Squats don't grow upper body, GH release is irrelevant?

[sl4vik]

This is interesting, I've always been told to do squats for the hormonal release etc..but this study proves that these bumps in hormones don't matter for hypertrophy at all.

Thoughts?

West et. al. Elevations in ostensibly anabolic hormones with resistance exercise enhance neither training-induced muscle hypertrophy nor strength of the elbow flexors. J Appl Physiol. 2009 Nov 12.

The aim of our study was to determine whether resistance exercise-induced elevations in endogenous hormones enhance muscle strength and hypertrophy with training. Twelve healthy young men (21.8 +/- 1.2 y, BMI = 23.1 +/- 0.6 kg(.)m(-2)) independently trained their elbow flexors for 15 weeks on separate days and under different hormonal milieu. In one training condition, participants performed isolated arm curl exercise designed to maintain basal hormone concentrations (low hormone, LH); in the other training condition, participants performed identical arm exercise to the LH condition followed immediately by a high volume of leg resistance exercise to elicit a large increase in endogenous hormones (High Hormone, HH). There was no elevation in serum growth hormone (GH), insulin-like growth factor (IGF-1) or testosterone after the LH protocol, but significant (P < 0.001) elevations in these hormones immediately and 15 and 30 min after the HH protocol. The hormone responses elicited by each respective exercise protocol late in the training period were similar to the response elicited early in the training period indicating that a divergent post-exercise hormone response was maintained over the training period. Muscle cross-sectional area increased by 12% in LH and 10% in HH (P < 0.001) with no difference between conditions (condition x training interaction, P = 0.25). Similarly, type I (P < 0.01) and type II (P < 0.001) muscle fiber CSA increased with training with no effect of hormone elevation in the HH condition. Strength increased in both arms but the increase was not different between the LH and HH conditions. We conclude that exposure of loaded muscle to acute exercise-induced elevations in endogenous anabolic hormones enhances neither muscle hypertrophy nor strength with resistance training in young men. Key words: testosterone, growth hormone, IGF-1, anabolism.

My Comments: For several decades now, there has been intense focus on the acute hormonal response to training. This started back in the 80�s where researchers, interested in growth did a rather cursory examination of elite powerlifters and bodybuilders, made some assumptions about muscle size, made some even bigger assumptions about how they trained, and then proceeded to reach some staggeringly poor conclusions.

Basically, what they observed was that bodybuilders were bigger than powerlifters, which is debatable in the first place. They also observed that powerlifters typically used low reps and long rest periods and bodybuilders (remember: this was the Arnold era) trained with high reps and short rest periods. Thus they concluded that high reps and short rest stimulated muscle growth and went looking for reasons why this was the case. I�d note that this is not really how you�re supposed to do science: you don�t reach your conclusion and go find reasons why it�s right. You test hypotheses and draw your conclusions from that. But I digress.

And the main focus for a while was potential differences in hormonal response to training, primarily focusing on testosterone and growth hormone (GH). The basic study design that was followed was to compare the acute hormonal response to either 3 sets of 5 repetitions with a long rest interval (3 minutes) to sets of 10 with a 1 minute rest interval. Repeatedly, studies showed that the first type of training boosted testosterone and the second GH. Entire training schemes have grown out of this but there was a problem: nobody ever bothered to see if these acute (usually less than 10-15 minute) bumps in hormones actually did anything.

Nevermind that this makes little sense anyhow for a variety of reasons. Not the least of which is that women have higher GH levels than men and get a bigger GH response to training, yet they don�t grow better. If anything, with the known impact of testosterone on muscle growth, if there was to be any benefit to this, you�d expect the lower rep/heavy work to be superior. Yet the researchers were arguing that it wasn�t. There was a logic missing in the argument (not the least of which being the assumption that powerlifters had smaller muscles than bodybuilders) that seemed to get skipped over.

In addition to the science, there is a long held belief, echoed in various places (including the comments section of another contentious article I wrote titled Squats vs. Leg Press for Big Legs) that certain movements, notably squats and deadlifts, will have full-body growth stimulating properties, generally mediated through the hormonal response.

It�s not uncommon to see people recommending things like �If you want big arms, squat/train legs.� for example. Essentially, heavy leg work is touted as being the key to overall growth. Nevermind that the same people who make this argument will often complain about �All those guys in the gym with huge upper bodies and no legs� without realizing that the two ideas contradict one another (that is, if leg training is required for growth, how can guys get huge upper bodies without training legs). But I digress again.

In any case, this study examined the issue directly with a somewhat confusing study design: twelve healthy young men trained their biceps on different days of the week under different training conditions. In what they called the low-hormone condition, the biceps were trained all by themselves; no other exercise was done. In the other called the high-hormone condition, the biceps were trained and then a large-volume of leg training was done to elevate the supposedly anabolic hormones.

Does that make sense, all subjects trained both arms, but on different days and under different conditions. And the training was far enough apart that the hormonal response from the leg training wouldn�t have impacted the low-hormone training session. This training was followed for 15 weeks and subjects consumed protein both before and after the training (so there was nutritional support).

Hormone levels were measured and while there was no significant change in hormones in the low-hormone situation, in the high-hormone situation, there were increases in lactate, growth hormone, free and total testosterone and IGF-1 with the peak occurring approximately 15 minutes after the leg work.

And, if the hormonal response to heavy leg training actually has any impact, what you�d expect to see is that one arm, the one trained along with the leg training, would grow better.

Did it happen? Guess.

Both maximal strength and muscle cross sectional area increased identically in both arms to the tune of a 20% vs. 19% increase in strength for low- vs. high-hormones and an increase in skeletal muscle cross sectional area of 12% vs. 10% in low- vs. high-hormones. These differences were not statistically significant. Quoting the researchers:

Despite vast differences in hormone availability in the immediate post- exercise period, we found no differences in the increases in strength or hypertrophy in muscle exercised under low or high hormone conditions after 15 weeks of resistance training. These findings are in agreement with our hypothesis and previous work showing that exercise-induced hormone elevations do not stimulate myofibrillar protein synthesis (36) and are not necessary for hypertrophy (37). Thus, our data ((36) and present observations), when viewed collectively, lead us to conclude that local mechanisms are of far greater relevance in regulating muscle protein accretion occurring with resistance training, and that acute changes in hormones, such as GH, IGF-1, and testosterone, do not predict or in any way reflect a capacity for hypertrophy.

I don�t think it gets any clearer than that and I�d note that another recent study titled �Resistance exercise-induced increases in putative anabolic hormones do not enhance muscle protein synthesis or intracellular signalling in young men.� by the same group found the exact same thing.

Summing Up: Leg training has no magic impact on overall growth, most of which is determined locally (through mechanisms of tension and fatigue mediated by changes in local muscular metabolism). If you want big arms, train arms. If you want big legs, train legs.

And if folks are wondering why empirically �folks who train legs hard� seem to get big compared to those who don�t, I�d offer the following explanation: folks willing to toil on heavy leg work work hard. Folks too lazy to train legs hard often don�t. And it�s the overall intensity of the training that is causing the difference, not the presence or absence of squats per se. Which is why guys who only hammer pecs and guns get big pecs and guns even if they couldn�t find the squat rack in the gym: the small acute hormonal responses to training are simply irrelevant to overall growth.

[Finnegan Bell]

How to squat for huge arms
By Stuart McRobert
Adapted from his best-selling book BRAWN

To build muscle mass, you must increase strength. It’s that simple. You will never get huge arms, a monstrous back, a thick chest, or massive legs without lifting heavy weights. I know that probably doesn’t come as a revelation to anyone. But despite how obvious it seems, far too many people (and not just beginners) neglect power training and rarely make increasing the weights lifted in each successive workout a priority. You must get strong in the basic mass building exercises to bring about a significant increase in muscle size. One of the biggest mistakes typical bodybuilders make is when they implement specialization routines before they have the right to use them.

It constantly amazes me just how many neophytes (beginners), near neophytes, and other insufficiently developed bodybuilders plunge into single-body part specialization programs in the desperate attempt to build big arms. I don’t fault them for wanting big arms, but their approach to getting them is flawed. For the typical bodybuilder who is miles away from squatting 1 ½ times their bodyweight for 20 reps (if you weigh 180 lbs., that means 20 reps with 270 lbs.), an arm specialization program is utterly inappropriate and useless.

The strength and development needed to squat well over 1 ½ times bodyweight for 20 reps will build bigger arms faster then focusing on biceps and triceps training with isolation exercises. Even though squats are primarily a leg exercise, they stress and stimulate the entire body. But more importantly, if you are able to handle heavy weights in the squat, it logically follows that the rest of your body will undoubtedly be proportionally developed. It’s a rare case that you would be able to squat 1 ½ times your bodyweight and not have a substantial amount of upper body muscle mass.

This is not to say that you don’t need to train arms, and squats alone will cause massive upper body growth. You will still work every body part, but you must focus on squats, deadlifts, and rows—the exercises that develop the legs, hips, and back. Once you master the power movements and are able to handle impressive poundages on those lifts, the strength and muscle you gain will translate into greater weights used in arm, shoulder and chest exercises.

In every gym I’ve ever visited or trained in, there were countless teenage boys blasting away on routines, dominated by arm exercises, in the attempt to build arms like their idols. In the ‘70s, they wanted arms like Arnold Schwarzenegger, in the ‘80s Robby Robinson was a favorite and currently Mr. Olympia, Ronnie Coleman, has set the standard everyone wants to achieve. Unfortunately the 3 aforementioned men as well as most other top bodybuilders have arm development far beyond the reach of the average (or even above average) weight trainer. But arm size can be increased. However, not in the way young trainers, with physiques that don’t even have the faintest resemblance to those of bodybuilders are attempting to make progress. Thin arms, connected to narrow shoulders, fixed to shallow chest, joined to frail backs and skinny legs, don’t need body part specialization programs. Let’s not have skewed priorities. Let’s not try to put icing on the cake before the cake has been baked.


Priorities
Trying to stimulate a substantial increase in size in a single body part, without first having the main structures of the body in pretty impressive condition, is to have turned bodybuilding upside-down, inside-out and back to front.

The typical bodybuilder simply isn’t going to get much meat on his arms, calves, shoulders, pectorals and neck unless he first builds a considerable amount of muscle around the thighs, hips and back. It simply isn’t possible—for the typical drug-free bodybuilder, that is—to add much if any size to the small areas unless the big areas are already becoming substantial.

There’s a knock-on (additive) effect from the efforts to add substantial size to the thigh, hip and back structure (closely followed by upper body pushing structure-pecs and delts). The smaller muscle groups, like the biceps, and triceps will progress in size (so long as you don’t totally neglect them) pretty much in proportion to the increase in size of the big areas. It’s not a case of getting big and strong thighs, hips, back and upper-body pushing structure with everything else staying put. Far from it. As the thigh, hip, back and upper-body pushing structure grows, so does everything else. Work hard on squats and deadlifts, in addition to bench presses, overhead presses and some type of row or pulldown. Then you can add a little isolation work—curls, calf raises and neck work (but not all of this at every workout).


The “Driver”
The key point is that the “engine” that drives the gains in the small areas is the progress being made in the big areas. If you take it easy on the thigh and back you will, generally speaking, have trouble making gains in the other exercises, no matter how hard you work the latter.

All this isn’t to say just do squats, deadlifts and upper back work, quite closely followed by some upper-body pressing work. While such a limited program will deliver good gains on these few exercises, with some knock-on effect throughout the body, it’s not a year after year program. Very abbreviated routines are great for getting gains moving, and for building a foundation for moderately expanded routines. They are fine to keep returning to on a regular basis. The other training isn’t necessary all in the same workout but spread over the week. This will maintain balance throughout the body and capitalize upon the progress made in the thigh, hip and back structure.

Just remember that the thigh, hip and back structure comes first and is the “driver” (closely followed by the upper-body pushing structure) for the other exercises. These other exercises, though important in their own right, are passengers relative to the driving team.


Big Arms
To get big arms, get yourself on a basic program that focuses on the leg, hip and back structure without neglecting the arms themselves. As you improve your squatting ability, for reps and by say 100 pounds, your curling poundage should readily come up by 30 pounds or so if you work hard enough on your curls. This will add size to your biceps. While adding 100 pounds to your squat, you should be able to add 50-70 pounds to your bench press, for reps. This assumes you’ve put together a sound program and have worked hard on the bench. That will add size to your triceps.

If you’re desperate to add a couple of inches to your upper arms you’ll need to add 30 pounds or more over your body, unless your arms are way behind the rest of you. Don’t start thinking about 17” arms, or even 16” arms so long as your bodyweight is 130, 140, 150, 160, or even 170 pounds. Few people can get big arms without having a big body. You’re unlikely to be one of the exceptions.

15 sets of arm flexor exercises, and 15 sets of isolation tricep exercises—with a few squats, deadlifts and bench presses thrown in as an afterthought—will give you a great pump and attack the arms from “all angles”. However, it won’t make your arms grow much, if at all, unless you’re already squatting and benching big poundages, or are drug-assisted or genetically gifted.

As your main structures come along in size and strength (thigh, hip and back structure, and the pressing structure), the directly involved smaller body parts are brought along in size too. How can you bench press or dip impressive poundages without adding a lot of size to your triceps? How can you deadlift the house and row big weights without having the arm flexors—not to mention the shoulders and upper back—to go with those lifts? How can you squat close to 2 times bodyweight, for plenty of reps, without having a lot of muscle all over your body?

The greater the development and strength of the main muscular structures of the body, the greater the size and strength potential of the small areas of the body. Think it through. Suppose you can only squat and deadlift with 200 pounds, and your arms measure about 13”. You’re unlikely to add any more than half an inch or so on them, no matter how much arm specialization you put in.

However, put some real effort into the squat and deadlift, together with the bench press and a few other major basic movements. Build up the poundages by 50% or more, to the point where you can squat 300 pounds for over 10 reps, and pack on 30 pounds of muscle. Then, unless you have an unusual arm structure, you should be able to get your arms to around 16”. If you want 17” arms, plan on having to squat more than a few reps with around 2 times bodyweight, and on adding many more pounds of muscle throughout your body (unless you have a better-than-average growth potential in your upper arms).

All of this arm development would have been achieved without a single concentration curl, without a single pushdown and without a single preacher curl. This lesson in priorities proves that the shortest distance between you and big arms is not a straight line to a curl bar.

[gspsilva]

i train legs because i dont want to look like one of them stupid guys wth the martini shape body like this ---> Y

[sl4vik]

Complete bs as we now know.

"they stress and stimulate the entire body. But more importantly, if you are able to handle heavy weights in the squat, it logically follows that the rest of your body will undoubtedly be proportionally developed"

That's why speed skaters have massive legs and no upper body, or bodybuilders in wheelchairs that have huge upper bodies but legs don't even work.

[sl4vik]

i train legs because i dont want to look like one of them stupid guys wth the martini shape body like this ---> Y

Yes, that's a perfect good reason and I agree, but I'm sick of all the people giving advice like "You want big arms and chest? GO SQUAT." No sir, if you want big arms and chest go eat and do arm and chest exercises.

[IronAbrams]

It's broscience at it's finest.

[FunkymonkAW]

My response to either of the above studies is "that's nice". I'm do squats for legs, not for arms.

[christos_swc]

My response to either of the above studies is "that's nice". I'm do squats for legs, not for arms.

Actually that's why I would do leg presses.
I do squats because it hits lots of muscle simultaneously, in the legs and "core", and everything that responds to the stress of being under the heavy load of the bar.
Also because it's a natural movement that requires balance and stabilization.
And because it makes me want to eat half the fridge, not even deadlifts make me this hungry right after.
This is a good indication to me that squats are indeed "the King of exercises" although I have not much affection for them, it's deads I would wanna do 24 hours a day.
They're a great muscle builder in that they involve lots of muscle, I never squat for arms nor have I ever taken seriously those who said I should.
And I don't believe that building a foundation with squats is necessary to promote upper body hypertrophy and strength.
It's a freakin great exercise so it's natural that it's been blown out of proportion on occasion, but it's not mystical nor magical, it's just a great exercise to put a LOT of meat on the body and become real strong.
Squats, Deadlifts, Bench presses, rows, shoulder presses and pull ups are enough to build the whole body if you wanna be(and look) real strong,but you have to do more exercises to develop certain muscles to their full potential though.

[Finnegan Bell]

My response to either of the above studies is "that's nice". I'm do squats for legs, not for arms.

Did u even read?? The article I posted suggests loading weights on squats,bench press and deadlifts so u can increase strength on other exercises and gain mass. read it brah its very good.

[thekrown]

I just read the second post saying do the major thigh hip and back exercises to increase arm size.

Is the chicken leg upper buff puff body a phenomenon? I don't understand how they can get big arms and chest without doing legs and I have to do legs to get it...

BTW I do train legs, a lot, and have a huge squatters ass but I really want to know why it's so common to see big arms and no legs if it's suppose to be more difficult than squatting your arms up to size.

[Karaim]

How to squat for huge arms
By Stuart McRobert
Adapted from his best-selling book BRAWN

To build muscle mass, you must increase strength. It?€™s that simple. You will never get huge arms, a monstrous back, a thick chest, or massive legs without lifting heavy weights. I know that probably doesn?€™t come as a revelation to anyone. But despite how obvious it seems, far too many people (and not just beginners) neglect power training and rarely make increasing the weights lifted in each successive workout a priority. You must get strong in the basic mass building exercises to bring about a significant increase in muscle size. One of the biggest mistakes typical bodybuilders make is when they implement specialization routines before they have the right to use them.

It constantly amazes me just how many neophytes (beginners), near neophytes, and other insufficiently developed bodybuilders plunge into single-body part specialization programs in the desperate attempt to build big arms. I don?€™t fault them for wanting big arms, but their approach to getting them is flawed. For the typical bodybuilder who is miles away from squatting 1 � times their bodyweight for 20 reps (if you weigh 180 lbs., that means 20 reps with 270 lbs.), an arm specialization program is utterly inappropriate and useless.

The strength and development needed to squat well over 1 � times bodyweight for 20 reps will build bigger arms faster then focusing on biceps and triceps training with isolation exercises. Even though squats are primarily a leg exercise, they stress and stimulate the entire body. But more importantly, if you are able to handle heavy weights in the squat, it logically follows that the rest of your body will undoubtedly be proportionally developed. It?€™s a rare case that you would be able to squat 1 � times your bodyweight and not have a substantial amount of upper body muscle mass.

This is not to say that you don?€™t need to train arms, and squats alone will cause massive upper body growth. You will still work every body part, but you must focus on squats, deadlifts, and rows?€”the exercises that develop the legs, hips, and back. Once you master the power movements and are able to handle impressive poundages on those lifts, the strength and muscle you gain will translate into greater weights used in arm, shoulder and chest exercises.

In every gym I?€™ve ever visited or trained in, there were countless teenage boys blasting away on routines, dominated by arm exercises, in the attempt to build arms like their idols. In the ?€˜70s, they wanted arms like Arnold Schwarzenegger, in the ?€˜80s Robby Robinson was a favorite and currently Mr. Olympia, Ronnie Coleman, has set the standard everyone wants to achieve. Unfortunately the 3 aforementioned men as well as most other top bodybuilders have arm development far beyond the reach of the average (or even above average) weight trainer. But arm size can be increased. However, not in the way young trainers, with physiques that don?€™t even have the faintest resemblance to those of bodybuilders are attempting to make progress. Thin arms, connected to narrow shoulders, fixed to shallow chest, joined to frail backs and skinny legs, don?€™t need body part specialization programs. Let?€™s not have skewed priorities. Let?€™s not try to put icing on the cake before the cake has been baked.


Priorities
Trying to stimulate a substantial increase in size in a single body part, without first having the main structures of the body in pretty impressive condition, is to have turned bodybuilding upside-down, inside-out and back to front.

The typical bodybuilder simply isn?€™t going to get much meat on his arms, calves, shoulders, pectorals and neck unless he first builds a considerable amount of muscle around the thighs, hips and back. It simply isn?€™t possible?€”for the typical drug-free bodybuilder, that is?€”to add much if any size to the small areas unless the big areas are already becoming substantial.

There?€™s a knock-on (additive) effect from the efforts to add substantial size to the thigh, hip and back structure (closely followed by upper body pushing structure-pecs and delts). The smaller muscle groups, like the biceps, and triceps will progress in size (so long as you don?€™t totally neglect them) pretty much in proportion to the increase in size of the big areas. It?€™s not a case of getting big and strong thighs, hips, back and upper-body pushing structure with everything else staying put. Far from it. As the thigh, hip, back and upper-body pushing structure grows, so does everything else. Work hard on squats and deadlifts, in addition to bench presses, overhead presses and some type of row or pulldown. Then you can add a little isolation work?€”curls, calf raises and neck work (but not all of this at every workout).


The ?€œDriver?€?
The key point is that the ?€œengine?€? that drives the gains in the small areas is the progress being made in the big areas. If you take it easy on the thigh and back you will, generally speaking, have trouble making gains in the other exercises, no matter how hard you work the latter.

All this isn?€™t to say just do squats, deadlifts and upper back work, quite closely followed by some upper-body pressing work. While such a limited program will deliver good gains on these few exercises, with some knock-on effect throughout the body, it?€™s not a year after year program. Very abbreviated routines are great for getting gains moving, and for building a foundation for moderately expanded routines. They are fine to keep returning to on a regular basis. The other training isn?€™t necessary all in the same workout but spread over the week. This will maintain balance throughout the body and capitalize upon the progress made in the thigh, hip and back structure.

Just remember that the thigh, hip and back structure comes first and is the ?€œdriver?€? (closely followed by the upper-body pushing structure) for the other exercises. These other exercises, though important in their own right, are passengers relative to the driving team.


Big Arms
To get big arms, get yourself on a basic program that focuses on the leg, hip and back structure without neglecting the arms themselves. As you improve your squatting ability, for reps and by say 100 pounds, your curling poundage should readily come up by 30 pounds or so if you work hard enough on your curls. This will add size to your biceps. While adding 100 pounds to your squat, you should be able to add 50-70 pounds to your bench press, for reps. This assumes you?€™ve put together a sound program and have worked hard on the bench. That will add size to your triceps.

If you?€™re desperate to add a couple of inches to your upper arms you?€™ll need to add 30 pounds or more over your body, unless your arms are way behind the rest of you. Don?€™t start thinking about 17?€? arms, or even 16?€? arms so long as your bodyweight is 130, 140, 150, 160, or even 170 pounds. Few people can get big arms without having a big body. You?€™re unlikely to be one of the exceptions.

15 sets of arm flexor exercises, and 15 sets of isolation tricep exercises?€”with a few squats, deadlifts and bench presses thrown in as an afterthought?€”will give you a great pump and attack the arms from ?€œall angles?€?. However, it won?€™t make your arms grow much, if at all, unless you?€™re already squatting and benching big poundages, or are drug-assisted or genetically gifted.

As your main structures come along in size and strength (thigh, hip and back structure, and the pressing structure), the directly involved smaller body parts are brought along in size too. How can you bench press or dip impressive poundages without adding a lot of size to your triceps? How can you deadlift the house and row big weights without having the arm flexors?€”not to mention the shoulders and upper back?€”to go with those lifts? How can you squat close to 2 times bodyweight, for plenty of reps, without having a lot of muscle all over your body?

The greater the development and strength of the main muscular structures of the body, the greater the size and strength potential of the small areas of the body. Think it through. Suppose you can only squat and deadlift with 200 pounds, and your arms measure about 13?€?. You?€™re unlikely to add any more than half an inch or so on them, no matter how much arm specialization you put in.

However, put some real effort into the squat and deadlift, together with the bench press and a few other major basic movements. Build up the poundages by 50% or more, to the point where you can squat 300 pounds for over 10 reps, and pack on 30 pounds of muscle. Then, unless you have an unusual arm structure, you should be able to get your arms to around 16?€?. If you want 17?€? arms, plan on having to squat more than a few reps with around 2 times bodyweight, and on adding many more pounds of muscle throughout your body (unless you have a better-than-average growth potential in your upper arms).

All of this arm development would have been achieved without a single concentration curl, without a single pushdown and without a single preacher curl. This lesson in priorities proves that the shortest distance between you and big arms is not a straight line to a curl bar.

"Even though squats are primarily a leg exercise, they stress and stimulate the entire body. But more importantly, if you are able to handle heavy weights in the squat, it logically follows that the rest of your body will undoubtedly be proportionally developed."

How does it logically follow that if your legs are able to handle heavy weight, you are able to bench more? It doesn't logically follow and makes no sense.

"The typical bodybuilder simply isn?€™t going to get much meat on his arms, calves, shoulders, pectorals and neck unless he first builds a considerable amount of muscle around the thighs, hips and back. It simply isn?€™t possible?€”for the typical drug-free bodybuilder, that is?€”to add much if any size to the small areas unless the big areas are already becoming substantial."

Why? That makes no sense again. The author has never seen disproportionally built gym-goers? (i.e. skinny legs and large upper body or huge chest and small everything else).

[Karaim]

Did u even read?? The article I posted suggests loading weights on squats,bench press and deadlifts so u can increase strength on other exercises and gain mass. read it brah its very good.

Doesn't make much sense to me.

[Nskrd]

Squats and Deads will strengthen your core and improve balance under heavy load, this will definitely help when it comes to doing other compound movements such as dips or pull ups. By themselves they won't really make your arms bigger though, that's bro-science.

[timhet]

One of the advantages to having big legs is that your overall metabolism will be larger, which will make it easier to lose bodyfat, which will help your overall physique.

[hybridmerc]

i like squats too i am not giving them up! NEVER NEVEEER!!!!

[sl4vik]

i like squats too i am not giving them up! NEVER NEVEEER!!!!

Nobody said anything about giving up squats.

[Finnegan Bell]

Doesn't make much sense to me.

Doesn't make sense that increasing weights on squats,deads and bench won't increase your overall strength??

Maybe brah , but for me ,when I started doing 5x5 madcow and increased strength on these 3 exercises + rows +militiary press , I increased my strength at pullups and dips without doing them for 2 months ,not to mention more muscle mass.

[Karaim]

Doesn't make sense that increasing weights on squats,deads and bench won't increase your overall strength??

Maybe brah , but for me ,when I started doing 5x5 madcow and increased strength on these 3 exercises + rows +militiary press , I increased my strength at pullups and dips without doing them for 2 months ,not to mention more muscle mass.

It'll definitely increase overall strength, but it won't make you stronger everywhere. I like deads and squats and I do them for the benefits to my legs and lower back, but that's about it.

[DeepChill12345]

lol

[christos_swc]

It'll definitely increase overall strength, but it won't make you stronger everywhere. I like deads and squats and I do them for the benefits to my legs and lower back, but that's about it.

Deadlifts are sooooo much more than just legs and lower back!

[JOSEF RAKICH]

Is the chicken leg upper buff puff body a phenomenon? I don't understand how they can get big arms and chest without doing legs and I have to do legs to get it...

But bro, when im at the bar grinding on all those bitches, none of them care about how big my legs are.

[Sir_Malak]

But bro, when im at the bar grinding on all those bitches, none of them care about how big my legs are.

That sums up half or more of the threads Nice.

[sportyaccordy]

but bro, when im at the bar grinding on all those bitches, none of them care about how big my legs are.

lmaooo

[SpartacusWinch]

Thats a great video!

Ya, no matter what any study shows, everyone should be doing squats and deadlifts.

[Slow-N-Steady]

Maybe brah , but for me ,when I started doing 5x5 madcow and increased strength on these 3 exercises + rows +militiary press , I increased my strength at pullups and dips without doing them for 2 months ,not to mention more muscle mass.

That's not really a compelling argument, as you were doing exercises that target the same areas as dips and pullups. Of course, your dips and pullups would go up if those muscle groups got notcieably stronger/bigger.

edit- OMG that video is funny as sh*t..

[patriarcaangela]

How to squat for huge arms
By Stuart McRobert
Adapted from his best-selling book BRAWN

To build muscle mass, you must increase strength. It’s that simple. You will never get huge arms, a monstrous back, a thick chest, or massive legs without lifting heavy weights. I know that probably doesn’t come as a revelation to anyone. But despite how obvious it seems, far too many people (and not just beginners) neglect power training and rarely make increasing the weights lifted in each successive workout a priority. You must get strong in the basic mass building exercises to bring about a significant increase in muscle size. One of the biggest mistakes typical bodybuilders make is when they implement specialization routines before they have the right to use them.

It constantly amazes me just how many neophytes (beginners), near neophytes, and other insufficiently developed bodybuilders plunge into single-body part specialization programs in the desperate attempt to build big arms. I don’t fault them for wanting big arms, but their approach to getting them is flawed. For the typical bodybuilder who is miles away from squatting 1 ½ times their bodyweight for 20 reps (if you weigh 180 lbs., that means 20 reps with 270 lbs.), an arm specialization program is utterly inappropriate and useless.

The strength and development needed to squat well over 1 ½ times bodyweight for 20 reps will build bigger arms faster then focusing on biceps and triceps training with isolation exercises. Even though squats are primarily a leg exercise, they stress and stimulate the entire body. But more importantly, if you are able to handle heavy weights in the squat, it logically follows that the rest of your body will undoubtedly be proportionally developed. It’s a rare case that you would be able to squat 1 ½ times your bodyweight and not have a substantial amount of upper body muscle mass.

This is not to say that you don’t need to train arms, and squats alone will cause massive upper body growth. You will still work every body part, but you must focus on squats, deadlifts, and rows—the exercises that develop the legs, hips, and back. Once you master the power movements and are able to handle impressive poundages on those lifts, the strength and muscle you gain will translate into greater weights used in arm, shoulder and chest exercises.

In every gym I’ve ever visited or trained in, there were countless teenage boys blasting away on routines, dominated by arm exercises, in the attempt to build arms like their idols. In the ‘70s, they wanted arms like Arnold Schwarzenegger, in the ‘80s Robby Robinson was a favorite and currently Mr. Olympia, Ronnie Coleman, has set the standard everyone wants to achieve. Unfortunately the 3 aforementioned men as well as most other top bodybuilders have arm development far beyond the reach of the average (or even above average) weight trainer. But arm size can be increased. However, not in the way young trainers, with physiques that don’t even have the faintest resemblance to those of bodybuilders are attempting to make progress. Thin arms, connected to narrow shoulders, fixed to shallow chest, joined to frail backs and skinny legs, don’t need body part specialization programs. Let’s not have skewed priorities. Let’s not try to put icing on the cake before the cake has been baked.


Priorities
Trying to stimulate a substantial increase in size in a single body part, without first having the main structures of the body in pretty impressive condition, is to have turned bodybuilding upside-down, inside-out and back to front.

The typical bodybuilder simply isn’t going to get much meat on his arms, calves, shoulders, pectorals and neck unless he first builds a considerable amount of muscle around the thighs, hips and back. It simply isn’t possible—for the typical drug-free bodybuilder, that is—to add much if any size to the small areas unless the big areas are already becoming substantial.

There’s a knock-on (additive) effect from the efforts to add substantial size to the thigh, hip and back structure (closely followed by upper body pushing structure-pecs and delts). The smaller muscle groups, like the biceps, and triceps will progress in size (so long as you don’t totally neglect them) pretty much in proportion to the increase in size of the big areas. It’s not a case of getting big and strong thighs, hips, back and upper-body pushing structure with everything else staying put. Far from it. As the thigh, hip, back and upper-body pushing structure grows, so does everything else. Work hard on squats and deadlifts, in addition to bench presses, overhead presses and some type of row or pulldown. Then you can add a little isolation work—curls, calf raises and neck work (but not all of this at every workout).


The “Driver”
The key point is that the “engine” that drives the gains in the small areas is the progress being made in the big areas. If you take it easy on the thigh and back you will, generally speaking, have trouble making gains in the other exercises, no matter how hard you work the latter.

All this isn’t to say just do squats, deadlifts and upper back work, quite closely followed by some upper-body pressing work. While such a limited program will deliver good gains on these few exercises, with some knock-on effect throughout the body, it’s not a year after year program. Very abbreviated routines are great for getting gains moving, and for building a foundation for moderately expanded routines. They are fine to keep returning to on a regular basis. The other training isn’t necessary all in the same workout but spread over the week. This will maintain balance throughout the body and capitalize upon the progress made in the thigh, hip and back structure.

Just remember that the thigh, hip and back structure comes first and is the “driver” (closely followed by the upper-body pushing structure) for the other exercises. These other exercises, though important in their own right, are passengers relative to the driving team.


Big Arms
To get big arms, get yourself on a basic program that focuses on the leg, hip and back structure without neglecting the arms themselves. As you improve your squatting ability, for reps and by say 100 pounds, your curling poundage should readily come up by 30 pounds or so if you work hard enough on your curls. This will add size to your biceps. While adding 100 pounds to your squat, you should be able to add 50-70 pounds to your bench press, for reps. This assumes you’ve put together a sound program and have worked hard on the bench. That will add size to your triceps.

If you’re desperate to add a couple of inches to your upper arms you’ll need to add 30 pounds or more over your body, unless your arms are way behind the rest of you. Don’t start thinking about 17” arms, or even 16” arms so long as your bodyweight is 130, 140, 150, 160, or even 170 pounds. Few people can get big arms without having a big body. You’re unlikely to be one of the exceptions.

15 sets of arm flexor exercises, and 15 sets of isolation tricep exercises—with a few squats, deadlifts and bench presses thrown in as an afterthought—will give you a great pump and attack the arms from “all angles”. However, it won’t make your arms grow much, if at all, unless you’re already squatting and benching big poundages, or are drug-assisted or genetically gifted.

As your main structures come along in size and strength (thigh, hip and back structure, and the pressing structure), the directly involved smaller body parts are brought along in size too. How can you bench press or dip impressive poundages without adding a lot of size to your triceps? How can you deadlift the house and row big weights without having the arm flexors—not to mention the shoulders and upper back—to go with those lifts? How can you squat close to 2 times bodyweight, for plenty of reps, without having a lot of muscle all over your body?

The greater the development and strength of the main muscular structures of the body, the greater the size and strength potential of the small areas of the body. Think it through. Suppose you can only squat and deadlift with 200 pounds, and your arms measure about 13”. You’re unlikely to add any more than half an inch or so on them, no matter how much arm specialization you put in.

However, put some real effort into the squat and deadlift, together with the bench press and a few other major basic movements. Build up the poundages by 50% or more, to the point where you can squat 300 pounds for over 10 reps, and pack on 30 pounds of muscle. Then, unless you have an unusual arm structure, you should be able to get your arms to around 16”. If you want 17” arms, plan on having to squat more than a few reps with around 2 times bodyweight, and on adding many more pounds of muscle throughout your body (unless you have a better-than-average growth potential in your upper arms).

All of this arm development would have been achieved without a single concentration curl, without a single pushdown and without a single preacher curl. This lesson in priorities proves that the shortest distance between you and big arms is not a straight line to a curl bar.

good stuff makes me wanna train heavier on those 'real weightlifting' lifts. thanks for the great reminder.

[JOSEF RAKICH]

That sums up half or more of the threads Nice.

lmaooo

Thats a great video!

edit- OMG that video is funny as sh*t..

There is another vid also which brings the lulz.

[Drewzker]

Deadlifts are sooooo much more than just legs and lower back!

exactly

Squats and deads work the entire body, which is why they grow the entire body.

[muruku]

How does it logically follow that if your legs are able to handle heavy weight, you are able to bench more? It doesn't logically follow and makes no sense.

Squats help strengthen your core and posterior chain and in turn helps you generate greater power for the bench press.

[Karaim]

Squats help strengthen your core and posterior chain and in turn helps you generate greater power for the bench press.

Hmmm. Not sure I follow the logic, or should I say lack thereof.