Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Razor

  • Rank
  • Birthday 11/21/1992

Character Details

  • Location
    Sunshine State, U.S.A.
  1. Deadlift is my favorite as well, and every time I increase the weight my shoulders want to hunch forward. Doing bent-over rows (and a lot of people recommend pendlay rows but I can't find a solid article about them for the life of me) on days you don't deadlift to help strengthen your shoulders. Make sure you're eating a ton. Hope things are going good, fairy!
  2. Weighed in monday night at 155 pounds! My first two weeks I gained NO weight. I also didn't eat much yesterday because I woke up late (no breakfast) and had to run errands in between class (no lunch). And at dinner I didn't put enough pasta to boil and cba to re-cook when I was done eating. Then today I didn't eat lunch because I found my bread to be moldy and I didn't have anything that was easy to cook. I'm going to make up for it tonight after the gym tonight with a truly ridiculous bowl of ice cream and a mass gainer shake (yay for going to sleep bloated!)
  3. Razor

    Juicing Fast

    I personally don't think it's a good idea to only subsist off of liquids, especially if you are a very active person. You'll probably get your vitamins, some fiber, and a whole lot of carbs. But it just doesn't seem right to me. If you ate actual fruit (and hopefully veg) along with it, I could see this potentially being nice. But liquid only? P.S. I'm not even counting the fact that low sodium and protein intake do not sound like a good idea for an active athlete... at all.
  4. Razor

    Cliff Bars

    I got here late to answer OP's question, but I'll answer yours. Look at the nutrition facts. Whatever they are, see if they are in line with your goals. Protein bars usually have lots of protein and carbs. The only real difference is taste and price (and whatever type of protein is used [whey, soy, etc.] which is easily found in the ingredients section). Go with what fits your macros, your taste buds, and your wallet. If quest bars fit that, awesome!
  5. Unfortunately strength is a very broad word. I hope they don't think they're using it the same way the rest of the weightlifting community does xD
  6. Omelettes are great. Lots of protein and omega acids. And with omelettes, you can pretty much put anything in them. I like bell peppers and mushrooms with a bit o cheese on mine. But you can also go with: Onions Diced Ham Bacon bits banana peppers chopped broccoli pinapple chunks pieces of chicken diced potato tomato etc.
  7. Okay, Phoenix. Lots to reply too. I think this thread is officially hijacked xD Dumb-bells give you a better ROM too, but decline decreases the ROM because it decreases the amount the pec has to move to lift the load. A higher angle of chest means more mechanical efficiency. More mechanical efficiency means less work required, which equates to a shorter range of motion (I'm probably not explaining this in correct logic but oh well). I basically mean the movement of the chest. When you bench, your pectorals move up and down. Slightly, probbaly no more than an inch. But the the movement is there. A better chest angle results in less vertical movement required (Think of walking up steps vs. walking up a ramp. Same height, less work). On third edition, you can find the information on the bottom on page 159. Those aren't really the reasons. You can find the info on page 160 of SS 3rd edition. -More bf% doesn't mean more muscle. But more muscle recruitment obviously helps -A bigger chest doesn't mean less ROM. Having huge quads shouldn't give you less range of motion on a squat. - More stability might help, but if you're already on a flat bench with adducted shoulders you should be pretty stable. And if you're not, 10 extra pounds of fat probably won't help. Rip says that more bodyweight gives muscles better pull on the bone, i.e. give more leverage against the fulcrums you're using to lift. He doesn't really explain it, so I should probably research it further. That wasn't my point at all. You're confusing two of my points and combining them. The first is that decline bench reduces range of motion in the chest. The second is that bridging or even arching your back also reduce range of motion of the chest. These are two seperate things that both reduce the ROM, the two are not involved with eachother. But of course if you're bridging on a decline, you are at that point doing a deltoid and triceps exercise xD Both of them reduce your ROM, however simple arching allows you to lift more weight without reducing your ROM a whole lot. This is a compromise, or happy medium, between range of motion and weight lifted. And I'm inquiring which is more beneficial at building the chest. Optimum range of motion with less weight, or compromised ROM with more weight (It's a small compromise, but it exists). Again this is in SS, I think starting at 160. Increased angle of chest means more mechanical efficiency. Your chest moves less up and down to lift the weight. Of course I agree. And I'm making a similar comparison. Arching your back reduces ROM. So I'm wondering if I should pursue flat back as a better exercise because of the increased ROM of the chest, or whether or not that ROM increase really makes a difference (because it is indeed small). I also highlighted two of those points, because in my eyes, they are opposites. You can either get a full ROM from an exercise and as a consequence lift as much, or you can compromise your ROM to increase more weight. Hence arching the back, not going parallel (or below parallel) on squats, etc. When did I talk about elbows? And here it is: The pec major is attached to more than just the sternum though.The pectoral also is attached to cartilage down the ribcage, around the seventh set of ribs I believe. (12 being the bottom most ribs). And I was under the impression that decline benching worked more of this part of the pectoral than flat or incline. Could be wrong.
  8. I'm aware of the Dip being the extreme decline and OHP being the extreme incline. What I was basically asking is if the decline builds more chest muscle. Despite the increased weight, there is also increased mechanical efficiency, and I wonder if that comes into play in terms of how beat up your pectorals get from the workout. I also thought that flat bench mostly contributed more to sternum attachment of the pectorals and that dips and decline affect more of the muscle that is attached to the rib-cage.
  9. Actually, when you are on a decline, your chest is elevated above your shoulders compared to a flat bench or incline. This creates more mechanical efficiency for the press movement. Yes, energy travels up and down within the pectorals during the press. This is the reason a thicker chess results in a larger bench press (not just having more muscle recruitment). It is also the reason a higher Bf% is more beneficial to the bench press movement. All this is in the SS book. If you can find a source that states otherwise, please provide it (not being condescending, I'd honestly like to see what others say about the physics of the bench press). I understand that. But it is the same physics. Bridging is the same as arching your back, just more exaggerated. Both physics are the same. My argument here is that in terms of muscle building, the strain on your muscles is greater with somewhat less weight and a more difficult form versus a higher weight with "easier" form (Not truly easier, but you know what I mean". Waldo raises an interesting point that it is true, the elbows do less work and therefore the chest is lifting more weight. I'm not sure whether or not it would build the chest more than proper flat or incline bench though. Yes, there is more work being done by the chest, but is it being damaged more? Damaging your muscles is the key to building them stronger, and I want to find out what type of exercise can do the most damage (without injury of course). That's what I said. In the decline bench, the chest is ELEVATED. It is elevated above the shoulders, and because of the body's position, it is at a higher angle for moving loads than on a flat bench or incline bench. Hence the reasoning for me saying the pectorals themself are elevated.
  10. 1) 9 2) 2 3) 149-> 155 Life: 5/5
  11. lol, contradictory. And as for the decline, no, I'm pretty sure flat and incline work the chest more. In the decline, the chest is elevated, REDUCING the range of motion of the chest. In a bench press, the chest muscle fibers still go slightly up and down. When you arch your back, or bridge, or use a decline bench, you are reducing the amount of distance the energy has to travel in the chest fibers, and therefore reducing their amount of overall work. You can lift more, but you won't build the chest as much. I see it as a similar way to squatting down about halfway vs. going ATG.
  12. So far what I'm seeing is this argument: Does lifting more weight but in a "cheating" sort of way lead to more benefit than lifting a little less the "harder" way. At least from what I know about muscle building, the harder you work, the more reward you get (so long as you're resting properly). The "bouncing" involves more muscles in the lift, therefore making it easier. But I would venture to guess (and I could be wrong) that even at a heavier weight, a more shared workload esults in less work done by the muscles you're trying to target. Sort of how you can decline bench press more weight, but it does not build the chest more. If you want to break PR's and lift more weights, doing the death drop on squats and shooting back up with momentum would be better. If you're trying to build more muscle, controlled and slower seems like it would be more beneficial. So if you want to build more muscle, a slow OHP from a stop would be better than bouncing the weight with extra weight. Momentum and more active muscles in the lift reduce the workload of the muscles you're trying to target overall. I could be completely wrong though. Somebody intelligent could sweep in and show a mathematical equation that the extra weight with different form provides more muscle improvement than slow and steady with lesser weight. But at least the way I see it now, Death dropping, arching back on the bench press, and bouncing on OHP are the same as swinging the weights when you're curling, no?
  13. I agree, Steve. Not to mention, supplements are very expensive as well. P.S. I can't believe you guys are paying that much for whey. Sam's Club has 4 lbs of it for 30 bucks. And there's a lot of BOGO coupons that float around for GNC and similar stores.
  14. Probably because that's how it works. Hormones can play a big factor, as can thyroid. But these only affect how your body processes the things you consume. If you consume less, you will lose weight. If you consume more, you will gain weight. It's the universal law of thermodynamics.
  • Create New...

Important Information

New here? Please check out our Privacy Policy and Community Guidelines