I was wondering if any of you guys have any routines to exercise routines? Right now Im 5'10 and 190lbs and starting to get a belly. Ideally I want to be in the 175-180 lb range with less fat and more muscle. Some additional information, my legs are very strong compared to my arms(I play a lot of pick up hockey). I have very bad shoulders.

-Would love to get some links from you guys, or perhaps a forum where I can get some advice.

I am working on a thread thats gonna have a shit load of scientifically developed routines and alot about the other topics ive posted about on this forum.

For right now focuse on High Intensity Low Frequency/Duration Forms of Training.

Focuse on "progression" if you go in the gym and use the same weights for the same amount of reps everytime youll go nowhere.

And remember rome wasn't built in a day but you should be able to predict progress.

Again that thread will be up shortly.

Like all exercises, if you wanna build big shoulders you gotta move as much weight as possible. Big moves like military presses, dumbbell presses and cleans will add some good size. If you're going for width, you need to hit the middle delts with some strict lateral raises.

growingtallerstretches .c o m/

_________________
grow taller naturally

Military presses like bench presses work primarly the triceps not the delts/pecs
do lat raises/ pec deck for delts/pecs.

Not sure if you're saying the bench press is a military press, or both the bench and military primarily work triceps... In the first case, just pointing out that a 'bench press' is not a military press, the military press is it's own specific lift, also known sometimes as the overhead press.

http://www.exrx.net/WeightExercises/Del ... Press.html

In any case, your comments were wrong. The triceps are used in both of those lifts only to lock out the bar, which should be the easiest part of the lift thanks to leverage issues. Both the military and bench presses are compound lifts, but the major muscle worked in each is the delt and the pec respectively (exrx.net, as one of the most respected exercise database and research sites around, confirms this). Stating that the bench or military primarily work triceps would have you laughed out of any bodybuilding website within seconds.

If you feel your triceps are being worked more than your chest, then you have one of two issues. The first is an improper range of motion - for bench press, the barbell should come down to an inch off your chest (touching it may lead to rotator cuff injuries) so that it may work the pectoralis region. If you are lowering the bar insufficient depth, then yes, it will become a triceps exercise, but then you are not executing a bench press so your argument is irrelevant. The same would apply for the military press, as you ought to lower it to neck height, but I've never seen anybody have an issue with that.

Your second potential issue is that your chest/delts are overdeveloped compared to your arms. Thus you would struggle with the tricep portion of the movement but not the chest/delt portion. To be able to execute the bench/military usefully, you might need to pre-exhaust your chest/delt so that they are fatigued during the lift and thus more prone to failure than your triceps.

This is only common sense - I mean, how many times have you seen a failed bench press repetition at the very TOP of the extension (three inches away from a completion or whatnot)? It's rare. Much more common is to lower the bar to your chest and be unable to raise it back up. Thus it's a chest failure that has caused the issue; this is because it's a chest exercise, not a tricep one.

I was saying that all presses will begin to fatique the tricep first hench it will be the first muscle grop to reach mmf (momentary muscle failure).

No offence, but that's a far cry from saying they primarily work the triceps. Additionally, I don't think it's true they reach muscle failure first - as I said, I rarely see anybody fail to lock out the lift, but plenty of people fail the portions where chest/delt are involved.

No offense you have no idead what your talking about

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYkdQ-yC ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcMOG0ECqDU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhYlg1ul ... re=related

you can learn alot read my post

viewtopic.php?p=398875#398875

Nice ad hominem fallacy there. I watched the first two of your links; they seem to me completely unrelated to the topic at hand, so I stopped at two. Neither video discussed tricep vs pectoralis/deltoid activation in the bench/military press or muscular failure. If you have any actually relevant links to the discussion, I'd be glad to watch and consider them, but throwing random links at me is just pseudointellectual.

EDIT: Just watched the third. Also completely irrelevant to the discussion. Really, did you put any thought into your post or just throw a tantrum and hurl random videos into your message?

In any case, feel free not to take my word for it. Go to the gym and do some bench presses yourself! Then come back and tell me the hardest part of the lift was the last five inches and not getting the damn thing off your chest to begin with (just a phrase, I'm aware it shouldn't touch the chest). If you can do that honestly, I'll consider your argument again. But it's really quite ridiculous.

EDIT: I just realised that as long as I'm taking up space on the OP's thread, I should probably be contributing. The best program I've run into is the original Stronglifts 5x5 with some of my alterations, which involves two separate workouts done on non-consecutive days (eg Monday - A, Wednesday - B, Friday - A, Sunday - B, and so on).

Workout A
Squat 3x5 (legs, particularly quads)
Bench Press 3x5 (chest and triceps)
Bent Over Row 3x5 (upper back and biceps - particularly if palms face out)

Workout B
Squat 3x5 (legs, particularly quads)
Overhead Press 3x5 (shoulders)
Deadlift 1x5 (lower back, calves and traps)

Progression:
Start with very light weights - this will help break your previous plateaus and accustom you to weightlifting
Add 2.5kg to everything but deadlift each time
Add 5kg to deadlift each time
Continue until you cannot achieve 3x5, then drop the weight 10% and begin progression again

Note* - Once you get the hang of weightlifting, you'll be able to sort of predict how much you will be able to lift next workout. For that reason, I favour a different method of progression, which you may want to trial: Begin with 3x5, then next workout, use 3x7 of the same weight. When you increase the weight, drop it down to 3x3, then continue progress again (3x5 same weight, 3x7 same weight, 3x3 higher weight). It means you progress in weight slower, but you won't need to reset nearly as often.

You probably will look at this workout and think it doesn't have enough volume, but it really does. Once you start lifting heavy weights you'll know this for sure. You'll probably be tempted to add in new exercises - don't. They'll just detract from progressing on the major lifts. If you follow this religiously, and have a good diet in accordance, you'll notice awesome results, particularly in strength. You can, however, add in some ab work if you like. That will not harm you.

What I changed:
I made everything 3x5 instead of 5x5, prevents a lot of stalling and resetting since a 5th set might fail simply due to fatigue even though you could comfortably handle a higher weight for 5 reps for a few sets. And yes, deadlifts were always 1x5.

I changed Inverted Rows to Bent Over Rows because then you gauge your progress more accurately than by having to compare against bodyweight. I do my Bent Over Rows with palms out to get some decent bicep usage (though it's still mainly a back exercise).

Too few reps, not enough isolation, etc

This is a strength building program, not a bodybuilding program. Why do I recommend it, then? Because it builds up a strength base faster than a bodybuilding program would, so when you do decide to switch to a bodybuilding program you can reach your goals faster than if you had started a hypertrophy routine straight away. It's that old phrase, "Sharpening the saw", yeah? Look at it this way:

A bodybuilding routine might have sets of 5-12 reps (either 5-8 or 8-12 are optimal hypertrophy ranges, depending on who you ask). Let's assume 12. You can currently benchpress 50kg for 12 reps. Now, if you want to get stronger, and notch that up to 55kg, that's 5kg extra for 12 reps... 60kg more you have to lift total. But if you were only doing 5 reps, that's 25kg more you have to lift total. So making progress is easier with lower reps.

If your goal is to bench press 90kg for 12 reps, it's a lot faster to progress to 90kg with low reps then, once you reach 90kg x 5, simply attempt to add on reps each time you work out, than if you were to attempt to progress with 12 reps each time. So gaining a strength base (a good benchmark is benchpress 1xBodyweight, Squat 1.5xBodyweight, Deadlift 1.8-2xBodyweight) before switching into a more advanced routine) is your best option right now, as a beginner to lifting.

Keep in mind that it's not as if you won't put on mass while you're on this routine however. You will gain size if you're eating and recovering properly. So don't be worried about "I have to do this for 4 months without seeing any progress". Also don't be worried about your legs being stronger than your upper body - they're meant to be! Your legs are larger than your upper body and have to carry that thing around all day. I'd bet your strength levels are fairly well proportioned, actually. Don't worry about squatting every workout making your legs too huge either - it's not something that just 'pops up' overnight. Plus squats have a massive testosterone boosting benefit (deadlifts too) that will help the rest of your body grow in conjunction.

Sorry for the wall of text but it's a damn good routine. Any other questions about it, just ask (feel free to message!). Or, hell, there's a Stronglifts website you can consult. Other programs worth looking into are Starting Strength and Reg Park stuff.

inb4 RVAIS says this sort of program doesn't work and I'm part of a bodybuilding conspiracy to keep you weak so you buy supplements and magazines from me... Just give it a shot bro, I guarantee you after two months (if your diet is keeping up and you're letting yourself recover) you'll be absolutely addicted to the strength gains you're making. After three months (at least for me), people will start asking how you're getting big.[/quote]

Actually the videos addressed why you should isolate the pecs first with flyes or pec deck before doing your presses to failure.


If overtraining works for you great, you must have the responders in your DNA that can with stand large amount of reps done multiple times a week, congrats your in the top 3% most of use are not.

Ive tried the standard bodybuilding routine/lifestyle. It didn't work for me and will not work for most everyone on this site.

Your opinion is noted though.

Juist a quick question;have you tried a HIT program for any period of time?
Cause Ive tried just about everything, HIT works the best.

Right, which would make the chest even more prone to failure during the press instead of the tricep... do you have any sources to back up 'triceps reach failure first because they are put under pressure before the chest'?
Overtraining is a measure of how much you're stimulating your muscles versus the recovery you're getting (diet, sleep, muscular rest basically). 400 sets per muscle group wouldn't be overtraining if you ate sufficient calories and macronutrients, slept well enough and had enough rest to balance that out. The question is, what's feasible? If you have a good diet, good sleep and a day off to rest, what can you do while still making progress?

You can most certainly make progress on Stronglifts or Starting Strength or Madcow or any of the other respected strength routines out there. If you consider those programs 'overtraining', then I see one of two possibilities:

1) Your diet, sleep and rest are inadequate
2) You are afraid to train during DOMS

In response to 1), I have to respond that it's not the program's fault, it's yours. I have made progress on strength programs despite occasionally not having access to enough food or sleep (1500calories-, 6hours and still my lifts could increase). My modified Stronglifts asks for what, 45 total reps per workout? That's a pitiful amount, you can only get away with it because you're using heavy weight and compounds. If that's overtraining according to you, you're being ridiculous.

2) Train during DOMS! It's not gonna hurt ya and DOMS is only a middling indicator of muscle recovery. I've had to practically limp to the gym before and still added 5kg to my squat that session. DOMS tends to go away during the session itself too.
What routine(s) did you try? It should be noted that a hypertrophy routine or split is generally considered an intermediate or advanced routine, certainly not a beginner one. I believe there's some studies floating around (maybe search the Starting Strength wiki for those, not sure) indicating a beginner trainee benefits most by having each muscle group stimulated 3-4x a week, whereas an advanced trainee benefits most by having each muscle group stimulated maybe 1x a week (I recall maybe 2x for legs).

If you got straight into a hypertrophy routine without adequate diet, rest, sleep and above all a proper strength and lifting base to work off, there's no wonder it didn't work out for you! I'd recommend looking into strength programs: The one I outlined works great. Once you build up a decent strength base, then you can move into a more advanced split, and as you progress your routine would get more and more advanced and specific.

There's a reason all the strength programs you see tend to be very similar: Few exercises, all compounds, ~5 reps, fullbody workouts on non-consecutive days. It's a cookiecutter outline that will work for basically anyone, unlike a hypertrophy routine that may need to be tailored to the individual's wants and desires. I basically guarantee if anyone here at least maintenance calories (with plenty of carbs, about half that amount of protein and some fat) and followed a strength program to a T, they would make awesome progress.
I haven't tried an HIT program, no. I haven't read much on it, either; however from a cursory look at it, my immediate thoughts are as such:

> Rep ranges seem too high to allow for easy progress.

> The timing of reps is overkill - yes, reps should be controlled, but you shouldn't be deliberately slowing yourself down. I probably couldn't slowly push a 1kg weight up for an hour, but doing so wouldn't yield muscle growth. Seems more suited for endurance training than strength/muscle development.

> Actually, going back to the first point, the structure of the few sample programs I saw doesn't look designed for easy progress in general.

> I don't really like training to muscle failure unless it's the last set of an isolation exercise or the last exercise of the workout. Otherwise it can compromise the rest of your workout, whether that's reps managed in the set or reps managed in an entirely different exercise that has some overlapping muscles used (eg going to failure on incline bench would lead to a worsened overhead press)

> Fullbody 3x a week seems to be the standard, that's a positive.

> Emphasises proper recovery, that's also good.

Doesn't seem like the best thing out to me but it's better than most routines beginners go onto (typically 3 way splits with too much isolation - good for a bodybuilder, not for a beginner with no strength base). I'd take a proper strength program over HIT any day. However, I will say this: The philosophy behind it all (go ridiculously hard in the gym then go home) is brilliant, even if arguably misapplied.

1. Because triceps bare the brunt of the force during the pressing excercises and being that they are a smaller muscle group they WILL fail first.

2. Overtraining just puts you in a deeper inroad which means youll need more time to recover and being that recovery supercedes growth, if your train prior to your actual growth you would have done nothing but short circuiting that growth mechanism. diet and sleep are important but it takes the body TIME to replenish the glycogen that was burned up during the workout. (see the mike mentzer links on my link below)

3. You can train while being over trained but its just counter productive, makes it an endurace contest; REMEBER THE MARATHON RUNNER IS ALWAYS SMALLER THAN THE SPRINTER.

4. Your whole set should be time, time is the graetest indicator of the amount of work being done; if I do 12 reps in 12 seconds and you do 12 reps in 20 seconds whos done more work? (hint 20 seconds is more than 12).

5. The only reason they go slow with the reps is to reduce momentum and have quality reps. I dont even do reps per se but my workout are a hell of a more productive than yours.

6. Thers plenty of studies floating around there that are from accredited scientist that prove Im right in my other post Ive listed them the muller study


http://ep.physoc.org/content/38/4/205.full.pdf

Do some reasearch before advising someone here and post sources this is the problem with health and fitness today no science all opinons and majic potions.


my thread devoted to the subject will help

viewtopic.php?p=398875#398875

Any sources for this one? Because it seems to me, and every weightlifter I've ever heard speak on the subject (no matter what style of training they follow), that the chest bares the brunt of the force during the bench press, and delts during military. Additionally, I don't think I've ever failed a press due to my triceps failing, nor have I seen this in anyone else.

exrx.net and Wikipedia (first two links I found while searching for 'bench press') both state that the bench press is mainly a chest development exercise. Any sources to say it's not?

I searched 'bench press record attempt' on Youtube and these were the first five results that failed (I missed ones that succeeded, obviously), reading down the page. They are not cherry picked:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_HfGJQp0_A (fails during chest portion)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6sktheFAbc (fails during chest portion)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FITUkk-MKro (fails during chest portion)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMih7_oK-yA (fails during chest portion)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrTtYc8w2QU (fails during chest portion)

Do you notice something? Seems to me like despite your logic, the chest always fails first!
Yes, it certainly takes the body time to recover fully, but this is dependant upon your diet and sleep and muscular rest. If I trained, then ate 500 calories a day for the rest of the week, my muscles have had far less energy to recover than if they had been fed 7,000 calories a week. Again, the question, is, what is feasible? The proven answer is that you can train with a full body workout like the one I listed on non-consecutive days without overtraining, provided your diet and rest are in check. If you were overtraining, you wouldn't be able to grow or make strength gains (at least not long term) which is simply not true. My progress on strength programs has been phenomenal, and you can take a look at some of the success stories on the Stronglifts site to see how much progress they have made.

They have progressed, therefore they obviously aren't overtraining.
See the above, Stronglifts constitutes overtraining in absolutely no way as long as you're eating well and sleeping right.
It would help if you had even a remote understanding of physics. Work is simply a measure of energy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_(physics) transferred by a force acting through a distance. In this case, we don't need to work out the force, since we are merely lifting a weight upwards. The equation becomes PE=W, or potential energy is equal to work, since whatever work we have done (energy we have given) has been transferred into the potential energy of the weight (if you don't understand potential energy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potential_energy).

PE = 1/2MGH
PE = 1/2*Mass*ForceOfGravity*Height

Let's say we lift a 100kg weight 1m. We're both lifting the same weight the same distance, yeah? Thus

PE=1/2*100*9.8m/s*1
PE=490J.

Since PE=W, and we have given the mass the same potential energy, we have performed the same amount of work. Time doesn't factor into the work we have done. But, I'll cut you some slack, perhaps you meant a similar concept where time does factor in? Which one of us is more powerful? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_(physics)

P=W/T
Power = Work/Time

For simplicity, let's say we've each done 100J of work, since we now know that our work is equivalent. You take 20s, I take 12s...

P=100/20=5 Watts for you
P=100/12=8.3 Watts for me

So who's more powerful? (Hint: 8.3 is greater than 5)

If you're going to bring physics into this man, at least have a high school knowledge of the field.
Momentum, despite what that link of yours says, isn't an external force.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum
Momentum is merely a descriptor of the mass and velocity of an object within a system. Read that again; a descriptor, not a force. That means it does not affect a thing. The reason why a high momentum is bad is because the trainee may not have the potential to generate a force to reverse that momentum or control the movement of the weight.

However, once the momentum is low enough that the weight can be controlled and lifted up again, there is no point to lowering it further. If you're in a car and coming up to a tight corner (let's assume there's no other cars around or anything), you might need to go at 50km/h to get around the corner safely. But there's no point going even slower at 10km/h because it doesn't make you any safer, only slower.

I have no idea what your workout is, but I'm quite willing to bet that if you switched to Stronglifts, you'd see more progress.
Mate.

Research and theory are intended to explain experience, not contradict it. That's the fundamental premise of the scientific method - experiment, observe what happens, then explain it with research. If the theory you had does not match the results, you abandon it.

What you are doing is completely unscientific. You are standing by research and theory despite it being contradicted by the experiments and results. That is not science. If you really wanted to drag science into this, you would be taking a look at the Stronglifts site and all the success stories. You'd be thinking, "Hm, that's strange", and doing research to explain why it works, rather than just sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting "Lalalala, no it doesn't".

By the way, please stop insinuating I haven't done my research. I've about 1gig of bodybuilding material saved on my computer, regularly browse three weightlifting websites and have years of various fitness experience under my belt, from endurance walking to high level martial arts to the weightlifting I do now. I'm quite willing to bet I know more about the subject than you, but I'm not trying to push that perspective because that's an appeal to authority and it's a logical fallacy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

I ask that you do the same.

Btw. Does dondeluis have any questions about routines? We've sort of hijacked this thread, but I'm still happy to address any questions he might have.


[/u]

Despite your argument you dont come with any science. Of course deadlifting 1000lbs with momentum is gonna generate more stimulus than 200lbs done super slow.

Your 1 gig "bodybuilding" materials isnt worth dick.

http://www.amazon.com/Body-Science-Rese ... 148&sr=8-1

Its writen by a medical doctor and explains in painful detail how it all works on a cellular level. Its very highly respected more than those bodybuilding rags you read.

http://www.bodybyscience.net/home.html/

I don't think you even read what I wrote; I was responding to your claim that lifting a weight slowly stimulates the muscles more than lifting the same weight fast, and showing how it is bunk. I never mentioned different weights - in fact, I specifically stated that we would lift the same weight, and showed that your statement that you would have performed more work was untrue.
Well, RVAIS, I'd certainly go out and read that book, but, as you said, it isn't worth dick! Oh, didn't you know? Body By Science is among those materials I have stored on my computer. I just checked, and sure enough, there's some HIT and Mike Mentzer stuff among it too. I guess it's all garbage, and just another bodybuilding rag I read. Or are you willing to concede, that maybe, just maybe, I have actually decent material on the subject and know what I'm talking about?

I'm still waiting for:

* Any source to indicate tricep failure is common or primary during the bench/military presses, rather than chest/delt failure.
* Any indication that with a proper diet and nutrition, Stronglifts constitutes overtraining and thus cannot lead to growth unless you are genetically gifted.

I certainly think it's unlikely that everybody I have spoken to that has tried Stronglifts has amazing (top 3%) genetics. Seems like no matter what genetics you have, it works, to be honest. If you haven't tried a strength program before, I'd highly recommend you give it a shot, I put on quite a lot of muscle with that routine. And no matter how good the science behind HIT seems, if you're not gaining as much muscle with it as is possible with Stronglifts, then maybe Stronglifts is a better routine for you to be doing.

Link below is the muscle I put on when I first started lifting (yes, it was basically all muscle, about the same amount of skin was pinchable and thus fat as before I started lifting) in... about two and a half months I suppose? The shirts are the same size and, as you can see, I went from filling about half my sleeve to filling the sleeve entirely. I don't have fantastic genetics, I just ate right and followed a good strength program.

Try it! It's awesome .

http://img405.imageshack.us/i/armprog.jpg/