Don't train obliques for small waist?

[gtorn]

Some of the oldschool bodybuilders like Steve Reeves argued that anyone who wants the classical narrow waist-wide shoulders V-shape look should avoid training his obliques.

Without getting into arguments over the aesthetics of a 29" in. waist on a 210lb 6'1" guy, I'd just like to know, is it, in fact, true that training obliques takes away from a narrow waist?

-G

[Gonzomedic]

It all depends on the persons height. If your built like a fire hydrant and want to compete in BB, I would imagine the thinner the waist would show off better.At 6'2" and concentrating more on power then asthetics I need all the help I can get out of my abs.

[tiramisu]

This falls under the heading of don't do deadlifts, squats or overhead lifting because they will make you thick.

If you maintain a symmetrical physique then your obliques are simply are part of it.
I've met people who subscribe to the small obliques club. In each case this has also come with no back or legs as part of the package.

[Jericho]

Having an actual small waist is overrated imho. LOOKING like you have a small waist is all I care about. Just improve your shoulders and lats. Here's an example I like to remember...Layne Norton has claimed a 35" waist when he is near competition form (which is better than 100% of normal people), and XX has claimed that even at his most shredded he only gets down to 34". I can pretty much guarantee you they look better than 99.9% of the population

Obliques, abs, deads, etc.. all might add muscle to your midsection which would technically thicken your waist but then I'll ask:

"Why limit the development of 10 muscles (chest, back, legs, etc...) because of 1 (midsection)?"

[slyfox115]

Its really a trade off. Exercises like heavy squats and deads will possibly increase your waist size simply because it will add new muscle to the core and posterior chain, but without those exercises, its less likely you will reach the potential you have for muscle. There are always genetic freaks who are exceptions to the rule, but for the majority this is true.

[bruno]

I'm pretty this guy is just talking about doing direct oblique, like side crunchs and side bends and stuff. If he is in fact talking about deadlifts and squats and stuff, then that's a different story, but I took what he asked at face value.

If I am right, then to the orginal question, I think it's fine to skip direct oblique work like side bands or suitcase deadlifts. I think those exercises are fine to do, or fine not to do. I do think direct ab work of some sort is important, and I do it a lot, but direct oblique work is not as important IMO.

[ThatArmyKid]

core work=good
big waste from core work= stable
small waist=can be stable and or chick magnet!

[gtorn]

Originally Posted by bruno

I'm pretty this guy is just talking about doing direct oblique, like side crunchs and side bends and stuff. If he is in fact talking about deadlifts and squats and stuff, then that's a different story, but I took what he asked at face value.

If I am right, then to the orginal question, I think it's fine to skip direct oblique work like side bands or suitcase deadlifts. I think those exercises are fine to do, or fine not to do. I do think direct ab work of some sort is important, and I do it a lot, but direct oblique work is not as important IMO.

Thanks. You were right on target. Reeves did heavy squats, shoulder presses, etc. but avoided direct work to his traps and obliques. I've just taken this to mean I should avoid shrugs, oblique work and heavy, low-rep ab work. Don't worry, guys, I'd never give up deads

[JimSG73]

I'd take a thick muscular waist over a narrow one anyday of the week. Of course I am a bit biased on this because I'm built like a tree trunk anyway. The smallest my waist has ever been was 36" when I was sitting at around 10%BF or so. I usually sit around a 38" waist, but I also do direct heavy ab/oblique work too, along with deads, squats etc.

[Linkie]

Damn it, am I the only one with a 27 inch waist?