Dumbbell Exercises - recommendations wanted

[Geo]

There was no room left next to yours I'm one of the minority in the gym I go to that actually does proper sets! There's no room in any gym session to lift light. It's counter productive.

 

Explain why its counter productive bud?

[Matt H]

Explain why its counter productive bud?

 

I'm refering to lifting 'light'. Obviously, there's some benefit in lifting light weights in a controlled fashion that puts different strains on your muscles however, but unless you're lifting 'heavy', you might well as not bother, because your muscles are capable of it - no need to induse muscle growth.

 

I've just googled this site. It's a good explanation of what I'm trying to say:

 

http://www.bodybuildingforyou.com/training-fitness/light-lifting-heavy-lifting.htm

[Geo]

i dont lift heavy.

 

I lift smart enough to stress the muscle group im working. Saying lifting heavy or don't bother is a fantastic attitude bud. a MUSCLE is either stressed or relaxed no in between. To induce muscle growth as i've said before you have to ram it full of good calories. End of. i see loads of people lift heavy, lift light, etc etc. None of them grow.

[mikeyb10supra]

not true big man.

 

as long as the muscle is place under tension then they will grow it dont matter about weight. Food builds muscle not training

 

Dont I know it plouging my way through tons at the moment ha ha. How the competition prep going?

 

 

 

i dont lift heavy.

 

I lift smart enough to stress the muscle group im working. Saying lifting heavy or don't bother is a fantastic attitude bud. a MUSCLE is either stressed or relaxed no in between. To induce muscle growth as i've said before you have to ram it full of good calories. End of. i see loads of people lift heavy, lift light, etc etc. None of them grow.

This is great advice. Most guys I see slap on so much weight at there form is shocking. They would get 100% better results by dropping the ego food and putting a weight on they can actually manage whilst performing the exercise correctly. As Geo said, it doesn't take vast amounts of weight to illicit a response from your muscles, but once this response has happened, the importance of good clean calories is paramount

[Matt H]

i dont lift heavy.

 

I lift smart enough to stress the muscle group im working. Saying lifting heavy or don't bother is a fantastic attitude bud. a MUSCLE is either stressed or relaxed no in between. To induce muscle growth as i've said before you have to ram it full of good calories. End of. i see loads of people lift heavy, lift light, etc etc. None of them grow.

 

Did you read that site? I don't think you're understanding my definition of lifting heavy and light. To sum it up: however, you get there, it's about leaving the gym knowing that you've put your muscles through as 'heavy' a workout as possible so maximum growth is induced from your session. There's no point in going into the gym and lifting 'light' as it will have little benefit.

[Geo]

Dont I know it plouging my way through tons at the moment ha ha. How the competition prep going?

 

going great mate actually, week 5 into diet of 16. I've got a thread going in off topic following my Prep for it, have a looksi.

 

Yeah its one thing i struggle with is eating loads to grow, if i could nail that id be laughing,

 

How you getting on?

[Matt H]

a MUSCLE is either stressed or relaxed no in between

 

Of course there is, it's the difference between picking up your cup of tea and drinking it and picking up your cup of tea and ramming it into your face. Muscles are obviously not on and off switches.

[Geo]

Of course there is, it's the difference between picking up your cup of tea and drinking it and picking up your cup of tea and ramming it into your face. Muscles are obviously not on and off switches.

 

God you do make me laugh sometimes bud.

[mikeyb10supra]

Ive had a few bad weeks with the bank holidays etc and being away with work. Im hoping now im back I can get back on it again. Just had a chest/Bi's sessiona and didnt go to bad. Im halfway through a protein shake and chese and ham baguette as we speak

[Axle]

Talk about conflicting information.

 

On that note, I'm off to the gym...

[TubbyTwo]

Im getting on well with my Kettlebell. Bl**dy hard work.

[Matt H]

Im getting on well with my Kettlebell. Bl**dy hard work.

 

Always a good tool and often overlooked in the gym.

[Matt H]

They would get 100% better results by dropping the ego food and putting a weight on they can actually manage whilst performing the exercise correctly.

 

100% agree

[Ian W]

Okay, so for my first attempt I've had a good half hour warm up followed by the below:

 

Chest - Good old fashioned press ups. Then use a chair and do press ups off that once you get stronger. I'll not tell you how many (or little) of these!

 

Arms - Dumbells Standing curls, hammer curls 3 sets of 10 reps (failed on last set)

 

Legs - Using dumbell so free standing squats feel the burn baby 2 sets of 10 reps (my legs are shaking..not sure that's a good sign!?

 

Shoulders - standing press 2 sets of 10 reps

 

Back - Dumbell rows 2 sets of 10 reps

 

Calves - Standing raises with dumbells 2 sets of 10 reps

 

Abs - crunches holding a light dumbell 50 reps

 

Triceps - Another option is to use 2 hands. Hold the dumbbell by the actual weight above your head so that the lower half of the weight is pointing towards your head. Lower the weight behind your head, again keeping your elbows pointing to the ceiling so that the muscle is getting the most extension. 3 sets again. 3 sets of 10 reps

 

Will keep at it every second day and see how I get on.

[Geo]

Okay, so for my first attempt I've had a good half hour warm up followed by the below:

 

Will keep at it every second day and see how I get on.

 

 

All it takes is time dude, the body is a great machine and adapts to things very very quickly. You'll soon be running further and further before you know it.

[Scott]

See thats the thing about gyms, they tell you what they have been taught. In the real world its so different.

 

If you curled 10kg dumbells to failure(high reps) then i guarantee you would be sore the next day, if you curled 30kg until failure(high reps, but lower reps than the 10kg dumbells) you would fail sooner, but the muscle would still be under stress. And you'd be just as sore.

 

As long as the muscle is place under tension for X amount of time, it will grow. Food obviously determines how fast, aswell as the individual. As we all have different genetics. I mean i take it 4000cals just to maintain my weight, for me to grow id need 5000cals or more to get to my desired weight. 4000cals or less +cardio i lose weight.

 

 

I can't get my head round that. Say there was a guy and he had a double in an alternate reality. We will call the guy in reality one Guy1 and the guy in the alternate Guy2.

 

Guy1 uses 10kg dumbells only. Every 2nd day he curls the weights till he is exhausted, no reps and no sets.

 

Guy2 uses a multitude of weights. Every 2nd day he curls the heaviest weight he can for 3 sets of 10. If he hasn't worked his arms to exhaustion then the next time he works out he ups the weight.

 

After 10 years of doing this, and having fantastic diets etc, would I be right in saying that, in your opinion, both guys would have exactly the same muscle size and exactly the same strength? Even though Guy1 has only ever lifted 10kg and Guy2 has probably worked up to 50kg per arm?

 

That just doesn't make any sense to me.

[Geo]

P.s this is for MattH.

 

I was benching 10kg tonight bud, so should i go home???

[Tannhauser]

Of course there is, it's the difference between picking up your cup of tea and drinking it and picking up your cup of tea and ramming it into your face. Muscles are obviously not on and off switches.

 

Matt,

 

Muscles are organised into bundles of fibres, each of which has a neuron to activate it. They're referred to as motor units. Motor units do operate on an all-or-nothing basis. They either contract if they get a signal beyond the necessary threshold - or they don't. They are very much like light bulbs. So an attempt to move a weight (a stress) will either 'recruit' a motor unit or it won't.

 

Having said this, muscles are made up of large numbers of motor units, and the units are different sizes with different thresholds. You only recruit as many motor untis as are needed to cope with the resistance (relative to how many units are available, due to current levels of fatigue).

 

So yes, motor units are all-or-nothing, but whole muscles aren't.

[cje001]

http://www.muscletalk.co.uk

 

Brill site, i`ve been training for years and year.

 

Best bench was 55kg dumbells in each hand and then also 3 20kg a side on a barbell.

 

200kg deadlift as well.

 

DBs are a great starting point for gym work, but you really need a bench mate to make it work.

 

Have a look at the site i recommended

[Tannhauser]

I can't get my head round that. Say there was a guy and he had a double in an alternate reality. We will call the guy in reality one Guy1 and the guy in the alternate Guy2.

 

Guy1 uses 10kg dumbells only. Every 2nd day he curls the weights till he is exhausted, no reps and no sets.

 

Guy2 uses a multitude of weights. Every 2nd day he curls the heaviest weight he can for 3 sets of 10. If he hasn't worked his arms to exhaustion then the next time he works out he ups the weight.

 

After 10 years of doing this, and having fantastic diets etc, would I be right in saying that, in your opinion, both guys would have exactly the same muscle size and exactly the same strength? Even though Guy1 has only ever lifted 10kg and Guy2 has probably worked up to 50kg per arm?

 

That just doesn't make any sense to me.

 

Scott,

 

As far as I'm aware, the usual thinking from sports scientists goes like this: motor units are recruited in size order. For lower weights, you only recruit the smaller slow-twitch units. When you up the weight, the bigger fast-twitch units are recruited. These are really only needed for near maximal efforts.

 

So the question is, can you ever get to the big units by using a relatively light weight and exhausting all the little motor units first? I presume this is the thinking behind time-under-tension, which says that the size of the load doesn't matter - you just need to keep the muscle under tension (load) until its exhausted. Or do you need to use heavy weights?

 

It's a bit of a debate. My own view is that you don't need significant amounts of time under tension to build muscle. For example, olympic lifters try to reduce the time under tension to the absolute minimum - it's all explosive lifts at very low reps. Yet over the years they build absolutely colossal thighs. And they don't train to exhaustion, either.

 

Specifically for building muscle, putting the muscle under tension during the eccentric (lowering) part of the movement can create more microfibril damage, which promotes hypertrohy, but it doesn't do much for strength.

 

In my opinion, in your scenario, Guy 1 will have arms like a marathon runner and Guy 2 will have increased in size and strength. Only a genetic freak is going to get to 50kg DB curls, though. And he would have done better on 5 X 5.

[Scott]

Scott,

 

As far as I'm aware, the usual thinking from sports scientists goes like this: motor units are recruited in size order. For lower weights, you only recruit the smaller slow-twitch units. When you up the weight, the bigger fast-twitch units are recruited. These are really only needed for near maximal efforts.

 

So the question is, can you ever get to the big units by using a relatively light weight and exhausting all the little motor units first? I presume this is the thinking behind time-under-tension, which says that the size of the load doesn't matter - you just need to keep the muscle under tension (load) until its exhausted. Or do you need to use heavy weights?

 

It's a bit of a debate. My own view is that you don't need significant amounts of time under tension to build muscle. For example, olympic lifters try to reduce the time under tension to the absolute minimum - it's all explosive lifts at very low reps. Yet over the years they build absolutely colossal thighs. And they don't train to exhaustion, either.

 

Specifically for building muscle, putting the muscle under tension during the eccentric (lowering) part of the movement can create more microfibril damage, which promotes hypertrohy, but it doesn't do much for strength.

 

In my opinion, in your scenario, Guy 1 will have arms like a marathon runner and Guy 2 will have increased in size and strength. Only a genetic freak is going to get to 50kg DB curls, though. And he would have done better on 5 X 5.

 

 

That was pretty much my thinking, although without the technical explanation behind it.... more of a hunch. The reason I questioned it using that scenario was I said earlier to Ian if he wants to keep lean and healthy muscle to use the low weights with higher reps, if he wants to build the muscle keep the reps fairly low while upping the weight as much as possible. Geo said that it wouldn't make any difference, according to your explanation it does make a difference, along the lines I thought it would.

 

Also, I looked up the world record for the bicep curl in order to come up with my 50kg figure

[Tannhauser]

That was pretty much my thinking, although without the technical explanation behind it.... more of a hunch. The reason I questioned it using that scenario was I said earlier to Ian if he wants to keep lean and healthy muscle to use the low weights with higher reps, if he wants to build the muscle keep the reps fairly low while upping the weight as much as possible. Geo said that it wouldn't make any difference, according to your explanation it does make a difference, along the lines I thought it would.

 

Also, I looked up the world record for the bicep curl in order to come up with my 50kg figure

 

I have to say I'm not hugely confident about my view. I used the example of olympic weightlifters, but what about professional cyclists? There you've got training that is totally opposite. It involves really low loads (because they can do thousands of "reps"), but huge amounts of time under tension. Yet they have ginormous thighs too.

 

Getting a bit off the original discussion, but interesting.

[Matt H]

P.s this is for MattH.

 

I was benching 10kg tonight bud, so should i go home???

 

Congratulations on your new personal best

[supracars]

Loving this discussion very interesting,

[supracars]

Congratulations on your new personal best

 

 

Lol