Do you still do barbell squats, or are you referring to Hack squats/smith bar squats?
[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:
[quote]worzel wrote:
I think this is a very important topic considering full ROM is advocated all the time.
Although full ROM (within your own ranges or course) is the way to go while building a solid foundation, partials can be the answer for lagging body parts once that foundation is built.
How many of you guys use partials?[/quote]
Not as a replacement for full ROM, but in addition to?
[/quote]
Oh’ dont get me wrong, I totally understand this!
Using full ROM flat bench as an example…
If you are shoulder & Triceps dominant then the chest will not receive the stimulation you want it to receive so partials can be the answer (again, once that foundation has been built with full ROM).
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]worzel wrote:
I think this is a very important topic considering full ROM is advocated all the time.
Although full ROM (within your own ranges or course) is the way to go while building a solid foundation, partials can be the answer for lagging body parts once that foundation is built.
How many of you guys use partials?[/quote]
The real difference lies between those who are relative newbies and those who actually look built. Yes, most newbs everywhere need to focus on “textbook form”. Most people won’t EVER progress much beyond this point. Regardless of the loudmouths on this forum, it is pretty clear that less than 20 people here actually stand out when they walk into a crowded gym based on their progress.
That means yes, the 160lbs newb with the 15" arms NEEDS to use “good form” to avoid injury.
If your goal is arms bigger than 18" then obviously you need to realize that modifications need to be made later on to individualize what you are doing.
No skinny newb needs to be training like a 250lbs bodybuilder unless they are using the exact same weight.
The average person in the gym and on this site won’t ever see 18" arms to begin with so why the hell are they so worried about how people much further along are training?[/quote]
In a previous post to BlueCollar I used the flat bench as an example where the shoulder & Triceps can dominate the movement so partials in this instance would be recommended to stimulate/activate the pec.
I KNOW newbs shouldnt train like 250lb bodybuilders, that is not what I am getting it. I am specifically talking about partials and their role in stimulating lagging body parts. When I say stimulation I mean neural, which in turn will lead to growth down the road…
[quote]Akuma01 wrote:
[quote]worzel wrote:
Do you find that doing partials lead to a decrease in ROM?
[/quote]
No, because i dont hit a muscle from just 1 angle. I suppose it COULD lead to a decrease in ROM if you go into the gym, do partial benching, and walk out. But if i do Partial Rom bench pressing, then walk over and do DB flys with some heavy ass DBs, and my arms are falling below parallel to the floor, where would the mobility be lost? I really dont even know if a loss of Rom is plausible in that instance. Someone working out like that would never get large enough to actually affect their Rom[/quote]
Good points!
I was thinking of Rockys example on squats and how it has worked for him. I have done this myself (not extending fully at the top) but soon realised that my lower back was aching lying in bed at night (this was a while ago!)
On such a major movement like squats partials in this instance would lead to shortness in the working muscles specifically the hip flexors. So unless you are doing lunges or specific stretches to address this situation then pain will ensue from the reduced ROM.
I had to correct this and so extended fully at the top plus I added hip flexor stretches and no more pain!
[quote]Proud_Virgin wrote:
Do you still do barbell squats, or are you referring to Hack squats/smith bar squats?[/quote]
I detailed how I train legs in the last 2-3 pages of that “professor x request” thread.
[quote]worzel wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]worzel wrote:
I think this is a very important topic considering full ROM is advocated all the time.
Although full ROM (within your own ranges or course) is the way to go while building a solid foundation, partials can be the answer for lagging body parts once that foundation is built.
How many of you guys use partials?[/quote]
The real difference lies between those who are relative newbies and those who actually look built. Yes, most newbs everywhere need to focus on “textbook form”. Most people won’t EVER progress much beyond this point. Regardless of the loudmouths on this forum, it is pretty clear that less than 20 people here actually stand out when they walk into a crowded gym based on their progress.
That means yes, the 160lbs newb with the 15" arms NEEDS to use “good form” to avoid injury.
If your goal is arms bigger than 18" then obviously you need to realize that modifications need to be made later on to individualize what you are doing.
No skinny newb needs to be training like a 250lbs bodybuilder unless they are using the exact same weight.
The average person in the gym and on this site won’t ever see 18" arms to begin with so why the hell are they so worried about how people much further along are training?[/quote]
In a previous post to BlueCollar I used the flat bench as an example where the shoulder & Triceps can dominate the movement so partials in this instance would be recommended to stimulate/activate the pec.
I KNOW newbs shouldnt train like 250lb bodybuilders, that is not what I am getting it. I am specifically talking about partials and their role in stimulating lagging body parts. When I say stimulation I mean neural, which in turn will lead to growth down the road…[/quote]
You still aren’t making much sense with this. Most of you even using “neural” in a sentence are using it wrong. I can only assume some personal trainers have made “CNS” the new buzz word.
Why would “partial reps” be the stimulus to get a lagging body part to grow in and of itself unless full rom was specifically keeping it from growing? I swear, most of the people claiming their shoulders or whatever cause their chest to somehow not work are likely doing the movement wrong or they lack the innate ability to feel a muscle group working.
My honest opinion is that people like that won’t be making much progress anyway…and usually not enough for them to have to worry about this.
We are not talking about beginners here. We are talking about people who are already big and I don’t see many people who qualify as such claiming they can’t feel entire muscle groups when they train.
[quote]23278 wrote:
Mine caps out at 185. Of course they step up from 130 straight to 185. Makes tons of sense! Maybe when I can do the 130’s for 25 reps I’ll try the big guys. :P[/quote]
LOL That was funny!
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]worzel wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]worzel wrote:
I think this is a very important topic considering full ROM is advocated all the time.
Although full ROM (within your own ranges or course) is the way to go while building a solid foundation, partials can be the answer for lagging body parts once that foundation is built.
How many of you guys use partials?[/quote]
The real difference lies between those who are relative newbies and those who actually look built. Yes, most newbs everywhere need to focus on “textbook form”. Most people won’t EVER progress much beyond this point. Regardless of the loudmouths on this forum, it is pretty clear that less than 20 people here actually stand out when they walk into a crowded gym based on their progress.
That means yes, the 160lbs newb with the 15" arms NEEDS to use “good form” to avoid injury.
If your goal is arms bigger than 18" then obviously you need to realize that modifications need to be made later on to individualize what you are doing.
No skinny newb needs to be training like a 250lbs bodybuilder unless they are using the exact same weight.
The average person in the gym and on this site won’t ever see 18" arms to begin with so why the hell are they so worried about how people much further along are training?[/quote]
In a previous post to BlueCollar I used the flat bench as an example where the shoulder & Triceps can dominate the movement so partials in this instance would be recommended to stimulate/activate the pec.
I KNOW newbs shouldnt train like 250lb bodybuilders, that is not what I am getting it. I am specifically talking about partials and their role in stimulating lagging body parts. When I say stimulation I mean neural, which in turn will lead to growth down the road…[/quote]
You still aren’t making much sense with this. Most of you even using ‘neural’ in a sentence are using it wrong. I can only assume some personal trainers have made ‘CNS’ the new buzz word.[/quote]
How should I use neural in a sentence? I am referring to motor unit recruitment, which consists of a motor neuron and all the fibres it innervates hence the use of a shortened explanation using the term neural!
Is it or is it not possible to have a muscle that is not recruited fully during a movement?
Some examples…
Inhibited Glutes anyone?
VMO
Adductors
Lower traps
Serratus
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Why would ‘partial reps’ be the stimulus to get a lagging body part to grow in and of itself unless full rom was specifically keeping it from growing? I swear, most of the people claiming their shoulders or whatever cause their chest to somehow not work are likely doing the movement wrong or they lack the innate ability to feel a muscle group working.[/quote]
There you said it! SOME people do lack the innate ability to FEEL a muscle group working and herein lies the problem!
Stating their chest is NOT working in a movement is a bit of a leap from not fully being recuited, as in what I am suggesting.
Once a motor program has been laid down for a specific movement it is very difficult to re-learn that movement to emphasise lagging body parts, hence the need for alternative measures to try and recruit that lagging body part without starting all over again.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
My honest opinion is that people like that won’t be making much progress anyway…and usually not enough for them to have to worry about this.[/quote]
Ok, you are entitled to your opinion.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
We are not talking about beginners here. We are talking about people who are already big and I don’t see many people who qualify as such claiming they can’t feel entire muscle groups when they train.[/quote]
Again’ Inhibited Glutes anyone?
Please correct me if I am wrong’ but didnt Mighty Stu have problems recruiting his pecs during pressing because his delts dominated the movement?
[quote]worzel wrote:
How should I use neural in a sentence? I am referring to motor unit recruitment, which consists of a motor neuron and all the fibres it innervates hence the use of a shortened explanation using the term neural!
[/quote]
WTF?
What fucking stimulation during resistance training is NOT neural stimulation?
Uh, unless multiple reps are used, it is usually the case that a muscle is not fully recruited simply because of a movement. It would not be a good survival characteristic to have a muscle that fires as a whole every single time it is stimulated to contract. As far as guys who claim their chest can not be stimulated, once again, this seems to be a problem for those who simply do not ever overcome it fully and do not get very large overall.
[quote]
Some examples…
Inhibited Glutes anyone?
VMO
Adductors
Lower traps
Serratus
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Why would ‘partial reps’ be the stimulus to get a lagging body part to grow in and of itself unless full rom was specifically keeping it from growing? I swear, most of the people claiming their shoulders or whatever cause their chest to somehow not work are likely doing the movement wrong or they lack the innate ability to feel a muscle group working.[/quote]
There you said it! SOME people do lack the innate ability to FEEL a muscle group working and herein lies the problem!
Stating their chest is NOT working in a movement is a bit of a leap from not fully being recuited, as in what I am suggesting.
Once a motor program has been laid down for a specific movement it is very difficult to re-learn that movement to emphasise lagging body parts, hence the need for alternative measures to try and recruit that lagging body part without starting all over again.[/quote]
Minor changes cause the body to have to relearn a movement. For instance, doing cardio on a treadmill for 30min everyday at the same incline and speed will result in less recruitment of muscle fibers as the body adapts. Changing the incline prevents that. This doesn’t need some drastic approach.
[quote]
[quote]Professor X wrote:
My honest opinion is that people like that won’t be making much progress anyway…and usually not enough for them to have to worry about this.[/quote]
Ok, you are entitled to your opinion.[/quote]
Wait, show me someone HUGE who has this problem. Then we can talk.
I’m sorry, but who all who qualifies as extremely developed is having such a problems with inhibited glutes? Your glutes don’t contract? That sounds like it would make you one poor athlete if that is the case. Also, what is up with the name dropping? While I respect Stu, his chest is a weak point and bringing him up here is one strange thing to do as if you are trying to pit members against one another. I am not talking about guys on his level of development under 180 in contest shape. Guys like Kingbeef will pass that progress up in a matter of a few more years if not already there and I doubt he has this problem. Do you understand the difference I am making now?
There is bodybuilder huge and there is everyone else. Once again, I have not seen many people with this problem who are able to overcome it like it was never a problem. Those body parts tend to remain a weak link in the chain.
Some people are born for this and others are not and their short comings may be short for the rest of the time they train.
I mean, honestly, if you can’t feel your chest working, do you really expect to build a gigantic chest? Some of this is innate ability.
On the topic of switching to all dumbells for chest, I’ve done this and it’s one of the best decisions regarding bodybuilding I’ve ever made. Chest went from lagging to being one of my best bodyparts in only about 4 months.
[quote]kingbeef323 wrote:
On the topic of switching to all dumbells for chest, I’ve done this and it’s one of the best decisions regarding bodybuilding I’ve ever made. Chest went from lagging to being one of my best bodyparts in only about 4 months.[/quote]
I know some people are gonna shit on me for this, because it’s not what the pros do, but I’ve been doing ring push-ups lately (both weighted and bodyweight) and those have been working ridiculously good for my chest. IMO chest development seems to benefit greatly from the stabilization effect (DBs, rings, etc).
I remember doing those for a few weeks last year and my chest grew noticeably within that time as well. Need to add those back in, prolly as a finisher.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
WTF?
What fucking stimulation during resistance training is NOT neural stimulation?
[/quote]
???
I never said anything to the contrary!
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Uh, unless multiple reps are used, it is usually the case that a muscle is not fully recruited simply because of a movement.
[/quote]
Yep!
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Itt would not be a good survival characteristic to have a muscle that fires as a whole every single time it is stimulated to contract.
[/quote]
Of course!
[quote]Professor X wrote:
As far as guys who claim their chest can not be stimulated, once again, this seems to be a problem for those who simply do not ever overcome it fully and do not get very large overall.
[/quote]
I never said their chest can not be stimulated! I gave the flat bench as an example of a ‘compound’ movement where muscles other than the pec’s can dominate! So’ in this instance, partials in the mid range would be of some value! Am I wrong?
And please dont start going on about 250lb plus guys and 15 inch biceps’ because that wasnt even part of the discussion until you brought it up (again?)
We were discussing the value of partial reps’ thats all…
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Minor changes cause the body to have to relearn a movement. For instance, doing cardio on a treadmill for 30min everyday at the same incline and speed will result in less recruitment of muscle fibers as the body adapts. Changing the incline prevents that. This doesn’t need some drastic approach.
[/quote]
I totally understand what you are saying with regards to the adaptation process and changing up movements.
I dont think partials are a drastic approach but you obviously do?
I said previously that partials are only part of the overall training equation and Full ROM is the foundation.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I’m sorry, but who all who qualifies as extremely developed is having such a problems with inhibited glutes? Your glutes don’t contract? That sounds like it would make you one poor athlete if that is the case.
[/quote]
Mate, I see poor glute activation all the time! Couple this with poor hamstring activation brought about by poor technique and piss poor flexibility programs. This is typically known as Lower Crossed Syndrome
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Also, what is up with the name dropping? While I respect Stu, his chest is a weak point and bringing him up here is one strange thing to do as if you are trying to pit members against one another. I am not talking about guys on his level of development under 180 in contest shape. Guys like Kingbeef will pass that progress up in a matter of a few more years if not already there and I doubt he has this problem. Do you understand the difference I am making now?
[/quote]
You must be paranoid because that is not what I was doing! I was using Stu because everyone is familiar with him and his positive contribution to this site.
My apologies to Stu if I was indeed out of line using him as an example of a real bodybuilder with dominant shoulders during benching.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
There is bodybuilder huge and there is everyone else. Once again, I have not seen many people with this problem who are able to overcome it like it was never a problem. Those body parts tend to remain a weak link in the chain.
Some people are born for this and others are not and their short comings may be short for the rest of the time they train.
I mean, honestly, if you can’t feel your chest working, do you really expect to build a gigantic chest? Some of this is innate ability.[/quote]
Again with the extremes?
I am talking about partials and their usefulness as part of a complete program made up of Full ROM movements, thats it!
What is so difficult to understand about this?