I bought Poliquin’s Principles from P-Dog over a week ago and loved the Arm routine outlined.
Wouldnt you know, I gave it a shot and my arms DID increase in size? Unfortunately it also brought out an imbalance, possibly in my rotator cuffs, rear delts, or shoulder area - I can get more repetitions/weight with my right arm.
Anyhow, my right arm is now ringing at 16.65 inches, up from 16.10 inches. My left arm is ringing at 16.30 inches, up from 16 inches - clearly an imbalance that needs to be fixed, even though its not noticeable without a measuring tape.
I have to admit I’m impressed. I tried plenty of protocols and ideas over the last 6 months after leaning down, and couldnt add a milimeter. Very basic book, but I gotta say, one of the best arm routines Ive done in a few years, if not the best. And if size is coming on, then something must be working.
Ill need to start working on my imbalance as well.
I can hear Waterbury’s legion go ‘Baaah, direct arm is useless’, and believe it or not, I agree with Chad’s views. But the truth is, this routine is working pretty darn well for size gains.
Wanted to comment on your direct vs. indirect arm training.
Like you, I’ve defenitely seen tremendous gains from direct arm work such as Staley’s (i think) EDT arms program or King’s Guns program, etc.
However, I’ve also seen tremendous improvements associated with no direct arm work. Chad himself and many others I know who generally stick with Oly type routines are testaments to this.
My idea is that both are accurate, and what I plan on doing just as a test is to train Waterbury style for 12 weeks or so, then after 12 weeks of no real direct arm training, BOOM, EDT or maybe since you’ve see such good gains a Poloquin style are routine. I beleive my reasoning is sound and of course will be throwing in mag10 cycles along with Tribex, etc so I hope to see some good gains from this.
Let me expand on my previous post: When someone claims to be a strength coach they are in fact stating that they are able to train and improve on the muscles of the body. Fair enough?
Chad Waterbury by excluding the arms from any sort of direct work is, in my opinon simply trying to be controversial for the sake of it. This I do not respect.
Other stregth coachs seem to be able to find their nitch without using such methods. Take Coach Davies for example. I find Coach Davies to be the real deal! No one would ever accuse him of putting forth body building routines yet if you you stuck to virtually any of his workouts you would find your muscles growing faster than you can kick back a glass of Grow’.
Yet, he does not put down arm traing. Coach Davies has respect for the entire human body (and its soul too I must add). Stick to those who know what the heck they are talking abou. You will find that life is to short to follow any suto guru who claims that you should never work your arms directly, what garbage!
Stoit - Waterbury HAS given plenty of arm training advice. See his latest article in the current online issue of T-mag. He also provides that option in his Anti-Bodybuilding program. He simply thinks direct arm training is overrated if you’re already doing big compound movements like chin-ups and dips. Not to mention rope drags. His arms are huge so it’s working for him at least.
I question the integrity more of those coaches who believe the same as Waterbury yet write whole books on arm training because they know thats what sells.
And hasn’t Davies also made fun of those who focus too much on the arms and beach muscles? I’m sure he has in a past article.
I just wanted to mention that Waterbury’s article this week about direct bicep work was really damn good.
I also think that it’s become “in” not to do direct arm work, even for bodybuilding purposes. While I wholeheartedly agree that big arms can be built without “direct” arm work, I think a bodybuilder (one concerned about the size of their upper arms) would be remiss in not at least occasionally including some kind of direct arm work.
diesel, I’m glad this program worked for you. Let us know how it does in the future. And we all suffer imbalances. It’s much more difficult when you take into consideration how each arm is used throughout the day.
Oh and stoit, you wrote of Davies “No one would ever accuse him of putting forth body building routines…”
He wrote a whole article called Renegade Bodybuilding!
By the way, I’m not trying to put down Davies at all. He’s contributed much to my training and I like his articles. You just seem to have a bias against Waterbury, a bias so strong you’re ignoring the facts.
Don’t oversimplify what Waterbury has to offer just to try to win an internet argument. He does have direct arm training advice, he just thinks it’s overrated if you’re training correctly in the first place.
Besides, Waterbury’s arm is bigger than both of Davies legs put together, so he much be right. joke!
Time for a little reality check! Waterbury’s arms are bigger than Coach Davies, yours, mine and just about everyone elses! Why? One word: Genetics!
Look at Waterbury’s build. Large boned tall etc. He would have had big arms if he never touched a weight! Some are blessed in this way. Do you think that Waterbury has to train his arms directly in order to maintain their large size? (however he ought to try to give them a little definition, just an observation) Of course not. Hence, his bias against direct arm training!
Most of the well meaning guys who log onto Testosterone.com are not blessed with naturally big arms such as Waterbury is. Do you think that Waterbury’s advice not to train arms directly hurts or helps the typical 16 year old 150lb kid who wants desparately to have a set of large muscular arms?
That is the crux of the matter. I have nothing personal against Chad Waterbury. Don’t know him never met him. I am only refering to his built in bias against arm training.
Because one is born with good genetics does not make him and expert in fitness advice or arm training, or lack of it in Waterbury’s case!
If you do not do leg curls or any other sort of Hamstring training, either directly or indirectly, I would think that your Hamstrings would not be as developed as they could otherwise be.
If one trains a muscle directly that muscle is better off than not training it at all. Is that simple enough for you Neil?