Opinions on barbell curl..

[monsta]

For years I've been doing bicep barbell curls using the technique described by most trainers and in magazines. That is, to keep the elbows at your side and maintain minimal movement of them as you curl the weight up in an arch. The reason for this I was always told/read was because it isolated the bicep better from your shoulder. Anyhow, a couple of years ago I was shown another way which made so much more sense to me. Now I raise the weight up vertically, letting my elbows float back and forward as the weight is raised. To do this I've had to drop the weight to almost embarrassing levels. The shoulders dont really come into play as they probably only move 10-20% of their range at a very small weight they can handle in that range, plus there is no tendency to use your back to swing the weight up and the weight remains above the centre of balance without rocking back and forward.
So.. [img]smile.gif[/img] what do the guru's here reckon, can anyone give me a good reason why I should go back to locking in the elbows or will I continue raising the weight vertically (thats how gravity works, vertical) I'd suggest to give it a serious try first, you may be surprised.

[Jean-Paul]

I have done curls using this method. It was shown to me by a bodybuilder back in the late 80's, and it seemed to work pretty well. I didn't give up the other method though. It feels like it hits areas the other method does not. Well, I say that, but in reality I have not curled a barbell in a couple of years, opting strictly for dumbbells if I do any bicep isolation work. Too many injuries!

[Bill Hartman]

I seem to recall Vince Gironda calling them body drag curls.

They create a poor mechanical advantage (thus less weight) as you are lengthening the biceps at the shoulder due to the shoulder extension while shortening them from the elbow. It may allow for a variability in loading the elbow flexors at a different angle. You could probably achieve the same effect by performing a regular curl and then bend forward with the arm in the contracted position. (For those who attempt this please refer to them as HARTMAN Curls...I'm tryin' to make a name here )

Certainly, it's a variation, but I don't think it would be something I would recommend as a primary exercise.

Bill Hartman, HARTMAN creator of the HARTMAN curl

[tootall_paul]

Bill is stealing a page from Chad Waterbury's book

the Waterbury Walks
and something else I just cna't remember now

[monsta]

yep, that makes sense Bill. I'll continue doin em every now n then because they feel good to me. I do other isolating stuff as well.
'the Hartman curl' does have a nice ring to it [img]smile.gif[/img] . But because I brought it to this board, I reckon I have to give credit to a bodybuilder, the late Lou Barrie that showed me. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[cuvermodel]

I believe what Bill is talking about (sorry Bill, he already named them) is the idea behind Scotelle curls, designed by Jerry Telle. You lean forward during preacher curls to maintain maximum tension on the biceps during the entire concentric portion. This is because in the regular preacher curl, the finished position is not having any tension (or very little) on the biceps. However, you would not want to bend forward with the arm already in the finished position of the curl Bill, you would want to bend forward DURING the curl. Or just do it on a preacher bench it's a lot easier to get the feel.

Hope this helps those guns out!

[Bill Hartman]

Cuver,

Excellent reference! I've actually done many "Scotelle Curls" myself. Here's why I modified them (finish the curl and then bend - for a standing curl)...

As we bend forward DURING the curl, mechanical advantage is decreasing which limited the amount of weight we could use. Granted we were able to load the 90-140 flexion portion of the curl more effectively but it wasn't maximum load/tension.

So what I do now is complete the curl and then bend until the forearm is perpendicular. We of course complete the eccentric by standing up with the forearm fixed. The added bonus...the static contraction in the weakest position and a heavier eccentric load of the top 1/2 of the movement.

Whenever I do them (which I admit is rare...hate arm training) I also do a seated curl in which I lay back and load the lower half in a similar fashion (done on a Swiss Ball...that's for JP [img]smile.gif[/img] )The static in the stretched position (in theory) increases strength throughout the full range. (the following explanation is not for cuver per se - you better already know that - but for all who read this post).

Your thoughts?

Bill Hartman

P.S. I've emailed Jerry about several programming issues in his first book. He responded by saying the book was total sh*t and he was surprised anyone could get anything out of it (I kinda liked the stick figures...NOT). He stated the second edition would be better. Whenever he gets around to writing it.

[monsta]

Yeah, I do something like that as well. I stand over the pad on the preacher curl rather than sit. This make me lean over giving more tension at the final part of the movement.
The other advantage is there is less tension on the elbow at its weakest point.. fully extended.