I dunno about this Menno. Sure, maybe the bicep is lengthened more using a neutral or pronated grip, but when you go to failure using reverse curls or hammer curls, it's not really the bicep that is the limiting factor is it? It's the Brachioradialis and the brachialis that are the limiting factors in those exercises because they have the best leverage, right? Unless you are saying that the bicep being lengthened/stretched is more beneficial than actually taking a muscle to failure, I'm not so sure about this.
You don’t understand limiting factors. I haven’t even watched this video yet so I’m not defending menno, but when there is a single joint there can’t be a limiting factor between the forces acting on that joint. Like in a freeweight squat, there can be a limiting factor between the knee force and hip force, but in a leg press, there is no limiting factor between the 2 because their movement is jointed due to the fixed path of the machine
He seemingly lacks the knowledge of how sarcomerogenesis (stretch mediated growth) will increase the length of sarcomeres until they are so long in series that further sarcomerogenesis is impossible, which is why stretch mediated growth (and I say growth because it’s muscle growth but technically not hypertrophy as Chris Beardsley elucidated) is a self limiting prophecy and can only occur for a set time (think 3-6 months) until the benefits inherently stop more benefits from occurring
This basically means that stretch will promote more growth for a very small set period and once those benefits are achieve sarcomerogenesis which is the mechanism by whites stretch mediated growth occurs will become impossible in that muscle.
That his hilarious. Especially considering noobs have oftentimes trouble leaving the bicep out of back movements, so they are stimulating it because they do it wrong.
2:08 I'm sorry, but I don't get the correlation between grip *width* and wrist position. You're making it sound like "since grip position doesn't affect biceps recruitment, then you can use any wrist position you want". More importantly, you didn't address the crucial concern raised by the supination argument: the biceps start already shortened, that is correct, but this also allows them to fully contract and contribute to the lift. A more pronated grip prevents the biceps from contracting and it should, in theory, shift the load to the other elbow flexors, recruiting the brachialis and brachioradialis more. In contrast, rotating the wrist from pronation/neutral into supination while curling could be better, to both reach the full stretch and still have the biceps greatly contribute to the entirety of the lift.
Also using different grips may make other muscles the limiting factors in a movement preventing you from taking your biceps to failure, this isnt a big deal if youre a beginner but te more advanced you get the more you need that extra intensity to grow.
Grip width determines wrist position. A narrow grip pull up puts your forearm in a pronated position, a wide grip pull up puts it in a neutral position. With neutral grip pull ups you go from neutral (narrow) to slight supination (wide). And with chin ups you get varying degrees of supination.
Thank God Menno, I got a lot of shit for disagreeing on a RP short a few days ago where mike said Hammer curls are almost always useless and supinated Is better everytime. But I would disagree with pronated curls being a good option as usually Is the grip which Is limiting.
A lot of people seem to think Mike Israetel is infallible, and would never question anything he says. They are mistaken. It is ironic that Mike would think hammer curls are useless, when despite his gear usage, people who extensively do hammer curls without the use of steroids have better arms than him.
10:26 'elbow should be at your side or behind'. I get the point here is to train the bicep at the shoulder (which is why Dr. Mike likes the lying bench bicep curl), but I still feel like the Preacher Curl is superior. I feel a more massive stimulus due to the fact that there is a normal force (the pad that supports the arm) which allows for better feeling of isolation. I've seen your knee supported curl where you lean back on the eccentric, but it still can't beat the pad of the preacher. Any direct bicep isolation move I feel best when there is a direct support just under the elbow (not any further, or else the eccentric portion gets capped).
Feeling a muscle doesn't correlate with hypertrophy or even the stimulus the muscle is getting. Most people would argue that you feel most muscles the most when they are in their shortened position, which is the least needed range of motion for hypertrophy. That being said, preacher curls are still great, because you have the benefit of actually making it a lot easier to load them in a lengthened position (even if not fully lengthened due to the shoulder joint), while with laying/incline dumbbell curls you usually run. into the problem of not having a lot of load at the most lengthened position (or too much load on your front dents if you keep your arms up).
@@LucaBl Your error is assuming that I am talking about the concentric portion. I was talking about the eccentric, or lengthened portion of the move, which works best when there is an opposing force (the pad), rather than relying on gravity solely.
@@SteveJonesOwnsDSP no, I understand what you are saying. I was just saying, that feeling a muscle doesn't mean anything. Like for example I feel my quads like hell with a leg extension and way less with a reverse nordic or a sissy squat, while both of those are more growth promoting for sure. I do agree with your point even, that's what I was saying with second paragraph.
To your point, the worse someone's technique is for back exercises (when they fail to lead with their elbows), the more of a bicep workout they will get from those pulling exercises.
Thank you very much for this video, Menno! This helps alot in understanding that compound exercises have always been kings, and non-fitness enthusiasts can go a long way with full body workouts with calisthenics and don't have to add isolations to save time.
The hand isn't moving, it's in equilibrium. So there's no point drawing the forces from the hand as they are counteracted by the forces in the bar. To consider the moment or torque at the joint use the muscle force line of action and the perpendicular distance from the joint. The problem occurs when you realise that there are two joints in the bicep; at the shoulder is lengthening while the bicep at the elbow is shortening. Still, both of these torques will only partially cancel each other out.
Furthermore, how many times have we seen biceps tears on an exercise with pronated forearm? I, personally, have only ever seen biceps tears on exercises with supinated grip, including deadlifts, chinups, straight bar curls, etc, which suggests to me that these movements put far more tension on the biceps than a pronated or neutral grip does, and we know that tension is a big driving factor in muscle growth. Nobody fails reverse curls due to biceps fatigue, or hammer curls for the same. These curls just do not stress or even use the biceps as much as actively supinating during a curl, or using fixed supinated grip. Science shows one thing, but real world experience shows another. There's a reason why people who skip arms while claiming compounds work arms have smaller arms than people who include isolations.
number 3. well thats doesnt count for me, i stoped training my biceps for years, but increased my total set with pullups and rows. after all these years my arms shrinked from 41-42cm to 37cm. 2 months back i started doing curls again and now my arms are already back to 39.5cm. when i do rows i can relax my biceps like 100%
Yeeeah, I don't believe this myself either. I think the study was on untrained people. My biceps are rarely sore after back day, but after arm day I usually feel it a lot more. There's most likely a lot of value in direct bicep work for intermediate/advanced lifters.
Yeh, if 2RIR or less is optimal for muscle growth, they could only be as effective if your biceps get close to failure, which for me at least they don't, not even close.
Yeah. I can see my clients using the biceps too much in their back training, after i have given some advice it looks better and they say they get tired in the back first, before my advices they got tired in their arms first. Even some advanced lifters just crank they weights with sloppy form and u can see their biceps work, but when I train my back i wanna focus on my back
Well try weighted pullups and tell if your biceps are sore instead of rows. If you row heavy you can't simply pull your elbows to your pockets and grip the bar hard so it does work your biceps just not as curls or pull-ups
Menno, do you think close (i.e. shoulder width or less), underhand grip compound back exercises with elbows kept tight to the torso and where the resistance is from an implement in your hands (i.e. bar, cable, dumbbell, machine, etc... but not bodyweight exercises) actually stimulate the biceps meaningfully for growth in more intermediate/advanced lifters? All studies I've seen seem to always use untrained lifters (who will probably grow measurably from almost any elbow flexor stimulus even if that same stimulus may not grow a more advanced lifter) and/or involve compound exercises with more elbow flare. For example, in an underhand, shoulder-width grip vertical cable pulldown, isn't the cable mostly pulling straight up and parallel to the forearms resulting in minimal resistance on the elbow flexors while performing flexion? Note: this is different than a slightly wider or overhand grip pulldown where the arm typically rotates and the elbows flare out a bit which results in the horizontal forces from the biceps assisting in the movement as described in this video (i.e. the direction of elbow flexion if your hands could move is in line with the pulling movement and opposite of the resistance). If the elbows are pointing straight forward as is typical with underhand grip at shoulder width, the elbow flexion motion would mainly be moving the forearm/hand front to back and not provide much horizontal force inward into the bar/implement or vertical force downward to assist in the pulling. Yes, there is a minor contribution from the elbow flexors since the hand technically arcs slightly and the elbow flexion motion is not purely horizontal, but it seems like it wouldn't be enough to stimulate growth in advanced trainees. Additionally, if at no point the cable is farther away horizontally from your body compared to your hands, the cable seems like it would actually be pulling your hand upward and slightly back inward towards your body at many points in the movement as your arm moves in an arc fashion and the elbow gets farther from the body horizontally, this seems like it would actually assist in elbow flexion rather than resist it. Leaning back slightly may mitigate this somewhat though as the lean may make the cable slightly less vertical and place the hands closer horizontally relative to the cable's distance from your body thus providing some resistance pulling the hand/forearm away from the body which would work the biceps regardless of elbow flare. Really curious on your thoughts since I often hear people mentioning to use underhand grip during back exercise to target the biceps more!
Unrelated to this video, but would you consider doing a video concerning Greg Nuckols' new article regarding recommendations for protein requirements? It was a very in depth and interesting read, would be curious to hear your thoughts on his analysis, especially considering he arrived at a different recommendation as to what you recommend (although not by much, more so the potential upper limit). Seems like the horse isn't dead enough yet. Thank you!
Beasue the bicep is shortened and it's trying to be stretched. Like imagine having a long rubber band and a short rubber band, the shorter one will snap faster if you pull. The longer band can be stretched further before snapping. Hope that makes sense.
do me a favor, put your arm out on your desk and then rotate your hand to a supinated grip. watch the bicep get "sucked up towards your shoulder" think of it in terms of a rubber band, long ones will stretch further, shorter ones don't. Its why tearing occurs more often will supinated because you are trying to get it to stretch beyond what's allowed while you have a shortened bicep.
I superset reverse curls with a big compound on leg days (hack squat, rdl whatever I am doing first) to supplement all the bicep work on pull day. helps with forearms too. easy way to throw in some easy arm volume and no extra time in gym
Do compounds involving biceps count more towards total bicep sets than compounds involving triceps count towards total tricep sets? If so should the number of isolation work for triceps be higher than for biceps generally? How much higher?
I like the take-home points, it's a good way to wrap up the video. Regarding myth #1, isn't it safe to assume that there will likely be other limiting muscles if you use a neutral or pronated grip to train the biceps, thus making the supinated grip a more efficient option since it's easier to assure the biceps are the limiting factor in the exercise?
It would be interesting to see a comparison isolating the difference between a supinated and pronated grip on hypertrophy when controlling for volume and proximity to failure. I do find it hard to believe that pronated would be much more superior than supinated when the beneficial lengthening is what, several millimeters longer?
As an armwrestler who trains almost exclusively neutral and pronated curl variations (as well as training back with the same grips) I can assure you that for SEVERAL YEARS my biceps saw extremely little if not zero growth, while I assumed they would grow from all the elbow flexion. However, it was only when I started including dumbbell supinating curls and EZ bar curls that my biceps actually started growing. So there's an individual case study of considerable duration that shows, for me at least, that the forearms work more than the biceps when not using a supinated/supinating grip on curls.
If you give someone completely untrained zero cues other than just “pull-up” or “pull-down”, sure they might get some decent bicep gains. But for any advanced lifter with decent proprioception, there is absolutely no way your getting even close to the same bicep gains. Moreover, it’s absurd to make claims that certain exercises hit x muscle just as well as isolations, as a well trained bodybuilder can make seemingly minor mechanical alterations that will completely change what muscle group an exercise targets.
The supination thing has always confused me. Biceps aid in supination, so why would pre-supinating them activate them more? It nullifies one of their functions, it should activate them LESS.
It should not activate them less. What should and does activate them less is pronating your wrist. Your quad doesn’t activate more when your hamstring is flexed so same thing applies to biceps when it comes to their role in supination
Love this content Menno - just a question, with the fixed implement for a pull down, much of the force production (I suspect) is isometric on nature - have any further data been developed on the hypertrophic stimulus of isometrics. I do know there is evidence of strength gains, but I'm unaware of anything to do with hypertrophy.
I disagree with #3. 5:08 that argument is dumb btw. Planches are a good biceps exercise and gymnasts do those. Their biceps doesn't come from chin-ups.
I have 18" arms at 45 and im natty. Alternate dumbbell curls and pullups. These studies and fitness content on studies is essentially convoluted slop that makes something simple more complex that what it is. The end.
Bone size and structure, initial muscle size/volume, muscle insertions and overall genetics influencing the hypertrophic potential of an individual are all different for different people. What you achieve or fail to achieve is not only due to exercise selection and how well or badly your workout program is structured. In large part the extent of muscular hypertrophy reached by someone depends on a set of preexisting parameters. Virtually ALL top ranking bodybuilders have a superior set of skeletal, muscular, connective tissue and even psychological parameters compared to the general population.
You may be correct on the biomechanics on the pull-up, but I couldn’t focus enough to tell. The way you deconstructed those force vectors made my engineering brain scream.
I dunno about this Menno. Sure, maybe the bicep is lengthened more using a neutral or pronated grip, but when you go to failure using reverse curls or hammer curls, it's not really the bicep that is the limiting factor is it? It's the Brachioradialis and the brachialis that are the limiting factors in those exercises because they have the best leverage, right? Unless you are saying that the bicep being lengthened/stretched is more beneficial than actually taking a muscle to failure, I'm not so sure about this.
Solution: do all types of curls during your lifting career
@@sunttu333, I do supinated traditional curls, hammer curls and reverse curls. Hit biceps, brachialis and brachioradialis.
You don’t understand limiting factors. I haven’t even watched this video yet so I’m not defending menno, but when there is a single joint there can’t be a limiting factor between the forces acting on that joint. Like in a freeweight squat, there can be a limiting factor between the knee force and hip force, but in a leg press, there is no limiting factor between the 2 because their movement is jointed due to the fixed path of the machine
He seemingly lacks the knowledge of how sarcomerogenesis (stretch mediated growth) will increase the length of sarcomeres until they are so long in series that further sarcomerogenesis is impossible, which is why stretch mediated growth (and I say growth because it’s muscle growth but technically not hypertrophy as Chris Beardsley elucidated) is a self limiting prophecy and can only occur for a set time (think 3-6 months) until the benefits inherently stop more benefits from occurring
This basically means that stretch will promote more growth for a very small set period and once those benefits are achieve sarcomerogenesis which is the mechanism by whites stretch mediated growth occurs will become impossible in that muscle.
study you linked: ''Twenty-nine young men, without prior resistance training experience''
that makes me doubt pulldown bicep growth
That his hilarious. Especially considering noobs have oftentimes trouble leaving the bicep out of back movements, so they are stimulating it because they do it wrong.
@@smebbo6435
there is no leaving the biceps out of back training.
imagine trying to leave triceps out of pressing.
2:08 I'm sorry, but I don't get the correlation between grip *width* and wrist position. You're making it sound like "since grip position doesn't affect biceps recruitment, then you can use any wrist position you want". More importantly, you didn't address the crucial concern raised by the supination argument: the biceps start already shortened, that is correct, but this also allows them to fully contract and contribute to the lift. A more pronated grip prevents the biceps from contracting and it should, in theory, shift the load to the other elbow flexors, recruiting the brachialis and brachioradialis more. In contrast, rotating the wrist from pronation/neutral into supination while curling could be better, to both reach the full stretch and still have the biceps greatly contribute to the entirety of the lift.
Also using different grips may make other muscles the limiting factors in a movement preventing you from taking your biceps to failure, this isnt a big deal if youre a beginner but te more advanced you get the more you need that extra intensity to grow.
Grip width determines wrist position. A narrow grip pull up puts your forearm in a pronated position, a wide grip pull up puts it in a neutral position. With neutral grip pull ups you go from neutral (narrow) to slight supination (wide). And with chin ups you get varying degrees of supination.
Amen
Thank God Menno, I got a lot of shit for disagreeing on a RP short a few days ago where mike said Hammer curls are almost always useless and supinated Is better everytime.
But I would disagree with pronated curls being a good option as usually Is the grip which Is limiting.
A lot of people seem to think Mike Israetel is infallible, and would never question anything he says. They are mistaken.
It is ironic that Mike would think hammer curls are useless, when despite his gear usage, people who extensively do hammer curls without the use of steroids have better arms than him.
If your grip is the limiting factor you need a stronger grip.
@@smebbo6435and how do u get that
@@smgonlykrownz9416 deadhangs and not using straps on pulls
he’s a big fan of versa gripps for limiting this effect. maybe that’s why?
10:26 'elbow should be at your side or behind'. I get the point here is to train the bicep at the shoulder (which is why Dr. Mike likes the lying bench bicep curl), but I still feel like the Preacher Curl is superior. I feel a more massive stimulus due to the fact that there is a normal force (the pad that supports the arm) which allows for better feeling of isolation. I've seen your knee supported curl where you lean back on the eccentric, but it still can't beat the pad of the preacher. Any direct bicep isolation move I feel best when there is a direct support just under the elbow (not any further, or else the eccentric portion gets capped).
Feeling a muscle doesn't correlate with hypertrophy or even the stimulus the muscle is getting. Most people would argue that you feel most muscles the most when they are in their shortened position, which is the least needed range of motion for hypertrophy.
That being said, preacher curls are still great, because you have the benefit of actually making it a lot easier to load them in a lengthened position (even if not fully lengthened due to the shoulder joint), while with laying/incline dumbbell curls you usually run. into the problem of not having a lot of load at the most lengthened position (or too much load on your front dents if you keep your arms up).
@@LucaBl Your error is assuming that I am talking about the concentric portion. I was talking about the eccentric, or lengthened portion of the move, which works best when there is an opposing force (the pad), rather than relying on gravity solely.
@@SteveJonesOwnsDSP no, I understand what you are saying. I was just saying, that feeling a muscle doesn't mean anything.
Like for example I feel my quads like hell with a leg extension and way less with a reverse nordic or a sissy squat, while both of those are more growth promoting for sure.
I do agree with your point even, that's what I was saying with second paragraph.
To your point, the worse someone's technique is for back exercises (when they fail to lead with their elbows), the more of a bicep workout they will get from those pulling exercises.
Thank you Menno for getting right into the content with no fluff 🙌🏼
Yes and extra points for the Bob Ross cameo haha
this is the problem with taking study conclusions completely out of their context and then making inferences
Thank you very much for this video, Menno! This helps alot in understanding that compound exercises have always been kings, and non-fitness enthusiasts can go a long way with full body workouts with calisthenics and don't have to add isolations to save time.
The hand isn't moving, it's in equilibrium. So there's no point drawing the forces from the hand as they are counteracted by the forces in the bar.
To consider the moment or torque at the joint use the muscle force line of action and the perpendicular distance from the joint.
The problem occurs when you realise that there are two joints in the bicep; at the shoulder is lengthening while the bicep at the elbow is shortening.
Still, both of these torques will only partially cancel each other out.
Furthermore, how many times have we seen biceps tears on an exercise with pronated forearm? I, personally, have only ever seen biceps tears on exercises with supinated grip, including deadlifts, chinups, straight bar curls, etc, which suggests to me that these movements put far more tension on the biceps than a pronated or neutral grip does, and we know that tension is a big driving factor in muscle growth. Nobody fails reverse curls due to biceps fatigue, or hammer curls for the same. These curls just do not stress or even use the biceps as much as actively supinating during a curl, or using fixed supinated grip. Science shows one thing, but real world experience shows another. There's a reason why people who skip arms while claiming compounds work arms have smaller arms than people who include isolations.
number 3. well thats doesnt count for me, i stoped training my biceps for years, but increased my total set with pullups and rows. after all these years my arms shrinked from 41-42cm to 37cm. 2 months back i started doing curls again and now my arms are already back to 39.5cm. when i do rows i can relax my biceps like 100%
Yeeeah, I don't believe this myself either. I think the study was on untrained people. My biceps are rarely sore after back day, but after arm day I usually feel it a lot more. There's most likely a lot of value in direct bicep work for intermediate/advanced lifters.
Yeh, if 2RIR or less is optimal for muscle growth, they could only be as effective if your biceps get close to failure, which for me at least they don't, not even close.
Yeah. I can see my clients using the biceps too much in their back training, after i have given some advice it looks better and they say they get tired in the back first, before my advices they got tired in their arms first. Even some advanced lifters just crank they weights with sloppy form and u can see their biceps work, but when I train my back i wanna focus on my back
Agreed. His advice sometimes seems like he’s trying to be contrarian for the sake of sticking out or something
Well try weighted pullups and tell if your biceps are sore instead of rows. If you row heavy you can't simply pull your elbows to your pockets and grip the bar hard so it does work your biceps just not as curls or pull-ups
you said supination is not better for biceps but then you said chin-ups are especially good for biceps even compared to pull-ups 🤔
Menno, do you think close (i.e. shoulder width or less), underhand grip compound back exercises with elbows kept tight to the torso and where the resistance is from an implement in your hands (i.e. bar, cable, dumbbell, machine, etc... but not bodyweight exercises) actually stimulate the biceps meaningfully for growth in more intermediate/advanced lifters?
All studies I've seen seem to always use untrained lifters (who will probably grow measurably from almost any elbow flexor stimulus even if that same stimulus may not grow a more advanced lifter) and/or involve compound exercises with more elbow flare.
For example, in an underhand, shoulder-width grip vertical cable pulldown, isn't the cable mostly pulling straight up and parallel to the forearms resulting in minimal resistance on the elbow flexors while performing flexion?
Note: this is different than a slightly wider or overhand grip pulldown where the arm typically rotates and the elbows flare out a bit which results in the horizontal forces from the biceps assisting in the movement as described in this video (i.e. the direction of elbow flexion if your hands could move is in line with the pulling movement and opposite of the resistance).
If the elbows are pointing straight forward as is typical with underhand grip at shoulder width, the elbow flexion motion would mainly be moving the forearm/hand front to back and not provide much horizontal force inward into the bar/implement or vertical force downward to assist in the pulling.
Yes, there is a minor contribution from the elbow flexors since the hand technically arcs slightly and the elbow flexion motion is not purely horizontal, but it seems like it wouldn't be enough to stimulate growth in advanced trainees.
Additionally, if at no point the cable is farther away horizontally from your body compared to your hands, the cable seems like it would actually be pulling your hand upward and slightly back inward towards your body at many points in the movement as your arm moves in an arc fashion and the elbow gets farther from the body horizontally, this seems like it would actually assist in elbow flexion rather than resist it.
Leaning back slightly may mitigate this somewhat though as the lean may make the cable slightly less vertical and place the hands closer horizontally relative to the cable's distance from your body thus providing some resistance pulling the hand/forearm away from the body which would work the biceps regardless of elbow flare.
Really curious on your thoughts since I often hear people mentioning to use underhand grip during back exercise to target the biceps more!
Unrelated to this video, but would you consider doing a video concerning Greg Nuckols' new article regarding recommendations for protein requirements?
It was a very in depth and interesting read, would be curious to hear your thoughts on his analysis, especially considering he arrived at a different recommendation as to what you recommend (although not by much, more so the potential upper limit).
Seems like the horse isn't dead enough yet.
Thank you!
If supination shorten bicep, why do powerlifters tend to tear their bicep when using supinated grip on deadlifts?
Probably because they straighten that arm a mm or more less then the other arm.
Beasue the bicep is shortened and it's trying to be stretched.
Like imagine having a long rubber band and a short rubber band, the shorter one will snap faster if you pull. The longer band can be stretched further before snapping.
Hope that makes sense.
Maybe because the tendon at elbow is stretched when the bicep shortens
It’s straight they do not curl the bar in deadlifts
do me a favor, put your arm out on your desk and then rotate your hand to a supinated grip. watch the bicep get "sucked up towards your shoulder" think of it in terms of a rubber band, long ones will stretch further, shorter ones don't. Its why tearing occurs more often will supinated because you are trying to get it to stretch beyond what's allowed while you have a shortened bicep.
I superset reverse curls with a big compound on leg days (hack squat, rdl whatever I am doing first) to supplement all the bicep work on pull day. helps with forearms too. easy way to throw in some easy arm volume and no extra time in gym
Do compounds involving biceps count more towards total bicep sets than compounds involving triceps count towards total tricep sets? If so should the number of isolation work for triceps be higher than for biceps generally? How much higher?
I like the take-home points, it's a good way to wrap up the video. Regarding myth #1, isn't it safe to assume that there will likely be other limiting muscles if you use a neutral or pronated grip to train the biceps, thus making the supinated grip a more efficient option since it's easier to assure the biceps are the limiting factor in the exercise?
It would be interesting to see a comparison isolating the difference between a supinated and pronated grip on hypertrophy when controlling for volume and proximity to failure. I do find it hard to believe that pronated would be much more superior than supinated when the beneficial lengthening is what, several millimeters longer?
Yeah that whole better to train the biceps outside of supination is complete nonsense.
I'll try some pronated grip curls with a lighter weight, see how it goes.
Maybe a Bayesian reverse curl using a D-handle might be an option.
I'm gonna try a set after doing some regular Bayesian curls tonight
You'll feel it all in your forearms and literally nothing in your biceps.
As an armwrestler who trains almost exclusively neutral and pronated curl variations (as well as training back with the same grips) I can assure you that for SEVERAL YEARS my biceps saw extremely little if not zero growth, while I assumed they would grow from all the elbow flexion. However, it was only when I started including dumbbell supinating curls and EZ bar curls that my biceps actually started growing. So there's an individual case study of considerable duration that shows, for me at least, that the forearms work more than the biceps when not using a supinated/supinating grip on curls.
You must not have watched up to the part where he said you could probably see more growth by using a variety of grips, did you?
If you give someone completely untrained zero cues other than just “pull-up” or “pull-down”, sure they might get some decent bicep gains. But for any advanced lifter with decent proprioception, there is absolutely no way your getting even close to the same bicep gains. Moreover, it’s absurd to make claims that certain exercises hit x muscle just as well as isolations, as a well trained bodybuilder can make seemingly minor mechanical alterations that will completely change what muscle group an exercise targets.
So Myth1 would suggest that a traditional supinated grip barbell curl is the least efficient/optimal for the bicepa VS reverse curls or hammer curls?
ty for your work! greats from Russia
🇺🇦 🇺🇦 🇺🇦
The supination thing has always confused me. Biceps aid in supination, so why would pre-supinating them activate them more? It nullifies one of their functions, it should activate them LESS.
It should not activate them less. What should and does activate them less is pronating your wrist. Your quad doesn’t activate more when your hamstring is flexed so same thing applies to biceps when it comes to their role in supination
Love this content Menno - just a question, with the fixed implement for a pull down, much of the force production (I suspect) is isometric on nature - have any further data been developed on the hypertrophic stimulus of isometrics. I do know there is evidence of strength gains, but I'm unaware of anything to do with hypertrophy.
It isnt isometric because as you pull bar down, your elbow angle closes.
Menno: what are some good neutral or pronated grip movements for biceps, then? NG Bayesian Curl, perhaps?
7:20 gahd dahm Hector can hold that position for a long time
what if your forearms are overpowering your biceps, should you still not care and use hammer grip to train biceps?
6:52 .. more please .. also clip this for Dr. Mike
I disagree with #3. 5:08 that argument is dumb btw. Planches are a good biceps exercise and gymnasts do those. Their biceps doesn't come from chin-ups.
I have 18" arms at 45 and im natty. Alternate dumbbell curls and pullups. These studies and fitness content on studies is essentially convoluted slop that makes something simple more complex that what it is. The end.
Bone size and structure, initial muscle size/volume, muscle insertions and overall genetics influencing the hypertrophic potential of an individual are all different for different people. What you achieve or fail to achieve is not only due to exercise selection and how well or badly your workout program is structured. In large part the extent of muscular hypertrophy reached by someone depends on a set of preexisting parameters. Virtually ALL top ranking bodybuilders have a superior set of skeletal, muscular, connective tissue and even psychological parameters compared to the general population.
Reverse curls back on the menu?
Menno is one of the best channels on YT! Keep up the good work
You may be correct on the biomechanics on the pull-up, but I couldn’t focus enough to tell. The way you deconstructed those force vectors made my engineering brain scream.
This has to be one of the dumbest “science based” videos I’ve ever seen
Like a pronated bicep curl?
Never done that😅
Thumbnail kinda juicy
great
What about Barbell row does it count as half the volume for biceps??
5:13
Row is a row.
💪💪💪
Meno. Somebody is definitely gonna clip that. You know exactly what timestamp I'm referring to
Nice we have a tinder profile pic thumbnail