Smal Midje

[Friskus]

Du tror eller trodde?

Trodde. Nå er jeg med!

[Gjest ILU]

"Stor", betyr at magen er større ene ikke trent i det hele tatt. " " er hermetegn, atlså ta ting med en klype salt, nesten litt ironisk.

Mark og bøy får magen større enn en ikke trent mage, derfor anbefalte jeg det ovenfor.

[Kristin Charm]

Mulig denne kan hjelpe litt: http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/sports_body_training_performance/sexy_female_training

Her er et utdrag:

The Britney Spears Syndrome

Think back to when you first saw Britney Spears. If you're like me, it was when she tied that Catholic schoolgirl shirt in a come-hither fashion and started shakin' her moneymaker to Baby One More Time. She was hot, young, and on her way to dominating the pop charts and dominating the fantasies of middle-aged guys around the globe.

Yep, she was perky up top, hard and protruding from behind, and rock hard in the middle. Let me translate that: she had firm boobies, a firm booty, and a slimly sculpted belly.

If you don't mind staring at the above pictures for a few seconds, I'd like you to pay close attention to her midsection. You'll notice that she had a very tiny waist.

Now the next part of this article can't be verified with complete accuracy, but it bears discussion. It can't be verified because it's about her training regimen, and I wasn't her trainer. Moreover, whoever trained her doesn't really matter either. Why? Because not all celebrities follow their trainer's advice with precision. If they did, there would be many more sexy, ripped female figures walking around Hollywood. So my point is this: her trainer probably has nothing to do with the next part of my discussion.

It's been reported that Britney got heavily involved in training when she started approaching the level of über celebrity. That's good. What I've heard around the campfire is that Britney is driven and committed to whatever she puts her mind to. Much like her music career, she put a lot of effort into keeping her body in tip-top shape. (Keep in mind I'm not referring to the Britney of today).

Anyway, I started noticing around 2003 that her physique was really changing. It was evident that she was indeed training, and doing a lot of it. But I could see a transformation taking place that I've seen so many times in the past with females. This metamorphosis that I'm referring to was happening directly in her midsection.

Sometime around late 2003 I saw an interview with her sister and, to paraphrase, she said that Britney did something like 1000 crunches every day. Now, as I said, I don't know if that's true but I can tell you that it sure looked like it. It appeared that Britney spent a lot of time doing crunches, side bends and the like.

What's the big deal, you say? The big deal is this: a ton of direct ab work is bad, bad news for a female who's trying to keep a slim midsection. Here's a picture that demonstrates my point

There are two things that should be noted about the above picture. First, she's not any fatter than she was in the first pictures. In fact, her abs show more definition. Second, and most importantly, she lost virtually all of the hourglass shape that her younger figure exhibited. She's still carrying very little body fat in this picture, but her waist is much larger than it was early in her career. And I'd be willing to bet a years salary that she wasn't trying to make her midsection any thicker and wider than it was in the first pictures. But she sure did make it bigger.

When I consult females who've been training and want me to take them to the next level, I've seen overdeveloped abs and obliques so many times that I've lost count. In fact, I've seen the disorder so many times that I had to give it a name. I call the female disorder that's caused by excessive core training The Britney Spears Syndrome.

Females typically perform too much direct ab and oblique work! They've fallen victim to the old theory of spot reduction — the idea that working a body part more will result in less fat around that area. My position is that spot reduction probably doesn't happen, and even if it does happen, it doesn't matter in the case of Britney. Why? Because any possible loss of body fat around her midsection from doing a zillion crunches and side bends every day will be overshadowed by the increased girth of her core muscles from training with such a high volume and frequency.

In fact, that's exactly what my High Frequency Training (HFT) philosophy is based on: the more you train a muscle, the bigger it will get. The paradox is that she used a type of HFT plan to make her core muscles smaller, while I preach that HFT is the ultimate way to make your muscles bigger.

But this issue doesn't end with the above thicker-waist-picture. One of the biggest challenges that a trainer like me faces is when a client inevitably falls off the wagon of fitness and nutrition. A good trainer will keep a celebrity client leaner than she needs to be in order to establish a "buffer zone." If a female client of mine thinks she looks best with 16% body fat, I'll keep her at 15%. That's because with even the most diligent clients, their training and nutrition will waver during vacations, holidays, break-ups, etc.

Now back to Britney. If you're one who thinks she doesn't look too bad with the thicker-waist-but-still-lean-physique, then you should think about the buffer zone. Sure, she might not look all that bad with a thicker waist when she's still lean, but guess what happens when she puts on a little extra fat? You get this:

Now we've got a problem. All of that extra muscle that she added to her midsection from endless crunches and side bends is now covered with a little extra body fat. What do you get? You get a midsection that's anything but alluring. Had she refrained from a plethora of ab and oblique work, she wouldn't be sporting that barrel midsection in the "gladiator" picture.

If you still like the idea of doing endless crunches and side bends to keep your waist svelte and sexy, then I encourage you to look at this comparison.

And this, my bra-wearing buddies, is the first thing that I'm here to eradicate. I've got a healthy dose of medicine to cure The Britney Spears Syndrome.

You might be wondering why I spent so much time talking about direct ab work. After all, the answer seems rather simple: just perform less ab work and you won't bulk up your midsection, right? That's true, but the purpose of mentioning Britney Spears and her thick midsection is to further demonstrate that women can build too much muscle, and screw up their proportions, if they're not careful.

This isn't just limited to the midsection. I've also seen it happen in women's thighs, calves, traps, and virtually any other body part.

So I'm also going to show you how to organize your training and eating plans in order to develop the slim, sexy, firm physique that maintains the feminine, athletic look. What separates the following information from everything else you've read is my training experience with this issue, and my understanding of physiology.

Mulig jeg er alene om dette, men synes denne artikkelen nesten var litt ubehagelig. Mange jenter frykter vel litt det å bli "for stor", og denne artikkelen fremer jo nettopp det at man trener for mye også "ødelegger" man de kvinnelige proporsjonene. Jeg skal ærlig innrømme at jeg trives veldig godt med en slank og ikke så altfor muskuløs (ehe) kropp, samtidig vil jeg jo bygge mer muskler, da det er utrolig godt å føle at du mestrer noe, og at du orker ting og klarer ting du ikke gjorde før! Kanskje det er litt irrasjonellt, men jeg føler det er vanskelig å vite hvor man bør stoppe, før det har gått for langt.

Skal jo også påpekes at jeg synes Britney ser bra ut med litt større midje også jeg, så synes ikke det er tidenes beste eksempel akkurat

[BROrilla]

Det er vl "kjent" at mye mark og bøy gir større midje, kraftigere hofter osv. Mange byggere før og nå som kutter disse øvelse pga denne "myten". Jeg vet ikke, men det er noen påstår det, andre ikke. Mange byggere som trener dette, har feks bøy som siste øvelse osv. Om det ligger noe i det aner jeg ikke:) Men jeg tror hvertfall ikke an for noe tynere midje av det etter år med tung bøy og mark:p Mye er gentetisk, mye er form, og mye er fett%

Og nå tenker jeg ikke på de som er redd for midjen når man drar 80 eller 80 bøy. jeg tenker stort, kjempe stort haha

men dette er hvertfall mannen med de råeste beina ever, tom platz!

[Therese]

Det er vl "kjent" at mye mark og bøy gir større midje, kraftigere hofter osv. Mange byggere før og nå som kutter disse øvelse pga denne "myten". Jeg vet ikke, men det er noen påstår det, andre ikke. Mange byggere som trener dette, har feks bøy som siste øvelse osv. Om det ligger noe i det aner jeg ikke:) Men jeg tror hvertfall ikke an for noe tynere midje av det etter år med tung bøy og mark:p Mye er gentetisk, mye er form, og mye er fett%

Og nå tenker jeg ikke på de som er redd for midjen når man drar 80 eller 80 bøy. jeg tenker stort, kjempe stort haha

men dette er hvertfall mannen med de råeste beina ever, tom platz!

Det er da begrenset hvor mye muskler som obliques(external og internal) og abdomen(m rectus abdominis) kan vokse i tverrsnitt, så dette "problemet" forstår jeg rett og slett ikke..

Det er og blir en myte

[BROrilla]

Det er da begrenset hvor mye muskler som obliques(external og internal) og abdomen(m rectus abdominis) kan vokse i tverrsnitt, så dette "problemet" forstår jeg rett og slett ikke..

Det er og blir en myte

selv tror jeg også det er en myte. Det biter hvertfall ikke på meg:) hehe.

[CaraMella]

Da har jeg nok bare blitt julefeit:p

[BROrilla]

Da har jeg nok bare blitt julefeit:p

hehe

[Pinglo]

Jeg kjenner jeg blir nesten litt provosert av den britneyartikkelen som postes i tide og utide, det er noe av det verste tullet jeg har lest om trening.

Først og fremst

1) Muskler blir der ikke "for alltid". Hvorfor i alle dager skulle folk trene hele livet dersom man bare kunne oppnå muskelvekst en gang, og deretter beholde det, som ren magi, resten av livet? Om man skulle trene en øvelse SÅ mye at man rett og slett blir for muskuløs, så er det ikke verre enn å kutte ned på treningen.

2) Å sammenlikne 16 år gammel britney med litt-uti-tjueårene-etter-første-barn-britney, er direkte urettferdig.

3) Dette er en artikkel som er bygget opp rundt å selge en tjeneste, nemlig spesialtrening til kvinner som ikke vil bli for muskuløse. Da må man fremstille det slik at alle tror man blir en plugg dersom man trener på egenhånd, og at man trenger spesialprogram og eksperthjelp. Skremselspropaganda, om man vil.