I know better than to 'arrange' dates for her.


Beelzibub

"Modern man must rediscover a deeper source of his own spiritual life. To do this,he is obligated
to struggle with evil, to confront his own shadow, to integrate the devil."
- Carl Jung

Lyle McDonald
October 3rd 04, 05:15 PM
Keith Hobman wrote:


>>More appropriately, kickbacks are relatively ineffective. They are
>>mostly done by women and men who are starting out and don't know any
>>better. 'Pansy' is neither effective or informative. But bullies often
>>resort to name calling.
>
>
> I wonder about the 'ineffective' part.
>
> Most bodybuilders I've read about use more basic exercises (exactly as you
> suggest) for building bulk, then different exercises for 'ripping'.

this is an old myth based on a lot of nonsense.
Pro bodybuidlers started doing that crap, but they had steroids to
prevent LBM losses while dieting.

>
> The rigorous diet required to get to extremely low bodyfat levels doesn't
> leave the person with much energy. So is it possible that kick-backs,
> cable cross-overs, etc. allow the person dieting to use as little energy
> as possible while still working bodyparts?

Possibly but you can usually keep people heavy up until a couple weeks
out from the show. Even ona diet with cardio.


> I'm no expert on this, but I'm trying to develop a broader perspective. It
> would seem to me there is some utility in these exercises at a particular
> stage of pre-competition training.

No, not really.
It's a lot of mythology that got developed when steroids entered the
picture.

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
October 3rd 04, 05:16 PM
Proton Soup wrote:

> On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 00:03:17 -0500, elzinator
> > wrote:
>
>
>>You might try what are commonly referred to as 'skull crushers'.
>>Third exercise down on this web page:
>>http://www.moleculegirl.com/wtmovements3.htm
>
>
> I think I see tupperware in those pics. What may I ask are you
> munching on during your workouts?
>

Chalk container, Beavis.

Lyle

elzinator
October 3rd 04, 05:50 PM
On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 11:04:53 -0500, Proton Soup wrote:
>On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 00:03:17 -0500, elzinator
> wrote:
>
>>You might try what are commonly referred to as 'skull crushers'.
>>Third exercise down on this web page:
>>http://www.moleculegirl.com/wtmovements3.htm
>
>I think I see tupperware in those pics. What may I ask are you
>munching on during your workouts?

I need lots of calcium....

Note the chalk on my shorts.


Beelzibub

"Modern man must rediscover a deeper source of his own spiritual life. To do this,he is obligated
to struggle with evil, to confront his own shadow, to integrate the devil."
- Carl Jung

Proton Soup
October 3rd 04, 05:59 PM
On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 11:50:29 -0500, elzinator
> wrote:

>On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 11:04:53 -0500, Proton Soup wrote:
>>On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 00:03:17 -0500, elzinator
> wrote:
>>
>>>You might try what are commonly referred to as 'skull crushers'.
>>>Third exercise down on this web page:
>>>http://www.moleculegirl.com/wtmovements3.htm
>>
>>I think I see tupperware in those pics. What may I ask are you
>>munching on during your workouts?
>
>I need lots of calcium....
>
>Note the chalk on my shorts.

Ah, thank you, didn't recognize it because I've never seen one.

-----------
Proton Soup

"Homo sapiens non urinat in ventum."

Johnny
October 3rd 04, 08:00 PM
Just apply the concept to the bicept issue and be done with it. The
thrust was a ribbing was about overtraining, body-part specific
exercise in general in someone who would benefit from heavy/basic
stuff, bla, bla, bla... plus you did get some damn good site
recommendations: check 'em out. They ARE really useful.
If you stick with heavy basic stuff for a few years you will get all
the mass you ever wanted....promise!
Great quote, by the way.

On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 05:22:27 GMT, Justin Morton >
wrote:

>"He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man."
> - Hunter S. Thompson



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Larry Hodges
October 3rd 04, 09:20 PM
John M. Williams wrote:
> Justin Morton > wrote:
>
>> Is there documentation to support that this will result in more
>> significant mass gains? I am concerned especially for bicep
>> hypertrophy. Not strength or endurance.
>>
>> Sometimes I feel I get a better bicep workout if I use less weight
>> and more reps, than if I use extremely heavy weight and 6-8 rep sets.
>
> I hear that you feel pleasant and sleepy right before you die from
> hypothermia. "Feel" doesn't mean anything. Do you want to accomplish
> something or "feel" like you accomplished something?
>
> For hypertrophy, using a weight that will put your maximum repetitions
> in the 8-12 range has been shown to be effective.
>
>> No matter the weight or the reps, I am doing 2 sets each of barbell
>> curls, concentration curls and hammer curls.
>
> That's plenty; I wouldn't do any more, and you could probably do less,
> depending on how often you train biceps.

<snipped some other stuff>

Why no more? Can you actually do too many sets here? This is what I'm
currently doing for biceps...

One arm preacher curls: 3 x 5 - 8 reps (after warmup)
Incline dumbbell curls: 3 x 6 (I rotate into a hammer curl at the bottom)
Concentration curls: 3 x 6

I do this 2 - 3 times per week.

I seldom go to failure. If I do, it's during concentration curls, as they
are what I finish up with, so I may cut them short. Also, I do these on my
pull day, meaning I'm already hitting biceps with my back.

Do you think I'm doing too much for biceps? Or better put, would I gain
better results in terms of hypertrophy by doing less and/or different sets
here?
--
-Larry

John M. Williams
October 3rd 04, 09:39 PM
"Larry Hodges" > wrote:

>John M. Williams wrote:
>> Justin Morton > wrote:
>>
>>> Is there documentation to support that this will result in more
>>> significant mass gains? I am concerned especially for bicep
>>> hypertrophy. Not strength or endurance.
>>>
>>> Sometimes I feel I get a better bicep workout if I use less weight
>>> and more reps, than if I use extremely heavy weight and 6-8 rep sets.
>>
>> I hear that you feel pleasant and sleepy right before you die from
>> hypothermia. "Feel" doesn't mean anything. Do you want to accomplish
>> something or "feel" like you accomplished something?
>>
>> For hypertrophy, using a weight that will put your maximum repetitions
>> in the 8-12 range has been shown to be effective.
>>
>>> No matter the weight or the reps, I am doing 2 sets each of barbell
>>> curls, concentration curls and hammer curls.
>>
>> That's plenty; I wouldn't do any more, and you could probably do less,
>> depending on how often you train biceps.
>
><snipped some other stuff>
>
>Why no more? Can you actually do too many sets here? This is what I'm
>currently doing for biceps...
>
>One arm preacher curls: 3 x 5 - 8 reps (after warmup)

Ouch. I have hyperextended my elbow with heavy weights, and the risk
is very real. There is no need for preacher curls if you're capable
of anchoring your elbow.

>Incline dumbbell curls: 3 x 6 (I rotate into a hammer curl at the bottom)
>Concentration curls: 3 x 6

Given the relatively low repetitions, I don't see that as a problem.
Doing that with a high-repetition routine can be overtraining.

>I do this 2 - 3 times per week.

Probably OK.

>I seldom go to failure. If I do, it's during concentration curls, as they
>are what I finish up with, so I may cut them short. Also, I do these on my
>pull day, meaning I'm already hitting biceps with my back.
>
>Do you think I'm doing too much for biceps? Or better put, would I gain
>better results in terms of hypertrophy by doing less and/or different sets
>here?

I think you could cut out your preacher curls and do just fine. Your
total would be 36 reps, 2-3 times per week, and with heavy enough
weight, that should be sufficient.

pyridox
October 3rd 04, 10:04 PM
John M. Williams > wrote in message
...
> "Larry Hodges" > wrote:
>
> >John M. Williams wrote:
> >> Justin Morton > wrote:
> >>
> >>> Is there documentation to support that this will result in more
> >>> significant mass gains? I am concerned especially for bicep
> >>> hypertrophy. Not strength or endurance.
> >>>
> >>> Sometimes I feel I get a better bicep workout if I use less weight
> >>> and more reps, than if I use extremely heavy weight and 6-8 rep sets.
> >>
> >> I hear that you feel pleasant and sleepy right before you die from
> >> hypothermia. "Feel" doesn't mean anything. Do you want to accomplish
> >> something or "feel" like you accomplished something?
> >>
> >> For hypertrophy, using a weight that will put your maximum repetitions
> >> in the 8-12 range has been shown to be effective.
> >>
> >>> No matter the weight or the reps, I am doing 2 sets each of barbell
> >>> curls, concentration curls and hammer curls.
> >>
> >> That's plenty; I wouldn't do any more, and you could probably do less,
> >> depending on how often you train biceps.
> >
> ><snipped some other stuff>
> >
> >Why no more? Can you actually do too many sets here? This is what I'm
> >currently doing for biceps...
> >
> >One arm preacher curls: 3 x 5 - 8 reps (after warmup)
>
> Ouch. I have hyperextended my elbow with heavy weights, and the risk
> is very real. There is no need for preacher curls if you're capable
> of anchoring your elbow.

i have found preacher curls with free weights to be problematic

however, the hammerstrength preacher curl machine works great

whit

>
> >Incline dumbbell curls: 3 x 6 (I rotate into a hammer curl at the
bottom)
> >Concentration curls: 3 x 6
>
> Given the relatively low repetitions, I don't see that as a problem.
> Doing that with a high-repetition routine can be overtraining.
>
> >I do this 2 - 3 times per week.
>
> Probably OK.
>
> >I seldom go to failure. If I do, it's during concentration curls, as
they
> >are what I finish up with, so I may cut them short. Also, I do these on
my
> >pull day, meaning I'm already hitting biceps with my back.
> >
> >Do you think I'm doing too much for biceps? Or better put, would I gain
> >better results in terms of hypertrophy by doing less and/or different
sets
> >here?
>
> I think you could cut out your preacher curls and do just fine. Your
> total would be 36 reps, 2-3 times per week, and with heavy enough
> weight, that should be sufficient.

John M. Williams
October 3rd 04, 10:14 PM
"pyridox" > wrote:
>John M. Williams > wrote:
>> "Larry Hodges" > wrote:
>> >John M. Williams wrote:
>> >> Justin Morton > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Is there documentation to support that this will result in more
>> >>> significant mass gains? I am concerned especially for bicep
>> >>> hypertrophy. Not strength or endurance.
>> >>>
>> >>> Sometimes I feel I get a better bicep workout if I use less weight
>> >>> and more reps, than if I use extremely heavy weight and 6-8 rep sets.
>> >>
>> >> I hear that you feel pleasant and sleepy right before you die from
>> >> hypothermia. "Feel" doesn't mean anything. Do you want to accomplish
>> >> something or "feel" like you accomplished something?
>> >>
>> >> For hypertrophy, using a weight that will put your maximum repetitions
>> >> in the 8-12 range has been shown to be effective.
>> >>
>> >>> No matter the weight or the reps, I am doing 2 sets each of barbell
>> >>> curls, concentration curls and hammer curls.
>> >>
>> >> That's plenty; I wouldn't do any more, and you could probably do less,
>> >> depending on how often you train biceps.
>> >
>> ><snipped some other stuff>
>> >
>> >Why no more? Can you actually do too many sets here? This is what I'm
>> >currently doing for biceps...
>> >
>> >One arm preacher curls: 3 x 5 - 8 reps (after warmup)
>>
>> Ouch. I have hyperextended my elbow with heavy weights, and the risk
>> is very real. There is no need for preacher curls if you're capable
>> of anchoring your elbow.
>
>i have found preacher curls with free weights to be problematic
>
>however, the hammerstrength preacher curl machine works great
>
>whit

If you have a stop at full eccentric, that's OK.

Not everyone has access to preacher curl machines.

pyridox
October 3rd 04, 10:45 PM
John M. Williams > wrote in message
...
> "pyridox" > wrote:
> >John M. Williams > wrote:
> >> "Larry Hodges" > wrote:
> >> >John M. Williams wrote:
> >> >> Justin Morton > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Is there documentation to support that this will result in more
> >> >>> significant mass gains? I am concerned especially for bicep
> >> >>> hypertrophy. Not strength or endurance.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Sometimes I feel I get a better bicep workout if I use less weight
> >> >>> and more reps, than if I use extremely heavy weight and 6-8 rep
sets.
> >> >>
> >> >> I hear that you feel pleasant and sleepy right before you die from
> >> >> hypothermia. "Feel" doesn't mean anything. Do you want to
accomplish
> >> >> something or "feel" like you accomplished something?
> >> >>
> >> >> For hypertrophy, using a weight that will put your maximum
repetitions
> >> >> in the 8-12 range has been shown to be effective.
> >> >>
> >> >>> No matter the weight or the reps, I am doing 2 sets each of barbell
> >> >>> curls, concentration curls and hammer curls.
> >> >>
> >> >> That's plenty; I wouldn't do any more, and you could probably do
less,
> >> >> depending on how often you train biceps.
> >> >
> >> ><snipped some other stuff>
> >> >
> >> >Why no more? Can you actually do too many sets here? This is what
I'm
> >> >currently doing for biceps...
> >> >
> >> >One arm preacher curls: 3 x 5 - 8 reps (after warmup)
> >>
> >> Ouch. I have hyperextended my elbow with heavy weights, and the risk
> >> is very real. There is no need for preacher curls if you're capable
> >> of anchoring your elbow.
> >
> >i have found preacher curls with free weights to be problematic
> >
> >however, the hammerstrength preacher curl machine works great
> >
> >whit
>
> If you have a stop at full eccentric, that's OK.
>

yes

> Not everyone has access to preacher curl machines.

poor *******s

whit

Larry Hodges
October 4th 04, 02:01 AM
pyridox wrote:
> John M. Williams > wrote in
> message ...
>> "pyridox" > wrote:
>>> John M. Williams > wrote:
>>>> "Larry Hodges" > wrote:
>>>>> John M. Williams wrote:
>>>>>> Justin Morton > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is there documentation to support that this will result in more
>>>>>>> significant mass gains? I am concerned especially for bicep
>>>>>>> hypertrophy. Not strength or endurance.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sometimes I feel I get a better bicep workout if I use less
>>>>>>> weight and more reps, than if I use extremely heavy weight and
>>>>>>> 6-8 rep sets.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I hear that you feel pleasant and sleepy right before you die
>>>>>> from hypothermia. "Feel" doesn't mean anything. Do you want to
>>>>>> accomplish something or "feel" like you accomplished something?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For hypertrophy, using a weight that will put your maximum
>>>>>> repetitions in the 8-12 range has been shown to be effective.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No matter the weight or the reps, I am doing 2 sets each of
>>>>>>> barbell curls, concentration curls and hammer curls.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's plenty; I wouldn't do any more, and you could probably do
>>>>>> less, depending on how often you train biceps.
>>>>>
>>>>> <snipped some other stuff>
>>>>>
>>>>> Why no more? Can you actually do too many sets here? This is
>>>>> what I'm currently doing for biceps...
>>>>>
>>>>> One arm preacher curls: 3 x 5 - 8 reps (after warmup)
>>>>
>>>> Ouch. I have hyperextended my elbow with heavy weights, and the
>>>> risk is very real. There is no need for preacher curls if you're
>>>> capable of anchoring your elbow.
>>>
>>> i have found preacher curls with free weights to be problematic
>>>
>>> however, the hammerstrength preacher curl machine works great
>>>
>>> whit
>>
>> If you have a stop at full eccentric, that's OK.
>>
>
> yes
>
>> Not everyone has access to preacher curl machines.
>
> poor *******s
>
> whit

I should've prefaced that...I do one-arm preacher curls on a HS machine.
And to prevent hyperextension, I start my first rep with me ass off the
seat. As I finish my set, I lift it off the seat again and let the weight
down. My arm is never completely straight at any time during my set.
Working weight lately is 55 - 60 lbs for single arm curls.

The main reason I like preacher curls on the hammerstrength machine is that
it maintains consistent weight throughout the rep. With dumbbells, the
weight decreases as you near the top of the rep. As I said, I still do
dumbbells, and prefer to do so on an incline bench to remove upper body
cheating. But if time is short, I'll keep the preacher curls on the HS over
the other stuff.

I'm not complaining about my results so far mind you. My arms are much
larger and stronger compared to a year ago. And even from the pics I posted
here earlier this year. It's just I'm always open to bettering my program.
So thanks for the input John and Whit.

I posted this on another thread already, but here's a picture from a month
ago on a backpacking trip. Arms are just a tad under 16" pre-workout.
Traps and chest have really grown this year also. Not large by your
standards, but a big change for me.

http://maximizesoftware.com/images/Dad%20Jake%20and%20Cassie.jpg

That's one of my sons and my daughter btw. Yes, they are staunch
conservatives and love to shoot. My boy there is 13, and can trap shoot 22
out of 25 with a 20 gage. My daughter loves shooting handguns, and I'd hate
to be on the receiving end of her efforts. That girl deadly with a .40. I
pitty da foo who breaks into our house. :)
--
-Larry

Tiger Hillside
October 4th 04, 06:24 PM
On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 09:01:30 -0600, (Keith Hobman)
wrote:

[snip]

>Now, if I can just figure out why anyone would consider standing on stage
>in a bikini a worthwhile endeavour I'll really have broadened
>perspectives...
>
>:^)

Perhaps if you had a broads perspective you would like to see men
standing on stage in a bikini.

;-)

pyridox
October 5th 04, 11:29 PM
Keith Hobman > wrote in message
...
> In article >, nospam.net wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 04:28:39 GMT, Justin Morton wrote:
> > >John M. Williams wrote:
> > >
> > >> I decided to be nice and responded to you in a manner which was more
> > >> polite than my usual. Now you're just being ignorant. So if you
fancy
> > >> yourself a "bodybuilder," then know that tricep kickbacks are not
> > >> significant lifts for bodybuilders; they're lifts for pansies.
> > >
> > >No sir, but I do fancy myself an "aspiring" bodybuilder. It is YOUR
> > >expertise that I need right now.
> > >
> > >I have no shame in admitting that I have only been lifting (very)
> > >seriously for 10 months, I am yet a baby. Learning what I can, how I
can.
> > >
> > >As far as the "kickbacks", I just read an article about Lee Haney in
> > >FLEX magazine and he was just PRAISING kick backs. So, I am a product
> > >of what I have read. I see that is not good, and do not confess to
> > >being a pansy :-)
> >
> > More appropriately, kickbacks are relatively ineffective. They are
> > mostly done by women and men who are starting out and don't know any
> > better. 'Pansy' is neither effective or informative. But bullies often
> > resort to name calling.
>
> I wonder about the 'ineffective' part.
>
> Most bodybuilders I've read about use more basic exercises (exactly as you
> suggest) for building bulk, then different exercises for 'ripping'.
>
> The rigorous diet required to get to extremely low bodyfat levels doesn't
> leave the person with much energy. So is it possible that kick-backs,
> cable cross-overs, etc. allow the person dieting to use as little energy
> as possible while still working bodyparts? IOW - given the diet they
> really don't have the energy to do the more demanding bulking exercises?
> But they still want to keep working out and the exercises also help them
> to focus on contracting each individual muscle.
>
> I'm no expert on this, but I'm trying to develop a broader perspective. It
> would seem to me there is some utility in these exercises at a particular
> stage of pre-competition training.
>

i think that's basically true

some days i go into the gym and i am just not "charged" enough where i can
put proper effort into neurologically difficult exercises, so i opt for more
machines and more iso stuff. stuff where the weight pretty much moves
already in a set groove, and i can just "gut" it out

as lyle et al will point out, muscles only know tension. so, i'm still
putting (at least some of) my muscles through high tension, but i don't need
to expend the energy (mental mostly) of the more complex movements.

i know some people would say "well just wait until you feel 100% again" but
that is not always an option, AND for people who have tight schedules, it
just will not work

whit

> Now, if I can just figure out why anyone would consider standing on stage
> in a bikini a worthwhile endeavour I'll really have broadened
> perspectives...
>
> :^)

elzinator
October 6th 04, 01:05 AM
On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 22:29:44 GMT, pyridox wrote:
>
>Keith Hobman > wrote in message
...
>> In article >, nospam.net wrote:
>>
>> > On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 04:28:39 GMT, Justin Morton wrote:
>> > >John M. Williams wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> I decided to be nice and responded to you in a manner which was more
>> > >> polite than my usual. Now you're just being ignorant. So if you
>fancy
>> > >> yourself a "bodybuilder," then know that tricep kickbacks are not
>> > >> significant lifts for bodybuilders; they're lifts for pansies.
>> > >
>> > >No sir, but I do fancy myself an "aspiring" bodybuilder. It is YOUR
>> > >expertise that I need right now.
>> > >
>> > >I have no shame in admitting that I have only been lifting (very)
>> > >seriously for 10 months, I am yet a baby. Learning what I can, how I
>can.
>> > >
>> > >As far as the "kickbacks", I just read an article about Lee Haney in
>> > >FLEX magazine and he was just PRAISING kick backs. So, I am a product
>> > >of what I have read. I see that is not good, and do not confess to
>> > >being a pansy :-)
>> >
>> > More appropriately, kickbacks are relatively ineffective. They are
>> > mostly done by women and men who are starting out and don't know any
>> > better. 'Pansy' is neither effective or informative. But bullies often
>> > resort to name calling.
>>
>> I wonder about the 'ineffective' part.
>>
>> Most bodybuilders I've read about use more basic exercises (exactly as you
>> suggest) for building bulk, then different exercises for 'ripping'.
>>
>> The rigorous diet required to get to extremely low bodyfat levels doesn't
>> leave the person with much energy. So is it possible that kick-backs,
>> cable cross-overs, etc. allow the person dieting to use as little energy
>> as possible while still working bodyparts? IOW - given the diet they
>> really don't have the energy to do the more demanding bulking exercises?
>> But they still want to keep working out and the exercises also help them
>> to focus on contracting each individual muscle.
>>
>> I'm no expert on this, but I'm trying to develop a broader perspective. It
>> would seem to me there is some utility in these exercises at a particular
>> stage of pre-competition training.
>>
>
>i think that's basically true
>
>some days i go into the gym and i am just not "charged" enough where i can
>put proper effort into neurologically difficult exercises, so i opt for more
>machines and more iso stuff. stuff where the weight pretty much moves
>already in a set groove, and i can just "gut" it out

Yeah, good for rehab too (currently doing rehab bb crap)

>as lyle et al will point out, muscles only know tension. so, i'm still
>putting (at least some of) my muscles through high tension, but i don't need
>to expend the energy (mental mostly) of the more complex movements.

Nah, they're 'smarter' than that.
(reading some of the studies in this Perception and Human Performance
book is fascinating and enthralling). There's a spatial component to
'muscle memory' (not in terms of hypertrophy, as is commonly
interpreted, but in terms of temporal, spatial and tension 'memory'. I
am beginning to wonder what the ratio of conscious to unconscious
intention and outcome is in many of our movements.

>i know some people would say "well just wait until you feel 100% again" but
>that is not always an option, AND for people who have tight schedules, it
>just will not work

Very true.


---------------------------------
Teddy Roosevelt for President!!

Lyle McDonald
October 6th 04, 02:03 AM
elzinator wrote:

>>as lyle et al will point out, muscles only know tension. so, i'm still
>>putting (at least some of) my muscles through high tension, but i don't need
>>to expend the energy (mental mostly) of the more complex movements.
>
>
> Nah, they're 'smarter' than that.
> (reading some of the studies in this Perception and Human Performance
> book is fascinating and enthralling). There's a spatial component to
> 'muscle memory' (not in terms of hypertrophy, as is commonly
> interpreted, but in terms of temporal, spatial and tension 'memory'. I
> am beginning to wonder what the ratio of conscious to unconscious
> intention and outcome is in many of our movements.

What are you gibbering about?

Lyle

Lyle McDonald
October 6th 04, 02:04 AM
pyridox wrote:

> Keith Hobman > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>In article >, nospam.net wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 04:28:39 GMT, Justin Morton wrote:
>>>
>>>>John M. Williams wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I decided to be nice and responded to you in a manner which was more
>>>>>polite than my usual. Now you're just being ignorant. So if you
>
> fancy
>
>>>>>yourself a "bodybuilder," then know that tricep kickbacks are not
>>>>>significant lifts for bodybuilders; they're lifts for pansies.
>>>>
>>>>No sir, but I do fancy myself an "aspiring" bodybuilder. It is YOUR
>>>>expertise that I need right now.
>>>>
>>>>I have no shame in admitting that I have only been lifting (very)
>>>>seriously for 10 months, I am yet a baby. Learning what I can, how I
>
> can.
>
>>>>As far as the "kickbacks", I just read an article about Lee Haney in
>>>>FLEX magazine and he was just PRAISING kick backs. So, I am a product
>>>>of what I have read. I see that is not good, and do not confess to
>>>>being a pansy :-)
>>>
>>>More appropriately, kickbacks are relatively ineffective. They are
>>>mostly done by women and men who are starting out and don't know any
>>>better. 'Pansy' is neither effective or informative. But bullies often
>>>resort to name calling.
>>
>>I wonder about the 'ineffective' part.
>>
>>Most bodybuilders I've read about use more basic exercises (exactly as you
>>suggest) for building bulk, then different exercises for 'ripping'.
>>
>>The rigorous diet required to get to extremely low bodyfat levels doesn't
>>leave the person with much energy. So is it possible that kick-backs,
>>cable cross-overs, etc. allow the person dieting to use as little energy
>>as possible while still working bodyparts? IOW - given the diet they
>>really don't have the energy to do the more demanding bulking exercises?
>>But they still want to keep working out and the exercises also help them
>>to focus on contracting each individual muscle.
>>
>>I'm no expert on this, but I'm trying to develop a broader perspective. It
>>would seem to me there is some utility in these exercises at a particular
>>stage of pre-competition training.
>>
>
>
> i think that's basically true
>
> some days i go into the gym and i am just not "charged" enough where i can
> put proper effort into neurologically difficult exercises,

Pussy.

> so i opt for more
> machines and more iso stuff. stuff where the weight pretty much moves
> already in a set groove, and i can just "gut" it out
>
> as lyle et al will point out, muscles only know tension. so, i'm still
> putting (at least some of) my muscles through high tension, but i don't need
> to expend the energy (mental mostly) of the more complex movements.
>
> i know some people would say "well just wait until you feel 100% again" but
> that is not always an option, AND for people who have tight schedules, it
> just will not work

And of course, this is ultimately quite tangential to the OP or my comments.

Lyle

elzinator
October 6th 04, 02:17 AM
On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 19:03:11 -0600, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>elzinator wrote:
>
>>>as lyle et al will point out, muscles only know tension. so, i'm still
>>>putting (at least some of) my muscles through high tension, but i don't need
>>>to expend the energy (mental mostly) of the more complex movements.
>>
>>
>> Nah, they're 'smarter' than that.
>> (reading some of the studies in this Perception and Human Performance
>> book is fascinating and enthralling). There's a spatial component to
>> 'muscle memory' (not in terms of hypertrophy, as is commonly
>> interpreted, but in terms of temporal, spatial and tension 'memory'. I
>> am beginning to wonder what the ratio of conscious to unconscious
>> intention and outcome is in many of our movements.
>
>What are you gibbering about?

It's the allergy meds.......way too much pseudoephedrine...


---------------------------------
Teddy Roosevelt for President!!

Lyle McDonald
October 6th 04, 02:17 AM
elzinator wrote:

> On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 19:03:11 -0600, Lyle McDonald wrote:
>
>>elzinator wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>as lyle et al will point out, muscles only know tension. so, i'm still
>>>>putting (at least some of) my muscles through high tension, but i don't need
>>>>to expend the energy (mental mostly) of the more complex movements.
>>>
>>>
>>>Nah, they're 'smarter' than that.
>>>(reading some of the studies in this Perception and Human Performance
>>>book is fascinating and enthralling). There's a spatial component to
>>>'muscle memory' (not in terms of hypertrophy, as is commonly
>>>interpreted, but in terms of temporal, spatial and tension 'memory'. I
>>>am beginning to wonder what the ratio of conscious to unconscious
>>>intention and outcome is in many of our movements.
>>
>>What are you gibbering about?
>
>
> It's the allergy meds.......way too much pseudoephedrine...

just explain what in the hell you mean by 'spatial component'.
AS in Millwards filled bag theory of hypertrophy or something else.

And what do you mean by tensino 'memory'?

Lyle

tacitrati
October 6th 04, 07:13 PM
elzinator > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 22:29:44 GMT, pyridox wrote:
> >
> >Keith Hobman > wrote in message
> ...
> >> In article >, nospam.net
wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 04:28:39 GMT, Justin Morton wrote:
> >> > >John M. Williams wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> I decided to be nice and responded to you in a manner which was
more
> >> > >> polite than my usual. Now you're just being ignorant. So if you
> >fancy
> >> > >> yourself a "bodybuilder," then know that tricep kickbacks are not
> >> > >> significant lifts for bodybuilders; they're lifts for pansies.
> >> > >
> >> > >No sir, but I do fancy myself an "aspiring" bodybuilder. It is YOUR
> >> > >expertise that I need right now.
> >> > >
> >> > >I have no shame in admitting that I have only been lifting (very)
> >> > >seriously for 10 months, I am yet a baby. Learning what I can, how
I
> >can.
> >> > >
> >> > >As far as the "kickbacks", I just read an article about Lee Haney in
> >> > >FLEX magazine and he was just PRAISING kick backs. So, I am a
product
> >> > >of what I have read. I see that is not good, and do not confess to
> >> > >being a pansy :-)
> >> >
> >> > More appropriately, kickbacks are relatively ineffective. They are
> >> > mostly done by women and men who are starting out and don't know any
> >> > better. 'Pansy' is neither effective or informative. But bullies
often
> >> > resort to name calling.
> >>
> >> I wonder about the 'ineffective' part.
> >>
> >> Most bodybuilders I've read about use more basic exercises (exactly as
you
> >> suggest) for building bulk, then different exercises for 'ripping'.
> >>
> >> The rigorous diet required to get to extremely low bodyfat levels
doesn't
> >> leave the person with much energy. So is it possible that kick-backs,
> >> cable cross-overs, etc. allow the person dieting to use as little
energy
> >> as possible while still working bodyparts? IOW - given the diet they
> >> really don't have the energy to do the more demanding bulking
exercises?
> >> But they still want to keep working out and the exercises also help
them
> >> to focus on contracting each individual muscle.
> >>
> >> I'm no expert on this, but I'm trying to develop a broader perspective.
It
> >> would seem to me there is some utility in these exercises at a
particular
> >> stage of pre-competition training.
> >>
> >
> >i think that's basically true
> >
> >some days i go into the gym and i am just not "charged" enough where i
can
> >put proper effort into neurologically difficult exercises, so i opt for
more
> >machines and more iso stuff. stuff where the weight pretty much moves
> >already in a set groove, and i can just "gut" it out
>
> Yeah, good for rehab too (currently doing rehab bb crap)
>
> >as lyle et al will point out, muscles only know tension. so, i'm still
> >putting (at least some of) my muscles through high tension, but i don't
need
> >to expend the energy (mental mostly) of the more complex movements.
>
> Nah, they're 'smarter' than that.
> (reading some of the studies in this Perception and Human Performance
> book is fascinating and enthralling). There's a spatial component to
> 'muscle memory' (not in terms of hypertrophy, as is commonly
> interpreted, but in terms of temporal, spatial and tension 'memory'. I
> am beginning to wonder what the ratio of conscious to unconscious
> intention and outcome is in many of our movements.
>
> >i know some people would say "well just wait until you feel 100% again"
but
> >that is not always an option, AND for people who have tight schedules, it
> >just will not work
>
> Very true.

ii should note that i tore the crap out of a leg muscle SPRINTING :( and
haven't been able to squat for over a month.

even light squats hurt, and the orthopaedic surgeon agreed not to do what
hurts.

however, i can leg press and do leg extensions and curls with NO pain

which just goes to show that these exercises do NOT work stabilizers as has
been said

i am pretty sure it's the gracilis (sp?) btw.

anyway, yesterday i did squats for 135. set of 2-3. as well. it was ok,
so eventually i will be back in the game

whit

>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Teddy Roosevelt for President!!

tacitrati
October 6th 04, 07:14 PM
Lyle McDonald > wrote in message
...
> pyridox wrote:
>
> > Keith Hobman > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> >>In article >, nospam.net
wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 04:28:39 GMT, Justin Morton wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>John M. Williams wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>I decided to be nice and responded to you in a manner which was more
> >>>>>polite than my usual. Now you're just being ignorant. So if you
> >
> > fancy
> >
> >>>>>yourself a "bodybuilder," then know that tricep kickbacks are not
> >>>>>significant lifts for bodybuilders; they're lifts for pansies.
> >>>>
> >>>>No sir, but I do fancy myself an "aspiring" bodybuilder. It is YOUR
> >>>>expertise that I need right now.
> >>>>
> >>>>I have no shame in admitting that I have only been lifting (very)
> >>>>seriously for 10 months, I am yet a baby. Learning what I can, how I
> >
> > can.
> >
> >>>>As far as the "kickbacks", I just read an article about Lee Haney in
> >>>>FLEX magazine and he was just PRAISING kick backs. So, I am a product
> >>>>of what I have read. I see that is not good, and do not confess to
> >>>>being a pansy :-)
> >>>
> >>>More appropriately, kickbacks are relatively ineffective. They are
> >>>mostly done by women and men who are starting out and don't know any
> >>>better. 'Pansy' is neither effective or informative. But bullies often
> >>>resort to name calling.
> >>
> >>I wonder about the 'ineffective' part.
> >>
> >>Most bodybuilders I've read about use more basic exercises (exactly as
you
> >>suggest) for building bulk, then different exercises for 'ripping'.
> >>
> >>The rigorous diet required to get to extremely low bodyfat levels
doesn't
> >>leave the person with much energy. So is it possible that kick-backs,
> >>cable cross-overs, etc. allow the person dieting to use as little energy
> >>as possible while still working bodyparts? IOW - given the diet they
> >>really don't have the energy to do the more demanding bulking exercises?
> >>But they still want to keep working out and the exercises also help them
> >>to focus on contracting each individual muscle.
> >>
> >>I'm no expert on this, but I'm trying to develop a broader perspective.
It
> >>would seem to me there is some utility in these exercises at a
particular
> >>stage of pre-competition training.
> >>
> >
> >
> > i think that's basically true
> >
> > some days i go into the gym and i am just not "charged" enough where i
can
> > put proper effort into neurologically difficult exercises,
>
> Pussy.
>
> > so i opt for more
> > machines and more iso stuff. stuff where the weight pretty much moves
> > already in a set groove, and i can just "gut" it out
> >
> > as lyle et al will point out, muscles only know tension. so, i'm still
> > putting (at least some of) my muscles through high tension, but i don't
need
> > to expend the energy (mental mostly) of the more complex movements.
> >
> > i know some people would say "well just wait until you feel 100% again"
but
> > that is not always an option, AND for people who have tight schedules,
it
> > just will not work
>
> And of course, this is ultimately quite tangential to the OP or my
comments.
>
> Lyle

it's on point to the comment about doing simpler stuff when you are totally
burned out

whit

>

Lee Michaels
October 6th 04, 07:47 PM
"tacitrati" > wrote
>
> ii should note that i tore the crap out of a leg muscle SPRINTING :( and
> haven't been able to squat for over a month.
>
> even light squats hurt, and the orthopaedic surgeon agreed not to do what
> hurts.
>
> however, i can leg press and do leg extensions and curls with NO pain
>
> which just goes to show that these exercises do NOT work stabilizers as
has
> been said
>
> i am pretty sure it's the gracilis (sp?) btw.
>
> anyway, yesterday i did squats for 135. set of 2-3. as well. it was ok,
> so eventually i will be back in the game
>
> whit
>

Uhhhhh......, Whit,

Maybe you should limit high risk activities and stick to low risk ones.

Like lifting and busting bad guys.

And no more mechanical bulls.

(Although the ocassional cowgirl is OK).

Keith Hobman
October 6th 04, 09:08 PM
In article et>,
"tacitrati" > wrote:

> elzinator > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Tue, 05 Oct 2004 22:29:44 GMT, pyridox wrote:
> > >
> > >Keith Hobman > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >> In article >, nospam.net
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 04:28:39 GMT, Justin Morton wrote:
> > >> > >John M. Williams wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >> I decided to be nice and responded to you in a manner which was
> more
> > >> > >> polite than my usual. Now you're just being ignorant. So if you
> > >fancy
> > >> > >> yourself a "bodybuilder," then know that tricep kickbacks are not
> > >> > >> significant lifts for bodybuilders; they're lifts for pansies.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >No sir, but I do fancy myself an "aspiring" bodybuilder. It is YOUR
> > >> > >expertise that I need right now.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >I have no shame in admitting that I have only been lifting (very)
> > >> > >seriously for 10 months, I am yet a baby. Learning what I can, how
> I
> > >can.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >As far as the "kickbacks", I just read an article about Lee Haney in
> > >> > >FLEX magazine and he was just PRAISING kick backs. So, I am a
> product
> > >> > >of what I have read. I see that is not good, and do not confess to
> > >> > >being a pansy :-)
> > >> >
> > >> > More appropriately, kickbacks are relatively ineffective. They are
> > >> > mostly done by women and men who are starting out and don't know any
> > >> > better. 'Pansy' is neither effective or informative. But bullies
> often
> > >> > resort to name calling.
> > >>
> > >> I wonder about the 'ineffective' part.
> > >>
> > >> Most bodybuilders I've read about use more basic exercises (exactly as
> you
> > >> suggest) for building bulk, then different exercises for 'ripping'.
> > >>
> > >> The rigorous diet required to get to extremely low bodyfat levels
> doesn't
> > >> leave the person with much energy. So is it possible that kick-backs,
> > >> cable cross-overs, etc. allow the person dieting to use as little
> energy
> > >> as possible while still working bodyparts? IOW - given the diet they
> > >> really don't have the energy to do the more demanding bulking
> exercises?
> > >> But they still want to keep working out and the exercises also help
> them
> > >> to focus on contracting each individual muscle.
> > >>
> > >> I'm no expert on this, but I'm trying to develop a broader perspective.
> It
> > >> would seem to me there is some utility in these exercises at a
> particular
> > >> stage of pre-competition training.
> > >>
> > >
> > >i think that's basically true
> > >
> > >some days i go into the gym and i am just not "charged" enough where i
> can
> > >put proper effort into neurologically difficult exercises, so i opt for
> more
> > >machines and more iso stuff. stuff where the weight pretty much moves
> > >already in a set groove, and i can just "gut" it out
> >
> > Yeah, good for rehab too (currently doing rehab bb crap)
> >
> > >as lyle et al will point out, muscles only know tension. so, i'm still
> > >putting (at least some of) my muscles through high tension, but i don't
> need
> > >to expend the energy (mental mostly) of the more complex movements.
> >
> > Nah, they're 'smarter' than that.
> > (reading some of the studies in this Perception and Human Performance
> > book is fascinating and enthralling). There's a spatial component to
> > 'muscle memory' (not in terms of hypertrophy, as is commonly
> > interpreted, but in terms of temporal, spatial and tension 'memory'. I
> > am beginning to wonder what the ratio of conscious to unconscious
> > intention and outcome is in many of our movements.
> >
> > >i know some people would say "well just wait until you feel 100% again"
> but
> > >that is not always an option, AND for people who have tight schedules, it
> > >just will not work
> >
> > Very true.
>
> ii should note that i tore the crap out of a leg muscle SPRINTING :( and
> haven't been able to squat for over a month.
>
> even light squats hurt, and the orthopaedic surgeon agreed not to do what
> hurts.
>
> however, i can leg press and do leg extensions and curls with NO pain
>
> which just goes to show that these exercises do NOT work stabilizers as has
> been said
>
> i am pretty sure it's the gracilis (sp?) btw.

Just got to view them on cadavers today. I could see where that would hurt
squatting,

Wild stuff looking at the hip and legs. We've got one specimen where the
guy was huge - must've been 6' 8" or so and tremendous muscularity. So
even his gracilis was like a small person's wrist in diameter. The
abductor magnus was...

Jeez. Like several of good sized roasts strung together. You couldn't get
around it with one hand. I don't know if it's because most of our
specimens tend to be elderly or what but this one just stands out like a
sore thumb. Everything looks different on it.

Lyle McDonald
October 6th 04, 09:11 PM
Keith Hobman wrote:


> Wild stuff looking at the hip and legs. We've got one specimen where the
> guy was huge - must've been 6' 8" or so and tremendous muscularity. So
> even his gracilis was like a small person's wrist in diameter. The
> abductor magnus was...

That's what mine looks like. Almost anyhow.

I'm almost back to the point of having to wear lycra all the time
because my inner thighs rub together so much. I've actually permanently
removed the hair from that area.

>
> Jeez. Like several of good sized roasts strung together. You couldn't get
> around it with one hand. I don't know if it's because most of our
> specimens tend to be elderly or what but this one just stands out like a
> sore thumb. Everything looks different on it.

That's it.
When I was in cadaver lab, we got all of the old, feeble, frail hospital
patients. Nasty stringy muscles, you couldn't tell what anything was.

And when you'd squeeze the veins, you could feel the cholesterole plaque
buildup.

If you get bored, tug on the tendon of the fingers or toes and make them
jump.

Note: cadaver lab will either make you hungry, or make you turn
vegetarian for 6 months.

Lyle

Lee Michaels
October 6th 04, 09:15 PM
"Lyle McDonald" wrote

> Keith Hobman wrote:
>
>
> > Wild stuff looking at the hip and legs. We've got one specimen where the
> > guy was huge - must've been 6' 8" or so and tremendous muscularity. So
> > even his gracilis was like a small person's wrist in diameter. The
> > abductor magnus was...
>
> That's what mine looks like. Almost anyhow.
>
> I'm almost back to the point of having to wear lycra all the time
> because my inner thighs rub together so much. I've actually permanently
> removed the hair from that area.
>

Naked inner thigh, eh??

What does that do to your standing in the monkey kingdom?

Lyle McDonald
October 6th 04, 09:16 PM
Lee Michaels wrote:

> "Lyle McDonald" wrote
>
>
>>Keith Hobman wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Wild stuff looking at the hip and legs. We've got one specimen where the
>>>guy was huge - must've been 6' 8" or so and tremendous muscularity. So
>>>even his gracilis was like a small person's wrist in diameter. The
>>>abductor magnus was...
>>
>>That's what mine looks like. Almost anyhow.
>>
>>I'm almost back to the point of having to wear lycra all the time
>>because my inner thighs rub together so much. I've actually permanently
>>removed the hair from that area.
>>
>
>
> Naked inner thigh, eh??

It's very strange looking. Legs are hairy as hell (where they aren't
shaved) except the inner thighs which are rubbed clean.

>
> What does that do to your standing in the monkey kingdom?

I fling poo better than anyone, I am still top male.

Lyle

Lee Michaels
October 6th 04, 09:32 PM
"Keith Hobman" > wrote
>
> Just got to view them on cadavers today. I could see where that would hurt
> squatting,
>
> Wild stuff looking at the hip and legs. We've got one specimen where the
> guy was huge - must've been 6' 8" or so and tremendous muscularity. So
> even his gracilis was like a small person's wrist in diameter. The
> abductor magnus was...
>
> Jeez. Like several of good sized roasts strung together. You couldn't get
> around it with one hand. I don't know if it's because most of our
> specimens tend to be elderly or what but this one just stands out like a
> sore thumb. Everything looks different on it.

Any idea what he died of?

Keith Hobman
October 6th 04, 09:42 PM
In article >, "Lee Michaels"
> wrote:

> "Keith Hobman" > wrote
> >
> > Just got to view them on cadavers today. I could see where that would hurt
> > squatting,
> >
> > Wild stuff looking at the hip and legs. We've got one specimen where the
> > guy was huge - must've been 6' 8" or so and tremendous muscularity. So
> > even his gracilis was like a small person's wrist in diameter. The
> > abductor magnus was...
> >
> > Jeez. Like several of good sized roasts strung together. You couldn't get
> > around it with one hand. I don't know if it's because most of our
> > specimens tend to be elderly or what but this one just stands out like a
> > sore thumb. Everything looks different on it.
>
> Any idea what he died of?

No, nor the actual age. His is one of the dismembered specimens. So we get
to look at his arm/shoulder and legs for the most part. Since they are
stripped of fat you can't really tell (or I can't anyhow) if this was an
athlete or a big fat guy who built the muscle hauling himself around. I
tend to think the former as the deltoid muscle, triceps and rotator cuff
are all huge. Biceps isn't really large, but really long and strong
looking.

The leg was unworldly. In comparison to the other specimens. The muscle
didn't look marbled at all, so I really don't think he was fat. But I
can't tell for sure. I keep getting mental images of a Karelin type of
physique with this dude. That big. His leg and hip would have come up to
just under my armpit.

elzinator
October 7th 04, 12:44 AM
On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 18:13:33 GMT, tacitrati wrote:
>
>elzinator > wrote in message

>> >some days i go into the gym and i am just not "charged" enough where i
>can
>> >put proper effort into neurologically difficult exercises, so i opt for
>more
>> >machines and more iso stuff. stuff where the weight pretty much moves
>> >already in a set groove, and i can just "gut" it out
>>
>> Yeah, good for rehab too (currently doing rehab bb crap)

>
>ii should note that i tore the crap out of a leg muscle SPRINTING :( and
>haven't been able to squat for over a month.
>
>even light squats hurt, and the orthopaedic surgeon agreed not to do what
>hurts.
>
>however, i can leg press and do leg extensions and curls with NO pain
>
>which just goes to show that these exercises do NOT work stabilizers as has
>been said
>
>i am pretty sure it's the gracilis (sp?) btw.

Yes, the 'graceful' muscle.

Do you need it massaged?

(hand up)

>anyway, yesterday i did squats for 135. set of 2-3. as well. it was ok,
>so eventually i will be back in the game

I'm in the same boat. Threw my back out twice sneezing. It's only now
starting to settle down.


---------------------------------
Teddy Roosevelt for President!!

elzinator
October 7th 04, 12:50 AM
On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 14:08:04 -0600, Keith Hobman wrote:
>In article et>,
>"tacitrati" > wrote:

>> i am pretty sure it's the gracilis (sp?) btw.
>
>Just got to view them on cadavers today. I could see where that would hurt
>squatting,
>
>Wild stuff looking at the hip and legs. We've got one specimen where the
>guy was huge - must've been 6' 8" or so and tremendous muscularity. So
>even his gracilis was like a small person's wrist in diameter. The
>abductor magnus was...
>
>Jeez. Like several of good sized roasts strung together. You couldn't get
>around it with one hand. I don't know if it's because most of our
>specimens tend to be elderly or what but this one just stands out like a
>sore thumb. Everything looks different on it.

Typically, most of the cadavers are indigents or donated by families.
THe former make up the greater %. And most are elderly.

I'm interested in knowing how the large individual died. Do they give
you the medical history of each cadaver? Acromegaly?

(in brain sectioning, the resident MD presents the case before the
brain is sectioned by same MD resident; similarly in muscle conference
before the immunohisto slides are examined)


---------------------------------
Teddy Roosevelt for President!!

elzinator
October 7th 04, 12:52 AM
On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 14:42:38 -0600, Keith Hobman wrote:
>In article >, "Lee Michaels"
> wrote:
>
>> "Keith Hobman" > wrote
>> >
>> > Just got to view them on cadavers today. I could see where that would hurt
>> > squatting,
>> >
>> > Wild stuff looking at the hip and legs. We've got one specimen where the
>> > guy was huge - must've been 6' 8" or so and tremendous muscularity. So
>> > even his gracilis was like a small person's wrist in diameter. The
>> > abductor magnus was...
>> >
>> > Jeez. Like several of good sized roasts strung together. You couldn't get
>> > around it with one hand. I don't know if it's because most of our
>> > specimens tend to be elderly or what but this one just stands out like a
>> > sore thumb. Everything looks different on it.
>>
>> Any idea what he died of?
>
>No, nor the actual age. His is one of the dismembered specimens. So we get
>to look at his arm/shoulder and legs for the most part. Since they are
>stripped of fat you can't really tell (or I can't anyhow) if this was an
>athlete or a big fat guy who built the muscle hauling himself around. I
>tend to think the former as the deltoid muscle, triceps and rotator cuff
>are all huge. Biceps isn't really large, but really long and strong
>looking.
>
>The leg was unworldly. In comparison to the other specimens. The muscle
>didn't look marbled at all, so I really don't think he was fat. But I
>can't tell for sure. I keep getting mental images of a Karelin type of
>physique with this dude. That big. His leg and hip would have come up to
>just under my armpit.

sounds like acromegaly.


---------------------------------
Teddy Roosevelt for President!!

Pat Styles
October 7th 04, 02:27 AM
"Lyle McDonald" > wrote in message
...
> Keith Hobman wrote:
>
>
> > Wild stuff looking at the hip and legs. We've got one specimen where the
> > guy was huge - must've been 6' 8" or so and tremendous muscularity. So
> > even his gracilis was like a small person's wrist in diameter. The
> > abductor magnus was...
>
> That's what mine looks like. Almost anyhow.
>
> I'm almost back to the point of having to wear lycra all the time
> because my inner thighs rub together so much. I've actually permanently
> removed the hair from that area.

Damn, you're sexy!
ps

Keith Hobman
October 7th 04, 02:39 AM
In article >, nospam.net wrote:

> On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 14:08:04 -0600, Keith Hobman wrote:
> >In article et>,
> >"tacitrati" > wrote:
>
> >> i am pretty sure it's the gracilis (sp?) btw.
> >
> >Just got to view them on cadavers today. I could see where that would hurt
> >squatting,
> >
> >Wild stuff looking at the hip and legs. We've got one specimen where the
> >guy was huge - must've been 6' 8" or so and tremendous muscularity. So
> >even his gracilis was like a small person's wrist in diameter. The
> >abductor magnus was...
> >
> >Jeez. Like several of good sized roasts strung together. You couldn't get
> >around it with one hand. I don't know if it's because most of our
> >specimens tend to be elderly or what but this one just stands out like a
> >sore thumb. Everything looks different on it.
>
> Typically, most of the cadavers are indigents or donated by families.
> THe former make up the greater %. And most are elderly.
>
> I'm interested in knowing how the large individual died. Do they give
> you the medical history of each cadaver? Acromegaly?
>
> (in brain sectioning, the resident MD presents the case before the
> brain is sectioned by same MD resident; similarly in muscle conference
> before the immunohisto slides are examined)


Ours aren't indigents, they are people who have filled out a card (while
living) donating their remains (upon death). I haven't seen anything with
a history of the people and I don't think they would let anatomy students
be privy to that information. Especially the people who have been
dismembered.

tacitrati
October 7th 04, 03:04 AM
Lee Michaels > wrote in message
...
>
> "tacitrati" > wrote
> >
> > ii should note that i tore the crap out of a leg muscle SPRINTING :( and
> > haven't been able to squat for over a month.
> >
> > even light squats hurt, and the orthopaedic surgeon agreed not to do
what
> > hurts.
> >
> > however, i can leg press and do leg extensions and curls with NO pain
> >
> > which just goes to show that these exercises do NOT work stabilizers as
> has
> > been said
> >
> > i am pretty sure it's the gracilis (sp?) btw.
> >
> > anyway, yesterday i did squats for 135. set of 2-3. as well. it was
ok,
> > so eventually i will be back in the game
> >
> > whit
> >
>
> Uhhhhh......, Whit,
>
> Maybe you should limit high risk activities and stick to low risk ones.
>
> Like lifting and busting bad guys.
>
> And no more mechanical bulls.
>

i didn't think sprinting was high risk.

but when you have a (probably already strained gracilis) it is.

:(

lesson learned

whit

> (Although the ocassional cowgirl is OK).
>
>
>
>

elzinator
October 7th 04, 03:06 AM
On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 19:39:56 -0600, Keith Hobman wrote:
>In article >, nospam.net wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 14:08:04 -0600, Keith Hobman wrote:
>> >In article et>,

>> >Just got to view them on cadavers today. I could see where that would hurt
>> >squatting,
>> >
>> >Wild stuff looking at the hip and legs. We've got one specimen where the
>> >guy was huge - must've been 6' 8" or so and tremendous muscularity. So
>> >even his gracilis was like a small person's wrist in diameter. The
>> >abductor magnus was...
>> >
>> >Jeez. Like several of good sized roasts strung together. You couldn't get
>> >around it with one hand. I don't know if it's because most of our
>> >specimens tend to be elderly or what but this one just stands out like a
>> >sore thumb. Everything looks different on it.
>>
>> Typically, most of the cadavers are indigents or donated by families.
>> THe former make up the greater %. And most are elderly.
>>
>> I'm interested in knowing how the large individual died. Do they give
>> you the medical history of each cadaver? Acromegaly?
>>
>> (in brain sectioning, the resident MD presents the case before the
>> brain is sectioned by same MD resident; similarly in muscle conference
>> before the immunohisto slides are examined)
>
>
>Ours aren't indigents, they are people who have filled out a card (while
>living) donating their remains (upon death). I haven't seen anything with
>a history of the people and I don't think they would let anatomy students
>be privy to that information. Especially the people who have been
>dismembered.

One of the 4 hospitals associated with this Uni is the county
hospital: mostly indigents. Many of the bodies are unclaimed, some J.
Doe's. Some of those cadavers are used for teaching, such as anatomy,
etc. It's a shame that the students are not made aware of the cause of
demise. That in itself can be a learning tool.

The forensics labs on the other hand are a very different scenario.
And man, let me tell you, it really stinks in there.

---------------------------------
Teddy Roosevelt for President!!

tacitrati
October 7th 04, 03:08 AM
elzinator > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 18:13:33 GMT, tacitrati wrote:
> >
> >elzinator > wrote in message
>
> >> >some days i go into the gym and i am just not "charged" enough where i
> >can
> >> >put proper effort into neurologically difficult exercises, so i opt
for
> >more
> >> >machines and more iso stuff. stuff where the weight pretty much moves
> >> >already in a set groove, and i can just "gut" it out
> >>
> >> Yeah, good for rehab too (currently doing rehab bb crap)
>
> >
> >ii should note that i tore the crap out of a leg muscle SPRINTING :( and
> >haven't been able to squat for over a month.
> >
> >even light squats hurt, and the orthopaedic surgeon agreed not to do what
> >hurts.
> >
> >however, i can leg press and do leg extensions and curls with NO pain
> >
> >which just goes to show that these exercises do NOT work stabilizers as
has
> >been said
> >
> >i am pretty sure it's the gracilis (sp?) btw.
>
> Yes, the 'graceful' muscle.
>
> Do you need it massaged?
>
> (hand up)
>

you know where i live. (the general area, anyways.)

<kerry/bush>

BRING......IT.......ON.....

</kerry/bush>

> >anyway, yesterday i did squats for 135. set of 2-3. as well. it was
ok,
> >so eventually i will be back in the game
>
> I'm in the same boat. Threw my back out twice sneezing

ya. the cut they are using in the current batch of cocaine must really
suck!

:l

whit

.. It's only now
> starting to settle down.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Teddy Roosevelt for President!!

elzinator
October 7th 04, 03:33 AM
On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 02:08:55 GMT, tacitrati wrote:
>
>elzinator > wrote in message
...
>> On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 18:13:33 GMT, tacitrati wrote:

>> >i am pretty sure it's the gracilis (sp?) btw.
>>
>> Yes, the 'graceful' muscle.
>>
>> Do you need it massaged?
>>
>> (hand up)
>>
>
>you know where i live. (the general area, anyways.)
>
><kerry/bush>
>
>BRING......IT.......ON.....
>
></kerry/bush>

<scene at cop station somewhere in/near Seattle>

[me] Excuse me, boys. Can you direct me to the man with the badge and
the sprained graceful muscle who impersonates Beevis and Butthead?

[cop eating a Krispy Creme and gulping 7-11 black coffee] Um, hmm...
uh.....

[me, with one eyebrow raised] You know, the one with the wild eyes and
shiny head, throws weights over his head, and likes to ride (ahem)
mechanical bulls. The Man That Walks on the Wild Side. Yeah, him.

[cop trying to hide the crumbs of donut gathered on his bulging gut]
Oh! You mean Whitney?!?

[me, fluttering my eyelids, lip turned up on one corner, and leaning
over the counter] Yes, Honey. That's the stud muffin I'm here to see.
I hear he needs some warm snakey fingers to massage his hurting
graceful muscle, and take care of that scar on his knee. I'm here to
make it feeeel so much better.

[cop, stuttering and spilling the remaining hot coffee in his lap] Um,
oh, yeah, he's, um, detained at the moment. But, uh, gee, I got this
muscle here that I pulled like last night....... oh ****; she's gone.

[me, moving determinably out the station door to look for a sushi bar,
lots of wasabi and a man called Jet Li]

Better catch me while you can. I'll keep the hands warm for ya.

>> >anyway, yesterday i did squats for 135. set of 2-3. as well. it was
>ok,
>> >so eventually i will be back in the game
>>
>> I'm in the same boat. Threw my back out twice sneezing
>
>ya. the cut they are using in the current batch of cocaine must really
>suck!

Nay, it's only freakin' ragweed, you dork.


---------------------------------
Teddy Roosevelt for President!!

Lyle McDonald
October 7th 04, 05:49 AM
Pat Styles wrote:

> "Lyle McDonald" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Keith Hobman wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Wild stuff looking at the hip and legs. We've got one specimen where the
>>>guy was huge - must've been 6' 8" or so and tremendous muscularity. So
>>>even his gracilis was like a small person's wrist in diameter. The
>>>abductor magnus was...
>>
>>That's what mine looks like. Almost anyhow.
>>
>>I'm almost back to the point of having to wear lycra all the time
>>because my inner thighs rub together so much. I've actually permanently
>>removed the hair from that area.
>
>
> Damn, you're sexy!

And I didn't even mention the hair shorts.
My legs are shaved but not all the way up. Mid thight or a bit higher.
With all the fur, it looks like I'm wearing fur shorts.

Gets girls hot.
Lyle

tacitrati
October 7th 04, 08:46 AM
elzinator > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 02:08:55 GMT, tacitrati wrote:
> >
> >elzinator > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 18:13:33 GMT, tacitrati wrote:
>
> >> >i am pretty sure it's the gracilis (sp?) btw.
> >>
> >> Yes, the 'graceful' muscle.
> >>
> >> Do you need it massaged?
> >>
> >> (hand up)
> >>
> >
> >you know where i live. (the general area, anyways.)
> >
> ><kerry/bush>
> >
> >BRING......IT.......ON.....
> >
> ></kerry/bush>
>
> <scene at cop station somewhere in/near Seattle>
>
> [me] Excuse me, boys. Can you direct me to the man with the badge and
> the sprained graceful muscle who impersonates Beevis and Butthead?
>
> [cop eating a Krispy Creme and gulping 7-11 black coffee] Um, hmm...
> uh.....
>
> [me, with one eyebrow raised] You know, the one with the wild eyes and
> shiny head, throws weights over his head, and likes to ride (ahem)
> mechanical bulls. The Man That Walks on the Wild Side. Yeah, him.
>
> [cop trying to hide the crumbs of donut gathered on his bulging gut]
> Oh! You mean Whitney?!?
>
> [me, fluttering my eyelids, lip turned up on one corner, and leaning
> over the counter] Yes, Honey. That's the stud muffin I'm here to see.
> I hear he needs some warm snakey fingers to massage his hurting
> graceful muscle, and take care of that scar on his knee. I'm here to
> make it feeeel so much better.
>
> [cop, stuttering and spilling the remaining hot coffee in his lap] Um,
> oh, yeah, he's, um, detained at the moment. But, uh, gee, I got this
> muscle here that I pulled like last night....... oh ****; she's gone.
>
> [me, moving determinably out the station door to look for a sushi bar,
> lots of wasabi and a man called Jet Li]
>
> Better catch me while you can. I'll keep the hands warm for ya.
>

my jurisDICtion ends at the oregon state line, missy.

> >> >anyway, yesterday i did squats for 135. set of 2-3. as well. it was
> >ok,
> >> >so eventually i will be back in the game
> >>
> >> I'm in the same boat. Threw my back out twice sneezing
> >
> >ya. the cut they are using in the current batch of cocaine must really
> >suck!
>
> Nay, it's only freakin' ragweed, you dork.
>
>

i just can't keep up with all the street slang these days.

ragweed? sounds more like marijuana than coke.

whit

> ---------------------------------
> Teddy Roosevelt for President!!

Keith Hobman
October 7th 04, 03:15 PM
In article >, nospam.net wrote:

> On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 19:39:56 -0600, Keith Hobman wrote:
> >In article >, nospam.net wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 14:08:04 -0600, Keith Hobman wrote:
> >> >In article et>,
>
> >> >Just got to view them on cadavers today. I could see where that would hurt
> >> >squatting,
> >> >
> >> >Wild stuff looking at the hip and legs. We've got one specimen where the
> >> >guy was huge - must've been 6' 8" or so and tremendous muscularity. So
> >> >even his gracilis was like a small person's wrist in diameter. The
> >> >abductor magnus was...
> >> >
> >> >Jeez. Like several of good sized roasts strung together. You couldn't get
> >> >around it with one hand. I don't know if it's because most of our
> >> >specimens tend to be elderly or what but this one just stands out like a
> >> >sore thumb. Everything looks different on it.
> >>
> >> Typically, most of the cadavers are indigents or donated by families.
> >> THe former make up the greater %. And most are elderly.
> >>
> >> I'm interested in knowing how the large individual died. Do they give
> >> you the medical history of each cadaver? Acromegaly?
> >>
> >> (in brain sectioning, the resident MD presents the case before the
> >> brain is sectioned by same MD resident; similarly in muscle conference
> >> before the immunohisto slides are examined)
> >
> >
> >Ours aren't indigents, they are people who have filled out a card (while
> >living) donating their remains (upon death). I haven't seen anything with
> >a history of the people and I don't think they would let anatomy students
> >be privy to that information. Especially the people who have been
> >dismembered.
>
> One of the 4 hospitals associated with this Uni is the county
> hospital: mostly indigents. Many of the bodies are unclaimed, some J.
> Doe's. Some of those cadavers are used for teaching, such as anatomy,
> etc. It's a shame that the students are not made aware of the cause of
> demise. That in itself can be a learning tool.

They might be letting some of the students, but not second year
kinesiology students. OTOH, I suspect the pre-med students look at
different things.

Pat Styles
October 7th 04, 03:21 PM
"Lyle McDonald" > wrote in message
...
> Pat Styles wrote:
>
> > "Lyle McDonald" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> >>Keith Hobman wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Wild stuff looking at the hip and legs. We've got one specimen where the
> >>>guy was huge - must've been 6' 8" or so and tremendous muscularity. So
> >>>even his gracilis was like a small person's wrist in diameter. The
> >>>abductor magnus was...
> >>
> >>That's what mine looks like. Almost anyhow.
> >>
> >>I'm almost back to the point of having to wear lycra all the time
> >>because my inner thighs rub together so much. I've actually permanently
> >>removed the hair from that area.
> >
> >
> > Damn, you're sexy!
>
> And I didn't even mention the hair shorts.
> My legs are shaved but not all the way up. Mid thight or a bit higher.
> With all the fur, it looks like I'm wearing fur shorts.

You almost got me to spit coffee all over my monitor. Mmmm, fur shorts with
little inner thigh smooth spots. You are a love machine!
ps

elzinator
October 9th 04, 06:08 PM
On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 07:46:14 GMT, tacitrati wrote:
>
>elzinator > wrote in message
...
>> On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 02:08:55 GMT, tacitrati wrote:
>> >
>> >elzinator > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 18:13:33 GMT, tacitrati wrote:
>>
>> >> >i am pretty sure it's the gracilis (sp?) btw.
>> >>
>> >> Yes, the 'graceful' muscle.
>> >>
>> >> Do you need it massaged?
>> >>
>> >> (hand up)
>> >>
>> >
>> >you know where i live. (the general area, anyways.)
>> >
>> ><kerry/bush>
>> >
>> >BRING......IT.......ON.....
>> >
>> ></kerry/bush>
>>
>> <scene at cop station somewhere in/near Seattle>
>>
>> [me] Excuse me, boys. Can you direct me to the man with the badge and
>> the sprained graceful muscle who impersonates Beevis and Butthead?
>>
>> [cop eating a Krispy Creme and gulping 7-11 black coffee] Um, hmm...
>> uh.....
>>
>> [me, with one eyebrow raised] You know, the one with the wild eyes and
>> shiny head, throws weights over his head, and likes to ride (ahem)
>> mechanical bulls. The Man That Walks on the Wild Side. Yeah, him.
>>
>> [cop trying to hide the crumbs of donut gathered on his bulging gut]
>> Oh! You mean Whitney?!?
>>
>> [me, fluttering my eyelids, lip turned up on one corner, and leaning
>> over the counter] Yes, Honey. That's the stud muffin I'm here to see.
>> I hear he needs some warm snakey fingers to massage his hurting
>> graceful muscle, and take care of that scar on his knee. I'm here to
>> make it feeeel so much better.
>>
>> [cop, stuttering and spilling the remaining hot coffee in his lap] Um,
>> oh, yeah, he's, um, detained at the moment. But, uh, gee, I got this
>> muscle here that I pulled like last night....... oh ****; she's gone.
>>
>> [me, moving determinably out the station door to look for a sushi bar,
>> lots of wasabi and a man called Jet Li]
>>
>> Better catch me while you can. I'll keep the hands warm for ya.
>>
>
>my jurisDICtion ends at the oregon state line, missy.

My. my. I didn't realize you were *that* big.


---------------------------------
Teddy Roosevelt for President!!

Lyle McDonald
October 9th 04, 06:08 PM
Pat Styles wrote:

> "Lyle McDonald" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Pat Styles wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Lyle McDonald" > wrote in message
...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Keith Hobman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Wild stuff looking at the hip and legs. We've got one specimen where the
>>>>>guy was huge - must've been 6' 8" or so and tremendous muscularity. So
>>>>>even his gracilis was like a small person's wrist in diameter. The
>>>>>abductor magnus was...
>>>>
>>>>That's what mine looks like. Almost anyhow.
>>>>
>>>>I'm almost back to the point of having to wear lycra all the time
>>>>because my inner thighs rub together so much. I've actually permanently
>>>>removed the hair from that area.
>>>
>>>
>>>Damn, you're sexy!
>>
>>And I didn't even mention the hair shorts.
>>My legs are shaved but not all the way up. Mid thight or a bit higher.
>>With all the fur, it looks like I'm wearing fur shorts.
>
>
> You almost got me to spit coffee all over my monitor. Mmmm, fur shorts with
> little inner thigh smooth spots. You are a love machine!

Yes, but that has nothing to do with my fur shorts or hairless inner thighs.

Lyle