Strong Abs, Tiny Waist

[Vainglorious]

My dilemma: I've recently started doing Pilates and will hopefully begin with other types of core strengthing moves because I want strong, well-defined abs. However, I currently have an hourglass shape with a very narrow waist, and I want to stay that way! So what excercises can I do (or shouldn't I do) to ensure that my waist stays small while I work on building my abs?

Think Jessica Biel in Blade III,

Any help would be great!

 

[theleip]

The only way to get your abs to show like in the picture you don't want is to have low body fat. Basically it doesn't matter what moves you do as your abs wont show if there is fat covering them. Also ab shape is genetics, so there is only so much you can do as far and shape goes.

 

[Susie]

That person probably did some weighted moves for their abs-- I think the main thing to keep the hourglass is don't do any moves with weights for your oblique (side) muscles, because you don't want them to get bigger. Good luck!

 

[bipennate]

That person probably did some weighted moves for their abs-- I think the main thing to keep the hourglass is don't do any moves with weights for your oblique (side) muscles, because you don't want them to get bigger. Good luck!

Heavy weights do NOT make your abs "big." That is a combination of genetics, hip:waist ratio (again, genetically determined for the most part), and low body fat.

Specific ab exercises won't do anything to get you "well defined abs," only low bf%

 

[Susie]

Heavy weights do NOT make your abs "big." That is a combination of genetics, hip:waist ratio (again, genetically determined for the most part), and low body fat.

Specific ab exercises won't do anything to get you "well defined abs," only low bf%

I agree the hip to waist ratio is a big part of whether you'll have an hourglass figure, but I HAVE read that if you want to keep your waist "narrow" you shouldn't do oblique exercises with weights (especially with heavy ones). Here is just one such source:

"Tiny waist

The smaller your waist, the more of an “illusion” of symmetry you create. This is achieved mostly by fat reduction through nutrition and cardio. However, certain exercises can broaden the waist. Anything that builds the lateral obliques like dumbbell side bends, should be avoided. Certain athletes may use side bends for sports training purposes, but if symmetry is your goal, stay away from them."

 

[bipennate]

I agree the hip to waist ratio is a big part of whether you'll have an hourglass figure, but I HAVE read that if you want to keep your waist "narrow" you shouldn't do oblique exercises with weights (especially with heavy ones). Here is just one such source:

"Tiny waist

The smaller your waist, the more of an “illusion” of symmetry you create. This is achieved mostly by fat reduction through nutrition and cardio. However, certain exercises can broaden the waist. Anything that builds the lateral obliques like dumbbell side bends, should be avoided. Certain athletes may use side bends for sports training purposes, but if symmetry is your goal, stay away from them."

You shouldn't look at advice given by a bodybuilder, whose genetics, workouts, and even pharmaceutical additives are 180 degrees different than yours and assume that it applies to you.

Yes, oblique work will cause growth in the obliques, but your genetic predisposition to muscle growth, coupled with diet and exercise routine will determine what that actually means. Bodybuilders, even without gear, develop oblique muscle from the stress of sneezing (an exaggeration, but you get the idea )!

 

[theleip]

Also you have to take in whether or not the person is in a calories deficit or in enough of a surplus to put on lean muscle mass. Can't build it, if you don't feed it. I don't think doing pilates is going to do much anyway, so I think she will be fine. Having a waist like that being a female (and female do grow muscle mass different than men so that article again doesn't realy apply here) takes a long time, lots of work, and a calorie surplus of a decent/great proportion. Even after that you have to have the genetic structure to make that shape.

 

[Susie]

Looking very good Jonathan!

That was just one article of several. And if if I shouldn't listen to advice given by body-builders, then why are all the bodybuilders on this site giving us advice???

I still think the bottom line remains, lifting weights for obliques can potentially make your waist thicker, yeah of course if you are the kind of person who never grows any muscle no matter what they do, then no worries as far as a thicker middle goes. But I'm not even talking about huge gains in muscle, even 1 inch of an increase on the waist can suck for someone who prides themselves on their tiny waist. My point was, if you aren't using weights for your oblique exercises, then you probably don't have to worry about your waist getting thicker from muscle.

I found this, written for women:
Myth #5: Weighted crunches will make my midsection thick

Fact: The abdominal muscle is a thin layer of muscle tissue, and not able to grow much in size like other body parts. Therefore, adding resistance to your abdominal training will only increase your midsection strength. It is the side bends and twists that can contribute to a thick waist.

 

[bipennate]

Looking very good Jonathan!

Thank you

That was just one article of several. And if if I shouldn't listen to advice given by body-builders, then why are all the bodybuilders on this site giving us advice???

Good question...here's a beter one: why are you listening to that advice???

I still think the bottom line remains, lifting weights for obliques can potentially make your waist thicker, yeah of course if you are the kind of person who never grows any muscle no matter what they do, then no worries as far as a thicker middle goes. But I'm not even talking about huge gains in muscle, even 1 inch of an increase on the waist can suck for someone who prides themselves on their tiny waist. My point was, if you aren't using weights for your oblique exercises, then you probably don't have to worry about your waist getting thicker from muscle.

Then what do you do about squats, deadlifts, chinups, pushups, etc, because they all produce greater surface EMG activity than do the majority of "core" exercises do...you can't isolate muscles, and assuming that avoiding direct work to an area will negate growth is a bodybuilder fallicy. The fact of the matter is that the obliques will grow like any other muscle under stress, regardless of whether you try and isolate it or not. If you don't want to perform direct oblique movement, that's fine...but if you're worried about increasing muscle mass around the midsection, it's not going to make much of a difference either way.

I found this, written for women:
Myth #5: Weighted crunches will make my midsection thick

Fact: The abdominal muscle is a thin layer of muscle tissue, and not able to grow much in size like other body parts. Therefore, adding resistance to your abdominal training will only increase your midsection strength. It is the side bends and twists that can contribute to a thick waist.

"About The Author:
Karen Sessions has been in the fitness industry since 1988. She is a nationally qualified bodybuilder and holds two personal training certifications."

Still bodybuilder nonsense, from an individual who has no education in the field.

 

[Susie]

Thank you

You're welcome! Now why did you take it down? Maybe we girls should start a petition like the one on QT Kitten's thread.

Good question...here's a beter one: why are you listening to that advice???

Because I assumed (foolishly?) that people who spend so much time and energy on growing muscles (some more genetically gifted/artifically enhanced than others) would know something about muscle growth.

Then what do you do about squats, deadlifts, chinups, pushups, etc, because they all produce greater surface EMG activity than do the majority of "core" exercises do...

Do you mean greater surface EMG activity on the "core" area than the so-called core exercises do?

you can't isolate muscles, and assuming that avoiding direct work to an area will negate growth is a bodybuilder fallicy. The fact of the matter is that the obliques will grow like any other muscle under stress, regardless of whether you try and isolate it or not. If you don't want to perform direct oblique movement, that's fine...but if you're worried about increasing muscle mass around the midsection, it's not going to make much of a difference either way.

Yes but avoiding direct work to the obliques while at the same time doing squats etc, still must be better than doing squats etc while also working the obliques with weights? I don't mean to be splitting hairs but tell me if my logic is wrong, because it seems oftentimes what appears logical to me when it comes to fitness oftentimes isn't the actual case.

"About The Author:
Karen Sessions has been in the fitness industry since 1988. She is a nationally qualified bodybuilder and holds two personal training certifications."

Still bodybuilder nonsense, from an individual who has no education in the field.

But nearly 20 years experience in the field doesn't account for anything?

Okay I hate these point-counterpoint messageboard debates, but maybe it's because after seeing your picture, I can't stay away!

P.S. SORRY VAINGLORIOUS, DON'T MEAN TO HIJACK YOUR THREAD!

 

[bipennate]

You're welcome! Now why did you take it down? Maybe we girls should start a petition like the one on QT Kitten's thread.

Because my gf would probably kick my ass for posting pics of myself on a female fitness chat board!

Because I assumed (foolishly?) that people who spend so much time and energy on growing muscles (some more genetically gifted/artifically enhanced than others) would know something about muscle growth.

Unfortunately, this isn't usually the case. You need to listen to the actual experts of the field, the ones that conduct the research, train the athletes, and pursue their educations in physiology. Bodybuilders aren't typically educated in this way, just experienced.

Do you mean greater surface EMG activity on the "core" area than the so-called core exercises do?

Core, including obliques.

Yes but avoiding direct work to the obliques while at the same time doing squats etc, still must be better than doing squats etc while also working the obliques with weights? I don't mean to be splitting hairs but tell me if my logic is wrong, because it seems oftentimes what appears logical to me when it comes to fitness oftentimes isn't the actual case.

Direct work is not the "gold standard" of development. Most programs that I write for my clients and athletes have little/no direct work for arms, for instance, but still produces excellent arm development and strength. If an exercise such as an overhead squat is strengthening the core musculature more effectively than an isolation exercise, then it stands to reason development at least as good, if not more, than from that same isolation exercise. Again, I don't have a problem specifically with choosing not to perform isolation work for a balanced individual, but if it's to avoid getting too "bulky" in a specific muscle or area, that's a bit of a misnomer.

But nearly 20 years experience in the field doesn't account for anything?

Maybe, maybe not...if it's 20 years of doing the "wrong" type of thing, then it doesn't. I have personally known trainers with at least as much experience, and they don't know a damned thing about training and exercise.

Okay I hate these point-counterpoint messageboard debates, but maybe it's because after seeing your picture, I can't stay away!

No comment...but honestly, this is what message boards are for: an exchange of information, questions and answers!

 

[Vainglorious]

Uuuummmmm... wow.

...

...

Okay?

 

[winspiff]

This is absolutely ridiculous. I can't believe that you are arguing with someone who is a Certified Strength and Conditioning Coach. Do you know what that means in our industry?

Did you know that Arnold - yes, the Governor and Mr. Universe - wrote a book in which he claimed you could "expand your ribcage" by doing certain exercises? Did you know that most fitness articles by celebrities are actually written by ghost writers?

And did you know that most professionals within this industry hate the worthless articles and exercises in popular magazines? Why? Because the truth is, there are really not many "recent" discoveries in fitness. Most of the best exercises available have been around for generations and are still the best.

Building up the Deltoids (top of the shoulders) and Lats (the sides of the upper back) will help form that sexy "V" shape. Obliques will not really do much to ruin it, especially with the way most people exercise their obliques. When obliques get "larger," what that actually means is they'll get tighter. That means you'll look sexier. It's the same thing with building your hamstrings. Your thighs will get bigger, but you'll look sexier because you look tighter.

Muscles either get bigger or they don't. Whether you work your endurance muscle fibers or your fast-twitch, the only thing you can do is increase their cross-sectional area. Doing weighted crunches just gets you there faster. Once your abs are as strong as you want them, you stop adding weight. By controlling your body fat, you'll control how much your muscles "pop out".

 

[winspiff]

Hey Vainglorious, sorry your thread got highjacked.

You'll probably be ok, especially with Pilates.

And by the way - I just realized that not only is that person CSCS, he/she is also ASCM-HFI. Don't mess with people who know what they are talking about.

 

[Susie]

And by the way - I just realized that not only is that person CSCS, he/she is also ASCM-HFI. Don't mess with people who know what they are talking about.

Yes, I should bow down and blindly worship at the alter of higher education. By your logic, students shouldn't ask their professors questions or engage in arguments with them because "do you know what their credentials mean???"
Give me a break.

 

[bipennate]

And by the way - I just realized that not only is that person CSCS, he/she is also ASCM-HFI. Don't mess with people who know what they are talking about.

Yes, I should bow down and blindly worship at the alter of higher education. By your logic, students shouldn't ask their professors questions or engage in arguments with them because "do you know what their credentials mean???"
Give me a break.

I have to agree with Susie, Winspiff, although I appreciate the acknowledgement. Just because I have a few letters behind my name, in my opinion, doesn't mean a lot: it's what I say that counts. I have been wrong before, and I will certainly be wrong again! I have personally known individuals with fantastic backgrounds and impressive resumes that don't know the first thing about effective training. You should always question the speaker: if they can back up what they say, then you've had the opportunity to learn something...if they can't, then you've exposed a fraud. In this industry especially, that is a very valuable thing!

-Jonathan

 

[deschain]

I have to agree with Susie, Winspiff, although I appreciate the acknowledgement. Just because I have a few letters behind my name, in my opinion, doesn't mean a lot: it's what I say that counts. I have been wrong before, and I will certainly be wrong again! I have personally known individuals with fantastic backgrounds and impressive resumes that don't know the first thing about effective training. You should always question the speaker: if they can back up what they say, then you've had the opportunity to learn something...if they can't, then you've exposed a fraud. In this industry especially, that is a very valuable thing!

-Jonathan

Ok, now that is cool.

A lot of people with your credentials would not have been so humble. I agree with a lot of what Winspiff said b/c frankly, it's usually best not to tie into an argument with someone with that much education and training. Loosely translated, all those letters actually spell "really-smart-son-of-a-b**ch"
But, Susie is also correct in that everyone should challenge and ask questions - how else do we really learn?

Anyway, just thought I'd comment.

 

[winspiff]

Yes, even I agree with Susie - definitely not the way I meant it. You should challenge people, I have learned a lot that way.

However, once someone explains something to you in a way that makes since, and once someone has proven your wrong, you shouldn't keep using articles written for fun to try to prove your point. What I mean is, if I went up to an professor and showed him a research review paper that contradicts him, he should conceed. However, if I showed him something I read in a magazine by someone who is a writer (not an expert) I should rethink my standpoint.

 

[monOU812]

" Obliques will not really do much to ruin it, especially with the way most people exercise their obliques. When obliques get "larger," what that actually means is they'll get tighter. That means you'll look sexier. It's the same thing with building your hamstrings. Your thighs will get bigger, but you'll look sexier because you look tighter."

"Muscles either get bigger or they don't. Whether you work your endurance muscle fibers or your fast-twitch, the only thing you can do is increase their cross-sectional area. Doing weighted crunches just gets you there faster. Once your abs are as strong as you want them, you stop adding weight. By controlling your body fat, you'll control how much your muscles "pop out".

DITTO to "Winspiff"
Just had to comment on this because I have had the experience of trying to lose inches in my waist. I lost 7 inches in 3 months by isolating my obliques. I did hanging side crunches. No bulk, just tight well defined abs. If you are losing inches, you obviously are getting bigger, just TIGHTER! Good luck! LOL to all the comments. Do whatever works. Everyones body is different and you can only know by doing it!