In reading through the responses, it sounds like it worked for several to the extent promised, and for almost everyone to some extent positively, which isn't bad for a 2-week program, iyam.
I'm still torn on whether to do this or not. Think I may do another cycle on Armstrong program later this summer instead, since it's been about a year.
Take a closer look at all the pics.
The first one, the guy clearly added mass all around, so it was likely a factor of diet, and the rest of his program. His abs are less visible, same with forarm vascularity.
Keep looking through the pics, you can see peoples chest's filled out, and alot of other things. Its pure crap. There are too many other factors, and the ones that had some seeming success probably had all other things in line too. For example, if they had full body days were they were doing BO Rows or pull ups along with some deads/squats and some benching, yeah, their arms could see some gains. And on top of that, this arms in 2 weeks program basically gave it a HFT spin.
If it sounds too good to be true, dont dismiss it, it may still work, just not for the same reason stated.
__________________
"Obsession is a word that lazy people use to describe the Dedicated."
Take a closer look at all the pics.
The first one, the guy clearly added mass all around, so it was likely a factor of diet, and the rest of his program. His abs are less visible, same with forarm vascularity.
Gaining mass is all about diet. Whats the point?
Quote:
Keep looking through the pics, you can see peoples chest's filled out, and alot of other things. Its pure crap.
Who cares if they gained mass in other areas, they still measured their progress by arm growth in the competition.
Quote:
There are too many other factors, and the ones that had some seeming success probably had all other things in line too.
Yes and the ones who didnt feel their progess was up to par admitted that they worked a lot or whatever. This isnt a scientific study, nor did it claim to be.
Quote:
For example, if they had full body days were they were doing BO Rows or pull ups along with some deads/squats and some benching, yeah, their arms could see some gains.
So?
Quote:
And on top of that, this arms in 2 weeks program basically gave it a HFT spin.
So?
__________________
"The strongest steel goes through the hottest fires."-Anonymous
"When you begin to believe nothing is heavy, all weights become light." -Rossbow
"Just remember, somewhere there is a little Chinese girl warming up with your max."-Jim Convroy
"It's a round hole, dammit. Everyone fits."--Anonymous Mod at Strengthmill
i'm so tired of hearing about articles like this. People need to stop worrying about their bis and start eating and lifting heavy. Have you ever seen someone who can bench 405 with small arms? Or even 315 for that matter. Tris take up a significantly larger portion of the arm than your bis, yet, you see the same amount of sets for bis as tris, and spend tons of time doing curls and tri extensions.
It doesn't help that the majority of the people who run challenges like this at t-mag, or compete in them are 160lbs soaking wet. They need to get bigger all around.
I'm sure saying this will sound like I'm being an asshole, but I agree with Alco to an extent. I see a lot of those pics over at t-mag and it is just amazes me how most of those people look like they have never lifted a weight and here they are all concerned about how big their biceps are. Sure, it's fantastic that they get fired up over a program and actually train. But what I hate about specialization programs (particularily bicep ones) is that you will see guys with 40 inch waists worrying about the size of their arms. But honestly, I looked at the first three pages of that thread and every single picture for the most-part included a guy whom if I saw standing on the street, I would think never seriously trained for any significant amount of time. But WOW......I got 1/8 or 1/16th of an inch on my right arm!!!!!11!
I agree with you guys, but try to look at it from their perspective for a moment.
A lot of us just started "training" a few years ago. A lot started off skinny or fat and have been working on the "problem" for a while. 3 years of lifting isn't a lot, but when you've only been doing it for 3 years, it seems like a long time to not get the progress you'd hoped for.
I wouldn't jump into a bi specialization program (nor a "challenge"), but I wish I was bigger, stronger, and leaner. As someone who used to be fat (3 years ago), it's frustrating to be where I am, despite the obvious positive changes to my body. Do I feel like looking for a quick fix? Yes. But, my arms are growing nicely with just a normal workout, thanks...
We all know the lottery is a bad risk (don't we?), but some people get so frustrated by where they are in life, that they're willing to gamble $5 a week, for a chance at never having to show up to work again.
One positive thing to these specialization programs (like a leg one, even) is that guys learn good ways to lift when doing them. The best specialization program gives you the workout and/or solid guidelines for the rest of the bod. If you see success, you'll likely see some success all over and realize what a good program can do.
That being said, I think Darden's article just said "do mine on top of your regular routine." Not so good, IMHO. What if you're a guy that's already killing his Arm Day with tons and tons of different curls? What's that guy learning?
or, specialization programs can give you almost no results (i.e: 1/8" on your biceps), and people get frustrated and quit.
T-mag has really been putting out some bad articles for the past few years. Eric's, Mike's, Tates, Berardi's and a few select others are the good ones. All they ever seem to write about is specialization programs. They never focus on a proper layout for a workout, which is what the majority of the t-mag readers need to do, a REAL program.
or, specialization programs can give you almost no results (i.e: 1/8" on your biceps), and people get frustrated and quit.
T-mag has really been putting out some bad articles for the past few years. Eric's, Mike's, Tates, Berardi's and a few select others are the good ones. All they ever seem to write about is specialization programs. They never focus on a proper layout for a workout, which is what the majority of the t-mag readers need to do, a REAL program.
Ummm, what about Chad's programs? Many people have gotten great results from his programs.
waterbury's programs are good b/c they focus around compound exercises. 10x3 is not much different than 5x5 or 6x4, etc etc... I actually think Starr's 5x5 program yields better results than ABBH. But yeah, waterbury's actual full programs are good.
or, specialization programs can give you almost no results (i.e: 1/8" on your biceps), and people get frustrated and quit.
T-mag has really been putting out some bad articles for the past few years. Eric's, Mike's, Tates, Berardi's and a few select others are the good ones. All they ever seem to write about is specialization programs. They never focus on a proper layout for a workout, which is what the majority of the t-mag readers need to do, a REAL program.
I see your point. I guess I'm going to take back some of what I said earlier. My theory is possible, but now I think that these articles have too much potential downside without some big ol' disclaimer on them about who they are right for.
I hope that the people who didn't see much (or any) arm progress saw progress elsewhere and realize that they just need a good workout and food. I noticed that a lot of them saw little arm growth, but commented on weight gain, chest gain, etc.
After going back and looking at the pics, today, I saw some arms and bods that are just tiny. I'm nothing to write home about, arm-wise, but I don't know why some of them bother "specializing" when they are just beginning.
.....but I don't know why some of them bother "specializing" when they are just beginning.
*echo* you have to have strong points to have weak ones. If you have a thick wide back, tree trunk legs, and popeye forarms and you want to "bring up the bi's a little". ok...more power to ya. chances are if you have those things your "bi's" probibly don't need blasting.
That is my point, that there were other factors involved, it wasnt just the routine, things arent accounted for, and diet is a field that should be paid attention to, more so then particular workouts even, and esp. more so than specialization workouts.
Who cares if they gained mass in other areas, they still measured their progress by arm growth in the competition.
My point there too, that what i was trying to point out, progress was made all around in some cases, once again, cant all be due to that program.
Yes and the ones who didnt feel their progess was up to par admitted that they worked a lot or whatever. This isnt a scientific study, nor did it claim to be.
Ofcourse, you dont work as hard, more often than not you wont see the same gains. And i know it wasnt a scientific study, but there'll always be someone who looks at it like its proof that itll do the same for them.
So?
Everyone rants and raves about full body and compound movements, and im reiterating.
So? So yeah, my entire post was bc im not a fan of the program, or specialization programs, and tried to succintly rant and say so. People were diving into it like there was something profound there, there blatantly isnt. Others bashed it completely, and i wouldnt do that, sure id rather spend my time doing something other than this program, but it can work. Not bc its special, or bc working your bis and tris only is the way to go, but bc more general and more acclaimed principles in sports science can back some of the things up. The most commonly understood example is CW's recent articles on FT, and simple logical: lift something heavy, lift it often, your muscle will get stronger/grow/both/something to that nature.
where you trying to get at something particular with your post?
__________________
"Obsession is a word that lazy people use to describe the Dedicated."
That is my point, that there were other factors involved, it wasnt just the routine, things arent accounted for, and diet is a field that should be paid attention to, more so then particular workouts even, and esp. more so than specialization workouts.
Again this isn’t a scientific study so there will be people with better diets, recovery, etc. This isn’t a diet article, it functions under the assumption that all of this stuff is in order. If youre not doing that, then you shouldn’t even be doing this Challenge. This is pretty moot to the article though, which is why I said “so.”
Quote:
Who cares if they gained mass in other areas, they still measured their progress by arm growth in the competition.
My point there too, that what i was trying to point out, progress was made all around in some cases, once again, cant all be due to that program.
And again I ask “so?” Youre pointing out that people made gains elsewhere, but how does that further your argument that this is “pure crap”? No one said your thighs, chest or whatever would get bigger, but if they did, then woohoo
Quote:
Yes and the ones who didnt feel their progess was up to par admitted that they worked a lot or whatever. This isnt a scientific study, nor did it claim to be.
Ofcourse, you dont work as hard, more often than not you wont see the same gains. And i know it wasnt a scientific study, but there'll always be someone who looks at it like its proof that itll do the same for them.
And that person will be stupid.
Quote:
So?
Everyone rants and raves about full body and compound movements, and im reiterating.
Youre saying that you could gain arm mass with full body days. That’s nice, but how does that compare with the article? Will they be greater, less, or what? Youre just making this statement without showing its relevance.
Quote:
So? So yeah, my entire post was bc im not a fan of the program, or specialization programs, and tried to succintly rant and say so. People were diving into it like there was something profound there, there blatantly isnt. Others bashed it completely, and i wouldnt do that, sure id rather spend my time doing something other than this program, but it can work. Not bc its special, or bc working your bis and tris only is the way to go, but bc more general and more acclaimed principles in sports science can back some of the things up. The most commonly understood example is CW's recent articles on FT, and simple logical: lift something heavy, lift it often, your muscle will get stronger/grow/both/something to that nature.
You used the phrase “and on top of that” to further some sort of argument, which still isn’t clear. What does the notion that “this arms in 2 weeks program basically gave it a HFT spin” have anything to do with what you just posted above?
Quote:
where you trying to get at something particular with your post?
Meh, Im just not sure what youre ranting about, or more specifically, how what you posted furthers your point.
__________________
"The strongest steel goes through the hottest fires."-Anonymous
"When you begin to believe nothing is heavy, all weights become light." -Rossbow
"Just remember, somewhere there is a little Chinese girl warming up with your max."-Jim Convroy
"It's a round hole, dammit. Everyone fits."--Anonymous Mod at Strengthmill
Looks like the "Bigger Arms in 2 Weeks" Test did not work
Linear Mode
