For one man that you will meet who has a fairly well built chest, you will find one hundred who have a poorly shaped pair of calves; and for every ten you find with a good looking biceps, you will find eighty with poor forearms.
The relative difference between biceps and forearm development is not so great as that which exists between the chest and calf. No doubt, this is due to the fact that, when a person strives to improve the size of his upper arm he involves to a certain extent some forearm action, which helps to bring about a little better condition. But still, the average is tremendously below what it should be, for reasons that we will go into further on in our story. Perhaps you will think it an odd comparison to try to strike an average between chest and calf development, but it is not such a bad contrast after all, if you are willing to consider the fact that the craze for chest development is almost equal to the big biceps craze, and that the legs are used continually all day long in the transportation of our body. If the chest had any kind of muscular co-ordination with the calves as the biceps has with the forearm, then we would see better results. Yet, if we had to seek a comparison of other muscles of the body with the calf and forearm, we would reach a worse average. It is the truth that no two parts of the body are concentrated upon so keenly as the chest and biceps, and no two parts are neglected so badly as the calf and forearms. It is natural for all of us to go after an object that provides the possibility of gaining the richest success, no matter what our object may be in either business or in sport. So it is just one of our worldly failings to make the same choice when it comes to muscle building. A big chest and a big biceps are two of the greatest glories of a young man's dreams, while the forearm and calves are forgotten. There is always an awakening, which usually is brought about when the contrast between the fine development of other muscles, in comparison with the lack of development in these two quarters becomes evident. Still, developing in either of these two parts is not such an easy matter. A very few do make unusual progress. Once in a great while, I hear from some exercise fan who tells me that he has no trouble with his calves or his forearms. He usually has troubles that lie elsewhere. I generally find that nature has been very kind to these parties in the first place, but these cases are rare.
Of the two, there is no question but what the muscles of the calf are the more difficult to improve. It really is a shame that this is so. Poor calves spoil the whole build, no matter how good we may be. Somehow I have acquired the habit of always looking at the calves the first, when surveying a physique. The calf of the leg does not have to be extremely large to set off a build; it is the shapeliness that gives distinction to their appearance that counts. Well formed calves are something beautiful to look upon, and the finest examples of calf development, apart from a certain class of bodybuilders who did not overlook the existence of these muscles in the first place, are found to belong to sprinters and cyclists. They both also have fine thighs, but their calves re generally par excellence,, and this is particularly true of the bike racer. Of course, these conditions are perfectly natural, because these men depend more largely upon their leg strength for success than do other athletes. Yet, I am not going to advise everybody who wants good calves to take up sprint racing or bike riding. There are other means just as effective, but these two examples are good to bear in mind during our lesson on muscular operation.
I have listened to various arguments by learned individuals who each had different ideas as to where they thought the difficulty existed in these troubled sectors. Each man had a certain amount of truth behind his convictions, but I believe that it is a collection of many reasons that make the calf and forearm muscles very stubborn from a development standpoint rather than just one reason. For the present, we will consider the calf, since I appear to have first allowed my mind to run in that direction.
In the chapter in which I have discussed the mystery of strength, I have shown how nature from her natural reservoirs supplies the body with the strength to suit the needs of circumstance and how she accumulates muscular size in proportion to the stimulated strength, but here is a place where, at first appearance, nature appears to have fallen down. Take postmen or policemen, men with an occupation that calls for constant use of the legs with very little interruption for rest during the day, you rarely see any of these men with unusual muscular size, unless they have practiced some sports that have involved great calf action. Now I agree that this does not seem right, for we have found that if a man goes into the lumber camps and swings an axe he received bigger and better shoulders, and so on, but here we find nothing out of the ordinary. The only change we can find is that the calf muscles are very hard, and they have a clearer muscular separation. There must be a reason for this peculiarity which apparently has been overlooked, but I think that we can find it. In the first place, ordinarily, the lower legs do not have so much to do with carrying the bodyweight as does the thighs. Most people have the impression that the lower limbs do it all. If they did, then nature would have equipped us with larger lower leg muscles. What actually takes place is that the muscles of the calf control the stride, the leg action from the knee down, in extending the foot. The calf muscles appear to me to be especially endowed with endurance, and they are primarily built for that purpose. In ordinary use they are called upon more for endurance than great muscular contraction. It surely is strange then that their structure should be so much harder than any of the other muscles, that is, if we view the situation in the same manner as the men who believe that hard muscles are a sure sign of being muscle bound. This one fact disproves that hard muscles are bound. It is the quality of their structure that has increased their
fibrous texture, and the size they ordinarily acquire is sufficient for ordinary conditions. Under examination, it is found that the tissues of the calf muscles are considerably more dense than the muscles of the biceps or even the thigh. This fact alone is one reason why the structure is so hard to break down in order to provide for greater growth. Then again, the manner in which we walk has a lot to do with it. A very well known track coach and famous walking champion once told me that the longer the stride, the less the actual action of the gastrocnemius muscle, which is the double headed muscle that forms the back of the calf, is called into play. He claimed that the greatest share of the lower leg action was absorbed by the great Achilles tendon, and the muscle that runs up the front of the shin bone. This was the reason he advanced, why walkers and long distance runners, in general, do not have larger calf muscles than they have. In the heel and toe stride, the body weight is "rocked," as walkers term it, and the real movement takes place from the hips and not from the knees. In spring racing it is different; the action comes from the knee, as we will see. Anyone can observe that people with flat feet have poor calves, and a man with a small foot is apt to have a better shaped calf, because his stride is shorter, and he is better
balanced upon his toes. This is one reason why women as a rule have better shaped calves than men. It was not so twenty years ago, because they had not then adopted, for general use, the high heeled shoes now worn high heels cause a greater
contraction of the calf muscle and also shorten the stride. Wearing such footwear is not a procedure of which I can say, I greatly approve, but it has an effect upon the calf that bolsters my belief.
People who live in the mountains have better calves than the lowlanders. Walking up a steep grade, or climbing crevices, as mountaineers do, compel a shortened stride with a greater contraction of the gastrocnemius muscles.
Nothing but very vigorous play of these muscles will increase their growth, and it has to be vigorous.
The muscles of the leg and foot are divided into three series and are termed as follows: first series, the extensor muscles on the front of the leg and dorsum of the foot. Second series, the muscles on the lateral, or side of the leg. Third series, the flexor muscles on the back of the leg and the sole of the foot.
I am not going to name all these muscles, as most of the names do not have any special meaning, as do some others in the body. These Latin and Greek names are not the easiest thing in the world to remember, so we will just concentrate on the more important names. The gastrocnemius or "calf muscle" as I explained, lies on the back of the calf, and they are muscles of flexion, which does not exactly mean of contraction. To flex is to bend, a when we say a piece of material is very flexible, meaning bendable. They bend the lower leg on the thigh, operating much as the forearm does on the upper arm. The gastrocnemius have very powerful knee control, and are divided in two sections. Each head has an origin at the knee, but becomes inserted into a broad membranous tendon which we generally term the tendon of Achilles, although it has another name. If a person walks flat-foot, very little
contraction of the muscles is caused, as it is the muscle that contracts as the body is raised high upon the toes. The next important muscle is the Peronaeus Tertius, which
is really a part of the extensor digitorum longus. It is a long strip of muscle that runs down the outside of the leg. It helps to flex the ankle and raise the foot in a lateral manner as in dancing and skating. Another muscle on the lateral part of the leg is the Peronaeus Longus, which everts the foot and greatly strengthens the arch of the foot by its passage across the sole to its insertion.
Try to keep this clearly in mind as I am explaining the principle will have no
interruption in studying the best type of exercises later on. The next is the Soleus, which does not cover the sole of the foot. It is a muscle that operates individually and is a very powerful extensor of the ankle with a triple origin. Our last muscle of
importance is the Tibialis Anterior, better known to us as the shin bone muscle. Now these are all with which I am going to deal, because what these muscles do, actually controls and decides what the other muscles, that surround the calf, will do. We all realize that the largest muscle is that twin creation on the back of the calf, and it is the muscle that decides for us on sight whether a person has a good looking leg or not.
However, we positively must consider all the muscles when it comes to the right kind of exercises to promote growth. If you want to find out how little a person knows about calf development, ask them to give you the best exercises for the lower limb, and it is a cinch that they will know a greater variety for any other part of the body than for the calf. It is surprising to me how little is really known about exercise of the lower limbs.
To invite a person to go out and walk six miles, jump, spring or bike race, in order to get a better leg, is to ask them to indulge in sports for which everybody has not the time or the inclination. To me, such advice seems poor indeed, or an admission that you are stumped. The real value of exercise lies in its ability to supply the need at a saving of time. Most people are not interested in the idea of taking up dancing, or sprinting to gain good legs. I know the vast majority of bodybuilders are not. There is a lot of difference between games and exercise. Exercise is a thing which everyone can benefit from and excel at, but this is not true of games.
When I was striving for better calves, I had the same problem to face as my calves