# bench targeting chest



## MZiggy (May 14, 2007)

is the chest all one muscle or can you target inner and outside part. I feel like im building muscle around the sides but not on the insides? i thought maybe close grip bench but i dont see any proof of this anywhere.


----------



## tucker01 (May 14, 2007)

Genetics.


----------



## kinkery (May 14, 2007)

to build an overall good chest you need to hit it from all angles(like any other muscle) for example

Basics for chest:
Incline Press (start your chest workout with these all the time)
Benchpress

(remember to switch up from using DB's And Barbells) 

Then Add in Some other stuff:
Pullovers
Fly's
Cable Crossovers
Incline Fly's
etc.

 hope that helps.


----------



## MZiggy (May 14, 2007)

chest day i do regular bench, decline bench, db flys, pushups in that order, then 2 days later on arm days i do military press, db flys, incline bench, skullcrushers and db curls.. does that look ok my other 2 days are for back and legs.


----------



## kcoleman (May 14, 2007)

kinkery said:


> to build an overall good chest you need to hit it from all angles(like any other muscle) for example
> 
> Basics for chest:
> Incline Press (start your chest workout with these all the time)
> ...



You've been misinformed.


----------



## kinkery (May 14, 2007)

post your whole routine layed out good. incline press is for chest :| why is it on arm day? lol theirs no need for decline press.


----------



## kinkery (May 14, 2007)

kcoleman said:


> You've been misinformed.



you think your gonna get a developed chest just by bench? don't think so bud. post a pic of your chest.


----------



## kcoleman (May 14, 2007)

kinkery said:


> you think your gonna get a developed chest just by bench?



Yes.



kinkery said:


> don't think so bud. post a pic of your chest.



No.


----------



## MZiggy (May 14, 2007)

if hes misinformed can you inform us...

my routine looks like this

mon
bench, decline bench, db flys, pushups

tues
yates row, bent dumbell row, lat pulldown, pullups, shrugs

thurs
squats, sldl, lunges, leg curl, calf raise

fri
military press, db flys, incline press, tricep pushdown, db curls

i work out at home with a squat rack, adjustable bench, lat pulldown, leg curl, and a ez curl bar i guess its called so i cant do cable crossovers or anything like that. im tryin to gain weight im 6'6 and 205lbs. any help is appreciated


----------



## kcoleman (May 14, 2007)

I am Joe's pectorals. Today Joe bench pressed 5 more pounds than he did last week, for an additional 1 repetition. After his workout, he provided his body with more than adequate nutrition for growth. I think responding to the stimulus he placed on me with hypertrophy would be a good idea when he falls asleep tonight.

But wait.... he neglected to finish off his workout with standing cable crossovers. Oh well. Fuck hypertrophy, I prefer homeostasis anyways.


----------



## MZiggy (May 14, 2007)

i dont think i caught your point, should i drop decline bench and do incline the same day as regular bench i think thats the question?


----------



## kinkery (May 14, 2007)

gaining weight is clean bulking. so its all about diet. also you should watch your tempo. for instance a tempo for hypertropy on bench would be 4-3-1 (4 negative, 3 sec strectch at bottome, and 1 sec going up) but it comes back to TUT(time under tensions).


----------



## kinkery (May 14, 2007)

MZiggy said:


> i dont think i caught your point, should i drop decline bench and do incline the same day as regular bench i think thats the question?



yes for instance. your chest workout should go something liek this-

Incline Press (always start with incline)
flat press
then add one of these: fly's, pullovers, incline fly's, or etc.

switch up from using dumbbells and barbells. drop the decline press( in my opinion its just an ego boost cause u can lift more)


----------



## kcoleman (May 14, 2007)

Sorry MZiggy I was responding to kinkery.

As to your original question, no you cannot target specific areas of the chest. It is all one muscle, it contracts the same in every chest exercise.

You should read through Cowpimp's stickies, training 101 and designing a routine I think they're called. You'd probably be happy with an upper/lower/off/upper/lower split. Come up with something based on those stickies and then post it in this section for critique.


----------



## kinkery (May 14, 2007)

kcoleman said:


> Sorry MZiggy I was responding to kinkery.
> 
> As to your original question, no you cannot target specific areas of the chest. It is all one muscle, *it contracts the same in every chest exercise*.
> 
> You should read through Cowpimp's stickies, training 101 and designing a routine I think they're called. You'd probably be happy with an upper/lower/off/upper/lower split. Come up with something based on those stickies and then post it in this section for critique.



so you don't think theirs isn't a difference in incline press and flat press  .


----------



## Witchblade (May 14, 2007)

Focus on overall development with different exercises. Don't target areas of the chest, just switch up exercises once in a while and keep a good vertical/horizontal push/pull ratio. The inner chest looks less developed than the outer chest simply because you lack overall mass.


----------



## MZiggy (May 14, 2007)

yea i used cowpimps designing a routine to make mine i mighta just added in incline press though i forget but everything else is straight from there


----------



## kcoleman (May 14, 2007)

kinkery said:


> so you don't think theirs a difference in incline press and flat press  .



Incline press has a greater range of motion and calls the shoulders into play more so than flat bench.


----------



## Twigz (May 14, 2007)

http://www.ironmagazineforums.com/training/41879-isolating-upper-middle-lower-pecs-chest.html


----------



## kinkery (May 14, 2007)

kcoleman said:


> Incline press has a greater range of motion and calls the shoulders into play more so than flat bench.



i meant to say isn't a difference


----------



## kinkery (May 14, 2007)

Positioning For Pecs (Build A Massive Chest)


----------



## AKIRA (May 14, 2007)

kinkery said:


> Positioning For Pecs (Build A Massive Chest)



Well Looky Looky, the son of a bitch had done his homework...

Kinda odd finding an article like that on IM.


----------



## Double D (May 15, 2007)

AKIRA said:


> Kinda odd finding an article like that on IM.



I was thinking the same.


----------



## AKIRA (May 15, 2007)

And no one said something about it yet!


----------



## Double D (May 15, 2007)

What do you think about it?


----------



## kcoleman (May 15, 2007)

kinkery said:


> Positioning For Pecs (Build A Massive Chest)



What the fuck does that prove?


----------



## kinkery (May 15, 2007)

kcoleman said:


> What the fuck does that prove?



stfu, you obviously know nothing


----------



## AKIRA (May 15, 2007)

Double D said:


> What do you think about it?



Well its mostly about form.  Then at the bottom, it gives you a workout template with shitty labels.  I dont think the article really says anything about targeting any particuliar muscular zone.

I say to hit the chest from all angles and make the fucker grow as a WHOLE.  In all reality, if a person believes that doing this or that to get his/her chest to grow and it works, for that time being, let them have it.  

When they plateau, theyre going to have to go back to the drawing boards, scratching their heads..again.


----------



## Double D (May 15, 2007)

AKIRA said:


> Well its mostly about form.  Then at the bottom, it gives you a workout template with shitty labels.  I dont think the article really says anything about targeting any particuliar muscular zone.
> 
> I say to hit the chest from all angles and make the fucker grow as a WHOLE.  In all reality, if a person believes that doing this or that to get his/her chest to grow and it works, for that time being, let them have it.
> 
> When they plateau, theyre going to have to go back to the drawing boards, scratching their heads..again.



So where do you stand. Different angles work different spots of the muscle? Meaning do you think incline works the top of the chest? I know where I stand, but wondering about others.


----------



## kinkery (May 15, 2007)

i'm just saying. IMO incline= upper(calvic). anything flat = Sternal Head and the pec. minor = chest dips and etc. but where i stand is that you should do all angles and exercises to get a proper developed chest. i'm not saying do 30 sets for chest in one workout. i'm saying stick with the basics in general( incline and flat(db's and bb's) and add in 2-4 sets of other stuff like dips(IMO this should be a staple in a chest routine( especially v dips) ), fly's, pullovers, cable crossovers. etc.


----------



## Double D (May 15, 2007)

I cant remember the last time I did flyes, pullovers, and I dont think I have did cable crossovers since college, theres just no need for what I train for.


----------



## Hialeahchico (May 15, 2007)

You should concentrate on intense benchin with proper form to build mass on your chest, intensity is the key IMO on chest development. After you build mass you can hit it from all angles with the pullovers, and cable crossovers etc.but you should really concentrate on building overall mass. remember you get what you work for so go hard or go home.


----------



## DiGiTaL (May 15, 2007)

I think its all one muscle but develops differently since its big therefore do other exercises to hit from angles.


----------



## Double D (May 15, 2007)

Lets be serious here, there is very few lifts that the chest doesnt get some sort of stimulation from. So is all the angles needed for proper chest development, maybe, maybe not, but progression is always key, so why not progress from flat bench to an incline bench?


----------



## ccr_bballer33 (May 15, 2007)

I agree with DD,

ultimately, the goal one is reaching for is progress. I don't believe one can simply stick to flat bench as heavy as one can each and every time a chest workout is done. Variation in movement and denying your body to adapt leads to progression at least it has for me.

Im just curious, how can you target, what you feel is three different areas, if it is one muscle?


----------



## Double D (May 15, 2007)

I truthfully dont think you can target a specific area, but you can target the entire muscle.


----------



## kinkery (May 15, 2007)

my summary:

Stick with the Basic's overall. IMO Just stick with the 3 Basics:
Incline- dumbbels/Barbell's
Flat- dumbbels/Barbell's
and IMO V-Dips.

sure if you have a shock week or etc you could supersett fly's with crossovers or pullovers with fly's or etc, etc, etc. many different ways...


----------



## Duncans Donuts (May 15, 2007)

kinkery said:


> stfu, you obviously know nothing



You need to be quiet.  You are not right.



> The existence of the so-called "upper", "lower", "inner" and "outer" pectorals along with the assertion that it is possible to isolate one or more of these to the relative exclusion of the others in training, are among the most firmly entrenched myths in Strength Training and Bodybuilding circles. In fact none of these truly exist as either separate and distinct muscles or regions in a functional sense. Even though it could be argued that there appears to be a structural distinction between the upper and lower pectorals (and some anatomy texts do in fact support this distinction though not all do) because the pectoralis-major does originate from both the sternum and the proximal or sternal half of the clavicle along it?s anterior surface (it also has connections to the cartilages of all the true ribs with the frequent exception of the first and seventh, and to the Aponeurosis of the external oblique muscle), this is considered to be a common (though extensive) origin in terms of the mechanical function of the muscle. Thus the pectoralis-major is in fact for all practical purposes one continuous muscle with a common origin and insertion, and functions as a single force-producing unit.
> 
> The terms upper, lower, inner and outer are imprecise and relevant only in order to make a vague subjective distinction between relative portions of the same muscle for descriptive purposes. They are vague and imprecise terms because there is no clearly delineated or universally defined border between them.
> Further it is not physically possible either in theory or practice to contract one region of a single muscle to the exclusion of another region or regions (as a Biomechanics Professor of mine once demonstrated to a bunch of us smart-ass know-it-all?s taking his course, using EMG analysis). When a muscle contracts it does so in a linear fashion by simultaneously reducing the length of its constituent fibers and thus its overall length from origin to insertion. Even where a single muscle is separated into multiple functional units that are clearly defined such as the triceps (which are referred to as ?heads? by Anatomists and Biomechanists), because they share a common point of insertion in order for one head to shorten all must shorten. This only makes sense if you think about it because otherwise there would be ?slack? in one when the other shortened, which as we know does not occur.
> ...



The overwhelming evidence against building portions of muscles (inner/outer pec, upper lower bicep) is becoming realized, finally.  Your muscle shape is inherited.  Sorry.


----------



## kinkery (May 15, 2007)

so i might aswell not even workout cause if i'm inheriting my muscle then i'll be where i would be even if i did workout?


----------



## Double D (May 15, 2007)

Hes not saying that, hes saying trying to focus on your upper chest does not recruit more muscle fibers there. Training your chest is training your chest. Just keep progressing through different exercises.


----------



## Duncans Donuts (May 15, 2007)

kinkery said:


> so i might aswell not even workout cause if i'm inheriting my muscle then i'll be where i would be even if i did workout?



You obviously don't understand what I'm saying.  Your muscle shape is inherited, as is your "hypertrophy" range (and hyperplasia range, too, assuming that is a real phenomenon).  Therefore you have to work out to optimize that range.

And I'm not saying inclines and declines don't have benefit.  In fact, I think they have enormous benefit.  Just not for what you seem to think they do.


----------



## kinkery (May 15, 2007)

Duncans Donuts said:


> You obviously don't understand what I'm saying.  Your muscle shape is inherited, as is your "hypertrophy" range (and hyperplasia range, too, assuming that is a real phenomenon).  Therefore you have to work out to optimize that range.
> 
> And I'm not saying inclines and declines don't have benefit.  In fact, I think they have enormous benefit.  Just not for what you seem to think they do.



so i can take a look at my dad and see how big his muscles are and then i see my range? so if he has 13" arms then i know my range. sorry but i'm 4 inches past that


----------



## Duncans Donuts (May 15, 2007)

kinkery said:


> so i can take a look at my dad and see how big his muscles are and then i see my range? so if he has 13" arms then i know my range. sorry but i'm 4 inches past that




You are as fucking stupid as a retarded duck, and putting words in my mouth that are so far off basis that I'm embarrased for you.  Stop wasting my time.


----------



## kinkery (May 15, 2007)

Duncans Donuts said:


> You are as fucking stupid as a retarded duck, and putting words in my mouth that are so far off basis that I'm embarrased for you.  Stop wasting my time.


----------



## Twigz (May 15, 2007)

Duncans Donuts said:


> You are as fucking stupid as a retarded duck, and putting words in my mouth that are so far off basis that I'm embarrased for you. Stop wasting my time.


----------



## StanUk (May 16, 2007)

kinkery said:


> to build an overall good chest you need to hit it from all angles(like any other muscle) for example
> 
> Basics for chest:
> Incline Press (start your chest workout with these all the time)
> Benchpress



Please explain why you think someone should start with incline press on every chest workout they do?


----------



## ccr_bballer33 (May 16, 2007)

Yah, you're not too bright. For one, your genetics aren't derived solely from your Dad. Two, just because he has those sized arms doesn't mean he has reached his full potential. You are taking all of these comments way out of context, and putting your own rationale to them.

Also, IMO, I never start a workout with the same exercise as the week before. I guess that kind of takes a page out of P/RR/S, but none the less. For me, I've had the best gains when variety is mixed into the rotation now and then.


----------



## kinkery (May 16, 2007)

StanUk said:


> Please explain why you think someone should start with incline press on every chest workout they do?



because the lower/mid chest is easy to develope. so you should start off with inclines.


----------



## StanUk (May 16, 2007)

kinkery said:


> because the lower/mid chest is easy to develope. so you should start off with inclines.



Easy to develop? So your saying that the lower/mid chest is easier to develop than the rest of the chest? Perhaps you would care to explain and perhaps show me some evidence.


----------



## kinkery (May 16, 2007)

yes it is easier. if you look at most people's chest you can see they have a good lower/mid chest but their upper chest lags. prolly the same as yours does


----------



## MCx2 (May 16, 2007)

kinkery said:


> because the lower/mid chest is easy to develope. so you should start off with inclines.



You're still at it?

Jesus.


----------



## AKIRA (May 16, 2007)

kinkery said:


> yes it is easier. if you look at most people's chest you can see they have a good lower/mid chest but their upper chest lags. prolly the same as yours does



The lower chest looks more developed because of gravity.  Its one one-fan shaped muscle.


----------



## AKIRA (May 16, 2007)

Double D said:


> So where do you stand. *Different angles work different spots of the muscle*? Meaning do you think incline works the top of the chest? I know where I stand, but wondering about others.



No way.  Lets say for instance, I appear to have some sort of smaller section of my chest.  I would simply change volume variables or change the exercise.  

For example, it looks like I have a small "upper" chest.  I ahve been doing flat bar bench for a time.  I then change to Dips, DBs, or yes, even incline barbell.  I dont choose incline cuz of the allegid "recruiting of the upper chest area," but to do something different from flat bench presses.


----------



## Duncans Donuts (May 16, 2007)

kinkery said:


> yes it is easier. if you look at most people's chest you can see they have a good lower/mid chest but their upper chest lags. prolly the same as yours does



i am a few credits away from a physiology degree and i can say without question you are fucking stupid as shit.


----------



## Leatherface (May 16, 2007)

OK, I have a legitimate question here that I hope you guys will take seriously.

When I do NOT do incline work for awhile, the chest area around my collar bone becomes more concave and hollow looking.  when I begin incorporating incline movements it thickens up.  Why?

Again, this is a legit question.  I am not being a smart a$$


----------



## StanUk (May 16, 2007)

Duncans Donuts said:


> i am a few credits away from a physiology degree and i can say without question you are fucking stupid as shit.



Thanks for clearing this up, I did have a feeling he was talking rubbish.


----------



## Double D (May 16, 2007)

kinkery said:


> because the lower/mid chest is easy to develope. so you should start off with inclines.



Sorry brother, but it sounds like you read that straight out of a bb'ing mag.


----------



## kinkery (May 16, 2007)

ohwell, you have your beliefs and i have mine


----------



## Big G (May 16, 2007)

kcoleman said:


> I am Joe's pectorals. Today Joe bench pressed 5 more pounds than he did last week, for an additional 1 repetition. After his workout, he provided his body with more than adequate nutrition for growth. I think responding to the stimulus he placed on me with hypertrophy would be a good idea when he falls asleep tonight.
> 
> But wait.... he neglected to finish off his workout with standing cable crossovers. Oh well. Fuck hypertrophy, I prefer homeostasis anyways.



Sorry. I'm just reading this thread for the first time and I just have to say that KColeman's post (above) is some pretty funny shit.


----------



## Big G (May 16, 2007)

And, Kinkery... I really think you should open your eyes on this one. I've only been at this for about six months and, until I read this post, I was under the imprssion that incline presses would target upper chest (I feel it there, if I do a lot of inclines) but clearly a lot of study has been done on all this and that's not the case. 

I'm going to continue to do incline/decline exercises simply becuase I enjoy the variety. But again, clearly, evidence exists to the contrary of both your or my (prior) understanding.


----------



## AKIRA (May 17, 2007)

kinkery said:


> ohwell, you have your beliefs and i have mine



beliefs?  Is this really so hard to believe?  Not to bring soreness into it, but ive never felt parts of my chest sore.  Its either the whole chest or none of it at all.

I was a bodypart training junkie even AFTER I enlisted here.  I finally gave movement training a try and some maxes have gone up (if youre worried about numbers) as far as how I look, look at the pics in my myspace.  My 221lb pic is from bodypart training.  The other two are from movement training.  Which ones look healthiest?  No changes in my cut and bulk diets, just exercise order and frequency.


----------



## kinkery (May 17, 2007)

AKIRA said:


> beliefs?  Is this really so hard to believe?  Not to bring soreness into it, but ive never felt parts of my chest sore.  Its either the whole chest or none of it at all.
> 
> I was a bodypart training junkie even AFTER I enlisted here.  I finally gave movement training a try and some maxes have gone up (if youre worried about numbers) as far as how I look, look at the pics in my myspace.  My 221lb pic is from bodypart training.  The other two are from movement training.  Which ones look healthiest?  No changes in my cut and bulk diets, just exercise order and frequency.



well its either my upper or mid/lower chest sore the next day. also ur myspace says "The user you're trying to view has set all their photos to private"


----------



## Double D (May 17, 2007)

Its because Akira is cool like that. I didnt realize that, I guess we are so tight I got right in, pardon the pun.


----------



## AKIRA (May 17, 2007)

kinkery said:


> well its either my upper or mid/lower chest sore the next day. also ur myspace says "The user you're trying to view has set all their photos to private"



It does?  God dammit.  This piece of shit whore pissed me off a few weeks ago and I messed with my settings, but I thought I changed it.  Now I am at work so I cant change it for hours.


Youre serious that you definetly feel sections of your chest sore?  I feel the bulk of my chest sore.  If I feel the upper area of my chest has some soreness, you can bet your cabooce its my anterior deltoids and not my chest.

Whats the harm in just thinking about how physiology works?


----------



## Double D (May 17, 2007)

Honestly if you are feeling one part or another sore it doesnt mean nothing. I dont know how many times we have said, "soreness means nothing"! Besdies that ask anyone who is familiar with teh human body and they will tell you there is no such thing as the upper part of the pectoralis major.


----------



## AKIRA (May 17, 2007)

Yeha, I only brought soreness into this to help with kinkery to understand, but it doesnt seem to be working.

This topic sucks.  The answer is pretty damn obvious.

There was another thread a long time ago about someone saying heavy DB Flies were better than Barbell benches for size.  Now that was an interesting quarrel.


----------



## Double D (May 17, 2007)

To many people read to many Wieder magazines, bottom line.


----------



## Hialeahchico (May 17, 2007)

> Originally Posted by *Duncans Donuts*
> i am a few credits away from a physiology degree and i can say without question you are fucking stupid as shit.


----------



## CowPimp (May 17, 2007)

There are two heads to the pectoralis major: sternal and clavicular.  EMG studies indicate that it is possible to shift the emphasis between these two heads to some degree, though the difference is not huge.  Unfortunately, I have yet to see any definitive proof that emphasis of the inner fibers of the pectoralis major is possible.


----------



## AKIRA (May 17, 2007)

How much stock do you put in EMGs in regard to overall muscle development?


----------



## Big G (May 18, 2007)

Last night I'm reading Arnold's Bodybuilding Encyclopedia and he recommends Preacher Curls to develop the (often hollow/flat) area between the bicep and the inner elbow. 

Now, I ask you, based on what we've been talking about here, how can that be?


----------



## Double D (May 18, 2007)

It cant be. It is the old bb'ing lingo. Every bb'ing mag talks about it.


----------



## Witchblade (May 18, 2007)

Big G said:


> Last night I'm reading Arnold's Bodybuilding Encyclopedia


That's where it went wrong.


----------



## Phred (May 18, 2007)

Back when I was in HS and started lifting at a local gym (mid 1970s) it was thought that if you wanted to work the inner chest, you used a wider grip and to work the outer chest you used a narrower grip (not as in a narrow grip BP).  Basically you moved your hands in or out a few inches on the bar from shoulder width.  It was also thought that using a Scott bench (preacher bench) that you would work the lower bicep.  Now a lot of books have been written with these kinds of philosophies over the years with no real scientific support to targeting parts of the muscles.  This was the guidance given and accepted at my gym.  And while it may seem logical that you can work a part of a muscle, you simply cannot isolate a portion of a muscle.  The other guidance was that when you take these blue vitamins, youhave to workout extra intensly or you will gain fat.  No one talked about PCT or liver functions.  My point is that a lot has been learned from those days and books/articles written "back in the day" need to be viewed as entertainment.  I am not saying the exercises suggested in the books are not useful, it is just that the exercises may not have the effects as written (or believed at the time).  Genetics, personal physical differences, etc. have more to do with how your muscles are shaped than a particular exercise.


----------



## Double D (May 18, 2007)

Nice post Phred.


----------



## kinkery (May 18, 2007)

yeah nice post Phred   . anyway. to build an impressive chest stick with incline and Flat  .


----------



## AKIRA (May 18, 2007)

Incline or Flat?    Why not decline?

Speaking of EMGs, Muscle & Fitness (a mag thats been used as a reference here) did some EMG tests on the chest and discovered that a decline DB press got those most activity, with a decline BB press right behind it.

If you never want to do some exercises, thats fine.  There are some I dont do, but when/if I hit a plateau, I might think about swallowing my pride and doing something different.


----------



## Double D (May 18, 2007)

Bottom line is a variety is best. But there is no way to target a specific area. And if that is true then I think I am going to go do some crunches to spot reduce my stomach area. You see I got this slight pudge there.


----------



## Duncans Donuts (May 18, 2007)

EMG studies mean less than nothing.  Decline barbell presses have shortest range of motion and tension time.  Give me a break.


----------



## Double D (May 18, 2007)

Yeah I was thinking about that to. And thats why I hardly ever do them. I can handle alot of weight with it, but the ROM is so close to nothing.


----------



## AKIRA (May 18, 2007)

I never put much faith in EMG studies.  Just trying to attack this from all angles and on both sides of the fence.


----------



## AKIRA (May 18, 2007)

Double D said:


> Bottom line is a variety is best. But there is no way to target a specific area. And if that is true then I think I am going to go do some crunches to spot reduce my stomach area. You see I got this slight pudge there.



  In the latest issue of Muscle & Fitness, there is an article that talks about less fat cells in an area that is being worked!!!!!!


----------



## Double D (May 18, 2007)

I know I so gotta work on my stomach (but the lower part), with hanging leg raises, I gotta work on my peak with preacher curls, I want that barbell lookin chest so I will be doing flyes, And most of all I need to lose fat in my face so I wil be doing face suctions..........


----------



## Stewart14 (May 18, 2007)

I'm surprised no one mentioned DB bench as far as "targeting the chest" goes, I think it builds the chest up better than any angle barbell bench.


----------



## CowPimp (May 18, 2007)

I don't put much stock in EMG studies, but I think some people deem them a bit more worthless than they are.  Nonetheless, the differences that I have seen with regard to the topic at hand are pretty small, and not something I would use EMGs to base my decisions on.

Also, to add a thought, even if it were true that certain variations were capable of stimulating contraction of specific portions of a muscle, we have no idea which exercises actually accomplish this anyway.  Current suggestions are based on entirely faulty information, and that's if it's even possible.


----------



## Leatherface (May 18, 2007)

I also find it interesting that these EMG studies are on exercises that most people are strongest in.  The two I have seen (Decline Bench and reversegrip chins) allow the lifter to lift more weight than their counterparts (flat/incline bench and wide grip chins) so perhaps THAT accounts for the most activity?


----------



## mrmark (May 19, 2007)

So based on what you guys have learnt, is it near impossible to place more emphasis on the clavicular head (upper pec)? 

Hypothetically, if you could, would it be at such an incline the action would be approaching more of a military press?


----------



## Stewart14 (May 23, 2007)

not to beat a dead horse, but I just wanted to say, first of all, I do not believe that inclines particularly "hit" the upper pecs more than a flat or decline press does.

however, I did some incline presses the other day and enough to make my chest very sore, and the interesting thing is that my "upper" pecs are pretty much sore to the touch, while the "lower" pecs feel nothing.  Pretty much the top 1/3 of my chest is sore when I move my arms or touch those spots.

I am not trying to prove anything, just add some fuel to the fire I guess...Do I think I am gonna grow a massive "upper" chest now? Doubt it, but I do think it is interesting nonetheless...


----------



## PWGriffin (May 23, 2007)

the lower portion of my chest doesn't ever get sore.  In fact my "upper" chest is a little sore right now too....but I didn't do any incline pressing monday...hmmm....maybe this means that flat pressing works the upper chest?!?


----------



## Soul of Sol (May 23, 2007)

My roommate and I are in an argument about this very fact right now. He believes that hitting the chest from different angles produces different results. I believe that you can't target one area of the muscle, the different angles are more for the secondary muscles.
 For instance, for him the incline press stimulates the clavicular head of the pec, while I think it stimulates the whole pec and places more stress on the anterior head of the delts and triceps.

 And just as I am typing this, I am thinking: then why in the hell do you need to hit the delts in so many angles? The more I learn the more questions I have....


----------



## CowPimp (May 23, 2007)

Stewart20 said:


> not to beat a dead horse, but I just wanted to say, first of all, I do not believe that inclines particularly "hit" the upper pecs more than a flat or decline press does.
> 
> however, I did some incline presses the other day and enough to make my chest very sore, and the interesting thing is that my "upper" pecs are pretty much sore to the touch, while the "lower" pecs feel nothing.  Pretty much the top 1/3 of my chest is sore when I move my arms or touch those spots.
> 
> I am not trying to prove anything, just add some fuel to the fire I guess...Do I think I am gonna grow a massive "upper" chest now? Doubt it, but I do think it is interesting nonetheless...



I get the same thing when I do flat or decline pressing.  I just tend to feel soreness more toward the insertion as opposed to the origin.


----------



## JerseyDevil (May 25, 2007)

CowPimp said:


> I get the same thing when I do flat or decline pressing. I just tend to feel soreness more toward the insertion as opposed to the origin.


Bingo!

I must admit I haven't even read the thread, but IMO, since the pectorals have only one insertion point, all chest movements work the chest as a whole. But variations and different angles work different stablizing muscles and help to keep progress going.

If you think the stabilizers don't make much of a difference, then that means a machine bench press would be just as effective as a barbell bench. No way.

I also think BB declines are next to useless. They just shorten the ROM so you can use more weight, and FEEL like you are building more strength. The only advantage is that it gets you used to 'feeling' more weight in your hands.  DB declines help in building the stabilizers aforementioned.


----------

