T Nation

Imbalances & How to Fix 'em

A bit of background: I’ve been following Starting Strength for 8 weeks and my diet is in surplus of about +800 calo/day.

My workout is:
Workout A: Squat, Bench, Chins, Hyper
Workout B: Squat, Press, Deadlift.
So the weekly timetable is: ABA Rest, BAB, Rest -> So on and so forth for 8 weeks.

I took measurements yesterday and found out that: 1) Put on 2.1 kg of muscle mass and BF went down 2% bringing it to 16.3%; 2) My arms shrunk by 2cm; My waist, hips and thighs increased by 5 cm; 3) My chest, shoulders, neck remain the same.

The question is: #2 what happened to my arms? I’ve been doing pulling and chins 2x week on SS program, why did my arms shrink and chest and shoulders unchanged, but my thighs increased 8%?

Suggestions and tips are always appreciated.

You weren’t doing any direct arm work and expected your arms to grow?

[quote]The Rattler wrote:
You weren’t doing any direct arm work and expected your arms to grow?[/quote]

this and your bodyfat went down.

Through my dieting I’ve noticed arm fat will go pretty rapidly while waist/leg fat goes a bit slower.

[quote]The Rattler wrote:
You weren’t doing any direct arm work and expected your arms to grow?[/quote] Sir, no sir, I didn’t expect it to grow of course, I thought it’d stay the same cause I’m doing Starting Strength at the moment and I get a bit of tricep works on Bench, Press and Dips.

you lost bodyfat, that’s a good thing.

You can add two or three sets of curls/extensions at the end of your workouts if you are worried.

Wow…Starting Strength sounds like it sucks.

Also…LOL at using a program that literally CAUSES imbalances yet wondering why you have them when it happens.

[quote]rds63799 wrote:
you lost bodyfat, that’s a good thing.

You can add two or three sets of curls/extensions at the end of your workouts if you are worried.[/quote]

…Or…why not just train arms normally?

I don’t understand this.

Surprised this has lasted this long. I would have thought a program telling lifters to devalue the importance of muscle groups would have been torn to pieces years ago.

There must be millions of skinny fat imbalanced people who really think they have it all figured out.

[quote]The Rattler wrote:
You weren’t doing any direct arm work and expected your arms to grow?[/quote]

Are you telling us we have to do curls and tricep extensions to get our arms to grow?

[quote]Professor X wrote:
There must be millions of skinny fat imbalanced people who really think they have it all figured out.[/quote]

Are you telling me squats, deadlifts, presses, and pulls do not directly train the arms?

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]The Rattler wrote:
You weren’t doing any direct arm work and expected your arms to grow?[/quote]

Are you telling us we have to do curls and tricep extensions to get our arms to grow?[/quote]

Blasphemy!

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]The Rattler wrote:
You weren’t doing any direct arm work and expected your arms to grow?[/quote]

Are you telling us we have to do curls and tricep extensions to get our arms to grow?[/quote]

After 11000 posts I think you’ve finally worked it out! We should make a thread named ‘do direct arm work for arm growth’ and sticky it.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]rds63799 wrote:
you lost bodyfat, that’s a good thing.

You can add two or three sets of curls/extensions at the end of your workouts if you are worried.[/quote]

…Or…why not just train arms normally?

I don’t understand this.

Surprised this has lasted this long. I would have thought a program telling lifters to devalue the importance of muscle groups would have been torn to pieces years ago.

There must be millions of skinny fat imbalanced people who really think they have it all figured out.[/quote]

I agree he should train arms normally, but I figure if he wants to do starting strength then let him. Might as well add some arm work if he does

[quote]rds63799 wrote:
but I figure if he wants to do starting strength then let him. [/quote]

I figure we should wage Holy War against Starting Strength and all who subscribe to it for bodybuilding purposes.

I want to see blood, dude.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]rds63799 wrote:
but I figure if he wants to do starting strength then let him. [/quote]

I figure we should wage Holy War against Starting Strength and all who subscribe to it for bodybuilding purposes.

I want to see blood, dude.[/quote]

we will destroy those armless, deltless and quadless heathens!

[quote]The Rattler wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]The Rattler wrote:
You weren’t doing any direct arm work and expected your arms to grow?[/quote]

Are you telling us we have to do curls and tricep extensions to get our arms to grow?[/quote]

After 11000 posts I think you’ve finally worked it out! We should make a thread named ‘do direct arm work for arm growth’ and sticky it.[/quote]

Tell me how I am not directly using my arms when I do any major compound lift.

Want to get real big arms?

Lift heavy fucking weights in every way imaginable.

[quote]tazui1982 wrote:
A bit of background: I’ve been following Starting Strength for 8 weeks and my diet is in surplus of about +800 calo/day.[/quote]
What is your current goal?

Are the height and weight in your profile currently accurate, 173cm/5’8", 78kg/about 172 pounds?

Squatting three times a week and not doing direct arm work will tend to create bigger legs and smaller arms in most people. Some folks do see some arm growth just from hitting rows and presses hard. Could be you’re not one of them, or could be you’re not hitting rows and presses hard enough, or could be you need to tweak things a bit (chin-ups instead of pull-ups, reverse-grip rows, etc.).

Another factor is how you were training before you began Starting Strength. If you used to train arms, and then stop, guess what usually happens?

Lastly, I did notice your other thread, where your max squat is 95kg x 5, your max bench is 85kg x 5, and your shoulder press is just 40kg x 5. I think it might be worth considering a different program that will balance you out overall, whether you’re goals are strength-based or physique-based.

2 cm seems very negligible especially if ones arms are already somewhat larger than average.

One could make one’s arms grow 2 cm temporarily just by providing enough hypertrophy stimulus - feel the pumps!

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Tell me how I am not directly using my arms when I do any major compound lift.[/quote]
“Directly” is the key phrase in that sentence. If you’re directly using your biceps during pulldowns, for example, your back will be unable to be maximally and efficiently trained.

[quote]Want to get real big arms?

Lift heavy fucking weights in every way imaginable.[/quote]
Like curling half-bodyweight for sets of 6-10 after several sets of pulldowns and rows? I agree.

If we’re talking about training for muscle growth, directly training each muscle (to clarify, that means using exercises which require the target bodypart to be the prime mover and allow that bodypart to experience sufficient fatigue to stimulate growth) will yield greater overall results for the overwhelming majority of people compared to having several muscle groups trained indirectly only.

In other words… nine times out of ten, the guy who does rows, pulldowns, bench presses, squats, barbell curls, pressdowns, leg curls, and calf raises will be more muscular than the guy who does rows, pulldowns, bench presses, and squats.

[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Tell me how I am not directly using my arms when I do any major compound lift.[/quote]
“Directly” is the key phrase in that sentence. If you’re directly using your biceps during pulldowns, for example, your back will be unable to be maximally and efficiently trained.

[quote]Want to get real big arms?

Lift heavy fucking weights in every way imaginable.[/quote]
Like curling half-bodyweight for sets of 6-10 after several sets of pulldowns and rows? I agree.

If we’re talking about training for muscle growth, directly training each muscle (to clarify, that means using exercises which require the target bodypart to be the prime mover and allow that bodypart to experience sufficient fatigue to stimulate growth) will yield greater overall results for the overwhelming majority of people compared to having several muscle groups trained indirectly only.

In other words… nine times out of ten, the guy who does rows, pulldowns, bench presses, squats, barbell curls, pressdowns, leg curls, and calf raises will be more muscular than the guy who does rows, pulldowns, bench presses, and squats.[/quote]

I think it has mostly to do with time under tension and the total number of muscle fibers recruited. There are a million-and-a-half ways to achieve hypertrophy.