Uneven bicep growth, and breaking a plateau

You guys might recall that I had posted a few months ago, and
discussed that I had almost completely severed my left hand about 8
years ago. After it was reattached, the pink is barely usable and has
no gripping power, and the knuckle of the ring finger doesn't really
move. This means that the grip of my left hand is primarily the index
finger, middle finger, and thumb.

Which is weird, I know.

After about 6 months of building, I've found that the weakest part of
my routine is my bicep day. I posted my entire routine in a thread a
few days ago, and I don't want to bore you with reiteration, but
here's what I do on bicep day:

EZ Curl: 8+6+4
(currently 8 @ 75lbs + 6 @ 85 + 4 @ 95)

Preacher Curl (with EZ): 3x12
(currently 3x12 @ 155)

Concentration or Hammer Curls (alternate each week): 15+10+5
(peak contraction on 15)
(currently 15 @ 25, 10 @ 35, 5 @ 45)

Forearm curls: 3x20
(currently 20 @ 45)

I'm following the logic of never doing more than 9 reps for a single
muscle group in one day. There are just a few problems with this
routine, though:

1. Although I lift to fatigue, after about 30 minutes I don't feel
like I've done anything.

2. I have not been able to increase weight on any of these reps for at
least 2 1/2 months. I increased the preacher curls from 135 to 155,
but then dropped the reps from 15 to 12 and haven't improved.

3. My flexed bicep is exactly the same size as it was 2 months ago.

4. The only thing I do with the dumbbells are concentration curls and
hammer curls. Yesterday, though, I made an unexpected discovery; while
my right arm (the "good" arm) completely gave out on the 5th rep, my
left arm was able to do 10, easily. I feel like I could have done 15
if I had tried.

(after learning this, I went back to the right arm and forced another
5 out, in an attempt to stay even)

After making this discovery, I did a mirror check (which I try not to
do too often for fear of becoming discouraged), and discovered that my
left bicep is short and is developing a peak, while my right bicep is
long, football-shaped, and no peak. I much prefer the shape of the
left bicep.

So, I am guessing on a few conclusions, and I'm hoping you guys can
help me figure out what to change.

1. Since my left hand is gripping with my index, and the right is
gripping with the pinky, maybe I should purposefully extend the pinky
on my right hand.

2. Maybe when I peak contract, I'm holding it longer or harder with
the left than the right.

3. Perhaps changing the preacher curl to dumbbells instead of the EZ
curl bar will help even them out.

4. I always start the dumbbell curls on my right hand (my dominant
hand, although not the stronger hand). Maybe I should alternate the
starting hand?


Similarly, I asked a lifting "friend" of mine (well, some guy I know),
and he said that when he uses dumbbells, he pushes both arms to
complete fatigue, paying no attention to using the same weight or
number of reps. Meaning, he might curl 5 @ 45lbs on the right arm, and
10 @ 55 on the left arm. He does the same thing with bench press; he
might press 125lbs on the right, and 145 on the left.

While the logic he used makes sense ("the point is to fatigue the
muscle, and if you're not pushing it to fatigue then it's not going to
grow), I can't understand why this wouldn't make you grow uneven more
so than matching. But the guy that told me this seems fairly
symmetrical, and isn't the type to mess with your head.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts. I know there are a lot of
questions here, but I've been saving up for awhile :-)

Jason

Jason" <jwcarlton@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1177453691.482461.119140@t39g2000prd.googlegr oups.com...
> You guys might recall that I had posted a few months ago, and
> discussed that I had almost completely severed my left hand about 8
> years ago. After it was reattached, the pink is barely usable and has
> no gripping power, and the knuckle of the ring finger doesn't really
> move. This means that the grip of my left hand is primarily the index
> finger, middle finger, and thumb.
>
> Which is weird, I know.
>
> After about 6 months of building, I've found that the weakest part of
> my routine is my bicep day. I posted my entire routine in a thread a
> few days ago, and I don't want to bore you with reiteration, but
> here's what I do on bicep day:
>
> EZ Curl: 8+6+4
> (currently 8 @ 75lbs + 6 @ 85 + 4 @ 95)

What do you mean by +6 and +4? It is usually written like 4 sets of 8-10
reps with X amount of weight.

>
> Preacher Curl (with EZ): 3x12
> (currently 3x12 @ 155)
>
> Concentration or Hammer Curls (alternate each week): 15+10+5
> (peak contraction on 15)
> (currently 15 @ 25, 10 @ 35, 5 @ 45)
>
> Forearm curls: 3x20
> (currently 20 @ 45)

I think most people get more than adequate forearm work from curls, but if
you don't feel that you are overtraining, then it should be cool.

>
> I'm following the logic of never doing more than 9 reps for a single
> muscle group in one day. There are just a few problems with this
> routine, though:

Do you mean sets?

>
> 1. Although I lift to fatigue, after about 30 minutes I don't feel
> like I've done anything.
>
> 2. I have not been able to increase weight on any of these reps for at
> least 2 1/2 months. I increased the preacher curls from 135 to 155,
> but then dropped the reps from 15 to 12 and haven't improved.

It sounds like you are over training. Bis and Tris are small bodyparts. Your
bis get trained when you do your back and your tris get worked when you do
shoulders and arms. There are 2 basic schools of breaking the body apart.
You have the push/pull method where you do back and bis one day, chest,
shoulders and tris the next and legs on the 3rd. Another good split is
chest/back, shoulders/arms, legs. I like the later as I like to pump up my
bis and tris on the same day. Seeing that my bis and tris get work on all
days I don't have to kill my arms.

>
> 3. My flexed bicep is exactly the same size as it was 2 months ago.
>
> 4. The only thing I do with the dumbbells are concentration curls and
> hammer curls. Yesterday, though, I made an unexpected discovery; while
> my right arm (the "good" arm) completely gave out on the 5th rep, my
> left arm was able to do 10, easily. I feel like I could have done 15
> if I had tried.
>
> (after learning this, I went back to the right arm and forced another
> 5 out, in an attempt to stay even)
>
> After making this discovery, I did a mirror check (which I try not to
> do too often for fear of becoming discouraged), and discovered that my
> left bicep is short and is developing a peak, while my right bicep is
> long, football-shaped, and no peak. I much prefer the shape of the
> left bicep.
>
> So, I am guessing on a few conclusions, and I'm hoping you guys can
> help me figure out what to change.
>
> 1. Since my left hand is gripping with my index, and the right is
> gripping with the pinky, maybe I should purposefully extend the pinky
> on my right hand.
>
> 2. Maybe when I peak contract, I'm holding it longer or harder with
> the left than the right.
>

Muscle shape is all genetic. You can't change the shape of your muscles, so
you bis will grow in a certain way no matter how you train. It is like
people who do hack squats hoping to build an outer thigh sweep. You are
either going to have a peak or not.

> 3. Perhaps changing the preacher curl to dumbbells instead of the EZ
> curl bar will help even them out.
>
> 4. I always start the dumbbell curls on my right hand (my dominant
> hand, although not the stronger hand). Maybe I should alternate the
> starting hand?
>
>
> Similarly, I asked a lifting "friend" of mine (well, some guy I know),
> and he said that when he uses dumbbells, he pushes both arms to
> complete fatigue, paying no attention to using the same weight or
> number of reps. Meaning, he might curl 5 @ 45lbs on the right arm, and
> 10 @ 55 on the left arm. He does the same thing with bench press; he
> might press 125lbs on the right, and 145 on the left.
>
> While the logic he used makes sense ("the point is to fatigue the
> muscle, and if you're not pushing it to fatigue then it's not going to
> grow), I can't understand why this wouldn't make you grow uneven more
> so than matching. But the guy that told me this seems fairly
> symmetrical, and isn't the type to mess with your head.
>
> Thanks in advance for your thoughts. I know there are a lot of
> questions here, but I've been saving up for awhile :-)
>
> Jason
>

--
Robert Schuh
"Everything that elevates an individual above the herd and
intimidates the neighbour is henceforth called evil; and
the fair, modest, submissive and conforming mentality,
the mediocrity of desires attains moral designations and honors"
- Nietzsche

http://www.hardbopdrums.com/

> > EZ Curl: 8+6+4
> > (currently 8 @ 75lbs + 6 @ 85 + 4 @ 95)
>
> What do you mean by +6 and +4? It is usually written like 4 sets of 8-10
> reps with X amount of weight.

This is how I was taught to write a pyramid when I took weight lifting
in high school:

8+6+4/75+85+95

This means 8 reps of 75, 6 reps of 85, and 4 reps of 95.

Of course, now I realize that my weight lifting coach was an idiot
that taught me how to do everything pretty much incorrectly.


> > I'm following the logic of never doing more than 9 reps for a single
> > muscle group in one day. There are just a few problems with this
> > routine, though:
>
> Do you mean sets?

Yep, sorry about that.


> It sounds like you are over training.

But, wouldn't the muscles be fatigued if I'm over-training them?
That's what has always confused me.


> Muscle shape is all genetic. You can't change the shape of your muscles, so
> you bis will grow in a certain way no matter how you train. It is like
> people who do hack squats hoping to build an outer thigh sweep. You are
> either going to have a peak or not.

I had always heard that, too, but I don't know that I believe it. In
my case, before the accident, both of my biceps were football-shaped,
and I accepted it. But now, my left arm has a different shape than it
had 10 years ago, and has developed a peak. This means that it CAN'T
be genetic; if it was, then my arms would have always been that way.

But, because of the way I hold the weights, I do lift with that arm
differently. So maybe the muscle growth isn't genetic so much as the
natural way that you lift?

I'm not doubting you, personally, Robert, just the research that
formed this widely-accepted belief. In retrospect, I don't remember if
I've ever actually SEEN any research on it, or if it's just something
I've always been told.

- Jason

Robert Schuh wrote:
[...]

> Muscle shape is all genetic.

Or the result of an industrial or other accident?

> You can't change the shape of your
> muscles, so you bis will grow in a
> certain way no matter how you train.

Wouldn't you call the "almost completely severed my left hand about 8
years ago" part a variable that could be considered? I mean, if the
injury from nearly a decade ago might have some impact on his current
training, then working around that injury may be of some benefit?

I don't know. I do agree that shape is primarily genetic, however if
the current shape is related to atrophy associated with or caused by
the injury then couldn't working around that injury result in an
individual's genetically-mandated shape being achieved?

re biceps peak

> <snip> You are either going to have
> a peak or not.

I agree with that statement so far as uninjured individuals are
concerned, however am curious if my scribbling above has any relevance
to the OP's situation.

Perhaps some machine work, where the trainer relies on pads versus
grip strength, would be of benefit.

--
Curt

On 26 Apr 2007 03:26:44 -0700, Curt <curtjames@gmail.com> wrote:

>Robert Schuh wrote:
>[...]
>
>> Muscle shape is all genetic.
>
>Or the result of an industrial or other accident?
>
>> You can't change the shape of your
>> muscles, so you bis will grow in a
>> certain way no matter how you train.
>
>Wouldn't you call the "almost completely severed my left hand about 8
>years ago" part a variable that could be considered? I mean, if the
>injury from nearly a decade ago might have some impact on his current
>training, then working around that injury may be of some benefit?
>
>I don't know. I do agree that shape is primarily genetic, however if
>the current shape is related to atrophy associated with or caused by
>the injury then couldn't working around that injury result in an
>individual's genetically-mandated shape being achieved?

I think even after injuries heal there is trauma to the area which can
last for many years longer. I think my leg problems are partially
related to an early childhood accident. And my wounds had completely
healed. In Jason's case he as the additional problems of gripping the
bar differently than most.

"Jason" <jwcarlton@gmail.com> schreef:

>> Muscle shape is all genetic. You can't change the shape of your muscles,
>> so
>> you bis will grow in a certain way no matter how you train. It is like
>> people who do hack squats hoping to build an outer thigh sweep. You are
>> either going to have a peak or not.

> I had always heard that, too, but I don't know that I believe it. In
> my case, before the accident, both of my biceps were football-shaped,
> and I accepted it. But now, my left arm has a different shape than it
> had 10 years ago, and has developed a peak. This means that it CAN'T
> be genetic; if it was, then my arms would have always been that way.

You have to realize that a muscle is stuck in between two joints; As it
grows in size, the shape will change as well. A peak usually comes when you
reach it maximum, or near maximium size. Also, the length of a muscle belly,
the longer the better, will dictate its eventual size. No matter how much
growth inducers you take.

For bodybuilders, best you can have are long muscle bellys coupled to a
small frame. Kinda like Flex Wheeler and Serge Nubret. Or even Arnold.
Despite what many people think, Arnold had a relative small frame.

Both Coleman Cutler have incredbly long bellys. I wont even mention Vic
richards.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoNyx-YH91w

Thats 320 pounds on a 5 feet 9 frame. Long bellys.

Ever wondered why some people have huge calves and others have matchsticks?

Check out the length before you chech out the thickness.

> But, because of the way I hold the weights, I do lift with that arm
> differently.

Maybe you are shifting. That just means that perhaps you use more
brachio/brachialis compered to biceps. Or vice versa.

>So maybe the muscle growth isn't genetic so much as the
> natural way that you lift?

I dont think so.

> I'm not doubting you, personally, Robert, just the research that
> formed this widely-accepted belief. In retrospect, I don't remember if
> I've ever actually SEEN any research on it, or if it's just something
> I've always been told.

I dont think Robert said that you cant change the shape of the arms. Of
course you can. You just can change the way each muscle grows. That was
determined way before you were born.

Know any white guys that look like Flex Wheeler?

--
Pete

Pete wrote:
[...]

> For bodybuilders, best you can have are long muscle bellys coupled to a
> small frame. Kinda like Flex Wheeler and Serge Nubret. Or even Arnold.
> Despite what many people think, Arnold had a relative small frame.
>
> Both Coleman Cutler have incredbly long bellys. I wont even mention Vic
> richards.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoNyx-YH91w

MONSTER!!!!

> Thats 320 pounds on a 5 feet 9 frame. Long bellys.
>
> Ever wondered why some people have huge calves and others have matchsticks?

Saw a guy walking his dog the other day. Was wearing shorts and had
calves like Casey Viator (well, at least hella closer to Casey than
mine, for sure). I'm guessing he never lifted weights in his life,
however.

Lee Priest, according to an article or interview in a recent MMI
offered that he never trains forearms and, iirc, he never trains abs
either. Genetics for the muscles and diet to bring out the abs. Must
be nice to be a native of Planet Priest, eh?

[...]

re Schuh

> I dont think Robert said that you cant change the shape of the arms. Of
> course you can. You just can change the way each muscle grows. That was
> determined way before you were born.

Check that post again. Here:

"Muscle shape is all genetic. You can't change the shape of your
muscles, so
you bis will grow in a certain way no matter how you train. It is
like
people who do hack squats hoping to build an outer thigh sweep. You
are
either going to have a peak or not."

If you define shape as an increase in size then, of course you can
change the "shape" but only so far as the muscle's size is concerned.
You're obviously changing the shadow it will cast, but I agree with
Schuh from the pov that peak is something you're born with and not
something you can change.

> Know any white guys that look like Flex Wheeler?

Hey, a bodybuilding quiz!

Alex, I'll go with "white guys that look like Flex Wheeler" for five
hundred, please.

Who is Jim Haislop?

(What do I win?)

--
Curt

"Curt" <curtjames@gmail.com> schreef:

>> Both Coleman Cutler have incredbly long bellys. I wont even mention Vic
>> richards.

>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoNyx-YH91w

> MONSTER!!!!

Incredible, isnt he?

>> Thats 320 pounds on a 5 feet 9 frame. Long bellys.

>> Ever wondered why some people have huge calves and others have
>> matchsticks?

> Saw a guy walking his dog the other day. Was wearing shorts and had
> calves like Casey Viator (well, at least hella closer to Casey than
> mine, for sure). I'm guessing he never lifted weights in his life,
> however.

Each and every time you take a step, the calf contracts. Gain 30 pounds, and
the calf works with 30 pounds more.
With good genetics, thats all you need. Training, OTOH, will get them to
their max.

> Lee Priest, according to an article or interview in a recent MMI
> offered that he never trains forearms and, iirc, he never trains abs
> either. Genetics for the muscles and diet to bring out the abs. Must
> be nice to be a native of Planet Priest, eh?

Abs and forearms get a lot of stimulation from other exercises. However, i
do have suspiciouns that he trains them pre-contest.

> re Schuh

>> I dont think Robert said that you cant change the shape of the arms. Of
>> course you can. You just can change the way each muscle grows. That was
>> determined way before you were born.

> Check that post again. Here:

> "Muscle shape is all genetic. You can't change the shape of your
> muscles, so
> you bis will grow in a certain way no matter how you train. It is
> like
> people who do hack squats hoping to build an outer thigh sweep. You
> are
> either going to have a peak or not."

I think Robert and i agree here. You can shape bodyparts, but not individual
muscles.

> If you define shape as an increase in size then, of course you can
> change the "shape" but only so far as the muscle's size is concerned.

Like i said in the other post, the shape continuesly changes when the size
increases. I just dont think we can actually influence that process.

> You're obviously changing the shadow it will cast, but I agree with
> Schuh from the pov that peak is something you're born with and not
> something you can change.

Exactly.

>> Know any white guys that look like Flex Wheeler?

> Hey, a bodybuilding quiz!

> Alex, I'll go with "white guys that look like Flex Wheeler" for five
> hundred, please.

> Who is Jim Haislop?

Looks pretty good.

But not even close to the 98 version of Wheeler. How much muscle can you
carry on a small frame?
A lot, it seems.

--
Pete