Don’t kid yourself.
It’s not about absolute muscle mass.
It never has been.
Yet you train like it is.
Pick your physique: Steve Reeves, or Ronnie Coleman?
Of course, I know the answer.
That’s because it’s about proportional muscle mass.
It’s about the X Physique.
WHY THE X PHYSIQUE IS APPEALING
Growing up skinny-fat, I had narrow shoulders, small wrists, and a wide waist. While I always wanted big muscles, they were the means to the end, more so than the end itself. What I really wanted was proportion – wide shoulders, a narrow waist, and powerful legs. Together, these form something known as the X Physique.
For a long time—and for whatever reason—I associated this X Physique with athleticism and virility. I’m no oracle, but I was onto something.
Fear Primes May not Affect Women’s Implicit and Explicit Mate Preferences
- Women value physical characteristics in men such as height, muscularity, and broad shoulders (Buss, 1994; Barber, 1995; Franzoi & Herzog 1987)…
Foundation of Human Culture - Human Morphological Variation
- Narrow hips are another advantage in fast running….
Human Evolution and Ultrarunning
- According to that hypothesis [D. M. Bramble and D. E. Lieberman, "Endurance running and the evolution of Homo." Nature, vol. 432, pp. 345-352, 18 Nov. 2004], such well-known human traits as lack of body hair, high perspiration rate, upright stature, high arches, broad shoulders, and large gluteus maximus were selected through evolution to make it easier for us to run long distances.
The Science of Sex Appeal: An Evolutionary Perspective
- …Using facial photos of male college students that were cropped at the neck, those with faces that women rated as attractive had more pronounced wedge shaped torsos (broad shoulders and narrow hips), a masculine feature many women prefer. In addition, these same males had stronger grip strength scores (see also Fink, Neave, & Seydel, 2007; Sell et al., 2009), and more sex partners…
- Proportions alone are associated with physical attractiveness. In the crudest sense, the more you appear like a certain sex, the more attractive you will be be. We don’t like ambiguity. [My conclusion: Since the X Physique is so culturally recognized in males, it's what's deemed as attractive from first glance. Same can be said for females and the hour glass shape.] We look for immediate cues to tell us whether or not someone can be mated with.
YOU NEED TO EMBRACE SOME VANITY
Is it cultural? Is it evolutionary? Physiological?
Really, who cares?
Part of building a body that matters is being proud of what you look like.
The seed is implanted. And as long as it’s there, we have to address it. So embrace your vanity. When I was in 9th grade and a classmate told me I had “boobs,” I sure didn’t care about culture.
Of course, it’s not good to base the entirety of your existence on your physical-self. But let’s face it: feeling good about your appearance trickles to every aspect of your life.
How you perceive yourself is the most important step in any physical transformation – and why I started the Skinny-Fat Ectomorph series with a post on mentality.
Bottom line: If you have any semblance of aesthetic regard, and you don’t address it, you will fail. If you have no hook with how you look, don’t worry about it. But if one slice of your brain wants bigger arms, and you ignore it, you’re cooked.
YOU’RE SCREWED, SORT OF…
Shoulder and hip width are genetically determined, and you can’t adjust skeletal structure. So if you’re born with narrow shoulders relative to your waist (like me), you have a lot of work ahead of you to make yourself into an X.
Instead of hating your parents and cursing to the clouds, focus your energy on building muscles in the right places to give yourself a better shot at the X Physique.
It sounds easy, but I kind of already know your problem.
You’re focusing on the wrong places.
The term “broad shoulders” is a bit misleading. If you’re throwing all of your focus to the front deltoids, you’re wasting your time.
THE NEED TO KNOW 1: TRAIN LIKE A BODYBUILDER
Everyone wants programs. But programs pale compared to principles. You won’t often find me writing programs for free on this website. I’m much more concerned about you developing the right philosophy – a mindset that sticks with you for life.
The following will be hard to swallow. But stop thinking about maximal strength. Just stop.
The goal here isn’t to break powerlifting world records. The goal is physique. That’s all.
YOU NEED TO TRAIN LIKE A BODYBUILDER, NOT A POWERLIFTER
I’m not talking about doing machine work or a host of isolation exercises, either.
When it comes to lifting weights, the goal is to continually overload the muscles. The easiest and most trackable way to do this is by slapping more plates on the bar. The problem with this philosophy is that the muscles become secondary to the weight.
But the muscles are what actually lift the weights.
This is different than most athletic performance methods. Plyometrics and the likes are more suited to train the nervous system and the entire musculoskeletal complex. So muscular control isn’t as concerning.
But when dealing with “carving” a physique, Arnold said it best: ”The weights are just a means to an end; how well you contract the muscles is what training is all about.”
This shift away from muscular control — in my opinion — is at fault for a lot of barbell related injuries. You should be lifting weights — unless you’re doing a complex or overspeed movement — with your mind in your muscles.
Control the weight, mentally and physically, through-out the entire range of motion. Make the muscles work in every phase. Think about them squeezing and lengthening.
And before I get the hatred, I’m not downing the importance of strength. Dan John hits it when he said: “You need to do two things to get stronger: add weight and do more reps. The answer has never been: lift light weights for high reps, or lift heavy weights for few reps. The answer remains: Lift heavy weights for high reps.”
But my addition to this is: heavy weight, high reps, with the mind in control of the muscles at work. (And by high reps, I’m talking about 5-10, which is “high” compared to the “few” reps referenced by Dan.)
The goal is to “sculpt.” Remember, it’s about proportional muscle, so what muscles get stressed the most in movement is important. And you can control this with the mind-muscle connection.
THE NEED TO KNOW 2: IT’S LESS ABOUT PRESSING
Broad shoulders are a hallmark of the X Physique. But it’s not about pressing, really. Pressing is secondary. Maybe even tertiary. So if you’re benching to grow the upper body for the X Physique, you’re missing out.
It starts with the back. Hands down. Most famous poses for showing off the X Physique don’t even involve the shoulders.
More specifically, it starts the the lats. The lats are the number one muscle to give someone a wider look. Some people even call lats “wings.” And I’m all about wings and taking flight (metaphorically) here at Life As Sport. Hell, even birds expand their wings to intimidate others. Big lats are a big mental boost.
THE NEED TO KNOW 3: BIG ARMS HELP
After building wings, building big arms helps create an a wider look. Yes, I said it. Big arms. But this only applies is you have the right back development.
Big arms without the wide lats means you just look like another goon. But taking one look at Don Howorth will help you understand what I mean.
THE NEED TO KNOW 4: PRESSING POSITION MATTERS
Of all body parts, the chest is the most finicky. And despite what I said earlier, pressing is still important. It’s just not the end all.
One thing to note about the X Physique and pressing is that puffy chests usually lose. Arnold had a great physique, but he rarely gets put in the same category as others for having the X Physique.
In this regard, the chest and pressing exercises chosen are important and should tailor to your body type. Blindly flat benching because powerlifters do won’t get you very far in the aesthetic column.
THE NEED TO KNOW 5: IT’S NOT ABOUT SIZE FOR THE SAKE OF SIZE
Although I touched on this earlier, if you’re in the running for an X Physique, it’s less about gaining a set amount of weight. Being 200 pounds reveals little about how that muscle is packed on your frame. It might be more beneficial to be 190 with the muscle in the right places.
It’s important you pick exercises and divide your time among what will propel you towards your goal. In other words, everything you do should have a specific goal or meaning attached to it. Don’t do anything for the sake of doing it. Make sure its specific rationale fits in with your entire rationale.
In most cases, a good physique is an illusion between muscle groups built in the right proportion when compared to one another. Anyone with an X Physique will immediately be perceived as more muscular, even if they are smaller or lighter.
This is the beauty of proportion, and is something that has been lost over time.
Again, not to dog basic barbell training — it is certainly is important — but the idea of not tailoring your program to your psychological wants (getting an X Physique, for instance) has cursed the population of people that pick up weights. The vast majority lift to look better — even if they lie and use the “it’s all about strength” excuse.
For someone that never wants to compete in powerlifting, there’s no reason why they can’t forego flat benching for incline benching, if that’s something that will work better for them. It’s not like swapping out benching for bosu ball one arm semi sumi functional presses. It’s one basic barbell lift for another. And I’m all about basic barbell lifts. Just the ones that are best suited for each goal. Consider it basic barbell training with a twist.
MOVING ON FROM HERE
Take the above advice and use it to adjust your program or fix your mindset as needed. I’ve been saying it for a while: if you want big arms, curl. Sure, do your chins and rows. But curl too. Make sure your program address your psychological desires, first and foremost. And then ask yourself if you have a specific type of physique that you’re reaching for, and if you’re actually doing anything to reach it.
Future articles in this series will give more specific advice on how to build an X Physique through exercise selection and whatnot. I don’t want to give you too much at once, of course.
But let me ask: What do you think of “sculpting” a physique? And what do you think of training for looks? Is it short-sighted? What’s the difference between lifting weights in front of a crowd and posing in front of a crowd? Should it be all about performance?
Drop your comments below. And most importantly, send this article to a friend if you think they’re lost or caught up in a philosophy that isn’t best for their long term progress.
Never personally been one to actively try and ‘sculpt’ my physique – however, because (or maybe in spite of) of the way I train, I have gained most of the things you have mentioned (good genetics in this department have helped too) – broad shoulders, decent-sized arms, and powerful looking legs.
I certainly don’t think training for looks is necessarily short-sighted; for many, its the only thing that’s going to initially get them in the gym in the first place! Most people need some type of outside motivation to train on a regular basis to begin with.
For me personally, right now its all about performance. I enjoy flipping, dabbling in tricking and parkour, handstands, and gymnastics, and I want to get better at all of these things – its an inherent motivation thing for me. But the side effect of training all these things (especially the gymnastics moves – with lower body barbell work) has resulted in a pretty good ‘X-Physique’ look for me. So I believe training for performance – with, as you mentioned, a little bit of vanity work thrown in (personally, I think even doing things such as curls can certainly help performance), can give a lot of people that X-Physique look. Just my 2 cents, though.
Absolutely, Josh. We’re motivated by the same things, no doubt. I’m a flipper and dabbler as well.
Funny you mention curls helping performance, but I totally agree.
I started incorporating bodybuilding into my training because I learned that bodybuilders (at least the good ones) understood that muscular balance was key, something that I knew early on was important for health and well-being. I still seek a visual balance and a balance in strength in order to stay healthy and look like I might not be the last one picked on your pickup [insert sport here] game.
Hah, well, bodybuilders have a lot of good things going on. It’s a shame a lot of people dismiss their ideas.
I completely agree.
I think most people do have a goal look in mind when they first start working out and I see no reason to not actively shape your physique in that direction.
The problem i see with focusing on looks primarily is it is less concrete and tangible as hitting a particular performance or strength level. So I err more to the side of find the big barbell moves that hit the muscles you desire most. Focus on their performance and te looks will come. And definitely get some pump work in there for vanitys sake. The guys who impress me the most are te ones who combine being jacked with effortless athleticism.
Yeah, but most guys that combine being jacked get jacked
Footballers love the part of their workout when they get jacked. So do most athletes.
But I disagree with a physique goal being less concrete. I think they both are about equal in…un-concreteness because once you achieve them you ask…”ok, what’s next…?”
Great article. I think too often we’re bombarded with anti-bodybuilding propaganda. Now, I’m not one who has intentionally trained like a bodybuilder but in fact quite the opposite. I do however, enjoy my training much more when focusing on certain areas of my physique.
For most people (average joes) looks will be the determining factor so sculpting a physique is certainly not short sighted. It’s my personal opinion that there should always be some performance to go along with the looks just as Kent said above.
Having said all that, is ego driven training necessary? I would argue that all weight training (and sports training in general) is ego driven and that to succeed at any level you need a healthy dose of ego.
I agree, Cameron.
If life is your sport, it’s ego driven to a point.
Even if you’re doing it for yourself, there’s something inside that says — “doing this will complete me.” And even that mentality is favoring ego.
When i think about sculpting a physique, i think about someone who has a decent base of overall musclemass and improve on the parts that want to be improved on. So maybe a person might do one of john roman’s specialization program or so. About training for looks, i think training goals are personal. if the main motivation for someone is vanity then so be it.Personally i might not do the same but everyone has different goals.
The difference between lifting weights in front of a crowd and posing in front of a crowd?well i guess in both situations they are showing that they have worked hard on for so long. In the former the emphasis seems to be on the weights and the lift being performed. whereas in the latter the appreciation is more towards the physique itself, and not the poundage.
Lastly i do not agree that everything should not be about performance.for example, If someone’s goal is to gain as much muscle as possible, then there is no point paying so much attention to performance at the expense of hypertrophy.No point emphasizing so much on someone’s sprinting speed if his main goal is to look good as there are other ways to achieve it.of course i would also agree that in the pursuit of looking good, your body and health should not be sacrificed.For example, if there are two exercises and both build muscle but the first exercise would lead to injuries but the second doesnt, so the second exercise would be a wiser pick
I wasn’t saying performance should be abandoned. Apologies if that’s how you took it.
But I think you’re right about training having to tailor to goals. And even then it’s OK to sprint or do something “unconventional” to your goals as long as you realize it’s a side dish and not the main course. Chances are, you won’t be very good at the side dish but it could be tasty anyway.
oh shoot that came out wrong. what i meant was “i do not agree that everything should be about performance”.sorry anthony, my bad. this serves as a reminder for myself to proofread nxt time haha
Hah, it’s OK. We’re all friends here.
An aesthetic goal is just as valid as any other goal, the problem with a lot of people is because they’re influenced by what they read in a lot of forums and even sometimes from some authors they respect but who have no regard for aesthetic goals. People read a lot of things like aesthetics are for wussies, if you don’t do this lift for reps with X weight you’re a wussy even if that lift doesn’t fit your needs. Then there’s the “problem” of fitness fashion, the ultimate fashion in the fitness world is the so called functional training where everyone is suppose to train like an athlete and olympic lifters and gymnasts to be functional and your arms will fall from your body if you do an isolation exercise. A lot of people let themselves be influenced by these things and end by getting away from their main goal. I always trained for aesthetics, tough i’m also fascinated by being stronger, just not necessarily in the so called big 3 lifts. Focusing on the mid and rear delts also have a big impact right?
People believe stories.
And that’s what everyone tells. Stories.
Whether they are true or not is a different story. (Pun lolz.)
Mid and rear delts helps, yeah.
Right on, Anthony. Sorry I haven’t commented in a while. I liked that you mentioned the mind-muscle connection. It’s funny, actually. I had just rediscovered it while looking into interviews of Zyzz. He always talked about putting your mind in every repetition. I had apprehensions about the mind-muscle connection, but I dove in anyway. I like it so far. I really really try to stress the upper chest in incline pressing now, for example. I feel the incline pressing now is more productive than when I had employed it before.
It’s too bad I believe that the mind-muscle connection was bullcrap. Bodybuilders do know their stuff.
I also ended up switching weighted dips for incline pressing, because I felt that it better suited my needs. It was hard, but it was harder to look at my relatively flat upper chest. I don’t regret the time spent doing dips or the switch, but I couldn’t keep pretending that the upper chest wasn’t important to me. I’m really happy now. I can’t complain.
I think training for looks is just as good a goal as training for strength. I appreciate it even more because I know that the people who advocate it are true to themselves. They’ve admitted they do care and that it’s okay to care about looks. I find that I admire these people for unearthing feelings of reasonable vanity unconscious in most people. I like that they’re not like some people who lash out at others for exercising desires they have yet to address.
So I respect Zyzz not for going against the norm, but for addressing a natural desire to look good. Why should training for looks be any more vain than training for strength? Both are respectable in their own rights.
Hey Traindom, glad to have you back!
And I agree on every front. Even with the inclines
I love dips but they get my chest all our of whack.
Hi Anthony.
Good article. Sets a nice tone for the rest of the articles in the series.
This mindset was created in me when the Adonis Index program was rolled out. I now train with a heavy emphasis on my back, delts, guns, calves and upper chest.
I got a question though. When I maximize time under tension, I got slower. As I might have mentioned earlier, I am a bowler (cricket). That is sort of like a baseball pitcher. But when I did strict reps of various lateral raises with slow eccentrics, my bowling speed dropped (I got bigger though). So now all my shoulder lifting is explosive, but my shoulders are smaller. How would I go about this?
Depends — what do you want to maximize? Performance or looks. Something there has to be sacrifices made.
tough choice eh? I guess I will concentrate on explosive reps in one big movement, and slower reps in isolation movements. And I will monitor my performance closely on the field.
Without structuring things myself, I’d say that’s about all you can do.
Thanks for sharing man! Nothing wrong with wanted a bit of “show” with your “go”
I know you mentioned more internal cues (feeling, lengthening, etc) While many many bodybuilders have used this, I think it is better to use external cues (move from point A to B). Performance drives aesthetic changes and is easier to monitor on a day to day/ session to session basis.
Even clients that I have who are only driven by how they look have performance goals (and we do measure their arms, chest, etc of course). I can then look and get a snap shot in short order if they are going in the right direction or not.
Rock on
Mike T Nelson PhD(c)
I disagree, Mike. Moving a weight from point A to point B does nothing for centralizing a mental connection with muscles at work. But, to each their own.
And most people do have performance goals, yeah, that’s why I like to mix the two, never getting too high on either side until the time is right.
Mike -
I take your point here. But is the internal cue (feeling the muscle) and the external cue (concerned with proper execution) necessarily mutually-exclusive ?
This may just be me, but when, for example, I’m performing dips, I focus on scap control and pec tension … and all goes well. Performance improves and with hella pump to boot!
Anthony -
This is as refreshing a write-up as I’ve read in some time!
0: the number of my male clients who live in fear of sarcoplasmic hypertrophy eating into their Fran times. They just want to look better nekkid and enjoy the health benefits that attend to that.
Nekkid is nice, I suppose.
Not a CrossFitter though, so the Fran times are beyond me.
Thanks for the reply and since we disagree now we must not be friends–hahaha.
Below is an article I did on internal vs external cues, but the same thing applies to the cues you give yourself during exercises.
http://www.theptdc.com/2012/02/stop-telling-your-client-to-activate-their-glutes/
My bias is to change the mechanical stress to get more size in a certain muscle instead of trying to “use” the muscle more with my mind. I am not against feedback, but I don’t think it is best to SEEK the feedback during training–it will show up.
Rock on
Mike T Nelson PhD(c)
You cite reflective and automatic systems as a way to disprove feeling a muscle (it seems to be support against it) by implying that conscious efforts are trumped by habit, but taking external cues are conscious efforts as well. The lifter still has to think about pushing the weight up. I’m still confused as to how the reflective and automatic systems come into play. If you could expand on this part more, it’d be nice.
I don’t know, Mike. I’ve yet to see an athlete not able to squeeze their butt when you tell them to squeeze their butt.
Nice article, I’m looking forward to the program ideas you post next in relation to this.
I gotta say though, I want to look good just like everyone else, but I can’t understand people that *just* want to look good. It’s just so superficial. At least try and reach some basic strength levels and then work on your physique..
It’s not hard – each session focus on the big lifts first, lowish reps, then do whatever you want after that as accessory work. You’ll get strong and look good. Easy peasy.
I agree, but the case can be made of basic strength levels being just as superficial as the looks. Both serve the same function for most of us — make us feel better.
That may be true, but they also have extrinsic value – bone density, ligament strength, decreased risk of disease, making carrying stuff easier, being more able to do.. stuff.
These aren’t superficial.
True. But few people actively train for those reasons. It’s a nice side effect though.
I’m not arguing, either way. Just sayin’
I’m not one to gawk at myself in the mirror, but looks do matter. If that makes any sense. And it seems you agree.
It can seem superficial if one were to train for no other reason than looks, but you have to look at the big picture. There’s the possibility that training for looks only is only but a fraction of one’s identity. Training for looks can have the same amount of importance as dressing well, both which should be considered and covered but not the foundation of one’s identity.
So in the gym, you could say someone is superficial for only training for one purpose, but if you take their whole life into account, it’s only one aspect of a whole life.
I myself train for multiple purposes, just to make things clear here. I train only the incline press, chin-up, and pistol and I have isolation days right after the compound days. I hit it as heavy as I can (with good form) and go for eight to ten repetitions in each set. I love training, but I also have other passions. So I can understand why someone would train for just looks.
Awesome looking “program” there Traindom. And, as always, I value your opinion. We agree, of course.
Interesting parallel between clothing though. But I can totally see where you’re coming from. It’s all about how you want to appear to the world. All in the same line.
Thanks for being so kind, Anthony. It’s a mutual respect. *Pound Fist Here* And I can’t take full credit for my programming skills. The 242 Method Beta helped me organize my program. So thanks to you haha. I can’t wait for your future releases. Looking forward to those.
You’re right about how it’s all in the same line. Each thing shows that you care about yourself. That’s not to say someone who dresses bad doesn’t care, though. But the effort is nice and appreciated. Not to mention self-esteem goes up like crazy, which is pretty priceless.
Priceless indeed.
The book will be released as soon as the graphics are completed. (They should have been done five days ago, btw.)
Anthony what are your thoughts on bodyweight stuff, I know you like pullups but what about pushups or trx stuff??Thanks
Love body weight stuff. Do it daily. Push-ups, pull-ups, body weight squats. I’ll be getting rings soon. More of a physical hygiene thing — I’d have to explain that in a blog post, haha!
Just to interject, I trained with a “performance first” mindset for many, many months … and had little in the way of hypertrophy to show for it. In the months since, after transitioning to a sort of “physique first” mindset … I’ve not noted any drop-off in the various performance benchmarks I had established for myself.
I can concur with this.
Really appreciate the article Anthony. Good too see an S&C guy say that there is nothing wrong in training for looks and that training for looks has to be somewhat different than training for performance.
Thanks, Deep, but I’m just a dude out there in the trenches like everyone else. I like looking good.
What a breath of fresh air. I too am one of those who at 30 years old got in to barbell training through crossfit. I ditched the crossfit and stuck with a Rippetoe style lifting schedule. Went through it well, moved on to 531; liked that too. Thing is: I still never really achieved a physique that I really wanted. Don’t get me wrong, those guys are awesome and 99% of the populace would do well just starting and sticking with those programs. Decent strength is a good starting point. But after gettting through those…well, I don’t want to just bash bodybuilding anymore. I still like Brooks Kubik etc etc but I know enough now to know that I don’t care about how much weight I can actually move – I only care about two things: how the ability to move that weight makes me healthier for the rest of life and how that ability makes me look (and thus FEEL) better.
Thanks for the reply, Ben. Glad you enjoy what I have to offer! Keep it up, you’ll find a good place eventually. You’re dialing into what you TRULY want.
Hey Anthony, loved this article and I’m exactly what you stated: skinny wrists, small wrist and narrow shoulders. I’m 16 years old and have recently begun to work out and have made some small gains within the last year. I still have some love handles and I’m wondering what kind of exercises/conditioning I should do to try to achieve the ‘V’ shape in my upper body as you stated.
David, sign-up for the newsletter. There’s stuff in there for you that will guide the way.
This is a great article!
I think the part I agree with the most is the section about lats.
Big arms with small lats does make one look like a goon. A lot of people neglect the back muscles nowadays but on the other hand, it isn’t easy achieving the desirable physique as shown in pictures above because of insertion points and origin of lats; it still all comes down to genetics I guess but you pointed that out.
Jaz, hard work usually prevails. Hang from a pull-up bar or gymnastics rings long enough and you will make some good progress.
Great article!
I think the part I agree with most is the section about lats.
Nowadays, I see the same people in the gym prioritize bicep curls and bench presses in their daily workout hence neglecting their back muscles. Personally, the lats are my favorite muscle group. Like you said, having big arms with no lats does make one look like a goon. But I think it all comes down to genetics in terms of insertion points and origins of the lats to get that ‘Steve Reeves’ look, no?
Anyways I really enjoyed reading this article!
Would you say bodyweight training is a far better way to increase width rather than lat pulldowns?
Ah, additional question here.
In short, yes. A lot of pull-ups, chin-ups, and front levers seem to work well. Gymnastics rings are friendly.
Sorry about the double post as the post didn’t show the first time round.
In addition to what you posted about lats, what would your explanation be for individuals like Bruce Lee or lets say the soccer player Cristiano Ronaldo who both have amazing lat width but relatively small in overall size in comparison to a bodybuilder? Sure they both have really low insertion points from genetics but how is possible to get so much width on the lats without having to be big in general? It’s as if they train their lats more than any other muscle.
Great article! Really looking forward to the second part.
Thanks Ed. It’s being curated. Got some other things to roll through in the meantime.