Db Weight
Eddie2088
Posts: 16 Member
I am skinny beginner guy. How much weight I should use in db to gain muscalur mass.
1
Replies
-
I am skinny beginner guy. How much weight I should use in db to gain muscalur mass.
As much as you can lift comfortably while following a proven program and eating in a surplus. Check out the Gaining Weight forum on here.
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10332083/which-lifting-program-is-the-best-for-you/p11 -
You'll have a difficult time building musculale mass just using dumbbells.
If you don't have access to a gym w/free weights, they're better than nothing but, if that' all you've got, I'd suggest you focus on general fitness rather than muscle growth, in order to avoid the frustration that can come from having unrealistic expectations9 -
You'll have a difficult time building musculale mass just using dumbbells.
If you don't have access to a gym w/free weights, they're better than nothing but, if that' all you've got, I'd suggest you focus on general fitness rather than muscle growth, in order to avoid the frustration that can come from having unrealistic expectations
It depends on to what dumbbells the OP has access. I'm not talking 2 lb ones, but the ones in my gym go up to 100 lb each.2 -
You'll have a difficult time building musculale mass just using dumbbells.
If you don't have access to a gym w/free weights, they're better than nothing but, if that' all you've got, I'd suggest you focus on general fitness rather than muscle growth, in order to avoid the frustration that can come from having unrealistic expectations
What?
DBs are free weights. And one can easily build muscle using DBs.7 -
Do you guys who take exception to my comment really believe you can build OVERALL muscle mass just using dumbbells?
If so, that's nonsense and you will be doing any beginner (like the OP) a disservice by telling him that he can do so.
Yeah, you can do bro-curls, flys, lunges and overhead presses w/dumbbells BUT have you ever seen anyone doing a deadlift or squat with them? NOT!
And have you ever tried to "bench" a pair of 100# dumbbells as opposed to a 45# barbell loaded w/155# of plates?
Pretty difficult for most people to bench a pair of 100#ers w/o spotters on each side to help get the dumbbells up to press position.
IMO, you can only build mass by (at a minimum) lifting the heavy weight -- a lot heavier than you can w/dumbbells -- (combined w/a caloric surplus) using barbells and plates (which is what I meant by "free weights) doing the basic time-tested heavy compound lifts -- most notably the DL, SQT and BP.
That's certainly all a beginner needs to do and the best route for such a person would be to just start w/a beginning barbell program like Starting Strength or Stronglifts (which only add OHP, Rows or PCs into the mix).
As an accessory lift, using dumbbells can be helpful to work develop specific body parts, like the arms, chest and maybe the calves and quads (or for Farmer's walks, suitcase or overhead carries) but for overall muscular development nothing is better IMO than a barbell and plates.
If you disagree, go for it but I still think you'll have a hard time developing any mass by using dumbbells alone and no beginner should be encouraged to attempt do so.
10 -
Do you guys who take exception to my comment really believe you can build OVERALL muscle mass just using dumbbells?
If so, that's nonsense and you will be doing any beginner (like the OP) a disservice by telling him that he can do so.
Yeah, you can do bro-curls, flys, lunges and overhead presses w/dumbbells BUT have you ever seen anyone doing a deadlift or squat with them? NOT!
And have you ever tried to "bench" a pair of 100# dumbbells as opposed to a 45# barbell loaded w/155# of plates?
Pretty difficult for most people to bench a pair of 100#ers w/o spotters on each side to help get the dumbbells up to press position.
IMO, you can only build mass by (at a minimum) lifting the heavy weight -- a lot heavier than you can w/dumbbells -- (combined w/a caloric surplus) using barbells and plates (which is what I meant by "free weights) doing the basic time-tested heavy compound lifts -- most notably the DL, SQT and BP.
That's certainly all a beginner needs to do and the best route for such a person would be to just start w/a beginning barbell program like Starting Strength or Stronglifts (which only add OHP, Rows or PCs into the mix).
As an accessory lift, using dumbbells can be helpful to work develop specific body parts, like the arms, chest and maybe the calves and quads (or for Farmer's walks, suitcase or overhead carries) but for overall muscular development nothing is better IMO than a barbell and plates.
If you disagree, go for it but I still think you'll have a hard time developing any mass by using dumbbells alone and no beginner should be encouraged to attempt do so.
Has it ever occurred to you that not everybody who strength trains is a powerlifter?
And you really, actually believe that it's absolutely impossible to build any muscle mass using dumbbells?15 -
Do you guys who take exception to my comment really believe you can build OVERALL muscle mass just using dumbbells?
If so, that's nonsense and you will be doing any beginner (like the OP) a disservice by telling him that he can do so.
Yeah, you can do bro-curls, flys, lunges and overhead presses w/dumbbells BUT have you ever seen anyone doing a deadlift or squat with them? NOT!
And have you ever tried to "bench" a pair of 100# dumbbells as opposed to a 45# barbell loaded w/155# of plates?
Pretty difficult for most people to bench a pair of 100#ers w/o spotters on each side to help get the dumbbells up to press position.
IMO, you can only build mass by (at a minimum) lifting the heavy weight -- a lot heavier than you can w/dumbbells -- (combined w/a caloric surplus) using barbells and plates (which is what I meant by "free weights) doing the basic time-tested heavy compound lifts -- most notably the DL, SQT and BP.
That's certainly all a beginner needs to do and the best route for such a person would be to just start w/a beginning barbell program like Starting Strength or Stronglifts (which only add OHP, Rows or PCs into the mix).
As an accessory lift, using dumbbells can be helpful to work develop specific body parts, like the arms, chest and maybe the calves and quads (or for Farmer's walks, suitcase or overhead carries) but for overall muscular development nothing is better IMO than a barbell and plates.
If you disagree, go for it but I still think you'll have a hard time developing any mass by using dumbbells alone and no beginner should be encouraged to attempt do so.
Has it ever occurred to you that not everybody who strength trains is a powerlifter?
And you really, actually believe that it's absolutely impossible to build any muscle mass using dumbbells?
Agreed. Personally, I use a combination of barbell, dumbbells, and cable machines, but as long as you're eating in a surplus and lifting with progressive overload, I'm pretty sure muscle gains are possible.4 -
Davidsdottir wrote: »Do you guys who take exception to my comment really believe you can build OVERALL muscle mass just using dumbbells?
If so, that's nonsense and you will be doing any beginner (like the OP) a disservice by telling him that he can do so.
Yeah, you can do bro-curls, flys, lunges and overhead presses w/dumbbells BUT have you ever seen anyone doing a deadlift or squat with them? NOT!
And have you ever tried to "bench" a pair of 100# dumbbells as opposed to a 45# barbell loaded w/155# of plates?
Pretty difficult for most people to bench a pair of 100#ers w/o spotters on each side to help get the dumbbells up to press position.
IMO, you can only build mass by (at a minimum) lifting the heavy weight -- a lot heavier than you can w/dumbbells -- (combined w/a caloric surplus) using barbells and plates (which is what I meant by "free weights) doing the basic time-tested heavy compound lifts -- most notably the DL, SQT and BP.
That's certainly all a beginner needs to do and the best route for such a person would be to just start w/a beginning barbell program like Starting Strength or Stronglifts (which only add OHP, Rows or PCs into the mix).
As an accessory lift, using dumbbells can be helpful to work develop specific body parts, like the arms, chest and maybe the calves and quads (or for Farmer's walks, suitcase or overhead carries) but for overall muscular development nothing is better IMO than a barbell and plates.
If you disagree, go for it but I still think you'll have a hard time developing any mass by using dumbbells alone and no beginner should be encouraged to attempt do so.
Has it ever occurred to you that not everybody who strength trains is a powerlifter?
And you really, actually believe that it's absolutely impossible to build any muscle mass using dumbbells?
Agreed. Personally, I use a combination of barbell, dumbbells, and cable machines, but as long as you're eating in a surplus and lifting with progressive overload, I'm pretty sure muscle gains are possible.
Agreed. Progression is the key. Your body doesn't know or care if you're using dumbbells, barbells or machines. It senses stress and adapts accordingly.6 -
Do you guys who take exception to my comment really believe you can build OVERALL muscle mass just using dumbbells?
If so, that's nonsense and you will be doing any beginner (like the OP) a disservice by telling him that he can do so.
Yeah, you can do bro-curls, flys, lunges and overhead presses w/dumbbells BUT have you ever seen anyone doing a deadlift or squat with them? NOT!
And have you ever tried to "bench" a pair of 100# dumbbells as opposed to a 45# barbell loaded w/155# of plates?
Pretty difficult for most people to bench a pair of 100#ers w/o spotters on each side to help get the dumbbells up to press position.
IMO, you can only build mass by (at a minimum) lifting the heavy weight -- a lot heavier than you can w/dumbbells -- (combined w/a caloric surplus) using barbells and plates (which is what I meant by "free weights) doing the basic time-tested heavy compound lifts -- most notably the DL, SQT and BP.
That's certainly all a beginner needs to do and the best route for such a person would be to just start w/a beginning barbell program like Starting Strength or Stronglifts (which only add OHP, Rows or PCs into the mix).
As an accessory lift, using dumbbells can be helpful to work develop specific body parts, like the arms, chest and maybe the calves and quads (or for Farmer's walks, suitcase or overhead carries) but for overall muscular development nothing is better IMO than a barbell and plates.
If you disagree, go for it but I still think you'll have a hard time developing any mass by using dumbbells alone and no beginner should be encouraged to attempt do so.
Building muscle is not about lifting "super heavy" it is about progressive overload with time (paired with adequate fuel of course). While it is easier with barbells to add load (not such a huge jump in weight), especially for the lower body, it is definitely possible without. For example, I have built quite a significant muscle base in my lower body...I don't squat very often with a barbell (the odd high rep Zercher squat), and while I do deadlift with a barbell, it is more high rep.. my max is really low considering how long I've been lifting. I deadlift with DB's all the time... RDLs, single leg.. etc. The ONLY lift I find really beneficial to use a barbell is the hip thrust. But I mean, it's definitely not the most common or necessary lift (depending on your goals of course). Otherwise I use a combination of dumbbells, kettlebells, cable and bands.
Especially for a beginner.. starting out even with bodyweight or minimal weight can be a challenge enough.13 -
Do you guys who take exception to my comment really believe you can build OVERALL muscle mass just using dumbbells?
If so, that's nonsense and you will be doing any beginner (like the OP) a disservice by telling him that he can do so.
Yeah, you can do bro-curls, flys, lunges and overhead presses w/dumbbells BUT have you ever seen anyone doing a deadlift or squat with them? NOT!
And have you ever tried to "bench" a pair of 100# dumbbells as opposed to a 45# barbell loaded w/155# of plates?
Pretty difficult for most people to bench a pair of 100#ers w/o spotters on each side to help get the dumbbells up to press position.
IMO, you can only build mass by (at a minimum) lifting the heavy weight -- a lot heavier than you can w/dumbbells -- (combined w/a caloric surplus) using barbells and plates (which is what I meant by "free weights) doing the basic time-tested heavy compound lifts -- most notably the DL, SQT and BP.
That's certainly all a beginner needs to do and the best route for such a person would be to just start w/a beginning barbell program like Starting Strength or Stronglifts (which only add OHP, Rows or PCs into the mix).
As an accessory lift, using dumbbells can be helpful to work develop specific body parts, like the arms, chest and maybe the calves and quads (or for Farmer's walks, suitcase or overhead carries) but for overall muscular development nothing is better IMO than a barbell and plates.
If you disagree, go for it but I still think you'll have a hard time developing any mass by using dumbbells alone and no beginner should be encouraged to attempt do so.
I disagree with most of this except the part about recommending a beginner to use Starting Strength or Stronglifts. Those are good programs for beginners because there is quite a bit of evidence that this novice progression scheme initially works well for both strength and hypertrophy. They are strength programs though, and a hypertrophy-focused person should move onto something else after a few months. Bars and plates are good tools because they are efficient and easy to use, but they are not the only tools you can use for adding mass. Even bodyweight/calisthenics bodybuilding is a thing, and people have built some pretty impressive physiques this way. Hypertrophy is driven by volume primarily. Heavy weights not required.4 -
Davidsdottir wrote: »
Agreed.
As to the other tangent... certainly lifts will be limited by the lack of a barbell and/or rack/cage. But you can certainly progress just fine and build strength and muscle with dumbbells.2 -
Do you guys who take exception to my comment really believe you can build OVERALL muscle mass just using dumbbells?
If so, that's nonsense and you will be doing any beginner (like the OP) a disservice by telling him that he can do so.
Yeah, you can do bro-curls, flys, lunges and overhead presses w/dumbbells BUT have you ever seen anyone doing a deadlift or squat with them? NOT!
And have you ever tried to "bench" a pair of 100# dumbbells as opposed to a 45# barbell loaded w/155# of plates?
Pretty difficult for most people to bench a pair of 100#ers w/o spotters on each side to help get the dumbbells up to press position.
IMO, you can only build mass by (at a minimum) lifting the heavy weight -- a lot heavier than you can w/dumbbells -- (combined w/a caloric surplus) using barbells and plates (which is what I meant by "free weights) doing the basic time-tested heavy compound lifts -- most notably the DL, SQT and BP.
That's certainly all a beginner needs to do and the best route for such a person would be to just start w/a beginning barbell program like Starting Strength or Stronglifts (which only add OHP, Rows or PCs into the mix).
As an accessory lift, using dumbbells can be helpful to work develop specific body parts, like the arms, chest and maybe the calves and quads (or for Farmer's walks, suitcase or overhead carries) but for overall muscular development nothing is better IMO than a barbell and plates.
If you disagree, go for it but I still think you'll have a hard time developing any mass by using dumbbells alone and no beginner should be encouraged to attempt do so.
what are you talking about, do you know the difference between strength training and mass building?8 -
Do you guys who take exception to my comment really believe you can build OVERALL muscle mass just using dumbbells?
If so, that's nonsense and you will be doing any beginner (like the OP) a disservice by telling him that he can do so.
Yes, and it's not nonsense. It's actually very basic fact.BUT have you ever seen anyone doing a deadlift or squat with them? NOT!
Yes - they're sometimes programmed by coaches to get their athletes more volume (aka: mass gainers). Of course, someone simply looking to build mass may never deadlift or squat in the first place. They're great movements, but not actually necessary.And have you ever tried to "bench" a pair of 100# dumbbells as opposed to a 45# barbell loaded w/155# of plates?
Yes. For reps. I wouldn't advise someone to start out with that weight. And I mean either. Starting out at 200 lb barbell bench press would be a good way for a beginner to get hurt.Pretty difficult for most people to bench a pair of 100#ers w/o spotters on each side to help get the dumbbells up to press position.
Yeah, but you'd work up that weight, so it likely wouldn't be nearly as much of a big deal. Additionally, one might not ever need to get to that weight anyway, since volume can be manipulated many other ways.IMO, you can only build mass by (at a minimum) lifting the heavy weight -- a lot heavier than you can w/dumbbells
That, quite frankly, is utter nonsense.That's certainly all a beginner needs to do and the best route for such a person would be to just start w/a beginning barbell program like Starting Strength or Stronglifts (which only add OHP, Rows or PCs into the mix).
Yes, SS and SL are good beginner programs. But they're not the only good beginner programs.
8 -
Do you guys who take exception to my comment really believe you can build OVERALL muscle mass just using dumbbells?
If so, that's nonsense and you will be doing any beginner (like the OP) a disservice by telling him that he can do so.
Yes, and it's not nonsense. It's actually very basic fact.BUT have you ever seen anyone doing a deadlift or squat with them? NOT!
Yes - they're sometimes programmed by coaches to get their athletes more volume (aka: mass gainers). Of course, someone simply looking to build mass may never deadlift or squat in the first place. They're great movements, but not actually necessary.And have you ever tried to "bench" a pair of 100# dumbbells as opposed to a 45# barbell loaded w/155# of plates?
Yes. For reps. I wouldn't advise someone to start out with that weight. And I mean either. Starting out at 200 lb barbell bench press would be a good way for a beginner to get hurt.Pretty difficult for most people to bench a pair of 100#ers w/o spotters on each side to help get the dumbbells up to press position.
Yeah, but you'd work up that weight, so it likely wouldn't be nearly as much of a big deal. Additionally, one might not ever need to get to that weight anyway, since volume can be manipulated many other ways.IMO, you can only build mass by (at a minimum) lifting the heavy weight -- a lot heavier than you can w/dumbbells
That, quite frankly, is utter nonsense.That's certainly all a beginner needs to do and the best route for such a person would be to just start w/a beginning barbell program like Starting Strength or Stronglifts (which only add OHP, Rows or PCs into the mix).
Yes, SS and SL are good beginner programs. But they're not the only good beginner programs.
Hey Mr. Buzzkill. I was just feeling special because I deadlift dumbbells and I can bench hundo's with no spotters and no dropping like a big boy. But now I feel less special. Thanks.7 -
Do you guys who take exception to my comment really believe you can build OVERALL muscle mass just using dumbbells?
If so, that's nonsense and you will be doing any beginner (like the OP) a disservice by telling him that he can do so.
Yes, and it's not nonsense. It's actually very basic fact.BUT have you ever seen anyone doing a deadlift or squat with them? NOT!
Yes - they're sometimes programmed by coaches to get their athletes more volume (aka: mass gainers). Of course, someone simply looking to build mass may never deadlift or squat in the first place. They're great movements, but not actually necessary.And have you ever tried to "bench" a pair of 100# dumbbells as opposed to a 45# barbell loaded w/155# of plates?
Yes. For reps. I wouldn't advise someone to start out with that weight. And I mean either. Starting out at 200 lb barbell bench press would be a good way for a beginner to get hurt.Pretty difficult for most people to bench a pair of 100#ers w/o spotters on each side to help get the dumbbells up to press position.
Yeah, but you'd work up that weight, so it likely wouldn't be nearly as much of a big deal. Additionally, one might not ever need to get to that weight anyway, since volume can be manipulated many other ways.IMO, you can only build mass by (at a minimum) lifting the heavy weight -- a lot heavier than you can w/dumbbells
That, quite frankly, is utter nonsense.That's certainly all a beginner needs to do and the best route for such a person would be to just start w/a beginning barbell program like Starting Strength or Stronglifts (which only add OHP, Rows or PCs into the mix).
Yes, SS and SL are good beginner programs. But they're not the only good beginner programs.
Hey Mr. Buzzkill. I was just feeling special because I deadlift dumbbells and I can bench hundo's with no spotters and no dropping like a big boy. But now I feel less special. Thanks.
If it makes you feel any better, I haven't done DB benching with 100s in a while - and when I did, I'm pretty sure I dropped them when I was done.4 -
Pretty difficult for most people to bench a pair of 100#ers w/o spotters on each side to help get the dumbbells up to press position.
Yeah, but you'd work up that weight, so it likely wouldn't be nearly as much of a big deal. Additionally, one might not ever need to get to that weight anyway, since volume can be manipulated many other ways.
I don't know that it's any harder for someone who's been progressing appropriately to get 100# or 120 or 140's into position than to get 35s or 55s into position. Once you've learned the correct technique, it's just technique.
And the half deadlift necessary to get the hundo from the floor to the start position probably works a lot more useful and interesting accessory muscles than doing the 200 lb bar.3 -
Do you guys who take exception to my comment really believe you can build OVERALL muscle mass just using dumbbells?
If so, that's nonsense and you will be doing any beginner (like the OP) a disservice by telling him that he can do so.
Yes, and it's not nonsense. It's actually very basic fact.BUT have you ever seen anyone doing a deadlift or squat with them? NOT!
Yes - they're sometimes programmed by coaches to get their athletes more volume (aka: mass gainers). Of course, someone simply looking to build mass may never deadlift or squat in the first place. They're great movements, but not actually necessary.And have you ever tried to "bench" a pair of 100# dumbbells as opposed to a 45# barbell loaded w/155# of plates?
Yes. For reps. I wouldn't advise someone to start out with that weight. And I mean either. Starting out at 200 lb barbell bench press would be a good way for a beginner to get hurt.Pretty difficult for most people to bench a pair of 100#ers w/o spotters on each side to help get the dumbbells up to press position.
Yeah, but you'd work up that weight, so it likely wouldn't be nearly as much of a big deal. Additionally, one might not ever need to get to that weight anyway, since volume can be manipulated many other ways.IMO, you can only build mass by (at a minimum) lifting the heavy weight -- a lot heavier than you can w/dumbbells
That, quite frankly, is utter nonsense.That's certainly all a beginner needs to do and the best route for such a person would be to just start w/a beginning barbell program like Starting Strength or Stronglifts (which only add OHP, Rows or PCs into the mix).
Yes, SS and SL are good beginner programs. But they're not the only good beginner programs.
Hey Mr. Buzzkill. I was just feeling special because I deadlift dumbbells and I can bench hundo's with no spotters and no dropping like a big boy. But now I feel less special. Thanks.
If it makes you feel any better, I haven't done DB benching with 100s in a while - and when I did, I'm pretty sure I dropped them when I was done.
Dropped from where though is the question.1 -
I can't chest press 100lb dumbbells and never will be able to, i should just give up.5
-
I know, i suck. now i'm so depressed i'm gonna eat this entire cheesecake to try and feel better.9 -
Do you guys who take exception to my comment really believe you can build OVERALL muscle mass just using dumbbells?
If so, that's nonsense and you will be doing any beginner (like the OP) a disservice by telling him that he can do so.
Yeah, you can do bro-curls, flys, lunges and overhead presses w/dumbbells BUT have you ever seen anyone doing a deadlift or squat with them? NOT!
And have you ever tried to "bench" a pair of 100# dumbbells as opposed to a 45# barbell loaded w/155# of plates?
Pretty difficult for most people to bench a pair of 100#ers w/o spotters on each side to help get the dumbbells up to press position.
IMO, you can only build mass by (at a minimum) lifting the heavy weight -- a lot heavier than you can w/dumbbells -- (combined w/a caloric surplus) using barbells and plates (which is what I meant by "free weights) doing the basic time-tested heavy compound lifts -- most notably the DL, SQT and BP.
That's certainly all a beginner needs to do and the best route for such a person would be to just start w/a beginning barbell program like Starting Strength or Stronglifts (which only add OHP, Rows or PCs into the mix).
As an accessory lift, using dumbbells can be helpful to work develop specific body parts, like the arms, chest and maybe the calves and quads (or for Farmer's walks, suitcase or overhead carries) but for overall muscular development nothing is better IMO than a barbell and plates.
If you disagree, go for it but I still think you'll have a hard time developing any mass by using dumbbells alone and no beginner should be encouraged to attempt do so.
I do. All the time. I use dumbbells exclusively at home and the majority of the time at the gym. My muscle strength and definition is just fine and I can continue to progress.7 -
stanmann571 wrote: »Pretty difficult for most people to bench a pair of 100#ers w/o spotters on each side to help get the dumbbells up to press position.
Yeah, but you'd work up that weight, so it likely wouldn't be nearly as much of a big deal. Additionally, one might not ever need to get to that weight anyway, since volume can be manipulated many other ways.
I don't know that it's any harder for someone who's been progressing appropriately to get 100# or 120 or 140's into position than to get 35s or 55s into position. Once you've learned the correct technique, it's just technique.
And the half deadlift necessary to get the hundo from the floor to the start position probably works a lot more useful and interesting accessory muscles than doing the 200 lb bar.
I bench with DB all the time and do struggle with getting into position. I didn't know there was a "correct" or preferred technique and have invented my own that I feel safe with. Can you describe the preferred technique or post a video? . TIA0 -
This is the method I use. My gym frowns on dropping them - from any height.
https://youtu.be/1XDxtAOAIrQ 6 -
jseams1234 wrote: »This is the method I use. My gym frowns on dropping them - from any height.https://youtu.be/1XDxtAOAIrQ
This is what I’ve been doing as well, although I’m not using dumbbells quite that heavy. I’m not sure my powerblocks would stand up to being dropped from any real distance. Honestly, I feel like there must be some nuance to @sgt1372’s comment that I’m missing, because I know you’re a smart guy and you’ve given me good advice in the past. Dumbbells aren’t necessarily ideal for beginners across the board, but they certainly have use and you can absolutely build some strength and muscle with them. Isn’t the definition of “novice gains” that the untrained beginner can make gains with almost any halfway decent program?
I doubt that I’d have been able to lift a barbell when I started lifting (waaaaay back in the beginning of March), and since I work out at home, dumbbells made much more sense as a starting point. I’m not doing exactly the same exercise as a barbell squat, for example, but I’ve gained noticeable strength and definition moving from dumbbell squats to goblet and now rear foot elevated (my *kitten* is still killing me from my first go at those with weight the day before yesterday). Yeah, I spent maybe a month lifting quite small amounts of weight in absolute measures, but I consider it time well spent “building a base” as it were.2 -
That’s pretty similar to how I start but the end is better.1
-
Since I can't see the video,
1. Start from a seated position. NOT laying down. This is also the finish position
2. Bring the dumbells to your knees, either separately or individually.
3. As you lay back, use your knees and rotate/slide the bells into position. With heavier bells there may be somewhat of a kip involved.
4. Do your presses.
5. Bring your knees back up. so that the bells are in contact with your thighs
6. Rotate the bells as you sit up, don't try to lift the bells so much as rotate them on their axis towards your knees. Again with heavier bells there may be a small kip. When you find the appropriate intersection of sitting and rotating, you'll actually find it easier to sit up than if you didn't have the weights(they'll sort of pull you along).
I prefer to pull the bells up rather than trying to curl them, sort of a half row/deadlift.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions