PDA

View Full Version : Big arms or Big legs?



bodyhard
02-05-2012, 10:36 AM
Wow Its been a f'cking minute that I have started a thread on BB.com and thought to myself, hmmm it's time I get back on my grind and start posting, if just to annoy some folks :)

Anyway I have been training my legs (and back) really hard and thought, I wonder what the consensus is on legs vs arms hence the question on the thread topic.

So if you had 1 choice to get either big arms or big legs which one would you choose...

NOTE: For you slow people who never understand a direct question, it is one or the other, no why not have both

I am pretty sure everyone would love to have a balance build, this is just a hypothetical question if you could have one over the other which one would you choose?

Jtbny
02-05-2012, 10:38 AM
In my teens and twenties big arms...now big legs.

baker
02-05-2012, 10:48 AM
Arms.

-=FLEX=-
02-05-2012, 10:50 AM
legs for sure

Guinea-pig
02-05-2012, 10:57 AM
If not training for any purpose big arms I have 18's at 6"1' they look very spidery when relaxed.

freebirdmac
02-05-2012, 11:00 AM
Legs. Which also means ain't got them :(

ArchAngel'73
02-05-2012, 11:03 AM
1 star thread. :D


Like the other quadzillas in this thread, legs, hands down.

OZBB
02-05-2012, 11:08 AM
Definitlly arms... they tend to be the things that people notice, they fill out your sleeves and are the body part girls hold on to and remark "00h you work out!!!". Legs are generally invisible to the world unless you wear short shorts

OZBB .

Dr.Griefo
02-05-2012, 11:10 AM
Arms. There is only 4-5 months of shorts weather where I live. I'm also envisioning having great big legs with skinny arms and in my mind, that looks worse than than big arms and skinny legs.

Time to hit the bis and tris ;)

Roniboney
02-05-2012, 11:11 AM
arms.I live in Ireland so it makes no sense having huge legs

ironwill2008
02-05-2012, 11:16 AM
Tough choice. I'll go with legs.








1 star thread. :D


Lulz. There's a troublemaker in every thread!

-=FLEX=-
02-05-2012, 11:19 AM
I live in Ireland so it makes no sense having huge legs

Explain this comment please. I has a confused. :confused:

acrawlingchaos
02-05-2012, 11:22 AM
I'd rather have a huge back then either, but if given the choice between the 2 you propose..... arms.

Lishnik
02-05-2012, 11:27 AM
Big arms.

tmonkey
02-05-2012, 11:28 AM
both :D






sorry bh

if i had to pick one I would probably go with arms since that is all anyone ever looks at.

OutOfStep
02-05-2012, 11:31 AM
Legs. Fortunately I don't have to choose IRL. :)

TenThreeFive
02-05-2012, 11:32 AM
This is the same as would you rather be deaf or blind. I change my mind depending on mood on that one and would on this one as well. Right now I think I'll take Legs as they are fun to train and chicks dig them.

db_ggmm
02-05-2012, 11:32 AM
Proportion is more important than having any individual body part be "large".

ljimd
02-05-2012, 11:36 AM
Arms

plumher
02-05-2012, 11:38 AM
Legs. Fortunately I don't have to choose IRL. :)


I hear ya. Got 18-19 inch arms and 28 inch thighs. Can I choose something else... Like wider shoulders ?

Husky Bob
02-05-2012, 11:39 AM
It's "welcome to the gun show" for me!

Dr.Griefo
02-05-2012, 11:48 AM
Explain this comment please. I has a confused. :confused:

Ireland gets about 2 days of summer.

chodan9
02-05-2012, 11:49 AM
legs
reasons being, they will have the most impact on fitness
and training them will a lot more carry over to the rest of the body

Corbi
02-05-2012, 11:50 AM
Definitlly arms... they tend to be the things that people notice, they fill out your sleeves and are the body part girls hold on to and remark "00h you work out!!!". Legs are generally invisible to the world unless you wear short shorts

OZBB .

This^^^, if I had to choose.

chodan9
02-05-2012, 11:55 AM
After thinking about it a bit I can actually point to times in my training where I did not directly train arms, yet I cant point to any time where I neglected legs.

clive
02-05-2012, 12:27 PM
Proportion is more important than having any individual body part be "large".

Arms without doubt.
I think arms that are proportionally bigger to the rest of the body actually look rather good!
A bit like women’s breasts!

KindaBigGuns
02-05-2012, 12:36 PM
Arms for sure. People just think you are gay if you were short shorts anyway. Everyone notices big arms though.

flat6nut
02-05-2012, 12:36 PM
Only one choice? I'll pass.

bodyhard
02-05-2012, 01:17 PM
I should have made a poll.

For you slow people, I know I know, it is not your fault, but let me reiterate..I will give you the benefit of the doubt and just assume you did not read the following...




NOTE: For you slow people who never understand a direct question, it is one or the other, no why not have both

I am pretty sure everyone would love to have a balance build, this is just a hypothetical question if you could have one over the other which one would you choose?

flat6nut
02-05-2012, 01:22 PM
What is your choice John?

bodyhard
02-05-2012, 01:30 PM
What is your choice John?

Well I have always had big arms (for me) so I have to say legs (hence training for them like crazy right now)

flat6nut
02-05-2012, 01:34 PM
Well I have always had big arms (for me) so I have to say legs (hence training for them like crazy right now)


Now that makes a big difference in the question. The way you asked it...I figured that the other body part would have to be normal or smaller in proportion.

In that case Ill take the legs...cause my arms are easy.

bodyhard
02-05-2012, 01:40 PM
Now that makes a big difference in the question. The way you asked it...I figured that the other body part would have to be normal or smaller in proportion.

In that case Ill take the legs...cause my arms are easy.

Or no you were right with your first assumption, if one had to take a back seat.

I was trying to see who would prefer to have small arms and big legs or small legs and big arms.

With that said I would still chose legs.

hazto
02-05-2012, 01:40 PM
Legs, has the greatest impact on overall training plus I see enough people in the gym with great upper body development and pigen legs.

flat6nut
02-05-2012, 01:46 PM
Or no you were right with your first assumption, if one had to take a back seat.

I was trying to see who would prefer to have small arms and big legs or big legs and small arms.

With that said I would still chose legs.

then my first post stands...Ill pass. ;)

Tommy W.
02-05-2012, 01:52 PM
A guy with *****y arms and legs and a big penis will get all the women anyway so why worry about it.

HoustonTXMuscle
02-05-2012, 01:53 PM
Would like to have massive arms. Feel that for my age, my legs are pretty well developed; based on what some of the younger women at the gym tell me while on the stairmaster.

jmelanson
02-05-2012, 02:17 PM
Definitlly arms... they tend to be the things that people notice, they fill out your sleeves and are the body part girls hold on to and remark "00h you work out!!!". Legs are generally invisible to the world unless you wear short shorts

OZBB .

This.

Medtreker
02-05-2012, 02:29 PM
NOTE: For you slow people who never understand a direct question, it is one or the other, no why not have both



"No why not have both" in for the double negitive, translates to "why have both" turns it upside down on OP.... I think.....

Is Chest one of the choices??

Karl_Hungus
02-05-2012, 02:31 PM
legs for sure

^^ This ... no question.

Medtreker
02-05-2012, 02:33 PM
A guy with *****y arms and legs and a big penis will get all the women anyway so why worry about it.

It took a good 35 posts, but the word penis finally made it into poll thread on size. :)

NorwichGrad
02-05-2012, 02:42 PM
Legs. It's true that guys with big arms get noticed right away. But guys with big arms and no legs get made fun of.

Tommy W.
02-05-2012, 02:53 PM
It took a good 35 posts, but the word penis finally made it into poll thread on size. :)

I had to cut to the chase for the benefit of the women reading this thread.

But on a serious note when I was 20 I had big arms and my buddy Larry had big legs and my girlfriend told me her and her friends had their own poll. My arms beat him 2 to 1. So from a standpoint of women, generally the arms have it. Personally, I've always had crap*y legs so I'd like to see how it feels to have good legs.

crupiea
02-05-2012, 03:33 PM
Big legas. far more functional strength.

arms will just about always be the weakest link no matter how big the are.

flat6nut
02-05-2012, 03:40 PM
A guy with *****y arms and legs and a big penis will get all the women anyway so why worry about it.

I thought Porsche owners had small dicks.































JK....I have one also. Thats where the "flat6" comes from.

BillyBatts
02-05-2012, 05:20 PM
Definitely legs! Most hard core lifters have big arms, but few have big legs. That's why you see a lot of lifters wearing sweatpants in the gym. (Some guys in the gym with big legs prefer sweats while others wear them to hide skinny legs.)

I never focused on my legs that much until 5 years ago. Now, working legs is my priority. At age 56, my legs are growing way more impressively than my upper body. Most of the compliments I receive in the gym revolve around my legs.

With shorts and bathing suit styles having cuffs that end at around the knees, there's virtually no way for people outside the gym to notice your legs. At least my wife notices.

StressMonkey
02-05-2012, 05:33 PM
Hands down arms.

Before I started working out I was really self conscious about them. When I started working out what I wanted more than anything was to get rid of my stick arms.

BrotherWolf
02-05-2012, 05:49 PM
I'll take legs because I am on my feet all day .. I need my legs more than i need my arms

Tommy W.
02-05-2012, 06:05 PM
I thought Porsche owners had small dicks.)

Fortunately for my wife I don't fit this stereotype


You have one also? I'm hoping that means a flat 6 not a small di*k














]

penn28
02-05-2012, 06:17 PM
Legs and with truly impressive calves.

hardNheavy2011
02-05-2012, 06:43 PM
Legs :D

Tifflex
02-05-2012, 07:36 PM
Legs:)

JohnDavis111
02-05-2012, 07:53 PM
Arms, Chicks love big arms lol. Seriously though Arms for sure.

discdoggie
02-05-2012, 08:24 PM
Arms, Chicks love big arms lol. Seriously though Arms for sure.

Sweeping generalization ftl. And incorrect assumption.

Me, I'd rather have more muscle on my legs.

bigtallox
02-05-2012, 08:45 PM
So if you had 1 choice to get either big arms or big legs which one would you choose...


Legs, of course ( but I'd really choose posterior chain if that was a choice ).



Big legas. far more functional strength.

arms will just about always be the weakest link no matter how big the are.

Exactly

Karl_Hungus
02-05-2012, 10:22 PM
Sweeping generalization ftl. And incorrect assumption.


Yup, that assumption is probably why it isn't uncommon to see top heavy guys with decent arms/upper body ambulating about the gym on a set of chicken legs.

Tyrbolift
02-06-2012, 05:29 AM
Big legs, because if I got in to an altercation with BH I could get away faster or kick him real hard in the nuts or something. :D

billb7581
02-06-2012, 05:35 AM
Big arms, my legs are decent, my arms are lacking (long and thin) and are going to take forever to get any size on them.

jtroster
02-06-2012, 05:37 AM
Legs. Because if you are working your legs properly you will also get gains all over your body.

Old-Time-Lifter
02-06-2012, 05:38 AM
I'd rather have a huge back then either, but if given the choice between the 2 you propose..... arms.

Agreed...

hammerfelt
02-06-2012, 06:22 AM
Neither. I only do full body workouts.

bodyhard
02-06-2012, 06:33 AM
Neither. I only do full body workouts.

Chalk it up for Mr. S..........L..........O...........W


:D :D :D

db_ggmm
02-06-2012, 07:35 AM
NOTE: For you slow people who never understand a direct question, it is one or the other, no why not have both

Picking one or the other, I don't understand who would pick legs. If you are going to be unproportional and awkward, I'm going to pick the lesser of two evils and take arms.

OutOfStep
02-06-2012, 08:16 AM
Picking one or the other, I don't understand who would pick legs. If you are going to be unproportional and awkward, I'm going to pick the lesser of two evils and take arms.


Your legs are needed to carry you around all day. You can't understand why someone would want them to be big and strong? Ok. Here's another interesting bit of information in favor of having big legs:


http://anabolicminds.com/forum/content/big-legs-heart-987/

billb7581
02-06-2012, 09:08 AM
But my legs carry me around now. Having big arms makes you look like you lift at least.

I have long assed arms and it's going to take a hell of a lot longer to get them to go anywhere

JordanClark9
02-06-2012, 09:10 AM
I'd go arms. Looks better than big legs IMO.

1slo5oh
02-06-2012, 09:17 AM
The attention whore side of me says Arms for reasons stated many times already....its the first thing people tend to notice if they are larger than "normal"

However...the older more logical side of me says legs. Especially seeing how much trouble my grandfather went through with his legs as he got older. It only makes logical sense to want big strong legs to help carry you through life on two feet rather a wheelchair..

With that said..my final decision is Arms....I would have rather have big arms than skinny legs. If all else fails I will have some huge guns to help wheel my chair around later on...lol

sok454
02-06-2012, 09:30 AM
I'll go with arms... Funny story when I got into work today... My asst. tells me I was the topic of their dinner table conversation last week. He son who is a soph. football player came into work last week and was chatting with us. Apparently he is amazed at how big my arms are and how big my upper body has gotten and that I'm able to keep a small waist... I started laughing as I think my arms are tiny... she then tried to tell him that I DL like 235 or bench that... I told her... uhh... that's not impressive and those aren't the weights I do for either... She said... yeah... my son didn't think so either.

zanak74
02-06-2012, 10:18 AM
Arms

Minotaur
02-06-2012, 10:38 AM
My legs grow pretty quickly, so I gotta go with arms. At my height 16-17" arms look pretty damn impressive. :)

KindaBigGuns
02-06-2012, 10:45 AM
This thread plus the link OutOfStep posted made me wonder, where do you measure the legs really, at the top like that article stated? It seems to me that people with well developed legs are just about as big halfway down to the knee as they are at the top, but noobies or people with smaller legs are much smaller halfway down towards the knee then they are at the top. I think genetic shape also effects this ratio though.....

x-trainer ben
02-06-2012, 11:00 AM
I must also say legs because of the years of dedication and pain it takes to make them admirable. The jersey shore tools have arms, but very rarely do I see a set of legs at any gym where I drop my jaw. They require a high pain tolerance to make them pop! Don't even get me started on the calf free gym goers !! If people spent the time on calves as they do chest, just imagine!!!

Tyrbolift
02-06-2012, 11:08 AM
This thread plus the link OutOfStep posted made me wonder, where do you measure the legs really, at the top like that article stated? It seems to me that people with well developed legs are just about as big halfway down to the knee as they are at the top, but noobies or people with smaller legs are much smaller halfway down towards the knee then they are at the top. I think genetic shape also effects this ratio though.....I'd say move the tape to the part where you get the highest number. :)

nixter
02-06-2012, 11:52 AM
Fortunately for my wife I don't fit this stereotype


You have one also? I'm hoping that means a flat 6 not a small di*k

]

Sweet! I have an '80 SC as a track toy. 03 M5 as my DD.

Oh and arms all the way. Hell I don't even want big legs! Strong yes, but I prefer sleeker, athletic looking legs.

sok454
02-06-2012, 12:42 PM
Sweet! I have an '80 SC as a track toy. 03 M5 as my DD.

Oh and arms all the way. Hell I don't even want big legs! Strong yes, but I prefer sleeker, athletic looking legs.

03 M5... oh man sweet. Was my dream car back in the day... Then i saw the E55.....

2nd_chance
02-06-2012, 01:27 PM
This is the same as would you rather be deaf or blind. I change my mind depending on mood on that one and would on this one as well. Right now I think I'll take Legs as they are fun to train and chicks dig them.The worst part about being blind would be not knowing if there were bugs in your food...


Anyway, I'd go legs as long as the arms weren't sticks.

hardNheavy2011
02-06-2012, 01:30 PM
Your legs are needed to carry you around all day. You can't understand why someone would want them to be big and strong? Ok. Here's another interesting bit of information in favor of having big legs:


http://anabolicminds.com/forum/content/big-legs-heart-987/

Hell yeah!! :D

On spread damn it!

BoutIt618
02-06-2012, 01:37 PM
arms, size for either has never been a problem for me, but the chicks seem to dig the arms more, and aside from staying around longer on this earth and impressing my son, thats my only other reason for training.

billb7581
02-06-2012, 02:14 PM
I must also say legs because of the years of dedication and pain it takes to make them admirable. The jersey shore tools have arms, but very rarely do I see a set of legs at any gym where I drop my jaw. They require a high pain tolerance to make them pop! Don't even get me started on the calf free gym goers !! If people spent the time on calves as they do chest, just imagine!!!

The jersey shore tools are also short. I have a hell of a time getting big arms but my legs are already big from carting my fat ass around.

Corbi
02-06-2012, 02:27 PM
Anyway, I'd go legs as long as the arms weren't sticks.

Nope, if you work your legs then you will have to be satisfied with arms like bje's:D

hammerfelt
02-06-2012, 03:34 PM
Chalk it up for Mr. S..........L..........O...........W


:D :D :D

lol, well Mr "Slow" has 19" arms and 31" legs.

Corbi
02-06-2012, 03:44 PM
lol, well Mr "Slow" has 19" fatceps and 31" legs.

Fixed it and now reads more truthful, have a great day.

bodyhard
02-06-2012, 05:11 PM
lol, well Mr "Slow" has 19" arms and 31" legs.

Well I have 13" arms and 19" legs..So what you saying?

Bofrere21
02-06-2012, 07:32 PM
I prefer working hard on the arms then the legs!

Arms are fun to work on. So if legs are ok, then = more time and more energy to focus for the fun 'weak' parts! Problem solved! :)

Eric

hammerfelt
02-06-2012, 08:41 PM
Well I have 13" arms and 19" legs..So what you saying?

I am not really trying to make my arms or legs any bigger. I am trying to lift heavier weights. Limbs getting larger are just a by product.

GuyJin
02-06-2012, 09:08 PM
I'd go with the legs. Having big arms (not fatceps but well muscled bis and tris) is cool and admittedly, they're eye-catchers and all that, but big legs (or at least, proportionate legs to the rest of your body) are, in the long run (for me) better from an overall health perspective. I read lots of stories about older people being too weak to lift themselves out of chairs or walk a few hundred feet and I don't want to be like that. I know some guys who are younger than I am and they don't bother working their legs or lower backs (i.e. deadlifts or stiff-leg deadlifts) at all. Naturally, they have constant lower back pain and they're weak as anything.

marinevet63031
02-06-2012, 10:13 PM
Arms

hochspeyer
02-06-2012, 10:30 PM
legs
reasons being, they will have the most impact on fitness
and training them will a lot more carry over to the rest of the body

^^^Well stated. I'm in this camp.

dekka213
02-06-2012, 10:40 PM
Legs: my flying knee is a rape scene(bodies in motion tend to stay in motion), My triangle is virgin tight on account of the hanging poke' chop hamstrings.
Guns: they make countering guillotines to easy. Its hard to slide them in for anacondas or darces. Id rather have huge ass forearms. lol. That!

MichaelCJ
02-07-2012, 04:39 AM
Legs, for sure.

bodyhard
02-07-2012, 05:51 AM
I am not really trying to make my arms or legs any bigger. I am trying to lift heavier weights. Limbs getting larger are just a by product.

Now I IZ really confuzed, then why did you post in the thread then :confused:

hammerfelt
02-07-2012, 07:22 AM
Now I IZ really confuzed, then why did you post in the thread then :confused:

Alright, I will chose big legs.

I would pick legs because doing lifts like squats and dead lifts do make your arms bigger as well. Not to the extent of working them directly, but there is more carry over to arms from legs than to legs from arms workouts.

BloodySalad
02-07-2012, 09:34 AM
If I had to choose only one, it would be arms.

Main reason is the fact that they're visible whereas my legs are covered 10 months of the year because of the ****ty weather in this country.
Other reason is that I enjoy working on arms far more than I do legs.

clive
02-07-2012, 10:31 AM
If I had to choose only one, it would be arms.

Main reason is the fact that they're visible whereas my legs are covered 10 months of the year because of the ****ty weather in this country.
Other reason is that I enjoy working on arms far more than I do legs.

I agree, it’s a shame in the UK we don’t really get the weather to wear shorts much and when you do the style is all knee length at the moment so you could have great legs but no one would know!

bodyhard
02-07-2012, 10:37 AM
ITT It is apparent that most people on here workout for other people to see......not caring much for what it does for them....


:D :D :D

BloodySalad
02-07-2012, 10:43 AM
^^ My understanding of the question is that it's just legs or arms and nothing else.
If it was legs and they were allowed to work their magic with the core, then yeah because you'd get you healthier overall and a good core also affects arms. But as it's just legs on their own without core, I don't see how they'd be much more beneficial health-wise over arms.
That's why I went for looks. :)

billb7581
02-07-2012, 10:47 AM
I am fairly certain I will have big defined legs before I see a bicep peak. The muscles are more compact, I have a 32 inch inseam and a 36 inch sleeve. My arms are real long and thin so if I could choose one, I would choose the one that is going to be more difficult for me to obtain.

clive
02-07-2012, 10:54 AM
ITT It is apparent that most people on here workout for other people to see......not caring much for what it does for them....

:D :D :D
If you look good, you feel good!

bodyhard
02-07-2012, 11:19 AM
If you look good, you feel good!

Yeah but if you feel good, you will look good...

Corbi
02-07-2012, 02:17 PM
Funny how so many here claim legs yet in the gym I would guess that 90% of the workouts I see are all arm based.

Corbi
02-07-2012, 02:20 PM
Yeah but if you feel good, you will look good...

Not always John, how many people just on this board claim they feel great and yet are either 75 lbs over weight or look like sticks?

pharmamarketer
02-07-2012, 02:21 PM
Legs

danow
02-07-2012, 02:27 PM
Big arms. Bigger arms are more useful than bigger legs.

bodyhard
02-07-2012, 04:40 PM
Not always John, how many people just on this board claim they feel great and yet are either 75 lbs over weight or look like sticks?

True but think about all the people that look like crap and yet swear they look good? :)

tonycon
02-08-2012, 05:31 AM
Arms for sure

Meatpants
02-08-2012, 05:41 AM
Legs. I beat the hell out of my legs, and the grow is the slowest of any body part. Would love to have bigger legs, or more response from legs over arms.

You folks who have it the other way around, and get easy growth from leg work, are blessed.

db_ggmm
02-08-2012, 07:20 AM
People who get easy growth on things are blessed, period.