Inner & Outer Bi's

no problem

DougoeFre5h said:
A followup, straight from the link you posted:

"Skeletal muscles usually have one end (the "origin") attached to a relatively stationary bone, (such as the scapula) and the other end (the "insertion") is attached across a joint, to another bone (such as the humerus)."

Im genuinly curious to know what your take is on this. Im down for a higher level discussion if you are.


OK here it goes.
Force and Tension
Lab 1

1. Take a small piece of plywood and hammer a nail in the center
2. Take some cotton string and cut ten pieces about .5 meters long.
3. Hold all the strings at one end between your forefinger and your thumb.
4. Wrap that end of the strings tightly around the nail and tie a knot. Try to keep the strings evenly lengthed.
5. Now take the other end of the strings and tie them around a pencil. Again, try to keep the length of the strings as even as possible.

OK are you with me so far?
The strings will represent the individual muscle fibrils or fibers.
The nail and the pencil will represent the attatchment to the bone.

6. Now take the board and place it flush to the end of a table. Let the pencil
hang off the table dangling above the floor.
7. Using one hand, slightly pull the pencil towards the floor.
8. With the other hand, spread the strings out evenly on the edge of the board so that you can easily count each individual string.
9. Now hold the board tightly with one hand, and pull the pencil down horizontally towards the floor so that the strings are even and tight.

Representation
1. If you pull straight down this represent a natural curl from ground to shoulder.
Look at the strings on the edge of the piece of wood when you pull straight down. They should all be even with the same amount of tension like the bridge of a guitar.
2. Do the same thing, except now pull the pencil toward the left or the right like a pendulum.
Again, look at the strings on the edge of board. Depending on which side you pull the strings the opposite side of the strings will actually be tighter than the inside strings. If you had a third hand you could pluck the strings and you would see this was true.

Conclusion:
Muscle fibers are actually attached to the bone a little sread out, like on the edge of the piece wood, not the nail. They are a little close but not as tiny of a spot as a nail.

By angling the force on the strings, the force on the outer strings will be greater than the force of the inner strings.

In the gym this equates to targeting muscle fibers by changing the angle.
If you notice when your arm is bent, the inner muscle of the bi sticks out, but the outer muscle stays flat. The outer part of the bi can never be targeted because you cannot pivot your wrist, elbow, or shoulder in the outward position. It is not a natural movement.

You will probably notice that you bi is actually the opposite as the example but that is because the mechanism that puts tension on the muscle is a contraction rather than an extension but it is still the same principle.

The same principle is used by engineers who construct large bridges that curve. The outer cables have to be longer than the inner cables to even out the tension.

Well thats the best I can do in this format to explain myself. Either you buy it or you don't.
 
Jeez

skarhead1 said:
Those awesome biceps are all from great geneitcs not how many different angles you hit your biceps. OR synthol. Im sorry you dont see this

Then maybe you should write Mr. Ronnie Coleman a letter and tell him he should drop the different bi exercises he does and stick to just one. Also, that would leave a lot more room in his DVD to tell everybody how its his genetics that make his arms shaped like that. And maybe he could even thank you personally on his video for helping him out and showing him the light.
 
He probably already knows its his genetics that make his physique like that.
 
Rows don't a do thing for my biceps. Straight bar curls and incline dumbell curls will give you the mass you want.;)

Do 3 sets of 6-8 reps, 2 exercises once a week with the heaviest weight that allows strict form. Bicep shape is genetically pre-determined, and all you can do is make them as big as possible. Arnold had the best bicep shape ever, and Dorian had the worst. Bad bicep peak didn't keep Dorian from winning the Olympia. You CANNOT isolate upper and lower bicep, but you can make the outer bicep much fuller by working the brachialis doing hammer curls.

Some people get large arms despite lack of direct arm work, but most have to work arms specifically for any real mass increase. I know of isolated cases where people sport 18" arms with no direct arm work, but these genetic freaks could probably get them by mowing the lawn.

Incline dumbbell curls with strict form are probably my single favorite bicep movement, and I do 3-4 sets of 8. Arms can be overtrained easily, but I have never seen anyone with truly great arms who didn't do specific arm blasting routines to get them.
 
jb perhaps you can post a clip of you doing this arm balster routine or your training journal complete with #s.

guess the guys i know with big arms who dont do curls werent aware they needed to blast them to get that way. =0l
 
I hear squats are cool....lol

pullinbig said:
jb perhaps you can post a clip of you doing this arm balster routine or your training journal complete with #s.

guess the guys i know with big arms who dont do curls werent aware they needed to blast them to get that way. =0l
 
mustanged77 said:
OK here it goes.
Force and Tension
Lab 1.....

Sure, HOWEVER the insertion and attachment are small enough in diameter that the model can sufficiently be represented by a point, not the other way around. You exaggerated the distance between fibers to prove your point. I STILL disagree due to the facts stated above.

Man the curl motion is pretty predefined, its up, then down. If you can honestly target upper and lower Bis, go ahead. Unfortunately for me, my biceps act as a single unit to pull my forearm towrds my shoulder. Not to mention I almost never to curls anyways so this argument for me at least, is pretty much moot.

Everyone has a different routine, I built my arms with back movements and tricep work. Very little curling happens. To each his own.
 
pullinbig said:
jb perhaps you can post a clip of you doing this arm balster routine or your training journal complete with #s.

guess the guys i know with big arms who dont do curls werent aware they needed to blast them to get that way. =0l
Exmgq! Good to see ya. How you been my chubby friend? :D

What's a balster? I know what works for me...that's my litmus test. I don't need critics either giving me "attaboys" or advice on a training journal. ;)
 
mustanged77 said:
I didn't say everyone was a meathead. I was a little offended at you for your refering to me as a geek who didn't understand basic movements.
i wasn't refering to you or anyone else in particular as a geek - that's my standard example to make my point... the HS kids wearing A&F and flexing their massive pumped up 13" gunz in my face when i'm halfway down on a heavy good morning.
 
cool

DougoeFre5h said:
Sure, HOWEVER the insertion and attachment are small enough in diameter that the model can sufficiently be represented by a point, not the other way around. You exaggerated the distance between fibers to prove your point. I STILL disagree due to the facts stated above.

Man the curl motion is pretty predefined, its up, then down. If you can honestly target upper and lower Bis, go ahead. Unfortunately for me, my biceps act as a single unit to pull my forearm towrds my shoulder. Not to mention I almost never to curls anyways so this argument for me at least, is pretty much moot.

Everyone has a different routine, I built my arms with back movements and tricep work. Very little curling happens. To each his own.


Cool! You right, its not a perfect model, merely an example. The only way I can counter this is to say that there are many bodybuilders with longer arms
who have the best shaped arms. But the opposite can be true also.
Also, the attachment of muscle to ligament can be anywhere from penny size to quarter size in the average grown male.- Thats a guess from what I seen in anatomy books-I do not know if thats a fact!

There are only two things true in bodybuilding;
Hell yeah!---------------- Hell no! and everything in between is negotiable.

Thanks for the civil arguement.
 
mustanged77 said:
No PhD. Just a Masters in Marine Biology. I teach Biology, Marine Biology and Human Anatomy. I have an extensive background in Physics, Mathmatics, and Organic Chemistry. I was Educated at the University of North Carolina in Charlotte.

Human Anatomy 101: No muscle is one solid piece. Striated muscles(your bis are one of them) are composed of hundreds, sometimes thousands of seperate muscle fibers. One fiber is a Myrofibril made of many sperate fibers called sarcomeres.

BodyBuilding 101: Muscle isolation is key

Advanced bodybuilding 101: Muscle fiber isolation can be achieved by applying force at different angles on one single muscle.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Skeletal_muscle.jpg

I'll be over here with my 3 dimensional arms if you have anymore questions. :wavey:


what he said
 
When you all mention not being able to train different angles to get different results, how do you explain incline/decline bench?

One explanation I might offer is that the pectoralis major is a convergent muscle type, not like the bicep.

Another point - the bicep works across three joints, it rotates the forarm, not just moving it up and down. This may support Mustang's argument about supinating/pronating the forearm during a curl since the bicep is only partially contracted when the forearm is in the pronated position (palm facing away from the shoulder).
 
Heavy arm training at 275 and i had 20 inch arms, or just shy

No direct arm training at 285 and i had 19 inch arms or just shy

I have said it before, you don't want to hit arms hard (that doesnt mean 15 sets) you are not going to have your arms at your best. Rows are not a replacement for curls. I can only give you my own results on this.
 
Back
Top