View Full Version : Layne Norton - Loaded Guns
05-31-2002, 10:55 AM
When I first started training my arms
were only 12". Now they measure in at just a shade
less than 18". For an all-natural 20-year-old
bodybuilder I'd say that's not too bad. So how did I
build them you ask? Well it's really a bit strange...Read how Layne did it and check out his two arm routines.
HOW TO REVIEW: Post Your Review Of This Article - CLICK ON POST REPLY BELOW! You do NOT need to be a registered member to post a reply in this section!
06-01-2002, 10:00 AM
Nice article layne. I, too, am a fan of the superset..
06-01-2002, 05:50 PM
why thank you mr. H
06-02-2002, 09:39 AM
Originally posted by str8flexed
why thank you mr. H
I prefer Big H :D..
07-13-2002, 10:00 AM
great article. we train biceps a tri's similarly, i use fewer exercises, but the volume and principles are the same.
I think this article is totally out of touch with real-world training. Mr. Norton certainly is one gifted individual if he can propser on such training insanity as this article suggests. It is full of all the mainstream bull, hype and deception which causes so many people training misery - no direct offense to Mr. Norton intended.
Few people will be able to prosper on a routine such as this for building large, lean and impressive arms. Because few people posess the necessary extraordinary genetic inheritance required to achieve such development.
"Genetics helped but I think that hard work and the proper routine were instrumental in helping me reach my goal."
This is very misleading. The impression this statement puts across is one which conveys that genetics merely play a minor role in building huge muscles and that "the proper routine", when correctly implemented, will result in stellar achievements thus making it far more responsable for outstanding muscular development. And, to bring up another point, there is not "proper routine" which is universally suitable for all trainees. The vast degree of variation in genetics, bone structure, body type, tolerance of exercise induced stress, bio-mechanics, diet and lifestyle in general makes it impossible to formulate "the proper routine".
For novice or inexperienced trainee who looks to the biggest physique for the correct training information, this statement will lead them down a path to frustration and despair when they take and follow the advice prescibed by a genetic freak such as Mr. Norton. Unless they posess the genetic potential for building huge muscles, they're on a road to ruin.
"My arms thrive on high volume. I do about 8-10 failure sets for biceps and 8-10 failure sets for triceps. I don't know why but my arms have always responded better when I worked them on a separate day from everything else and when I used high volume."
I know why your arms respond to sperate day isolation training based around high volume. Because you have way above average genetics and a high degree of tolerance for exercise-induced stress.
The role of genetics in this and other articles are not clearly put across. This article lacks many essential caveats if it is to be useful to 99%+ of trainee's who read it. Caveats such as;
...but remember, I have the extraordinary genetics to use such training methods. Unless you do, this training is totally unsuitable and should not be attempted. My achievemets are a result of my very hard work and relentless dedication, but my genetics played a much bigger role - they allowed me to get this big and strong in ways which only gifted individuals can...
I think that this article, though a good explination of how Mr. Norton trained his arms, should not be followed by anyone who wishes to make bodybuilding progress - unless they are very gifted individuals. I believe that the article should be ammended accordingly to ensure all who read it are aware of this fact.
11-06-2002, 04:56 AM
Genetics play a role yes, and I clearly state in the article that the routine worked well for me. I have gotten more positive feedback on this routine from people that have tried it than from any other. I'm a biochemistry major, I know that genetics do indeed exist...however, most people use them as an excuse. I just refuse to do that. I think saying that I am full of bull is over doing it a bit. I trained two people in the past year...both are drug free like me. One went from 196 lbs to 220lbs in 3 months and only gained 2% bodyfat (keep in mind this was a well trained NCAA division II baseball player) and he put an inch on his arms using this routine (15.5"-16.5") I have recently begun training another student at my college and he has also responded quite nicely to this routine. Funny coincidence for a routine that is bs indeed.
11-06-2002, 07:31 AM
Layne clearly stated this is what worked for him. Genetics? Who cares. Everyone uses that as an excuse. I started at 140 lbs and now weigh 204. It couldn't be that I busted my butt day ain and day out in the gym and the KITCHEN, it must just be genetics. Proper nutrition is essential. Along with rest. I use a similar type of arm routine. I've gotten great gains. But it must e because of genetics. Not due to the fact that I never cheat on my diet, follow a strict pre and post workout nutritional schedule, take the time to make 3 days of food in advance, carry a lunch box with me, get 7-8 hours of sleep a night, constantly research and increase my knowledge in biochemistry, exercise physiology, motor control, and nutrition. DON'T GIVE ME THAT GENETICS BULL!!!
11-06-2002, 09:37 AM
hehe, down boy! :D
11-25-2002, 12:30 PM
I'd like to see amusclehead's opinion on your advocation of the 21's (read his sample on biceps)
03-17-2006, 09:03 AM
I don't beleive that your arms are 18". Mine are 18" and they are a lot bigger than yours bro
03-17-2006, 10:07 AM
believe what you want to believe... bro
06-18-2006, 02:43 PM
congrats on your long overdue pro-card Layne!
1. anyways...I did'nt see if you covered the frequency of training arms in this article. 1x a week, 2x a week?
2. Any thing you would change/add to this method of bringing up arms that you have learned/experienced in the last 4 yrs?
3. any periodization for recovery?
06-20-2006, 01:01 PM
believe what you want to believe... bro
I definetly believe your arms are eighteen inches. But in the photo on the article, they looked a lot smaller. (Second coloured one down.) Were they eighteen inches in that picture too?
Chickeneater has a good question. Details on your training frequency would be good.