Can I build a booty without weights?
Options
Replies
-
If you're talking sprints and gymnastics, these are exercises that are more ANAEROBIC than aerobic. Look at 100m sprinters versus long distance runners. Big difference in muscularity. And muscular definition has more to do with low body fat than actually having big muscles. Bruce Lee is a good example.GiddyupTim wrote: »I'd like to play devil's advocate here.
I used to be a soccer player.
I have seen many teenage boy soccer players develop pretty massive legs just by playing soccer, which one would think would be impossible considering how many calories sprinting 4-7 miles a game and maybe 4 miles per practice that it requires.
My brother has extremely large thighs from soccer and periodic training running hill repeats -- nothing more.
Now certainly, those are teenage males loaded up on testosterone who might have developed those legs anyway. But it is not uncommon on the soccer field, and I definitely know male cyclists (admittedly young, again) who have developed large legs without weights by bicycling -- hard bicycling, but bicycling alone nonetheless.
Moreover, my wife, a 50-year-old female and a life-long runner, recently took up rowing on a team. She has now been doing it for approximately two years. She has wide hips and she used to have a fairly flat butt. But she's my wife, so I look at her butt quite often and I think it has gained some volume over these two years of rowing. It is hard to say without being able to compare before and after side-by-side. But it definitely seems like it to me.
Sure, lifting weights in ever increasing quantities is, of course, optimal. But it seems quite possible to build muscle with other activities.
There are guys in the park who do nothing but body weight calisthenics -- not to mention gymnasts -- who are absolutely jacked. They may not have the size of a body builder, but they are quite muscular.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
You do realize that if one GAINS weight, they are moving more resistance? That's progressive overload.Silkysausage wrote: »Firm up your *kitten* using bands and floor exercises but there'll be no bubble butt...
If you can manage to progressively add resistance in a surplus you can. It is more difficult but not impossibleSilkysausage wrote: »Firm up your *kitten* using bands and floor exercises but there'll be no bubble butt...
If you can manage to progressively add resistance in a surplus you can. It is more difficult but not impossible
You know, I had internalized the whole “you can't build muscle without weights and a surplus” but then I had an aerialist instructor who did nothing but body resistance trapeze and aerial silks. I asked her if she lifted and she laughed out loud. “I don’t need to do that *kitten* with this” she said.
She probably was eating at a surplus at some point, but with no lifting at all she had massive arms/shoulders/back. She was probably 4in shorter than me, 30lbs heavier and much leaner.
Add in her flexibility and I was ridiculously jealous.
Not impossible, but I think a lot of people here on MFP discount the possibility. It just takes a LOT of dedication.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
You do realize that if one GAINS weight, they are moving more resistance? That's progressive overload.Silkysausage wrote: »Firm up your *kitten* using bands and floor exercises but there'll be no bubble butt...
If you can manage to progressively add resistance in a surplus you can. It is more difficult but not impossibleSilkysausage wrote: »Firm up your *kitten* using bands and floor exercises but there'll be no bubble butt...
If you can manage to progressively add resistance in a surplus you can. It is more difficult but not impossible
You know, I had internalized the whole “you can't build muscle without weights and a surplus” but then I had an aerialist instructor who did nothing but body resistance trapeze and aerial silks. I asked her if she lifted and she laughed out loud. “I don’t need to do that *kitten* with this” she said.
She probably was eating at a surplus at some point, but with no lifting at all she had massive arms/shoulders/back. She was probably 4in shorter than me, 30lbs heavier and much leaner.
Add in her flexibility and I was ridiculously jealous.
Not impossible, but I think a lot of people here on MFP discount the possibility. It just takes a LOT of dedication.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Absolutely. But here most people say you can’t get significant overload to build that much muscle with body weight alone. To the point where I feel like they are discouraging these activities.
Edit: no...gaining weight means they’re eating more regardless of resistance training. I respect you enough to know you know the difference. Gaining muscle is a different story, and she was a brick house that had never lifted a weight. Yes, she had to have had progressive overload, but she did it with body weight alone. That was my point.
Edit again. Oh I see what you’re saying about increased (body) weight...but that doesn’t change the fact that most people on MFP say it’s not possible.1 -
One can do progressive overload with body weight only by manipulating leverage points, but there's a limit. Aerialists do a lot of single arm, single leg and "flag poling", so they've definitely been able to progress not only in strength, but also a little muscle.
You do realize that if one GAINS weight, they are moving more resistance? That's progressive overload.Silkysausage wrote: »Firm up your *kitten* using bands and floor exercises but there'll be no bubble butt...
If you can manage to progressively add resistance in a surplus you can. It is more difficult but not impossibleSilkysausage wrote: »Firm up your *kitten* using bands and floor exercises but there'll be no bubble butt...
If you can manage to progressively add resistance in a surplus you can. It is more difficult but not impossible
You know, I had internalized the whole “you can't build muscle without weights and a surplus” but then I had an aerialist instructor who did nothing but body resistance trapeze and aerial silks. I asked her if she lifted and she laughed out loud. “I don’t need to do that *kitten* with this” she said.
She probably was eating at a surplus at some point, but with no lifting at all she had massive arms/shoulders/back. She was probably 4in shorter than me, 30lbs heavier and much leaner.
Add in her flexibility and I was ridiculously jealous.
Not impossible, but I think a lot of people here on MFP discount the possibility. It just takes a LOT of dedication.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Absolutely. But here most people say you can’t get significant overload to build that much muscle with body weight alone. To the point where I feel like they are discouraging these activities.
Edit: no...gaining weight means they’re eating more regardless of resistance training. I respect you enough to know you know the difference. Gaining muscle is a different story, and she was a brick house that had never lifted a weight. Yes, she had to have had progressive overload, but she did it with body weight alone. That was my point.
Thing is, most AVERAGE people can't do a lot of gymnastics, aerial work, hard dancing, etc. well without a few years of experience under their belt. And most people WON'T take the time to learn it based on how society today looks for instant gratification. I don't think it dissuades them from trying it. I think it's the DEDICATION to sticking to it that most people may not be able to do (just like any exercise programming) unless they really commit to it.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
2 -
You do realize that if one GAINS weight, they are moving more resistance? That's progressive overload.Silkysausage wrote: »Firm up your *kitten* using bands and floor exercises but there'll be no bubble butt...
If you can manage to progressively add resistance in a surplus you can. It is more difficult but not impossibleSilkysausage wrote: »Firm up your *kitten* using bands and floor exercises but there'll be no bubble butt...
If you can manage to progressively add resistance in a surplus you can. It is more difficult but not impossible
You know, I had internalized the whole “you can't build muscle without weights and a surplus” but then I had an aerialist instructor who did nothing but body resistance trapeze and aerial silks. I asked her if she lifted and she laughed out loud. “I don’t need to do that *kitten* with this” she said.
She probably was eating at a surplus at some point, but with no lifting at all she had massive arms/shoulders/back. She was probably 4in shorter than me, 30lbs heavier and much leaner.
Add in her flexibility and I was ridiculously jealous.
Not impossible, but I think a lot of people here on MFP discount the possibility. It just takes a LOT of dedication.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Absolutely. But here most people say you can’t get significant overload to build that much muscle with body weight alone. To the point where I feel like they are discouraging these activities.
Edit: no...gaining weight means they’re eating more regardless of resistance training. I respect you enough to know you know the difference. Gaining muscle is a different story, and she was a brick house that had never lifted a weight. Yes, she had to have had progressive overload, but she did it with body weight alone. That was my point.
Edit again. Oh I see what you’re saying about increased (body) weight...but that doesn’t change the fact that most people on MFP say it’s not possible.
Do you know what she looked like before she started aerial? Chances are she was a big girl who gained significant muscles from carrying around extra weight. Then she lost body fat and became a brick house. I'm around a lot of aerialists. While you can build some nice upper body muscle, you're not going to turn into a brick house doing it. Like climbers, most are very thin and lean with a lot of strength.
1 -
Hey! So currently I don't have access to a gym or weights and I want a big booty! I've been doing booty workouts that supposedly will give me a bigger butt but all it's done is toned it and made it rounder, but not bigger.
My worry is that if I keep doing the same workout my body will get used to it and stop any process all together so I've made a new workout to try out this afternoon - but idk if it will give me the booty I want still or just keep it toned??
Any tips, advice or moves? Help!
Try glute Bridges0 -
Try glute Bridges0
-
Eating enough and lifting consistently will make ur glutes grow but u have to have the mind muscle connection while doing the exercise and not just going thro the motions, also hip thrusts are great for glute growth.0
-
If you're talking sprints and gymnastics, these are exercises that are more ANAEROBIC than aerobic. Look at 100m sprinters versus long distance runners. Big difference in muscularity. And muscular definition has more to do with low body fat than actually having big muscles. Bruce Lee is a good example.GiddyupTim wrote: »I'd like to play devil's advocate here.
I used to be a soccer player.
I have seen many teenage boy soccer players develop pretty massive legs just by playing soccer, which one would think would be impossible considering how many calories sprinting 4-7 miles a game and maybe 4 miles per practice that it requires.
My brother has extremely large thighs from soccer and periodic training running hill repeats -- nothing more.
Now certainly, those are teenage males loaded up on testosterone who might have developed those legs anyway. But it is not uncommon on the soccer field, and I definitely know male cyclists (admittedly young, again) who have developed large legs without weights by bicycling -- hard bicycling, but bicycling alone nonetheless.
Moreover, my wife, a 50-year-old female and a life-long runner, recently took up rowing on a team. She has now been doing it for approximately two years. She has wide hips and she used to have a fairly flat butt. But she's my wife, so I look at her butt quite often and I think it has gained some volume over these two years of rowing. It is hard to say without being able to compare before and after side-by-side. But it definitely seems like it to me.
Sure, lifting weights in ever increasing quantities is, of course, optimal. But it seems quite possible to build muscle with other activities.
There are guys in the park who do nothing but body weight calisthenics -- not to mention gymnasts -- who are absolutely jacked. They may not have the size of a body builder, but they are quite muscular.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Um.......Whatever......They are bodyweight exercises and many people doing those activities get big, not just low body fat.
Look at the arms on those gymnasts!1 -
GiddyupTim wrote: »
If you're talking sprints and gymnastics, these are exercises that are more ANAEROBIC than aerobic. Look at 100m sprinters versus long distance runners. Big difference in muscularity. And muscular definition has more to do with low body fat than actually having big muscles. Bruce Lee is a good example.GiddyupTim wrote: »I'd like to play devil's advocate here.
I used to be a soccer player.
I have seen many teenage boy soccer players develop pretty massive legs just by playing soccer, which one would think would be impossible considering how many calories sprinting 4-7 miles a game and maybe 4 miles per practice that it requires.
My brother has extremely large thighs from soccer and periodic training running hill repeats -- nothing more.
Now certainly, those are teenage males loaded up on testosterone who might have developed those legs anyway. But it is not uncommon on the soccer field, and I definitely know male cyclists (admittedly young, again) who have developed large legs without weights by bicycling -- hard bicycling, but bicycling alone nonetheless.
Moreover, my wife, a 50-year-old female and a life-long runner, recently took up rowing on a team. She has now been doing it for approximately two years. She has wide hips and she used to have a fairly flat butt. But she's my wife, so I look at her butt quite often and I think it has gained some volume over these two years of rowing. It is hard to say without being able to compare before and after side-by-side. But it definitely seems like it to me.
Sure, lifting weights in ever increasing quantities is, of course, optimal. But it seems quite possible to build muscle with other activities.
There are guys in the park who do nothing but body weight calisthenics -- not to mention gymnasts -- who are absolutely jacked. They may not have the size of a body builder, but they are quite muscular.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Um.......Whatever......They are bodyweight exercises and many people doing those activities get big, not just low body fat.
Look at the arms on those gymnasts!
And you honestly believe those gymnasts don't spend any time in the weight room?3 -
I would be extremely surprised to learn that their muscles come from weight lifting, yes!
They spent most of their time working on their skills, because it requires such skill. Given that, I would doubt that many coaches have them fatiguing themselves -- and losing flexibility -- by lifting heavy weights in the gym and being sore and tired the next day.
You're going to tell me that those 16-year-old female Olympians, with muscles everywhere and broad shoulders, got those -- and got to where they are -- by pumping iron in the weight room, not by practicing their craft?3 -
Posted by a gymnast on a Bodybuilding.com forum:
"Gymnasts don't ACTUALLY do isometric holds for conditioning a lot of the time. Unless you are working a specific strength move (mainly on rings) like an iron cross, planche, maltese or inverted cross, the majority of the conditiong will be dynamic exercises like planche progression pushups, front lever progression pullups, rope climbs, dips, handstand pushups, etc. Working out the specific skills is actually a large chunk of the exercising and requires enormous stamina and endurance strength to complete usually 5-6 hours per day. The actual conditioning where they work on strength is only about 30-1 hour a day and will not usually include failure training since that would burn out the gymnast especially if they are training 5-6 hours a day. Imagine that.. gaining muscle and increasing strength without having to rest for days to let your muscles heal. Who would've thought, eh?
How is gymnastics training and conditioning not as effective at lifting weights? The point of their training and conditioning isn't to gain muscle but to build the incredible strength to weight ratios, and I, for one, think it does a pretty good job. Lifting weights, in general, is most aimed towards hypertrophy than building strength (well, more dependent on the lifting program at least). They are just different modes of training. One isn't really more effective than the other depending on your different goals. If your goal is to build functional strength though, bodyweight exercises is the way to go."5 -
GiddyupTim wrote: »Posted by a gymnast on a Bodybuilding.com forum:
"Gymnasts don't ACTUALLY do isometric holds for conditioning a lot of the time. Unless you are working a specific strength move (mainly on rings) like an iron cross, planche, maltese or inverted cross, the majority of the conditiong will be dynamic exercises like planche progression pushups, front lever progression pullups, rope climbs, dips, handstand pushups, etc. Working out the specific skills is actually a large chunk of the exercising and requires enormous stamina and endurance strength to complete usually 5-6 hours per day. The actual conditioning where they work on strength is only about 30-1 hour a day and will not usually include failure training since that would burn out the gymnast especially if they are training 5-6 hours a day. Imagine that.. gaining muscle and increasing strength without having to rest for days to let your muscles heal. Who would've thought, eh?
How is gymnastics training and conditioning not as effective at lifting weights? The point of their training and conditioning isn't to gain muscle but to build the incredible strength to weight ratios, and I, for one, think it does a pretty good job. Lifting weights, in general, is most aimed towards hypertrophy than building strength (well, more dependent on the lifting program at least). They are just different modes of training. One isn't really more effective than the other depending on your different goals. If your goal is to build functional strength though, bodyweight exercises is the way to go."
So they strength train for 30 minutes to an hour per day. Does that sound familiar at all? Ring any bells?
If they incorporate that into their training routine every day, 5-6 days per week, they strength train as much or more than the average Joe Public gym rat. And they have very experienced trainers, so they're working specific, focused routines and not wasting one minute in the gym, unlike a lot of Joe Public gym-goers who screw around in the gym for two hours and accomplish next to nothing. And most knowledgeable sources who are up on the most current research don't advocate training to failure often (if at all), so that's a completely irrelevant point.
Of course gymnasts spend more time training gymnastics (not sure what gymnasts have to do with the OP wanting to build a booty, though). There's a thing called specificity of exercise. If you want to get good at gymnastics, you practice gymnastics. If you want to get good at football, you practice football. If you want to get good at running, you practice running. If you want to get good at picking up heavy things, you practice picking up heavy things. For many of these sports, strength training is a supplemental exercise, not a means to an end in and of itself. When your goal is to create muscular hypertrophy, there is plenty of clearly established research outlining the best practices to do so. And progressive strength training is the key component.
The point of it all, as it pertains to this thread, is that the OP isn't going to build a booty doing air squats and leg raises. And I didn't see anywhere that she said she wanted to become a gymnast.4 -
So, your position is that all the muscle that most gymnasts have comes from 30 minutes a day in the gym, not working to failure?
I thought you had to lift heavy to gain muscle?
1 -
[1] Read my post again. That's not what I said at all. Allow me to quote a small part of it back:GiddyupTim wrote: »[1]So, your position is that all the muscle that most gymnasts have comes from 30 minutes a day in the gym, not working to failure?
[2]I thought you had to lift heavy to gain muscle?...For many of these sports, strength training is a supplemental exercise, not a means to an end in and of itself...
Weight training supplements their primary work on the specific demands of their sport. Swimmers lift weights. Football players lift weights. Hockey players lift weights. Ice skaters lift weights. Runners lift weights. Cyclists lift weights. Even golfers lift weights. None of them lift weights with the primary goal of becoming bodybuilders or powerlifters. Their programs are specifically tailored to the demands of their particular sport, with the goal of improving their performance. Their routines are completely different from somebody trying to build massive muscles to walk on stage, or somebody trying to build strength in specific competitive lifts (squat, deadlift and bench press in the case of powerlifters) - or somebody trying to "build their booty". A gymnast won't train like a cyclist, and a swimmer won't train like a hockey player.
[2] You have to lift heavy enough to cause an adaptive response in the body. And failure is not necessary - or even optimal most of the time. Working to failure (unless it's properly/intelligently programmed) is counterproductive in that it creates higher demands upon the CNS (higher than is necessary for either strength or hypertrophy gains) and can impair recovery.
The whole gymnast thing (which you brought up, and again really isn't germane to this thread) is a non-starter because most people, and especially beginners, don't possess the strength, balance or technical ability to perform a lot of those movements. Go into just about any gym in the world (other than a gymnastics-specific one) and you're not going to find many, if any, people who can do an iron cross on the rings, or work a pommel horse, or do even a relatively basic uneven parallel bar routine. Not even those big bruhs over there in the corner deadlifting with 5 plates on each side of the bar. Why? Specificity of exercise.2 -
I am sorry. I have no idea where you are coming from.......
The question here was: Can you building mass in your glutes without weight training?
I said, I don't know. People often say, 'no, in order to build mass you must lift weights and you must lift with some progression in the weights.' But, clearly there appear to be people who do build notable mass without weights. With largely body weight exercise.
Where's the relevance in the fact that a gymnast doesn't train like a golfer? Of course not.
But the fact remains: Gymnasts, for one, do not dedicate significant effort to heavy weight training. Google it. You will see. They do some weights, yes. Particularly if they have a specific weakness to work on. But they do not lift progressively, every other day, with significant weights.
Gymnasts become able to do an iron cross by hanging from the bar, swinging on the rings, doing pull ups.
And they get buff. Look at Mary Lou Retton. I would be highly surprised to learn that weight lifting was a truly significant part of her training, back in those days. Yet, she was pretty buff and pretty strong. She clearly had put on some muscle through her discipline.0 -
GiddyupTim wrote: »I am sorry. I have no idea where you are coming from.......
The question here was: Can you building mass in your glutes without weight training?
I said, I don't know. People often say, 'no, in order to build mass you must lift weights and you must lift with some progression in the weights.' But, clearly there appear to be people who do build notable mass without weights. With largely body weight exercise.
Where's the relevance in the fact that a gymnast doesn't train like a golfer? Of course not.
But the fact remains: Gymnasts, for one, do not dedicate significant effort to heavy weight training. Google it. You will see. They do some weights, yes. Particularly if they have a specific weakness to work on. But they do not lift progressively, every other day, with significant weights.
Gymnasts become able to do an iron cross by hanging from the bar, swinging on the rings, doing pull ups.
And they get buff. Look at Mary Lou Retton. I would be highly surprised to learn that weight lifting was a truly significant part of her training, back in those days. Yet, she was pretty buff and pretty strong. She clearly had put on some muscle through her discipline.
They do work progressively, It's just that the progressions are in accordance with their skills.
planche progressions, lever progressions, etc0 -
Of course they work progressively.
And the people who build mass with body weight exercise perhaps have been than average genetics and certainly work extremely hard at what they do.
My objection is that people here seem to be arguing that gymnasts are buff because of the weight lifting they do, and they would not get strong and muscular without that weight lifting, which I believe is not the case.2 -
GiddyupTim wrote: »Of course they work progressively.
And the people who build mass with body weight exercise perhaps have been than average genetics and certainly work extremely hard at what they do.
My objection is that people here seem to be arguing that gymnasts are buff because of the weight lifting they do, and they would not get strong and muscular without that weight lifting, which I believe is not the case.
OK, I get it, you're confusing progressive with weight lifting.
Progressive is progressive whether it's body weight or barbell.1 -
Of course you can build muscle without weights, but it probably won't be as effective (since it's much easier to add additional weight to the bar) and won't be as quick. If that is ok and in line with your goals OP, than go for it. What I generally see, is people aren't following a well structured program and can go years with just spinning their wheels and wonder why they can't build muscle.4
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 982 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions