Weight gain from muscle - how much?

#1 11-25-2006, 07:41 AM

Hi All,

I have been weight training for a year now but before that I had never done
any form of exercise. I spent the first 3 months on machines and cardio 3
times a week to get used to exercise. I then started on free weights 4 times
a week with an additional 1 or 2 one hour cardio sessions in the form of
power walking and running. When I started on the free weights, I consulted a
PT with the goal of toning/cutting. My regime consists of the following:

3 exercises for each muscle group

1st exercise in each group:
2x10 warm-up sets
3x8 heavy sets
1x10 warm-down (to failure)

2nd and 3rd
1x10 warm-up set
3x8 heavy sets
1x10 warm-down (to failure)

On to my question/s. I am wondering how much muscle I may have gained in the
past year given my regime, genetics, age, medical factors etc? I am 37
years old, 5'10" and when I started training I weighed 104kg (~229lbs).
Even though genetically I am a heavy build, I was overweight! I am minus a
thyroid gland and have syndrome-x (an insulin resistance which untreated,
can lead to type-2 diabetes).

As an indication, 9 months ago a friend suggested measuring my arms. They
were 11 inches. 9 months later they are 17 inches. That's the only
measurement I took. I now weigh 90kg (~198lbs). I gather I have lost more
than 14kg of fat but I'm wondering how much I have gained in muscle mass? I
guessed about 4kg. Is this ridiculous or sound about right?

Thanks in advance,

Steph.

#2 11-25-2006, 07:41 AM

On Nov 24, 7:57 am, "Stephan Carydakis" <steph...@netspace.net.au>
wrote:
> As an indication, 9 months ago a friend suggested measuring my arms. They
> were 11 inches. 9 months later they are 17 inches. That's the only
> measurement I took. I now weigh 90kg (~198lbs). I gather I have lost more
> than 14kg of fat but I'm wondering how much I have gained in muscle mass? I
> guessed about 4kg. Is this ridiculous or sound about right?

One of the better ways to track how your body composition changes is
thru knowing your bodyfat percentage. There are online calculators that
use tape measurements (they vary alot), caliper pinch tests of your fat
rolls (they may vary depending on who is doing them and how many sites
they measure), the unreliable Tanita scales (depends on time of
day/hydration levels), and hydro water dunking (the most reliable).
The main thing is to use a method consistantly and watch the bodyfat go
downwards.
Once you know what your bodyfat percentage is, you can use a simple
math formula to figure out if you have actually gained or lost muscle,
and or gained or lost bodyfat.
MULTIPLY your BODYWEIGHT by your BODYFAT% = your fat poundage
SUBTRACT that number from your BODY WEIGHT = your lean mass poundage
Then compare your before and after numbers to get lbs lost/gained

For example:
Before weight: 145lbs @ 26% bodyfat

145lbs x .26 bodyfat = 37.7 lbs fat
145 - 37.7 = 107.3 lbs lean mass

After results: 145lbs @ 18% bf

145 x .18 = 26.1 lbs fat
145 - 26.1 = 118.9 lbs lean mass

Take the fat amount from before & subtract the after amount:
37.7 - 26.1 = 11.6 lbs fat lost

Take the after amount of lean mass & subtract the before amount:
118.9 - 107.3 = 11.6 lbs muscle gained

Hope this helps!

joanne

#3 11-25-2006, 07:41 AM

On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 02:57:35 +1100, "Stephan Carydakis"
<steph777@netspace.net.au> wrote:

>As an indication, 9 months ago a friend suggested measuring my arms. They
>were 11 inches. 9 months later they are 17 inches. That's the only
>measurement I took.

That sounds a bit absurd.

#4 11-25-2006, 07:41 AM

Shute wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 02:57:35 +1100, "Stephan Carydakis"
> <steph777@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>
> >As an indication, 9 months ago a friend suggested measuring my arms. They
> >were 11 inches. 9 months later they are 17 inches. That's the only
> >measurement I took.
>
> That sounds a bit absurd.

Perhaps he measured his forearms on the first try...then, upon applying
his corrective optics with help from his mom, he measured his neck.

Just a thought.

#5 11-25-2006, 07:41 AM

It's not! That's the fact of the matter. But they are not exactly 17. They
are more like 16.8 but hey, I'm a man...

"Shute" <Shute@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:ceaem29cntpf7e78qmdp9dn0431jp7gdcc@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 02:57:35 +1100, "Stephan Carydakis"
> <steph777@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>
> >As an indication, 9 months ago a friend suggested measuring my arms. They
> >were 11 inches. 9 months later they are 17 inches. That's the only
> >measurement I took.
>
> That sounds a bit absurd.
>

#6 11-25-2006, 07:41 AM

hehe - mums arthritis ruled her out so my dad helped me measure my neck.

On a serious note, why does this sound ridiculous? Not everyone's genetics
allows them to have results like me! As my PT pointed out 9 months ago,
genetics are an overwhelming factor. After 3 months of circuit type work, I
was doing weights not that far away from where he was after years of
training. While he was not a large man, he was strong and cut to the max.

So now that your feelings are hurt does this mean you wont be attempting to
answer my questions?

"EatMe" <trollsblow@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1164422449.133844.292970@h54g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
>
> Shute wrote:
> > On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 02:57:35 +1100, "Stephan Carydakis"
> > <steph777@netspace.net.au> wrote:
> >
> > >As an indication, 9 months ago a friend suggested measuring my arms.
They
> > >were 11 inches. 9 months later they are 17 inches. That's the only
> > >measurement I took.
> >
> > That sounds a bit absurd.
>
> Perhaps he measured his forearms on the first try...then, upon applying
> his corrective optics with help from his mom, he measured his neck.
>
> Just a thought.
>

#7 11-26-2006, 06:23 AM

Stephan Carydakis wrote:
> hehe - mums arthritis ruled her out so my dad helped me measure my
> neck.
>
> On a serious note, why does this sound ridiculous?

A gain of more than 50% over a 9 month period DOES sound a bit suspect!!!
Were you flexing the bicep on the 2nd measure, but possibly not on the 1st?

> Not everyone's genetics allows them to have results like me!

But, IMO, someone with good genetics would generally start out with big arms
before training them!

> As my PT pointed out 9
> months ago, genetics are an overwhelming factor. After 3 months of
> circuit type work, I was doing weights not that far away from where
> he was after years of training.

Define not far away? The difference between a 100kg bench and a 120kg is
only 20%, but might represent an additional 2 [or more] years training
depending on other variables.

> While he was not a large man, he was
> strong and cut to the max.
>
> So now that your feelings are hurt does this mean you wont be
> attempting to answer my questions?
>
>
> "EatMe" <trollsblow@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1164422449.133844.292970@h54g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
>>
>> Shute wrote:
>>> On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 02:57:35 +1100, "Stephan Carydakis"
>>> <steph777@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>> As an indication, 9 months ago a friend suggested measuring my
>>>> arms. They were 11 inches. 9 months later they are 17 inches.
>>>> That's the only measurement I took.
>>>
>>> That sounds a bit absurd.
>>
>> Perhaps he measured his forearms on the first try...then, upon
>> applying his corrective optics with help from his mom, he measured
>> his neck.
>>
>> Just a thought.

--
Bully
Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't
matter, and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

#8 11-26-2006, 06:23 AM

"Stephan Carydakis" <steph777@netspace.net.au> schreef:

> As an indication, 9 months ago a friend suggested measuring my arms. They
> were 11 inches. 9 months later they are 17 inches. That's the only
> measurement I took. I now weigh 90kg (~198lbs). I gather I have lost more
> than 14kg of fat but I'm wondering how much I have gained in muscle mass?
> I
> guessed about 4kg. Is this ridiculous or sound about right?

It is ridiculous.

If i gain 2 inches on my upper arms, i gain about 40 pounds all over.
Including legs.

You gained 6 inches. That means you trippled the *mass* of your upper arms.

It is not unusual that BBers that gain 6 inches on upper arms, lets say from
14 to 20 inches, gain more than 100 pounds of muscle mass...

----
Pete

#9 11-26-2006, 06:23 AM

"Bully" <bully1@proteinbars.co.ok> schreef:

>> On a serious note, why does this sound ridiculous?

> A gain of more than 50% over a 9 month period DOES sound a bit suspect!!!
> Were you flexing the bicep on the 2nd measure, but possibly not on the
> 1st?

Its more than 50%. Its about 300%.

>> Not everyone's genetics allows them to have results like me!

> But, IMO, someone with good genetics would generally start out with big
> arms before training them!

Not always.
Some people have an *excellent* response to resistance training, but were
skinny to begin with.

>> As my PT pointed out 9 months ago, genetics are an overwhelming factor.
>> After 3 months of
>> circuit type work, I was doing weights not that far away from where he
>> was after years of training.

> Define not far away? The difference between a 100kg bench and a 120kg is
> only 20%, but might represent an additional 2 [or more] years training
> depending on other variables.

If it takes 2 years to increase your strength with 20%, you are maxed out.

----
Pete

#10 11-26-2006, 06:23 AM

"Bully" <bully1@proteinbars.co.ok> wrote in message
news:4sqfscF10pfi8U1@mid.individual.net...
> Stephan Carydakis wrote:
> > hehe - mums arthritis ruled her out so my dad helped me measure my
> > neck.
> >
> > On a serious note, why does this sound ridiculous?
>
> A gain of more than 50% over a 9 month period DOES sound a bit suspect!!!
> Were you flexing the bicep on the 2nd measure, but possibly not on the
1st?
>

It may but thats the measurements! No I was not flexing on the first. 5
months ago they were over 14 inches.

> > Not everyone's genetics allows them to have results like me!
>
> But, IMO, someone with good genetics would generally start out with big
arms
> before training them!
>

Not if you don't/have never really used them! Sitting down and typing on a
computer aint such a good bicep workout.

> > As my PT pointed out 9
> > months ago, genetics are an overwhelming factor. After 3 months of
> > circuit type work, I was doing weights not that far away from where
> > he was after years of training.
>
> Define not far away? The difference between a 100kg bench and a 120kg is
> only 20%, but might represent an additional 2 [or more] years training
> depending on other variables.
>

He was on the same type of regime as I am now on and he was maxing at 27.5kg
in each hand on BB bicep curls. I was on 22.5kg. On lat pull down he was
maxing at 200 kg and I was doing 170kg. He mentioned that he probably
wouldn't get any bigger and would not see much if any increases in weights
at the stage he was at.

> > While he was not a large man, he was
> > strong and cut to the max.
> >
> > So now that your feelings are hurt does this mean you wont be
> > attempting to answer my questions?
> >
> >
> > "EatMe" <trollsblow@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:1164422449.133844.292970@h54g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
> >>
> >> Shute wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 02:57:35 +1100, "Stephan Carydakis"
> >>> <steph777@netspace.net.au> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> As an indication, 9 months ago a friend suggested measuring my
> >>>> arms. They were 11 inches. 9 months later they are 17 inches.
> >>>> That's the only measurement I took.
> >>>
> >>> That sounds a bit absurd.
> >>
> >> Perhaps he measured his forearms on the first try...then, upon
> >> applying his corrective optics with help from his mom, he measured
> >> his neck.
> >>
> >> Just a thought.
>
> --
> Bully
> Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk
>
> "Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't
> matter, and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss
>
>

#11 11-26-2006, 06:23 AM

"Pete" <phoutstra@wanadoo.nl> wrote in message
news:4568306f$0$70470$dbd49001@news.wanadoo.nl...
> "Stephan Carydakis" <steph777@netspace.net.au> schreef:
>
> > As an indication, 9 months ago a friend suggested measuring my arms.
They
> > were 11 inches. 9 months later they are 17 inches. That's the only
> > measurement I took. I now weigh 90kg (~198lbs). I gather I have lost
more
> > than 14kg of fat but I'm wondering how much I have gained in muscle
mass?
> > I
> > guessed about 4kg. Is this ridiculous or sound about right?
>
> It is ridiculous.
>
> If i gain 2 inches on my upper arms, i gain about 40 pounds all over.
> Including legs.
>
> You gained 6 inches. That means you trippled the *mass* of your upper
arms.
>
> It is not unusual that BBers that gain 6 inches on upper arms, lets say
from
> 14 to 20 inches, gain more than 100 pounds of muscle mass...
>
> ----
> Pete
>
>

To be more accurate, it's more like 5.6 inches as they are not exactly 17
but around 16.8. And they were not exactly 11 they where 11.2 or 11.3. But
anyways, they are the facts wether you guys believe it or not. They haven't
grown in the last 3 weeks as I took the 16.8 measurement 3 weeks ago and
they are still that. The only other thing I can think of is that I was not
on creatine when I took the initial reading, but now am. I have not taken a
measurement when not on creatine. They say creatine can increase the size of
muscles due to water retention in muscle cells?

#12 11-26-2006, 06:23 AM

"Stephan Carydakis" <steph777@netspace.net.au> schreef:

>> Define not far away? The difference between a 100kg bench and a 120kg is
>> only 20%, but might represent an additional 2 [or more] years training
>> depending on other variables.

> He was on the same type of regime as I am now on and he was maxing at
> 27.5kg
> in each hand on BB bicep curls. I was on 22.5kg. On lat pull down he was
> maxing at 200 kg and I was doing 170kg.

No-no-no!

A 22.5 kg DB curl and a 170kg pulldown?

No fucking way...

----
Pete

#13 11-26-2006, 06:23 AM

Dnia 2006-11-25 Pete napisa³(a):
> "Stephan Carydakis" <steph777@netspace.net.au> schreef:
>
>>> Define not far away? The difference between a 100kg bench and a 120kg is
>>> only 20%, but might represent an additional 2 [or more] years training
>>> depending on other variables.
>
>> He was on the same type of regime as I am now on and he was maxing at
>> 27.5kg
>> in each hand on BB bicep curls. I was on 22.5kg. On lat pull down he was
>> maxing at 200 kg and I was doing 170kg.
>
> No-no-no!
>
> A 22.5 kg DB curl

I can curl 10kg per side one-armed on my barbell. Right hand with good
form, left hand with no-nonsense form. I mean, that to curl it with
left hand I need to lower my shoulder a bit, but that's it.

I have virtually no biceps, too. And I do not curl (if one-armed clean
and press doesn't count).

> and a 170kg pulldown?

I guess it's a machine with some unknown leverages.

> No fucking way...

I believe him. I doubt his measurements, but I believe that he can curl
22.5 kg per side.

P.S. - Is a curl over 20 kg per side non-sucky? If so, I managed to
reach non-suckiness in a strangest way. I *never* thought that I may
turn out to be non-sucky on curls!

--
Andrzej Rosa 1127R

#14 11-26-2006, 06:23 AM

"Pete" <phoutstra@wanadoo.nl> wrote in message
news:45684ab2$0$86552$dbd4d001@news.wanadoo.nl...
> "Stephan Carydakis" <steph777@netspace.net.au> schreef:
>
> >> Define not far away? The difference between a 100kg bench and a 120kg
is
> >> only 20%, but might represent an additional 2 [or more] years training
> >> depending on other variables.
>
> > He was on the same type of regime as I am now on and he was maxing at
> > 27.5kg
> > in each hand on BB bicep curls. I was on 22.5kg. On lat pull down he was
> > maxing at 200 kg and I was doing 170kg.
>
> No-no-no!
>
> A 22.5 kg DB curl and a 170kg pulldown?
>
> No fucking way...
>
> ----
> Pete
>
>

Yes-yes-yes! What is wrong with you guys??? Firstly, I was on 22.5 but I can
now get to 27.5. I still can't get passed 170kg on lat pull down. What are
you saying anyways? Are you saying that if I do 170kg lat pull down (that is
with a spotter and I cant get more than 4), that I should be doing more on
db curls? I can curl more than 27.5 but not after doing 6 sets of standing
bb curls! 27.5 is all I can manage on my 5th set of db curls.

If you are going to make statements like 'No-no-no', you need to elaborate
on what it is you mean exactly.

#15 11-26-2006, 06:23 AM

Stephan Carydakis wrote:
[...]

re 11-inch arms to 17-inch arms (biceps measurement?) in 9 months with
corresponding fat *loss*

> <snip> why does this sound ridiculous?

Because it's an incredible size jump, Steph. One almost impossible to
accept as truth. Ymmv.

Pictures? Visual proof would indeed help, however even photos can be
manipulated. Were you measuring the same bodypart each time? Is your
one arm withered and you measured the healthy arm the second time? Are
you Casey Viator after recovering from an industrial accident AND
creating a time machine of some sort? Are you an alien that cloned
Bruce Randall... with a twist?
http://www.americanpowerliftevolutio...ndallPage.html

Seriously, I remember reading that to gain an inch on your arm that you
need to gain between ten and fifteen pounds. You claim that you gained
SIX inches on your arm while actually losing weight? So immediately
your claim is running contrary to my perceived reality. Hey, it
happens. But are you sure you've measured correctly?

> Not everyone's genetics allows them to have results like me!

Likewise, not everyone's imagination allows them to believe the results
you claim. ;o)

> As my PT pointed out 9 months ago, genetics are
> an overwhelming factor.

(looks at 14-inch bicep)

TELL ME ABOUT IT!

> After 3 months of circuit type work, I was doing weights
> not that far away from where he was after years of
> training. While he was not a large man, he was strong
> and cut to the max.

[...]

Okay, mister genetic superior. Schuh's table is over there. Get
yourself a protein drink and introduce yourself around. Welcome to the
newsgroup. Avoid the ferns.

--
Curt

#16 11-26-2006, 06:23 AM

Bully wrote:

re a six-inch jump in biceps measurement in 9 months in addition to a
weight loss

> Were you flexing the bicep on the 2nd measure,
> but possibly not on the 1st?

Even that wouldn't account for a six-inch increase, imo.

What's the difference between your flexed and unflexed arm? Even your
untrained unflexed arm and your trained and flexed arm? Rhetorical.

Regardless, if the OP accomplished such a feat then "Bully" for him.
;o)

> But, IMO, someone with good genetics would
> generally start out with big arms before training
> them!

I tend to agree, but will offer that it's not a necessity or an
absolute. Some do "balloon" but the OP presents an incredible leap.

--
Curt

#17 11-26-2006, 06:23 AM

On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 17:53:14 +0100, "Pete" <phoutstra@wanadoo.nl>
wrote:

>I can curl about 70 kilos for 8 reps right now.
>
>And i do pull-downs with 115 right now.
>
>So thats about 165% of what i curl.
>
>Most people can pull-down 150-200% of what they curl with a barbell.
>
>You said the following;
>
>"I was on 22.5kg. On lat pull down he was maxing at 200 kg and I was doing
>170kg."
>
>A DB curl with 22.5 equals about 50 kilo with a barbell.
>So you can triple that, and THAN some, on pulldowns ?!?!?!
>
>No.
>
>Your biceps are the the weak link when doing pull-downs. Even with
>superhuman lattisimus development, your biceps are involved in pulling that
>weight down.
>
>BTW, you weigh 90 kilos right? But you pull down 80 kilos more. Right?
>
>Right.

Pete I worked out with a guy that could do something like this. He
weighed about 175lbs. Used about 80lbs combined for the dumbbell
curl. Then used 250lbs for the lat pulldown. Not quite as bad as
this guy but still unusual. He seemed to be better at pulling
exercises than pushing ones. His bench press was shit and only used
135lbs. I didn't really watch how he did it. Maybe he threw his
lower back into it like I see a lot of people do.

Not that I believe this guy or anything. All his numbers are way out
of proportion.

#18 11-26-2006, 06:23 AM

On 25 Nov 2006 09:06:59 -0800, "Curt" <curtjames@gmail.com> wrote:

>Bully wrote:
>
>re a six-inch jump in biceps measurement in 9 months in addition to a
>weight loss
>
>> Were you flexing the bicep on the 2nd measure,
>> but possibly not on the 1st?
>
>Even that wouldn't account for a six-inch increase, imo.
>
>What's the difference between your flexed and unflexed arm? Even your
>untrained unflexed arm and your trained and flexed arm? Rhetorical.

He also lost fat while gaining muscle. Which means at least some of
the original 11 inches where fat.

#19 11-26-2006, 06:23 AM

Pete wrote:
[...]

> It is not unusual that BBers that gain 6 inches
> on upper arms, lets say from 14 to 20 inches,
> gain more than 100 pounds of muscle mass...

Which even exceeds just slightly the 10 to 15 pounds of bodyweight
range of what's reportedly needed to be gained to achieve an increase
of one inch on a bodybuilder's biceps, fwiw.

To lose weight and gain size and size like THAT (six inches on your arm
measurement in nine months), well, this guy immediately goes to the
very top of the Those Most Hated list.

No doubt about that.

> Pete

--
Curt

#20 11-26-2006, 06:23 AM

Stephan Carydakis wrote:
[...]

> To be more accurate, it's more like 5.6 inches as they are not
> exactly 17 but around 16.8. And they were not exactly 11 they
> where 11.2 or 11.3. But anyways, they are the facts wether
> you guys believe it or not.

Facts? Okay. Changing facts. I can deal with change. Now, instead of 11
to 17 in nine months it's 11.3 to 16.8 in... is it still nine months or
would you like to adjust that number, too?

Let's round to a nearby half-inch, okay? Go with 11 1/2 inches unflexed
and arm straight to 16 1/2 inches at a flexed at about a 45
degree-angle measurement, okay? Over nine months.

What's your straight and unflexed arm measurement now? I'll guess 14
1/2 inches. That's giving you a flexed increase of two inches which
isn't unheard of and, yes, a nine-month increase of three inches which
is the difference from your untrained measurement of 11.5 inches to
your current 14.5 inches (16 1/2 inches flexed).

Still, you say you /lost/ weight? Maybe you did indeed.

Congrats. Keep lifting. Enjoy your stay, however it wouldn't hurt to be
able to post a YouTube deal of your pulldowns and db curls. People here
have done that as it's easier to be in awe of a weighted chin by DZ or,
say, a deadlift by Freides or Williams if you can actually SEE the lift
performed. Likewise people have posted pics of their physique as Robert
Schuh, Larry Hodges, Bob Volkmer, and more can attest.

> They haven't grown in the last 3 weeks as I took the 16.8
> measurement 3 weeks ago and they are still that. The only
> other thing I can think of is that I was not on creatine when
> I took the initial reading, but now am. I have not taken a
> measurement when not on creatine.

Uh, I'm trying my best not to be a jerk, but you're not helping.

"I was not on creatine when I took the initial reading, but now am. I
have not taken a measurement when not on creatine." Notice anything
funny there? The initial reading (or measurement) was *not* on
creatine, but you _haven't_ taken a measure when not on creatine???
I'll make the leap. Got it. Never mind.

Anyway, maybe it would be better to just say that ALL your gain has
been muscle and leave it at that. Would that be okay with you? No
numbers. No amount lifted in kilograms or pounds. Just that you've made
impressive gains and all concerned are very impressed and pleased for
you. Kudos.

> They say creatine can increase the size of muscles
> due to water retention in muscle cells?

That's some serious water retention, Steph. I guess it would be
inappropriate to call you Mr. Noah's Ark Arms, right? Katrina Biceps
would be just as bad, I imagine.

--
Curt

#21 11-26-2006, 06:24 AM

Thats interesting, my BP is not so good either. 100kg with spotter is the
best I've done on my 5th set. Usually without spotter, I max out ay 90kg.

"Shute" <Shute@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:4a0hm2130hovf6om66orrhd9mjru3hpf2a@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 17:53:14 +0100, "Pete" <phoutstra@wanadoo.nl>
> wrote:
>
> >I can curl about 70 kilos for 8 reps right now.
> >
> >And i do pull-downs with 115 right now.
> >
> >So thats about 165% of what i curl.
> >
> >Most people can pull-down 150-200% of what they curl with a barbell.
> >
> >You said the following;
> >
> >"I was on 22.5kg. On lat pull down he was maxing at 200 kg and I was
doing
> >170kg."
> >
> >A DB curl with 22.5 equals about 50 kilo with a barbell.
> >So you can triple that, and THAN some, on pulldowns ?!?!?!
> >
> >No.
> >
> >Your biceps are the the weak link when doing pull-downs. Even with
> >superhuman lattisimus development, your biceps are involved in pulling
that
> >weight down.
> >
> >BTW, you weigh 90 kilos right? But you pull down 80 kilos more. Right?
> >
> >Right.
>
> Pete I worked out with a guy that could do something like this. He
> weighed about 175lbs. Used about 80lbs combined for the dumbbell
> curl. Then used 250lbs for the lat pulldown. Not quite as bad as
> this guy but still unusual. He seemed to be better at pulling
> exercises than pushing ones. His bench press was shit and only used
> 135lbs. I didn't really watch how he did it. Maybe he threw his
> lower back into it like I see a lot of people do.
>
> Not that I believe this guy or anything. All his numbers are way out
> of proportion.
>

#22 11-26-2006, 06:24 AM

"Pete" <phoutstra@wanadoo.nl> wrote in message
news:456874fb$0$194$dbd41001@news.wanadoo.nl...
> "Stephan Carydakis" <steph777@netspace.net.au> schreef:
>
> >> No-no-no!
>
> >> A 22.5 kg DB curl and a 170kg pulldown?
>
> >> No fucking way...
>
> > Yes-yes-yes! What is wrong with you guys???
>
> Nothing.
>
> > Firstly, I was on 22.5 but I can now get to 27.5. I still can't get
passed
> > 170kg on lat pull down. What are
> > you saying anyways? Are you saying that if I do 170kg lat pull down
(that
> > is
> > with a spotter and I cant get more than 4), that I should be doing more
on
> > db curls?
>
> Yes.
>
> > I can curl more than 27.5 but not after doing 6 sets of standing
> > bb curls! 27.5 is all I can manage on my 5th set of db curls.
>
> > If you are going to make statements like 'No-no-no', you need to
elaborate
> > on what it is you mean exactly.
>
> I can curl about 70 kilos for 8 reps right now.

I dont know how long you've been training or your genetics, or what
supplements you may use, but 70kg curl in one hand, as in DB, is quite a
bit. You must have 22 inch arms man.

>
> And i do pull-downs with 115 right now.

then your back is your weak link

>
> So thats about 165% of what i curl.
>
> Most people can pull-down 150-200% of what they curl with a barbell.

i aint most people

>
> You said the following;
>
> "I was on 22.5kg. On lat pull down he was maxing at 200 kg and I was doing
> 170kg."
>
> A DB curl with 22.5 equals about 50 kilo with a barbell.
> So you can triple that, and THAN some, on pulldowns ?!?!?!
>
> No.

yes!

>
> Your biceps are the the weak link when doing pull-downs. Even with
> superhuman lattisimus development, your biceps are involved in pulling
that
> weight down.
>
> BTW, you weigh 90 kilos right? But you pull down 80 kilos more. Right?
>
> Right.
>

yeah, about 4 with not good form (wrists rotate) and a spotter

> ----
> Pete
>
>

#23 11-27-2006, 03:43 AM

Stephan Carydakis wrote:

re pulldowns

> yeah, about 4 with not good form (wrists rotate)
> and a spotter

What does that mean? Your wrists rotate how? You really gotta get a
video up online somewhere, Steph. My Sony Cyberwhatever has video
capability and it's a pretty inexpensive camera. Do you have a digital?

You wrists rotate? Like twisting the throttle on a motorcycle? You're
using a standard lat pulldown bar?
http://www.ironworkout.com/pulldown.jpg

And your form is sumpin sumpin like that guy's? What is the spotter
doing? Holding you down?

--
Curt

#24 11-27-2006, 03:43 AM

"Curt" <curtjames@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1164523523.727295.241880@l12g2000cwl.googlegr oups.com...
> Stephan Carydakis wrote:
>
> re pulldowns
>
> > yeah, about 4 with not good form (wrists rotate)
> > and a spotter
>
> What does that mean? Your wrists rotate how? You really gotta get a
> video up online somewhere, Steph. My Sony Cyberwhatever has video
> capability and it's a pretty inexpensive camera. Do you have a digital?
>

It's the type with 2 independant levers connected to independant weight
stacks where you stack free weights. I like it because each side is
independant. Imagine that. Its the same type as this one
http://www.houstontexans.com/wpimage...t-Pulldown.jpg . When I get
bad form, my wrists rotate so that my thumbs face the sky. The form in the
phot is bad according to what my PT said. He wreckons this brings a bit of
tricep in and to keep my palms facing the ground for good form.

>
> You wrists rotate? Like twisting the throttle on a motorcycle? You're
> using a standard lat pulldown bar?
> http://www.ironworkout.com/pulldown.jpg
>
> And your form is sumpin sumpin like that guy's? What is the spotter
> doing? Holding you down?
>

hehe, he needs to. my thighs hold me in. he grabs the handles from behind
me.
Hey I spoke to my friend who ask me to measure my arms. He distinctly
remembers them being 14 inches about 6 months ago because they where
slightly bigger than his when he was training. He cant recall the originall
measurement.

> --
> Curt
>

#25 11-27-2006, 03:43 AM

"Curt" <curtjames@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1164474419.418045.309070@45g2000cws.googlegro ups.com...
> Bully wrote:
>
> re a six-inch jump in biceps measurement in 9 months in addition to a
> weight loss
>
> > Were you flexing the bicep on the 2nd measure,
> > but possibly not on the 1st?
>
> Even that wouldn't account for a six-inch increase, imo.
>
> What's the difference between your flexed and unflexed arm? Even your
> untrained unflexed arm and your trained and flexed arm? Rhetorical.
>
> Regardless, if the OP accomplished such a feat then "Bully" for him.
> ;o)
>

unflexed 13.5 flexed 16.8.

> > But, IMO, someone with good genetics would
> > generally start out with big arms before training
> > them!
>
> I tend to agree, but will offer that it's not a necessity or an
> absolute. Some do "balloon" but the OP presents an incredible leap.
>
> --
> Curt
>

#26 11-27-2006, 03:43 AM

"Shute" <Shute@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:421hm2dcsen6t9749q8c11grdvr6elgsjs@4ax.com...
> On 25 Nov 2006 09:06:59 -0800, "Curt" <curtjames@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Bully wrote:
> >
> >re a six-inch jump in biceps measurement in 9 months in addition to a
> >weight loss
> >
> >> Were you flexing the bicep on the 2nd measure,
> >> but possibly not on the 1st?
> >
> >Even that wouldn't account for a six-inch increase, imo.
> >
> >What's the difference between your flexed and unflexed arm? Even your
> >untrained unflexed arm and your trained and flexed arm? Rhetorical.
>
> He also lost fat while gaining muscle. Which means at least some of
> the original 11 inches where fat.

true. while not an expert in body types, my legs and arms seem to carry the
least fat (by far) overall. My torso and face are the last areas to lose it
(especially love handles and lower abdomen) and while I don't know my bfp, I
still have quite a bit on the torso. My top ab is just starting to be
noticeable!. but I can feel the other suckers under the layers of lard just
waiting to come out for a spin.

#27 11-27-2006, 03:43 AM

"Curt" <curtjames@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1164480246.889348.111380@l39g2000cwd.googlegr oups.com...
> Stephan Carydakis wrote:
> [...]
>
> > To be more accurate, it's more like 5.6 inches as they are not
> > exactly 17 but around 16.8. And they were not exactly 11 they
> > where 11.2 or 11.3. But anyways, they are the facts wether
> > you guys believe it or not.
>
> Facts? Okay. Changing facts. I can deal with change. Now, instead of 11
> to 17 in nine months it's 11.3 to 16.8 in... is it still nine months or
> would you like to adjust that number, too?
>

Well, I am of the male species. I suppose I need to be more accurate in
future.

> Let's round to a nearby half-inch, okay? Go with 11 1/2 inches unflexed
> and arm straight to 16 1/2 inches at a flexed at about a 45
> degree-angle measurement, okay? Over nine months.
>

Yes OK. They are 16.8 right now.

> What's your straight and unflexed arm measurement now? I'll guess 14
> 1/2 inches. That's giving you a flexed increase of two inches which
> isn't unheard of and, yes, a nine-month increase of three inches which
> is the difference from your untrained measurement of 11.5 inches to
> your current 14.5 inches (16 1/2 inches flexed).
>

unflexed 13.5 flexed 16.8.

> Still, you say you /lost/ weight? Maybe you did indeed.

I have. Heaps of it over the last year. As I said, 12 months ago, I weighed
104KG and I'm somewhere around 90 at the moment (in the morning after I've
let the hostages out and before eating anything)

>
> Congrats. Keep lifting. Enjoy your stay, however it wouldn't hurt to be
> able to post a YouTube deal of your pulldowns and db curls. People here
> have done that as it's easier to be in awe of a weighted chin by DZ or,
> say, a deadlift by Freides or Williams if you can actually SEE the lift
> performed. Likewise people have posted pics of their physique as Robert
> Schuh, Larry Hodges, Bob Volkmer, and more can attest.
>

I'll try and get some stuff up soon. Why the DB curls? They're pretty
average from what others say? Doesn't your 'max' depend alot on what you
have done before hand anyway? If I do 6 sets of BB curls before hand, then 3
sets of DB curls, the last 'heavy' DB will be much less than say going
straight to 2 DB warmup then crank on the weight for a heavy?

> > They haven't grown in the last 3 weeks as I took the 16.8
> > measurement 3 weeks ago and they are still that. The only
> > other thing I can think of is that I was not on creatine when
> > I took the initial reading, but now am. I have not taken a
> > measurement when not on creatine.
>
> Uh, I'm trying my best not to be a jerk, but you're not helping.
>

Do you usually struggle with the jerk in you forcing his (her?) way out? I'm
not sure.

> "I was not on creatine when I took the initial reading, but now am. I
> have not taken a measurement when not on creatine." Notice anything
> funny there? The initial reading (or measurement) was *not* on
> creatine, but you _haven't_ taken a measure when not on creatine???
> I'll make the leap. Got it. Never mind.
>

Yes reading that back literally sounds a tad stupid to me too. But I'm glad
that bridge came up and the synaptic roadway was able to continue. Well
done!

> Anyway, maybe it would be better to just say that ALL your gain has
> been muscle and leave it at that. Would that be okay with you? No
> numbers. No amount lifted in kilograms or pounds. Just that you've made
> impressive gains and all concerned are very impressed and pleased for
> you. Kudos.
>
> > They say creatine can increase the size of muscles
> > due to water retention in muscle cells?
>
> That's some serious water retention, Steph. I guess it would be
> inappropriate to call you Mr. Noah's Ark Arms, right? Katrina Biceps
> would be just as bad, I imagine.
>

hehe. I don't know! I have experienced a weight gain of around 3 kgs after
about the 5th day of a creatine loading cycle. I dont know if creatine can
add 1/2 inch, more less or anything at all. Note the question mark at the
end of that statement.

Thanks for the enjoyable reading.
> --
> Curt
>

#28 11-27-2006, 03:43 AM

"Curt" <curtjames@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1164473574.420775.38810@14g2000cws.googlegrou ps.com...
> Stephan Carydakis wrote:
> [...]
>
> re 11-inch arms to 17-inch arms (biceps measurement?) in 9 months with
> corresponding fat *loss*
>
> > <snip> why does this sound ridiculous?
>
> Because it's an incredible size jump, Steph. One almost impossible to
> accept as truth. Ymmv.
>

I don't know what represents an incredible size jump. I'm here to learn.

> Pictures? Visual proof would indeed help, however even photos can be
> manipulated. Were you measuring the same bodypart each time? Is your
> one arm withered and you measured the healthy arm the second time? Are
> you Casey Viator after recovering from an industrial accident AND
> creating a time machine of some sort? Are you an alien that cloned
> Bruce Randall... with a twist?
> http://www.americanpowerliftevolutio...ndallPage.html
>

Damn! He must have inspired the early drive in cinemas. Look, I do have a
wide back. I'm that kind of build - naturally broad. I don't need to prove
anything. I don't know why I should but I will endeavour to get something on
vid or still. Hey, is 310KG good for leg press? Not a 45 type. This type:
http://www.exerciseandleisure.com/nxp07.htm

> Seriously, I remember reading that to gain an inch on your arm that you
> need to gain between ten and fifteen pounds. You claim that you gained
> SIX inches on your arm while actually losing weight? So immediately
> your claim is running contrary to my perceived reality. Hey, it
> happens. But are you sure you've measured correctly?
>

Look, as I said just up there ^, I can't be 100% sure about my initial
reading but its what I remember. Given that I'm male and nearly 38, my
memory could be wrong. I have to give you that if you guys are in the know.
However, like I said in another post or 2, a good friend distinctly
remembers that around 5 months ago, my arms were just under 14 inches. He
actually remembers they were just over 35cm becuase when he used to train a
bit, he had 34 cm arms. My arms are now 16.8 inches. These are actual, 100%
certifiable measurements and time frames. So while I can't say 100% that my
memory is correct for the initial measurement, the last 5 months is
definately correct. So does 3 inches in 5 months still sound almost
impossible?

> > Not everyone's genetics allows them to have results like me!
>
> Likewise, not everyone's imagination allows them to believe the results
> you claim. ;o)
>

Fair enough.

> > As my PT pointed out 9 months ago, genetics are
> > an overwhelming factor.
>
> (looks at 14-inch bicep)
>
> TELL ME ABOUT IT!
>
> > After 3 months of circuit type work, I was doing weights
> > not that far away from where he was after years of
> > training. While he was not a large man, he was strong
> > and cut to the max.
>
> [...]
>
> Okay, mister genetic superior. Schuh's table is over there. Get
> yourself a protein drink and introduce yourself around. Welcome to the
> newsgroup. Avoid the ferns.
>

Hehe. Did I mention that I'm a direct decendant of Hercules? :-]

> --
> Curt
>

#29 11-27-2006, 03:43 AM

Stephan Carydakis wrote:
[...]

> I don't know what represents an incredible
> size jump.

Trust me, neither do I.

Ahahaha!

Dammit.

> I'm here to learn.

Never a bad goal. Welcome to misc.fitness.weights.

[...]

re Bruce Randall &
http://www.americanpowerliftevolutio...ndallPage.html

> Damn! He must have inspired the early drive in cinemas.

I don't know about that, but he certainly offered an example of someone
who could make phenomenal physical changes as well as incredible
strength gains.

> Look, I do have a wide back. I'm that kind of build
> - naturally broad. I don't need to prove anything.

You're absolutely right. Usenet in general and this newsgroup
specifically, I believe, has a tendency to want to ferret out fakes,
charlatans, liars. If there's even a hint of discrepancy then certain
patrons, myself included, will fuss over the possibility that
whatever's been written is curious and therefore some type of scam.
ESPECIALLY when it comes to numbers such as lifts accomplished,
repetitions completed or measurements achieved.

It's misc.fitness.weights and those numbers are at least a few coins of
the realm, imo. People are impressed by the guy who can move heavy
stuff and, yeah, regardless of what some antibodybuilder-types might
aver, look good doing it.

Regardless, I rescind the question re visual proof. You're here to
learn so go ahead and do that, but - word of warning - don't expect to
gain that learning by being confrontational. There are great people
here. Some abrasive, but all worthy of your reading time, imo. A thick
figurative skin will serve you well. Will serve *everyone* well when it
comes to Usenet.

> I don't know why I should but I will endeavour
> to get something on vid or still.

Unnecessary. Again, I rescind the request, I apologize for jumping on
the You Frigging Liar bandwagon, I wish you the best in your training
program, I hope you continue to achieve impressive results.

> Hey, is 310KG good for leg press? Not a 45 type. This type:
> http://www.exerciseandleisure.com/nxp07.htm

Fifteen plates? The machine holds 409KG, you slacker! ;o)

> > <snip> But are you sure you've measured correctly?
>
> Look, as I said just up there ^, I can't be 100% sure
> about my initial reading but its what I remember.

And with that "I can't be 100% sure" in mind, let's just forget about
the starting measurements. It'll only serve to undermine my sense of
self esteem (i KEED!) and raise more doubt in general as to your
accuracy and trustworthiness. Ymmv. Just a thought.

> Given that I'm male and nearly 38, my memory
> could be wrong.

I suspect that's a true statement. I'm 44 and remember fondly those
long drives in the country and passionate nights by fireside with Kim
Basinger.

-=snip=-

> My arms are now 16.8 inches.

Okay.

> So does 3 inches in 5 months still sound almost
> impossible?

I'm certain it's not impossible. Give me some Synthol and talk to me in
5 months.

(ba dump bump)

Seriously, you say you've done that and so what need is there for
verification of something you already know to be true?

[...]

> > Okay, mister genetic superior. <snip> Get yourself
> > a protein drink and introduce yourself around.
> > Welcome to the newsgroup. Avoid the ferns.
>
> Hehe. Did I mention that I'm a direct decendant of
> Hercules? :-]

Oh? I've heard of him. Strong guy, about so tall, from Athens, iirc.

--
Curt

#30 11-27-2006, 03:43 AM

"Stephan Carydakis" <steph777@netspace.net.au> schreef:

> unflexed 13.5 flexed 16.8.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA !!!

----
Pete