i want to be LESS muscular

August 17, 2007 12:17 PM

selective muscle mass decrease?

so genetically, I have a huge muscular lower half and a moderately muscled and lean upper half.

its mostly lean muscle, so its not a matter of fat burning.

Would stretching help? more aerobic exercise?

I have my upper half where i want it so bulking up the top to even out isn't ideal.

posted by nihlton to sports, hobbies, & recreation (10 comments total)

Long-distance running or biking ought to do it. What won't do it, though, is exceptionally intense or explosive workouts.
posted by notsnot at 12:24 PM on August 17, 2007

Biking is not a good way to reduce the musculature of the lower body.
posted by rhizome at 12:33 PM on August 17, 2007

Stop exercising your lower half and it will atrophy. I don't recommend this, but you can accelerate loss of muscle tissue (all over your body) by dieting and avoiding carbohydrates. Then exercise the top to get back to where you want.
posted by Manjusri at 12:45 PM on August 17, 2007

I'm with notsnot. I used to have huge calves and thighs and over the last few years of running, I've noticed that they are much smaller now, not just fat, but it seems to be a change in the type of muscle.
posted by advicepig at 12:49 PM on August 17, 2007

To clarify, despite a family of thick-legged people, I've always had skinny legs (for a guy; my legs on a woman would look great, I'm told!) which i attributed to years of moderate-to fast riding and running. Recently, after a year (or two) off from exercise, I started making my rides and runs more explosive, with more intervals. In seeming consequence, despite having lost ten pounds, my jeans are tighter in the ass and legs from build-up of muscle. These that fit me fine before I took the time off from exercise.
posted by notsnot at 1:06 PM on August 17, 2007

I second/third running. When I was marathon-training I wasn't the least bit bulky; in fact, I wasn't muscly-looking at all. And my butt just got flatter as I lost weight. (I'm a chick.)

That was 2 years ago; I've since abandoned running for the stairmaster, and my legs and butt keep getting bigger (as I lose fat).

Cycling is a toughie. Depends on your intensity, I'd think. You can't go riding 50 miles a day and not expect to bulk up (at least, not in my experience; even after one week of that my thighs are bigger) but for just recreational weekend riding, it'd be a good supplement to something like running, I'd think.

(I imagine swimming would be good, too, but I don't really know there. It's worth looking into.)
posted by iguanapolitico at 1:48 PM on August 17, 2007

Oh, and to more directly answer your question: in general, yes, more aerobic exercise. The way you ask the question implies that you might do weights/squats and the like; those things bulk you up more than the cardio type stuff (running, cycling, etc). But focus on endurance as opposed to intensity. Long/slow better than short/fast.
posted by iguanapolitico at 1:51 PM on August 17, 2007

Sit in bed. Seriously. Do nothing. No weight bearing, no nothing. Let them atrophy. Do as little walking/work with your legs as possible.

Now, for what it's worth: you're decreasing all that wonderful muscle that protects your knees and hips. Are you sure you want to do this?
posted by filmgeek at 1:57 PM on August 17, 2007 [1 favorite]

Row.
low resistance, long pieces on an erg (rowing machine).
posted by The Esteemed Doctor Bunsen Honeydew at 11:10 PM on August 17, 2007

Running (leaving aside sprints and intervals) is a high-rep, low-intensity workout. You can get the same effect by doing high-rep, low-intensity weightlifting, if that's your thing.
posted by zippy at 9:37 AM on August 18, 2007