Re:Lifting for strength --- WOW!!!

[Guest guest]

You guys have got quite the rift going between the two of you.

FWIW/not worth. I would agree with Brett on his first point.

Personally, I have found dumbells to be much more difficult than

barbell presses. At my peak, I could bench press 265lbs for a max 8

reps. Switching to dumbells, the best I ever " got up " was 110 each.

It is MY belief, that dumbells are great for chest development.

Bench Presses are great for entire upper torso development, including

the chest.

Me thinks you guys maybe trying to say the same things. The problem

is that bench presses bring in multiple muscle groups, while dumbbell

presses tend to isolate the chest more. I also wonder, if the term

strength, is being confused with mass. Bench press IMO, adds way

more OVERALL " bulk " , while dumbbell presses add " bulk " primarily to

the CHEST.

Sorry if this is nowhere near helping your discussion. Just my two

cents.

Del

> > ____________

> > Yeah well wasn't it you who said if a person subtracts

> > 45lbs from their barbell weight that's how much they

> > can do with dumbells. I don't think you can honestly

> > say that bench pressing 2 70lb dumbells is just as

> > tough as pressing 140lbs.

> I think that pressing 140 on barbell is MUCH easier than pressing

70lb dumbells. I can

> do 17 reps with 225, but no way on earth I can do that with 110's.

On a good day,

> totally focused, warmed up but fresh, maybe 10 reps. But not 17

> . On incline, it is

> closer for me, but there is still a difference. I was doing sets

of 7-8 with 225 on

> monday, slightly easier than if I was doing 110lb dumbells.

>

> > I don't think I can express myself anymore when it

> > comes to going up quickly in dumbell press without

> > being redundant. Maybe someone else reading the

> > arguement could get into it better than me.

>

> You are saying that someone will increase their strength faster

with dumbells than with

> barbells? 1) that's a new one, 2) I'd like to see some references,

3) hasn't happened to

> me, and I've done both since I started lifting.

>

> I refer back to my example of flat dumbell. Since I haven't done

it much lately, only

> incline, I was " rusty " . However, in the 3-4 weeks since I started,

I am now using 95s

> instead of 70s, and I'm guessing that this " WD-40 " phase will

continue until 120-130s, at

> which point my " neuro " levels will be in line with my " muscle "

levels, ie, the dumbell

> amounts will be inline with my barbell amounts. The good part will

be that I will have

> added another " weapon " to my exercise " arsenal " that I can rotate

in regularly to entice

> my muscles to continue to adapt. Another good part that I'm hoping

for is that in the

> process, I will have stimulated my chest some. I don't see it as

superior or inferior

> for my purposes, just another tool.

>

> And as I said, like it or not, the barbell benchpress, along with

the squat and dead, are

> THE accepted measurements of strength on this planet, so IF you

want to compare apples to

> apples, they are the tool.

>

> And I want to. A little bit. (looking at the amounts some

powerlifters do, it is pretty

> easy to stay humble)

>

> Brett