# bench pressing



## russianalex (Oct 20, 2004)

what is the difference between incline,. flat, and decline
i can do flat and decline but incline is not a go..i cant even get the bar off of of the damn holders


----------



## Mudge (Oct 20, 2004)

Incline hits the shoulders a lot more. Some people at my gym put a plate under the chair to bolster it up, however there are also 3 positions to choose from on the rack. Or you can slide a chair into a power rack. I'm 6'2" and use the center portion with the seat at its highest setting, and the incline at my gym is fixed unless I slide a chair into a power rack setup. I dont do any overhead pressing because of the steep incline.


----------



## bulletproof1 (Oct 20, 2004)

russianalex said:
			
		

> i cant even get the bar off of of the damn holders



ummmmm decrease the weight?


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 20, 2004)

Mudge is right.

The incline presses work primarily the upper portion of your pecs that are below your front delts. But your shoulders greatly come into play.

The flat bench primarily works the middle area of your chest & decline works the lower area of the chest.

There are some ppl who would disagree with this & say that the chest develops as a whole, but it's very important to do all angles of the chest.

But it's also important not to train your chest & shoulders on the same day or on back to back days for the reason Mudge & I listed, that your shoulders play a huge part in your chest workout.

I also agree that power racks are very useful.

Some times I use the squatting cage racks & adjust the supports with a bench to the appropriate level.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 20, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Mudge is right.
> 
> The incline presses work primarily the upper portion of your pecs that are below your front delts. But your shoulders greatly come into play.
> 
> ...



Mudge is right, but your post contains misinformation.  First of all, you cannot isolate a certain portion of the pectoralis major.  It is one muscle.  It contracts as a whole.  Although you can stimulate different fibers via different movements, you cannot choose which fibers are stimulated as a result.  In addition, the muscle will still grow as a whole.

There is also no middle or lower chest.  As I said, it is one muscle.  It is important to hit use the chest in different movements for the  reason I already laid out, but you cannot isolate certain portions of the chest.  If you want to make it appear as though your upper chest is larger, then the anterior delt will help.  The muscle runs under the top of the pectoralis major, and will push it out more creating the illusion of more mass on the upper portion of the chest.

There is absolutely no reason you cannot do chest and shoulders on the same day.  A very common split is push, pull, legs.  However, since you already use your shoulders in various chest movements, you won't need to do as many sets for the shoulders since you would have slightly pre-exhausted them with the pressing movements. 

Now, Alex, if you are having trouble getting the bar off, then you have two choices.  One, lower the weight.  You are not going to be able to incline press as much as you bench press.  Two, you can raise the holders.  You will be at a mechanical advantage if the stands are higher and all you have to do to get the bar off is lock out your arms the last few inches.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 20, 2004)

cowpimp



> Mudge is right, but your post contains misinformation. First of all, you cannot isolate a certain portion of the pectoralis major. It is one muscle. It contracts as a whole. Although you can stimulate different fibers via different movements, you cannot choose which fibers are stimulated as a result. In addition, the muscle will still grow as a whole.



Here we go again    

There are many who will disagree with you.

You can't expect to be able to incline bench 255lbs if you only do flat bench press plain & simple.

Your upper chest area will not develop by doing flat bench press or decline bench press alone.

I've even spoken to steroid users regarding this matter & they feel the same way even with steroids they still need to train their upper, middle, & lower pecs to develop everything.

Why is it that guys who only do flat bench that can do 275 or 315lbs one day decide that they should be doing incline presses & they can't even do 185lbs on incline bench compared to their flat bench?

It's simple you have to work all areas of your chest from all angles to make the entire chest grow.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 20, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Here we go again
> 
> There are many who will disagree with you.
> 
> ...



The reason you can't expect "to incline bench 255lbs if you only do flat bench press" is because your central nervous system has to adapt to each movement before you reach a higher level of neuromuscular efficiency. Most of the time, any new movement you choose to do will improve more rapidly than a movement you have been using most of your training career.

When I first started parallel squatting with correct form, I couldn't do as much weight as I could going ass to grass with incorrect form.  How does that make sense?  Because my central nervous system had adapted to the incorrect movement.  The same thing happened with my bench press.  Now, both movements are catching up and surpassing my previous numbers.

You can develop an "upper chest" with only flat and decline movements, as long as your anterior delts are large and you have good genetics in terms of the shape of your chest muscle.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 20, 2004)

cowpimp



> The reason you can't expect "to incline bench 255lbs if you only do flat bench press" is because your central nervous system has to adapt to each movement before you reach a higher level of neuromuscular efficiency. Most of the time, any new movement you choose to do will improve more rapidly than a movement you have been using most of your training career.
> 
> When I first started parallel squatting with correct form, I couldn't do as much weight as I could going ass to grass with incorrect form. How does that make sense? Because my central nervous system had adapted to the incorrect movement. The same thing happened with my bench press. Now, both movements are catching up and surpassing my previous numbers.
> 
> You can develop an "upper chest" with only flat and decline movements, as long as your anterior delts are large and you have good genetics in terms of the shape of your chest muscle.




     Pure rubbish.

Then how come these guys who just do 5 sets have no upper chest what so ever, never mind a full cleavage.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 20, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> cowpimp
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Pure rubbish?  I'm quoting doctors and informatoin based on scientific studies.

Also, how can you generalize that guys who do 5 sets have no upper chest?  Did you travel all throughout the world, take a random sample of people with the most varied level of genetics you could possibly find, and put them through a battery of scientific studies.  Or, again, are you pulling numbers out of your ass?


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 20, 2004)

Cowpimp



> Pure rubbish? I'm quoting doctors and informatoin based on scientific studies.
> 
> Also, how can you generalize that guys who do 5 sets have no upper chest? Did you travel all throughout the world, take a random sample of people with the most varied level of genetics you could possibly find, and put them through a battery of scientific studies. Or, again, are you pulling numbers out of your ass?



Yes pure rubbish.    

Doctors? They hardly know a thing about bodybuilding or training in general.

I had a doctor who told me to stop doing weights b/c he thinks I was an unhealthy weight even though my BF% was around 15%. He told me I should only be doing cardio & that 170lbs would be a much better body weight for someone 5ft10.

So don't even start with doctors. They know family medicine, drugs, surgeries & so on, they don't know much at all about training unless of course they bodybuild or have played sports themselves that require training.


As for ppl who only do 5 sets of flat bench having no upper chest development or power, I've been to enough gyms in large cities to see how these guys train & seen their non existing shape that they try to show off in their tank tops.

Yes genetics plays an important role, but if you don't even train certain areas they won't develop. 

Myself for instance my chest cleavage doesn't fill out completely near the very top, it never did & I was incline benching 265lbs for about 4-6 reps & I'm currently doing 245lbs for about 5-7 reps & using 95's for incline flies with a full upper pectoral stretch & it still doesn't fill out entirely in the cleavage area. The outer area of the upper portion of the pecs fills out & connects along with the area that connect with the front delts. 

It's genetic.

But if you don't even do the movements, those areas will majorly be lacking nor will you have power for those movements.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 20, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Cowpimp
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I should have been more clear.  I am talking about doctors of physiology, kinesiology, and anatomy.  Not medical doctors.  You do know a doctor is someone who has a PhD, not just a medical doctor, right?

So you know the routine of every guy with an undeveloped chest in all the gyms you have been to?  Wow, you must do a lot of chatting and very little weight training to have such a large amount of knowledge about everyone around you who is training.

The whole muscle contracts.  Try to forcibly contract part of a muscle.  I dare you.  A muscle doesn't know the difference between one movement and another, only your central nervous system does.


----------



## Rocco32 (Oct 20, 2004)

Johhhhny, you should just let people who know what they are talkind about answer these training questions. Stop trying and messing newbies up with your idiocy! Thank you and have a nice day


----------



## Mudge (Oct 20, 2004)

I work with around 20-25% less weight on inclines when I do them, which is the end of my chest workout. Vince Taylor didn't do incline work as best I recall.


----------



## russianalex (Oct 20, 2004)

so basically with an incline bench i should do less. and a decline, flat, and incline work diff parts of your chest?


----------



## bulletproof1 (Oct 20, 2004)

rock4832 said:
			
		

> Johhhhny, you should just let people who know what they are talkind about answer these training questions. Stop trying and messing newbies up with your idiocy! Thank you and have a nice day



  thats a classic. 

hey johnnny


----------



## gococksDJS (Oct 20, 2004)

russianalex said:
			
		

> so basically with an incline bench i should do less. and a decline, flat, and incline work diff parts of your chest?


 When it comes to incline, it's not that you should do less its that most people can't do as much as flat press. It is very rare to see someone who can do the same 1RM at flat and incline. Incorporating all three presses into your workout routine is the best way to achieve full pectoral balance. For full chest development you need a variety of exercises that target your upper, middle, lower, inner and outer pectorals. Decline works your lower chest, flat press targets your overall chest but doesn't isolate the upper chest enough to bring them into full development. Incline press targets the upper chest. Flyes are good for inner chest development and use a wider grip on flatpress for outer chest.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 20, 2004)

russianalex said:
			
		

> so basically with an incline bench i should do less. and a decline, flat, and incline work diff parts of your chest?



No, they don't work different parts of your chest.  A muscle contracts as a whole.  You cannot contract different parts of a muscle.  A little tip to learning good information on IM forums: don't listen to anything Johnnny says.  He may have some good information occasionally, but in general, ignore his posts.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 20, 2004)

gococksDJS said:
			
		

> When it comes to incline, it's not that you should do less its that most people can't do as much as flat press. It is very rare to see someone who can do the same 1RM at flat and incline. Incorporating all three presses into your workout routine is the best way to achieve full pectoral balance. For full chest development you need a variety of exercises that target your upper, middle, lower, inner and outer pectorals. Decline works your lower chest, flat press targets your overall chest but doesn't isolate the upper chest enough to bring them into full development. Incline press targets the upper chest. Flyes are good for inner chest development and use a wider grip on flatpress for outer chest.



NO.  What are you basing this information on?  Are you just assuming that based on what you hear through the grapevine?  Can you explain how this works to me, please?


----------



## pmech (Oct 20, 2004)

gococksDJS said:
			
		

> When it comes to incline, it's not that you should do less its that most people can't do as much as flat press. It is very rare to see someone who can do the same 1RM at flat and incline. Incorporating all three presses into your workout routine is the best way to achieve full pectoral balance. For full chest development you need a variety of exercises that target your upper, middle, lower, inner and outer pectorals. Decline works your lower chest, flat press targets your overall chest but doesn't isolate the upper chest enough to bring them into full development. Incline press targets the upper chest. Flyes are good for inner chest development and use a wider grip on flatpress for outer chest.


 

I LOVE these threads.


----------



## P-funk (Oct 20, 2004)

rock4832 said:
			
		

> Johhhhny, you should just let people who know what they are talkind about answer these training questions. Stop trying and messing newbies up with your idiocy! Thank you and have a nice day




     



fianlly!!!  Someone said it!!


----------



## bulletproof1 (Oct 20, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> A little tip to learning good information on IM forums: don't listen to anything Johnnny says.  He may have some good information occasionally, but in general, ignore his posts.



damn johnnny you are very popular around here today.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 20, 2004)

P-funk said:
			
		

> fianlly!!!  Someone said it!!



Indeed.  I'm glad someone stepped in to help me.  I was getting quite annoyed.  I thought this poor young man was going to go into the training world filled with Johnnny's training ideologies.  I was worried.


----------



## russianalex (Oct 20, 2004)

Thanks Guys But I Really Dont Know Who Is Right And Who Is Wrong Untill I Get A Few Opinions Asnd Try Them Out Myself
Its Kinda Hard For Me Tho Becuase Some Ppl Are Saying There Is Notihng I Can Do About The Nipple Problem And That Only Surgery Can Remove It..also Someone Said That I Need Lots Of Shakes And Gym Memberships
I Have A Thing In My Basement Its All Good I Just Need To Perfect My Routine And Finetune Evrything


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 20, 2004)

Johnny, you're notorious for being a complete dumb ass, but to call what someone says pure rubbish is without a doubt the largest bit of irony I have ever seen in the course of my life.  

I know this one guy who confirmed everything I've ever said and prooves incontrovertibly the point I'm trying to make right now.  I'm going to use this guy to anecdotally support whatever I'm trying to say because I feel this qualifies as evidence, whereas related scientifice research is rubbish.  

You are a complete fucking buffoon.


----------



## russianalex (Oct 20, 2004)

*damn!*

damn duncan donuts you told him
i dont understand
use who?


----------



## pmech (Oct 20, 2004)

Alex,

Johnny has a less than stellar past of providing proof to anythng he says beyond "knowing someone , somewhere, who is bigger, knows more and is always right" and is often a complete "buffoon" as Duncan stats.

Read everything here, pay attention to what the senior members of the community have to say including visiting a doctor for your nip problems.

Read all of the stickies in the diet forum and the Training forum

Above all else, dont listen to Johnny.


----------



## P-funk (Oct 20, 2004)

man, Johnny is really getting ripped a new one in here!!


----------



## gococksDJS (Oct 20, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> No, they don't work different parts of your chest. A muscle contracts as a whole. You cannot contract different parts of a muscle.


Maybe I misworded my original post. I am aware that the pectoralis major is one muscle, but it is possible to exert more stress on different areas of your pectoralis major, which is what those exercises that i listed do. Read this caption concerning incline press from Dr. Richard Dryden, who used to be an anatomy professor at Guy's Hospital Medical School in London, England, and who is currently a Biology professor at the University of Plymouth.

_* "*The muscles involved are similar to those outlined for the bench press, with the main difference being that the incline bench press is designed to put more stress specifically on the upper fibres of pectoralis major muscle. Pectoralis major is a fan-shaped muscle that has an extensive medial attachment to the ribs, sternum, and clavicle and then narrows down to its attachment to the humerus. Thus, the upper fibres are passing laterally and slightly downwards, the middle fibres are passing laterally, and the lower fibres are passing laterally and upwards. By the use of incline, decline, and standard bench press exercises it is possible to target specific parts of pectoralis major."_
    Incline press does involve your delts a great deal, but you do not need to rely on deltoid mass to make your upper chest look big, which is what I think you may have said to someone in an earlier post. Incline, and decline press can make the upper and lower fibres of your pectoralis major more dense, giving you an overall thicker chest.


----------



## Mudge (Oct 20, 2004)

russianalex said:
			
		

> Its Kinda Hard For Me Tho Becuase Some Ppl Are Saying There Is Notihng I Can Do About The Nipple Problem And That Only Surgery Can Remove It..



If you are talking gyno then only surgery can remove that. If you are talking puffy nipples with no hard lumps, bodyfat loss can possibly change that, however lifting a weight will not spot reduce fat. The muscle has no ability to catabolize fat stores directly.


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 20, 2004)

Please don't anyone bite my head off but, maybe you should look at the pics for proof of what works best. Take a look at my pec picture in the gallery, I don't bench and my pecs are pretty kick ass if I must say 
and by the way, that is all pecs, the pics make them look like breast, but trust me, i am very tiny (11%bf)


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 20, 2004)

Muscles contract progressively from points of origin to point of insertion. 

The reason you will  lift more, for example on a flat db press is because you are taking advantage of the pectorals doing what they are designed to do; bring the arms across the front of the chest.

If you do an incline dumbell press, besides bringing the deltoids into play, you are not calling in to practice all of the pectoralis muscle fibers that you potentially could:

"Not all myofibrils exert force to the same magnitude throughout the length of a sarcolemma; only as a muscle loses its mechanical efficiency-due to the force deviating from a straight line-wherein it increases its girth at the point of full contraction will those myofibrils toward the center of the muscle belly be called upon to work."

If you do 80 pound flat dumbells press for 8 reps, you are exhausting, in accordance with the mechanical physics listed about, more muscle fibers than using 60 pound dumbells for 8 reps in the incline position.  You aren't just exhausting some (as in using a lower weight with an incline press); you are exhausting maximally what you are capable of doing.  Incline DB presses will, to an extent, improve your chest - and make you stronger - but it won't make your upper chest bigger, in my opinion.  Regarding hypertrophy, muscles grow as a whole, not selectively.


----------



## MTN WARRIOR (Oct 20, 2004)

Mind if I get in on this one again??


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 20, 2004)

gococksDJS said:
			
		

> Maybe I misworded my original post. I am aware that the pectoralis major is one muscle, but it is possible to exert more stress on different areas of your pectoralis major, which is what those exercises that i listed do. Read this caption concerning incline press from Dr. Richard Dryden, who used to be an anatomy professor at Guy's Hospital Medical School in London, England, and who is currently a Biology professor at the University of Plymouth.
> 
> _* "*The muscles involved are similar to those outlined for the bench press, with the main difference being that the incline bench press is designed to put more stress specifically on the upper fibres of pectoralis major muscle. Pectoralis major is a fan-shaped muscle that has an extensive medial attachment to the ribs, sternum, and clavicle and then narrows down to its attachment to the humerus. Thus, the upper fibres are passing laterally and slightly downwards, the middle fibres are passing laterally, and the lower fibres are passing laterally and upwards. By the use of incline, decline, and standard bench press exercises it is possible to target specific parts of pectoralis major."_
> Incline press does involve your delts a great deal, but you do not need to rely on deltoid mass to make your upper chest look big, which is what I think you may have said to someone in an earlier post. Incline, and decline press can make the upper and lower fibres of your pectoralis major more dense, giving you an overall thicker chest.



Thank you!  Although I disagree, at least you are presenting a case for yourself.  This is what good debates are all about.

From what I understand, different movements constitute the usage of different motor units, and therefore different muscle fibers.  However, this selection has nothing to do with physical proximity.  The central nervous system "chooses" the fibers based on the intensity (The speed of the fibers) and the movement (Which fibers from the pool of fibers representing the proper speed).

Even if the fiber selection was based on physical location, it doesn't mean that you can induce hypertrophy in certain portions of a muscle.  The muscle will still grow as a whole.


----------



## P-funk (Oct 20, 2004)

Holy Crap D.  I just noticed the quote in your signature!!  that is awesome!  I love Goethe....LOL, especially when it is preceeded by a moron!!


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 20, 2004)

rock4832



> Johhhhny, you should just let people who know what they are talkind about answer these training questions. Stop trying and messing newbies up with your idiocy! Thank you and have a nice day



Speak for yourself.

I'm only trying to help the newbie.

But since you're against incline presses you can go ahead & have a lesser developed chest than you could if you did inclines doesn't mean this newbie has to.

Incline presses whether it's incline bench, or DB flies are very, very important to do. There are a lot of ppl who just focus on incline presses along with some flat DB flies or dips & no flat bench.

Duncans Donuts



> Johnny, you're notorious for being a complete dumb ass, but to call what someone says pure rubbish is without a doubt the largest bit of irony I have ever seen in the course of my life.
> 
> I know this one guy who confirmed everything I've ever said and prooves incontrovertibly the point I'm trying to make right now. I'm going to use this guy to anecdotally support whatever I'm trying to say because I feel this qualifies as evidence, whereas related scientifice research is rubbish.
> 
> You are a complete fucking buffoon.



All I have to say to you is stop doing incline presses for 6 weeks & see how strong your incline presses are.

I thought you were intelligent, but maybe there's something affecting your brain function.

So I guess Gopro is an idiot & doesn't know what he's talking about either eh?

Gopro strongly believes to entirely develop your pectorals, you have to hit them from ALL angles & GRIPS to make it grow & become stronger.

I agree with him, so by calling me an idiot for believing that, than you're also calling him one as well.

Listen Alex, you have to hit your pecs from all angles & grips. 

The upper portion of the chest is the hardest to develop & requires a lot of attention, incline bench or incline db presses, incline flies, flat bench & chest dips is a complete pectoral routine that will pack on size & strength.

Your entire chest will simply not grow by doing only flat bench presses. Even power lifters do incline presses & only a few sets of flat bench I see them at the gym several times a week & they have fully developed & strong/powerful pecs.

j


----------



## russianalex (Oct 20, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> rock4832
> 
> 
> 
> ...


i really dont know who to listen to here


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 20, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Your entire chest will simply not grow by doing only flat bench presses. Even power lifters do incline presses & only a few sets of flat bench I see them at the gym several times a week & they have fully developed & strong/powerful pecs.



 P, here's another one that applies quite well:

"We do not have to visit a madhouse to find disordered minds; our planet is the mental institution of the universe."
- Goethe

Hey, Johnny, as far as your "Flat bench won't make your chest grow" comment, I measured my chest today at slightly beyond 50 inches.  Just about 30 minutes ago I close grip benchpressed 285 pounds for 7 reps (with 2 additional rest pause sets with no break) - I have not done any other bench press exercise for over 2 months, except for that for my chest, performed once a week.

I may not be in the same league as the favorite steroid junkie "pro bodybuilders" you tout, nor any of the other SELECTED NON SPECIFIC ANECDOTES YOU BLATHER ABOUT, but I can gurantee that your quote above reeks of ignorance.

BTW, I respect Gopro.  Don't try and drag him into this conversation, you fucking spineless piece of vaginal shit.  This don't concern him.


----------



## Jonnnny (Oct 20, 2004)

One reason is that you're doing your back & biceps on the same day which is a huge no, no.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 20, 2004)

Duncans Donuts



> Hey, Johnny, as far as your "Flat bench won't make your chest grow" comment, I measured my chest today at slightly beyond 50 inches.



I bet I can figure out how you got that measurement. 

Jonnnny



> One reason is that you're doing your back & biceps on the same day which is a huge no, no.



Bravo, do you think I anyone wouldn't notice that you registered with 4 n's while my name only has 3?


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 20, 2004)

Oh, on another point, Gopro never accused me of taking steroids when I said repeatedly I was only considering to take them, he never said that doing "just flat" won't make your chest grow, never claimed that CP was spouting "rubbish", and most importantly:

Nobody except you has ever blamed their HYPOTHYRODISM ON EPHEDRA.

EDIT:

Please, PLEASE tell me how I got that measurement?  I'm ever so curious.


----------



## Jonnnny (Oct 20, 2004)

Bravo, do you think I anyone wouldn't notice that you registered with 3 n's while my name only has 4?


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 20, 2004)

Duncans Donuts



> Oh, on another point, Gopro never accused me of taking steroids



I never said that Gopro accused you of taking steroids.

I said that Gopro felt it was important to hit the pecs from all angles in another thread.


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 20, 2004)

You are something J.

When you drew GoPro into this conversation, I simply pointed out the fact that you have a track record of doing the exact opposite of what a man of integrity does.  The steroid accusation was one of many reasons I don't respect anything that you say.

BTW, how did I get that chest measurement, to be curious?


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 20, 2004)

Duncans Donuts



> You are something J.
> 
> When you drew GoPro into this conversation, I simply pointed out the fact that you have a track record of doing the exact opposite of what a man of integrity does. The steroid accusation was one of many reasons I don't respect anything that you say.
> 
> BTW, how did I get that chest measurement, to be curious?



Again I don't care what you think. 

Mudge is totally honest and cool with his steroid use & I've had many conversations with him about it.

I don't think any less of him b/c he's using. I wouldn't hide it either if I was using.

But I do listen to Gopro regarding many issues & topics.

As for the chest measurement, I can think of a couple of ways.


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 20, 2004)

So share them with us!  Just come out and call me a liar, it won't be the first time.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 20, 2004)

Duncans Donuts



> So share them with us! Just come out and call me a liar, it won't be the first time.



Nah, I think I'll let ppl think about it themselves.


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 20, 2004)

Yeah, we wouldn't want anyone to trust your credibility, after all.


----------



## myCATpowerlifts (Oct 20, 2004)

Duncan and Johnny quit arguing....there's no point in arguing....diff. people, diff opinions....no one's exactly wrong or right, just shut up

You sound like a couple of elementary kids cussing back and forth on an Instant messenger program or something


----------



## myCATpowerlifts (Oct 20, 2004)

and btw duncan, he meant that you have huge bitch tits


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 20, 2004)

Thanks Mycat.  And I'm not gonna let up on Johnny, cuz people have to be accountable.


----------



## Jonnnny (Oct 20, 2004)

I think Johnnny is trying to do some good here, we may not agree with everything said here but at least he has good intentions.

Don't give up Johnny, we Jonnny's must now unite!


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 20, 2004)

Duncans Donuts



> Thanks Mycat. And I'm not gonna let up on Johnny, cuz people have to be accountable.



It is clear to me that you have nothing better to do with your time.

myCatPowerlifts



> Duncan and Johnny quit arguing....there's no point in arguing....diff. people, diff opinions....no one's exactly wrong or right, just shut up
> 
> You sound like a couple of elementary kids cussing back and forth on an Instant messenger program or something



I agree with that, but it is important to hit your pecs from all angles & grips btw.


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 20, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> It is clear to me that you have nothing better to do with your time.



What have you been doing with your time?

I'm squashing this, you can believe what you want.  Incline presses OFFER benefit, but not more so for your pecs (upper or otherwise) than flat benchpresses.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 20, 2004)

Duncans Donuts



> What have you been doing with your time?
> 
> I'm squashing this, you can believe what you want.  Incline presses
> OFFER benefit, but not more so for your pecs (upper or otherwise) than
> flat benchpresses.



What have I been doing with my time? 

Let's see, work full time, shcool 4 days a week, spending time with my girlfriend, training, & hanging out with friends & relatives, & reading my bible when I can

But you can squash what you want.

You can't expect to incline bench press 265 or more lbs if you don't do the movement.

If you simply do flat bench your upper chest area will be weak as hell.

If you've never done incline presses of any kind & focused & solely do flat presses, it doesn't matter if you're flat benching 405, you won't be able to do 315lbs right away. You have to build up first

I've been to enough gyms & seen enough ppl train to have seen this many times whether you believe what I say or not.


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 20, 2004)

Johnny, you asked what I was doing with my time in reference to why I was posting so much on the board.  I pointed out that you were spending your time doing the same thing - posting.

No exercise transfers perfectly from one to the other, not because of muscles involved necessarily, but because of neurological adaptations to the exercise itself.  There are a number of studies that refer to this CNS adaptation specifically.

I don't care what you believe, but to say your upper chest won't grow from doing flat benches is flat wrong.  All the exercises you list though do have potential benefit.


----------



## Uzi9 (Oct 21, 2004)

I think this Johnnny isn`t worth the bother, its a shame he seems to preach just what "he" thinks as gospel and downgrades everybodies opinions with his own facts that he thinks up in his head (not researched with scientific knowledge).

Although it wont be people like us that suffer (i.e. the trainers that have enough experience in the gym and read enough text on anatomy to realise our own opinions with enough degree of knowledge to hold valid argument) but the newbie`s who he litters with his own thought up ideas.

But the worst thing is his insults to people who dont share his same opinion, and that is why I am typing this post.


----------



## JerseyDevil (Oct 21, 2004)

For me anyway, if I stop doing flat bench and only concentrate on inclines, within a few weeks my flat will drop quite a bit.  On the other hand, if I cease incline and only do flat bench, even several weeks later my incline is still strong.  I know this for a fact because although BB incline is one of my fav movements, I had to stop it for a couple of months due to shoulder problems.  When I resumed, I lost only about 10 lbs on my max. Take that for what it's worth.


----------



## P-funk (Oct 21, 2004)

Jonnnny said:
			
		

> One reason is that you're doing your back & biceps on the same day which is a huge no, no.




I do back, bi's and traps (upper body pull) on the same day!!  I do all my upperbody push muscles on the same day too!

There is nothing wrong with that.


----------



## bulletproof1 (Oct 21, 2004)

good god this thread is causing a friggin riot. i feel sorry for the newbie. look russianalex, you are just going to have to pick which 1 you think works best and try it. thats what bodybuilding is is trial and error. rarely does everyone agree on everything around here .....especially when johnnnys opinion is involved.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 21, 2004)

I have just had a conversation with Gopro who is on my side regarding this topic.

I'm hoping he will come here & say what he has to say here to clearify a lot.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 21, 2004)

Uzi9



> But the worst thing is his insults to people who dont share his same opinion, and that is why I am typing this post.



I haven't insulted anyone only truth be stated.


----------



## Rocco32 (Oct 21, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Uzi9
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't insulted anyone only truth be stated.


Your not a good one to be dealing in "Truth" Johnnny. Just not part of the world you live in.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 21, 2004)

Ladies & gentlemen, here is a quote from a conversation I had with the knowledgeable Gopro:



> as far as the upper chest thing, yes I believe you need various angles to develop the chest fully...i do not believe that just by performing flat presses you will fully develop the upper chest



I believe Gopro over you guys any day. He knows what he is talking about.


----------



## bulletproof1 (Oct 21, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Ladies & gentlemen, here is a quote from a conversation I had with the knowledgeable Gopro:
> 
> 
> 
> I believe Gopro over you guys any day. He knows what he is talking about.




johnnny you waste more space around here than anyone ive seen.
no one doubts gopros intelligence but we do doubt yours. why cant you form your own opinions instead of piggybacking off of everyone else?


----------



## largepkg (Oct 21, 2004)

Johnnny, is it possible for you to have an original thought?

Do you need to check with Gopro to know when the best time to take a dump is?


No disrespect to Gopro intended.


----------



## Rocco32 (Oct 21, 2004)

bulletproof1 said:
			
		

> johnnny you waste more space around here than anyone ive seen.
> no one doubts gopros intelligence but we do doubt yours. why cant you form your own opinions instead of piggybacking off of everyone else?


Exactly!!


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 21, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Incline presses whether it's incline bench, or DB flies are very, very important to do. There are a lot of ppl who just focus on incline presses along with some flat DB flies or dips & no flat bench.



I still would like to see some proof that incline presses are necessary for chest development besides your claims of some guys at your gym doing incline presses and having well developed chests.  That is far from a scientific analysis, and is open to countless variables.



> All I have to say to you is stop doing incline presses for 6 weeks & see how strong your incline presses are.



This has very little to do with muscular strength.  This is a function of the central nervous system.  I already explained this, but you refuse to listen to general anatomy and physiology principles.



> So I guess Gopro is an idiot & doesn't know what he's talking about either eh?
> 
> Gopro strongly believes to entirely develop your pectorals, you have to hit them from ALL angles & GRIPS to make it grow & become stronger.



Why do you have to bring gopro into this?  No one said he doesn't know what he's talking about.  I also believe that different movements assist in the development of muscles.  However, I believe this not because I think the movements cause localized hypertrophy, but because the central nervous system uses a different pool of muscle fibers depending on the movement applied.  It has nothing to do with the physical location of the muscle relative to the plane of movement.

Either way, the incline press is not absolutely required to build a nice chest.  There is no one movement for any muscle that is a must, period.



> I agree with him, so by calling me an idiot for believing that, than you're also calling him one as well.



No, two people can believe the same thing without them both being accurately described by the same adjectives.  People call you an idiot because you try to backup your statements the same way every time: "The guys at my gym who do X activity have Y results.  Therefore, I must be unequivocally correct."  Gopro will backup his statements with personal training experience that is much more viable and useful.



> The upper portion of the chest is the hardest to develop & requires a lot of attention, incline bench or incline db presses, incline flies, flat bench & chest dips is a complete pectoral routine that will pack on size & strength.
> 
> Your entire chest will simply not grow by doing only flat bench presses. Even power lifters do incline presses & only a few sets of flat bench I see them at the gym several times a week & they have fully developed & strong/powerful pecs.



Again with the guys at your gym.  Jesus.  Why don't you try doing some reading and provide some useful information.  Why is this the case?  If you can present people with some factual information instead of vague anecdotes, then maybe they will listen.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 21, 2004)

Alex, the bottom line is that it is useful to use multiple movements for the same muscle.  We are just debating the reasoning behind why it is so.  Don't worry about the science behind it just yet.

Either way, I feel my training program is better suited for you.  You don't need to be doing a ton of movements.  You are a total beginner.  You're going to get great results for the first several months of lifting no matter what you do.  My routine focuses on the heavily compound movements that are going to provide you with a good base to branch out into other exercises with.  A lot of stabilizer muscles (In particular your core) should be adequately activated enough so that later you can branch out and use a wider variety of movements.  Start with the basics; get more advanced when you learn your strengths and weaknesses.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 21, 2004)

bulletproof1



> johnnny you waste more space around here than anyone ive seen.
> no one doubts gopros intelligence but we do doubt yours. why cant you form your own opinions instead of piggybacking off of everyone else?



Now I've heard it all.

I'm piggybacking off of everyone else?

I've believed this about the chest since I was 17yrs old way before I knew Gopro & way before I was even on this forum.

CowPimp



> Why do you have to bring gopro into this?



Why?

B/c Gopro feels the same way I've felt regarding this issue for 9yrs that's why.
& ppl around here respect Gopro.

He believes the same as me that I've always believed.

Alex listen to what I quoted Gopro on, he is a professional trainer & has been training for years.

That's all I can say.

largepkg



> Johnnny, is it possible for you to have an original thought?
> 
> Do you need to check with Gopro to know when the best time to take a dump is?
> 
> ...



Obviously I have to with ppl like this.

When I believe the same as Gopro regarding different issues & ppl don't believe me, I know they will believe Gopro.

Now that you have seen Gopro's opinion I'm being criticised for asking his opinions "which happen to be the same as mine" regarding this issue.

You guys just can't accept the fact that incline presses are very important for full pectoral development & strength increases.

I personally think that you guys don't want to accept it b/c it's one or 2 more exercises you'll have to do & maybe it's a case of being lazy at that point.

Alex listen to Gopro he knows what he is talking about, incline presses & incline work are just as important as flat bench presses & decline bench presses are.

As Gopro stated, "some ppl are just too smart for their own good" 

& I highly support that.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 21, 2004)

I like how you avoided responding to the rest of my post and instead took one line out of context to write a response to.  Good job.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 21, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> I personally think that you guys don't want to accept it b/c it's one or 2 more exercises you'll have to do & maybe it's a case of being lazy at that point.



I already said that I DO INCLINE PRESSES.  I just said that the reason I do them is not because I want to develop my "upper chest."  Try listening to what I say.  I will say it once more:


*I feel that incline presses are useful for the development of the pectoralis major.  It is useful because different muscle fibers are stimulated via the central nervous system depending on what movement you are doing.  However, these fibers are not stimulated based on the location in the pectoral muscle*


----------



## gopro (Oct 21, 2004)

Who is this gopro fellow Jonnny keeps referring to?


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 21, 2004)

> It is useful because different muscle fibers are stimulated via the central nervous system depending on what movement you are doing.



Whoa, what?


----------



## largepkg (Oct 21, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> Who is this gopro fellow Jonnny keeps referring to?



I'm not to sure. Johnnny really seems to like him though. 

Some advise for this gopro fella. Never turn your back on Johnnny we just aren't sure what he might do.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 21, 2004)

We know he isn't going to think for himself. So we aren't totally in the dark.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 21, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Whoa, what?



From what I understand, the central nervous system decides what motor units, and therefore muscle fibers, to use based on a few things: the intensity of the lift, the duration of the lift, and the actual movement itself.

The intensity and duration go hand in hand.  Slow muscle fibers are activated first.  If the duration of the lift is short and the intensity as high, as in lifting a 1RM, then more fast twitch fibers will be included in addition to the slow twitch fibers.  However, if you train your 1RM again tomorrow, the same pool of fibers are going to be used to complete the movement.

Now, a different pool of fibers will be used only if the movement is different.  There are, of course, going to be many of the same fibers used, but different ones will be recruited in addition.

Is my understanding of this concept off base?


----------



## MaxMirkin (Oct 21, 2004)

I want to help a fellow Russian out, but I am so not getting in the middle of this one.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 21, 2004)

Your understanding is not off base, but I think you're overlooking origin and insertion points. If a muscle, very generically, looks like this:

o------------i

And all fibers in the given muscle are the same way, you would not be able to recruit one set of fibers without the other. The effects lifting from different angles has on the CNS are very real. By changing the angle, the ROM, a stance you are giving your CNS a "fresh look" at the lift. But the muscles contract the same way, regardless of angle. The exception would be muscles with different origin and insertion points. The traps would be one example of that.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 21, 2004)

Gopro



> Who is this gopro fellow Jonnny keeps referring to?



Nice one 

largepkg



> I'm not to sure. Johnnny really seems to like him though.
> 
> Some advise for this gopro fella. Never turn your back on Johnnny we just aren't sure what he might do.



& what exactly do you mean by that?

If you mean what I think you mean than you are dead wrong.


----------



## pmech (Oct 21, 2004)




----------



## largepkg (Oct 21, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Gopro
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Acceptance of your problem is the first step to a cure!


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 21, 2004)

pmech

I think you're spending too much time in cheeseland.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 21, 2004)

largepkg



> Acceptance of your problem is the first step to a cure!



I have no problem accept for a couple of immature school childeren to deal with.

Anyway I'm going to continue making my pecs grow & get stronger by hitting them from all angles & grips.

Have fun with your 5 sets of bench press.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 21, 2004)

Hahahaha.

Oh man.


----------



## nikegurl (Oct 21, 2004)

Is anyone else utterly amazed that Johnny hasn't been made mod in training forum yet?


----------



## largepkg (Oct 21, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> largepkg
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Just for the record Dookie. I do 9 sets for my chest! They would include flat bench, incline DB, and some fly movement. So there


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 21, 2004)

nikegurl



> Is anyone else utterly amazed that Johnny hasn't been made mod in
> training forum yet?



I'm surprised that you're not a moderator by now since you know everything there is to know.


Some ppl are just funny, you support Gopro on this topic & he believes the exact same thing that I do regarding upper chest work for a fully developed & strong chest, yet you guys are against me who believes the exact same thing as Gopor does.

IMO that's a big hipocrat.


----------



## nikegurl (Oct 21, 2004)

he said dookie.


----------



## MaxMirkin (Oct 21, 2004)

nikegurl said:
			
		

> Is anyone else utterly amazed that Johnny hasn't been made mod in training forum yet?


----------



## nikegurl (Oct 21, 2004)

actually Johnny - I RESPECT gopro but don't agree w/him on the upper chest thing - but that isn't the point.  I've yet to claim I know everything and I definitely DON'T go around giving out bad training advice.


----------



## pmech (Oct 21, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> pmech
> 
> I think you're spending too much time in cheeseland.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 21, 2004)

largepkg



> Just for the record Dookie. I do 9 sets for my chest! They would include flat bench, incline DB, and some fly movement. So there



If you're doing incline presses than why are you even arguing with me? Just for the sake of arguing? That's a big waste of time.

But your chest routine is similar to mine except I do 12 sets total, 4 exercises 3 sets each.

3 sets of flat or decline bench
3 sets of incline bench
3 sets of some various form of db incline flies
3 sets of either dips or cable cross overs or flat db flies

My chest routine only takes 30mins & my biceps after that only take 15-20mins so I'm not training more than 1hr.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 21, 2004)

I don't agree. And I could go through and prove to you, AGAIN, that what you're saying is simply an appearance brought about by other mechanisms. And you would tell me about some guy at your gym who's been working out for 20 years or provide some other wholly unrelated backing for your false belief. The big difference is that I can prove what I'm saying, you can't.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 21, 2004)

nikegurl



> actually Johnny - I RESPECT gopro but don't agree w/him on the upper chest thing - but that isn't the point. I've yet to claim I know everything and I definitely DON'T go around giving out bad training advice.



So what you're saying is that Gopro is also giving bad training advice also. Hmmmm.

But you do give the impression that you know everything at times.


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 21, 2004)

Dude, stop bringing up gopro.  We have a great relationship with him, and though we may disagree, he conducts himself intelligently, cohesively, and coherently.

Read:  coherently.  Bringing up gopro is entirely inappropriate, as he has nothing to do with this discussion.  It is an attempt to draw attention away from the facts.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 21, 2004)

Johnnny, using someone else's credibility to try to establish your own is laughable at best.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 21, 2004)

Saturday Fever



> I don't agree. And I could go through and prove to you, AGAIN, that what you're saying is simply an appearance brought about by other mechanisms. And you would tell me about some guy at your gym who's been working out for 20 years or provide some other wholly unrelated backing for your false belief. The big difference is that I can prove what I'm saying, you can't.



Anyway I could see that if you were a 300+lbs man that your chest would be very, very large despite incline work, but I'm sure that 300lbs man did a lot of incline work at some point in his life to get that way.

The 2003 World's Strongest Man that you see on ESPN & TSN all the time goes to my gym with another ranked buddy of his. Their chest routine is this, 

4 sets of flat bench press
4 sets of incline bench press
4 sets of either incline db flies or dips

That's it that's all & they're a good 280-300lbs at 6ft tall & 6ft3 with a 820lb squat.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 21, 2004)

Saturday Fever



> Johnnny, using someone else's credibility to try to establish your own is laughable at best.



Actually that's not what I'm doing, I'm just making a point that even very exerienced ppl believe the same thing regarding this topic such as Gopro.

So I guess Gopro is giving bad advice to.

Did you know that he is a trainer as well?

I think he knows what he's doing or he wouldn't have a job.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 21, 2004)

Those guys are also loaded on steroids. They could develop a massive chest sitting on the john taking a dump. What's your point?

Again, you have NO backing or evidence. Just anecdotal stories. Try again. This time, think and speak for yourself.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 21, 2004)

Duncans Donuts



> Dude, stop bringing up gopro.  We have a great relationship with him,
> and though we may disagree, he conducts himself intelligently,
> cohesively, and coherently.
> 
> ...



Again I'm just showing that I'm not alone regarding this one.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 21, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Saturday Fever
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What does gopro have to do with anything? You think dropping his name every other post makes anything YOU say worth a hill of beans? If I added "Dave Tate says.." to every post I made, two things could be learned:

1) I can't think or speak for myself.
2) I don't really have any knowledge, but I can read.

Thanks but I'd rather be my own person and earn my own credibility.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 21, 2004)

Saturday Fever



> Those guys are also loaded on steroids. They could develop a massive
> chest sitting on the john taking a dump. What's your point?
> 
> Again, you have NO backing or evidence. Just anecdotal stories. Try
> again. This time, think and speak for yourself.



This is true, but there are ppl who take steroids & don't train properly & they don't make any gains of any kind & they might as well have flushed their money down the toilet.


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 21, 2004)

NO, you are not bud.  You are using his belief in something to try and divert attention, and I quote



> So what you're saying is that Gopro is also giving bad training advice also. Hmmmm.



Instead of standing up and telling us why you believe (btw: saying "because i said so" is not evidence), you continuously refer to gopro and if we DISAGREE with what you say, we must hate gopro and think he's a fool.

You have done this repeatedly, in other threads.  It's spineless.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 21, 2004)

Thank you for proving my point.


----------



## largepkg (Oct 21, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> largepkg
> 
> 
> 
> ...



First of all take a look back at my post before you accuse me of anything! 

My only problem with you is you don't seem to have an original thought of your own. Regurgitating someone Else's knowledge doesn't make you knowledgeable!


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 21, 2004)

Saturday Fever



> What does gopro have to do with anything? You think dropping his name
> every other post makes anything YOU say worth a hill of beans? If I
> added "Dave Tate says.." to every post I made, two things could be learned:
> 
> ...



Like I already said I obviously have to list someone's name who has credibility Gopro is in my favor.

Like I also already said I've believed this about the chest for 9yrs now so I already had my own opinions. But since a few of you think I'm full of sh!t on this one, then I figure maybe someone like Gopro with some credibility will convince you ppl other wise. By saying I'm full of sh!t having the same belief you are also saying that he is full of it & I personally don't think that Gopro is.
I believe that Gopro knows what he is talking about more so than any of you here.

But Gopro did say it was pointless to try as some ppl are too smart for their own good.

Duncans Donuts



> NO, you are not bud.  You are using his belief in something to try and
> divert attention, and I quote



I am just pointing out that Gopro shares the same belief that I've had for about 9yrs now regarding the pectorals.

largepkg



> My only problem with you is you don't seem to have an original thought
> of your own. Regurgitating someone Else's knowledge doesn't make you
> knowledgeable!



As I've already said that I've had this belief & opinion regarding the pectorals for about 9yrs now & I've only been here since the summer.

Do the math.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 21, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Saturday Fever
> 
> 
> 
> Like I already said I obviously have to list someone's name who has credibility Gopro is in my favor.



No, you do NOT have to list someone's name simply because you lack the ability to express yourself. If doing an incline press will somehow improve your ability to build the mysterious "upper chest" then PROVE it. Saying "gopro agrees" is not proof. Proof is FACT.



> Like I also already said I've believed this about the chest for 9yrs now so I already had my own opinions. But since a few of you think I'm full of sh!t on this one, then I figure maybe someone like Gopro with some credibility will convince you ppl other wise. By saying I'm full of sh!t having the same belief you are also saying that he is full of it & I personally don't think that Gopro is.
> I believe that Gopro knows what he is talking about more so than any of you here.



Great that you think so highly of him. And yet, I've laid an open challenge to PROVE it and nobody has ever stepped up. Instead they counter with slop like, "you wouldn't believe my proof." Well, SHOW me your proof. And be prepared for me to either agree or question your proof. If it is truly proof, it is backed by evidence and no question I ask won't have an answer. That is what facts are. You present a fact, I question it, you provide evidence. Maybe I question still and you provide further evidence that further backs the FACT you have presented. But NOBODY can do this.



> But Gopro did say it was pointless to try as some ppl are too smart for their own good.



Funny you should use that expression, "too smart for their own good." It implies we should all be stupid and just accept what we're told without questioning or seeking proof. I think you dug yourself a nice hole there.


----------



## gopro (Oct 21, 2004)

Haven't you people figured this out yet...I AM Jonnny!


----------



## largepkg (Oct 21, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> Haven't you people figured this out yet...I AM Jonnny!


----------



## MaxMirkin (Oct 21, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> Haven't you people figured this out yet...I AM Jonnny!


 ............(I knew it!)


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 21, 2004)

All I have to say is that I'm going to continue training the way I've trained for the last 10yrs almost.

But please don't tell this poor innocent newbie that he doesn't have to do any upper chest presses or any upper chest work at all & his chest will still fully develop b/c it's just nonsense.

He needs to hit his pecs from all angles & grips especially now b/c he is still going through puberty & he will make a lot of gains during this time.


----------



## russianalex (Oct 21, 2004)

this is really confusing

whos who?

im me but who are you

 is going on here?!?!


----------



## gopro (Oct 21, 2004)

russianalex said:
			
		

> this is really confusing
> 
> whos who?
> 
> ...



Get used to it...life gets more confusing as you go along...


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 21, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Your understanding is not off base, but I think you're overlooking origin and insertion points. If a muscle, very generically, looks like this:
> 
> o------------i
> 
> And all fibers in the given muscle are the same way, you would not be able to recruit one set of fibers without the other. The effects lifting from different angles has on the CNS are very real. By changing the angle, the ROM, a stance you are giving your CNS a "fresh look" at the lift. But the muscles contract the same way, regardless of angle. The exception would be muscles with different origin and insertion points. The traps would be one example of that.



Alright, so in the case of the pectoralis major, which has two heads with different origins, you might be able to recruit all the fibers in one head but not the other?


----------



## MTN WARRIOR (Oct 21, 2004)

gococksDJS said:
			
		

> Read this caption concerning incline press from Dr. Richard Dryden, who used to be an anatomy professor at Guy's Hospital Medical School in London, England, and who is currently a Biology professor at the University of Plymouth.
> 
> _* "*The muscles involved are similar to those outlined for the bench press, with the main difference being that the incline bench press is designed to put more stress specifically on the upper fibres of pectoralis major muscle. Pectoralis major is a fan-shaped muscle that has an extensive medial attachment to the ribs, sternum, and clavicle and then narrows down to its attachment to the humerus. Thus, the upper fibres are passing laterally and slightly downwards, the middle fibres are passing laterally, and the lower fibres are passing laterally and upwards. By the use of incline, decline, and standard bench press exercises it is possible to target specific parts of pectoralis major."_
> QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 21, 2004)

Nope. Shared insertion point at the Humerus. If the shoulder rotate inwards, both heads will flex.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 21, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Nope. Shared insertion point at the Humerus. If the shoulder rotate inwards, both heads will flex.



So, to separately contract the muscles, they must have different points of insertion AND origin?  Therefore, no matter what movement is done with the chest, the same motor units are recruited?


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 21, 2004)

Well, that's where it gets tricky. If the moving part was the sternum and/or clavicle(origin) and not the humerus(insertion), then you could separately contract and isolate muscles.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 21, 2004)

With regards to Richard Dryden, I'll repost a conversation:



> "Wide grip benches can be wonderful for lateral pectoral mass but they will do very little for the medial fibers, because these fibers barely shorten at all when benching." Stephen E. Alway, Ph.D.
> 
> And *we* are the ones uneducated in basic anatomy? Sorry, but this is something an undergrad in any branch of exercise science would not hold as truth....let alone someone with a doctorate.
> 
> ...





> Joint angle and MU recruitment are related, but only in the sense that the angle determines the amount of tension present.
> 
> Force is transmitted through the muscle from the origin to the insertion. What you're trying to say with the concept of an "inner" fiber is that somehow, a part of that line of force is contracting less than another part.
> 
> ...





> So in order for the muscle fiber to contract it must contract equally along it's range? Is that what you're saying? I think you're just simply overlooking the sarcomer structure and how it functions mechanically. There is a definite varaince in the force transmission of the sarcomer depending on its length and this is related to the actin-myosin connections and how they are located.
> 
> Why would any single sarcomere vary in length with respect to others in the same myofibril? Even if they did, that's within single fibers; I'm talking more about the muscle as a whole.
> 
> ...


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 21, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Well, that's where it gets tricky. If the moving part was the sternum and/or clavicle(origin) and not the humerus(insertion), then you could separately contract and isolate muscles.



Okay, so, it doesn't matter which is different, the origin or insertion.  The only thing that matters is if the one that is different is also the one that moves when the muscle contracts?


----------



## minesastella (Oct 21, 2004)

Hi Guys/Gals
I'm pretty new to this forum, I'd just like to say Inly do Incline Bench Presses in my workouts, varying angles, 100Kg for 10 reps, 4 sets on each, I tried a flat Bench earlier this week and I managed to push 100Kg out easily, probably could have added 10Kg or so.


----------



## gococksDJS (Oct 21, 2004)

MTN WARRIOR, this is the link from where I got that quote. It is a website run by a team of doctors, nurses, and graduate students who specialize in healthcare biology. The caption about benchpress is about half way down the page. 
http://www.nurseminerva.co.uk/muscular.htm#q7
I did not find anything in this article about isolation. It says you can put more stress on separate areas of your pectoralis major i.e. upper, lower, but it says nothing about isolating. The definition of isolate is to set apart or cut off from others, so by this I would believe that you would not be able to isolate areas of your pectoralis major because it contracts as a whole, but this article says that it is possible to isolate areas of a muscle. About a third of the way down read under "The Sculptor in Training"

http://www.fitstep.com/Misc/Newsletter-archives/issue18.htm

Now im not sure if this website is credible because there are a lot of bullshit sites on the internet, including that one that promised me they could add 7" in 1 month.


----------



## pmech (Oct 21, 2004)

gococksDJS said:
			
		

> Now im not sure if this website is credible because there are a lot of bullshit sites on the internet, including that one that promised me they could add 7" in 1 month.


You mean... it isn't going to work?????


----------



## myCATpowerlifts (Oct 21, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> I agree with that, but it is important to hit your pecs from all angles & grips btw.




i agree, its definetly needed, doing only flast has unbalanced me noticably

and i know more about my body than anyone else, so nobody can tell me that a muscle doesnt grow differently in response to diff. angles...etc


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 21, 2004)

Well, I certainly can tell you that. Let me offer you a "theory" as to why you believe doing an incline press has produced an "upper chest" for you.

Your anterior deltoid originates on the clavicle (the same as your pec). When you perform an incline press, you put yourself in a position that functionally requires more use of your anterior deltoid than a regular flat bench press. Now as your deltoid hypertrophies (and depending where, genetically, your delt originates) you get what APPEARS to be a developed upper chest. When in fact what you've done is hypertrophied your delt by performing a lift that greater stimulates it than a flat press.

And really, if you're after appearances, then you have achieved your goal. But I'm arguing that what you're doing is not what you think you're doing. And to top that off, human anatomy would agree with the ability to create this "appearance" via the anterior delt, whereas it disagrees with the idea you have actually developed the mysterious "upper chest."


----------



## russianalex (Oct 21, 2004)

Guys I Put Up This Post And I Have One More Question
Everyone Here Is Talking About Incline
What About Decline
Just Today I Worked Out For 30 Mins I Cant Do More Because I Have Nothing To Do I Dont Know Any Rountines
I Did 3 Sets 8 Reps Of The Following
Inline With 60 Lbs
Flat With 80 Lbs
Decline With 70 Lbs
And Then I Did Some Freeweights But I Dont Know What Theyt Are Called
I Think Some Curls And Then Situps, Pushups, Crunches, And When You Just Keep Your Arms Straight At Your Side And Then Lift With 10 Pounders
Is This A Good Routine?
And I Topped It Off With Some Milk For That Calcium Boost
So What Are Decline Presses For Anyhow?


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 21, 2004)

I wouldn't mind answering but I just get ignored.    I let them start a big debate again.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 21, 2004)

russianalex said:
			
		

> Guys I Put Up This Post And I Have One More Question
> Everyone Here Is Talking About Incline
> What About Decline
> Just Today I Worked Out For 30 Mins I Cant Do More Because I Have Nothing To Do I Dont Know Any Rountines
> ...



Look at the routine I laid out for you.  Use the exercises I mentioned.  You asked for advice, but you didn't incorporate the advice either me or Johnnny offered to you, although not listening to Johnnny was a good thing.

Go to Exrx if you need to learn more exercises or how to properly do an exercise.  As I have told you, you need to do more research (Searching and Google are your friends) regarding the form on the bench press, squat, and deadlift.  The form is very complex for all three.

Please read the stickies in the training and diet and nutrition forum.  PLEASE.  It doesn't take that long.  People on these forums don't like to spoon feed information to people.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 21, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Well, I certainly can tell you that. Let me offer you a "theory" as to why you believe doing an incline press has produced an "upper chest" for you.
> 
> Your anterior deltoid originates on the clavicle (the same as your pec). When you perform an incline press, you put yourself in a position that functionally requires more use of your anterior deltoid than a regular flat bench press. Now as your deltoid hypertrophies (and depending where, genetically, your delt originates) you get what APPEARS to be a developed upper chest. When in fact what you've done is hypertrophied your delt by performing a lift that greater stimulates it than a flat press.
> 
> And really, if you're after appearances, then you have achieved your goal. But I'm arguing that what you're doing is not what you think you're doing. And to top that off, human anatomy would agree with the ability to create this "appearance" via the anterior delt, whereas it disagrees with the idea you have actually developed the mysterious "upper chest."



Thank you!  That's what I said a long time ago.  It's really not that hard to comprehend.


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 21, 2004)

*Pecs*

See, that's exactly what i mean


----------



## gwcaton (Oct 21, 2004)

Jeanie said:
			
		

> See, that's exactly what i mean


Not to change the subject but ... Jeanie You look Incredible !!!

Hey ! where'd your pic go !


----------



## JerseyDevil (Oct 21, 2004)

I agree with SF's theory as well.  The front delts tie into the pecs, and incline presses strongly stress that area, giving the 'illusion' of a more developed upper chest.


----------



## gwcaton (Oct 21, 2004)

russianalex said:
			
		

> Guys I Put Up This Post And I Have One More Question
> Everyone Here Is Talking About Incline
> What About Decline
> Just Today I Worked Out For 30 Mins I Cant Do More Because I Have Nothing To Do I Dont Know Any Rountines
> ...


Alex here is a link to some exercises and what they are called. don't know if this will help or not but give it a look .
http://bodybuilding.com/fun/exercises.htm


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 21, 2004)

gwcaton said:
			
		

> Not to change the subject but ... Jeanie You look Incredible !!!
> 
> Hey ! where'd your pic go !


okay, I put it back....thought it may be a bit intrusive!  No one listens to womens advice...I suppose I should used to that


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 21, 2004)

I came into the thread late and overnight there were 2 new pages of posts. I certainly wouldn't ignore anything you say.


----------



## gwcaton (Oct 21, 2004)

Jeanie said:
			
		

> okay, I put it back....thought it may be a bit intrusive! No one listens to womens advice...I suppose I should used to that


Anybody who wouldn't listen to a womans advise just because she is a woman is crazy. there are some very knowledgeable women on this board .  And looking as good as you do would make me tend to think that you have some idea of what you are talking about


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 21, 2004)

What is your routine Jeanie?


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 21, 2004)

Who me? My routine?      

Okay, Pecs are VERY important to me since I tend to lose my fatty breast tissue when leaning out....So, I am very intense in my chest routines.  Now I don't use a barbell for benches, instead I preger dumbells.  I do INCLINE (which is what gives me the appearance of cleavage )  I do DECLINE (because it lifts what I do have )  And i do flat bench for the all over development.  I also use some of the machines, too.  I always finish with cable cross overs.  
Thank you for asking


----------



## DOMS (Oct 21, 2004)

Cowpimp, if doing declines and inclines do not develop the pecs anymore than a flat bench press, then why do them?

Looking back at the sentence, it sounds a bit harsh, it's not meant to be.  I just don't know how to phrase it any better.

Oh yeah, and Jeanie...w00t!


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 21, 2004)

cfs3



> Cowpimp, if doing declines and inclines do not develop the pecs anymore than a flat bench press, then why do them?



He & the others will probably just say to do them for variation LOL  just like some of the others do.

Jeanie



> I do INCLINE (which is what gives me the appearance of cleavage ) I do DECLINE (because it lifts what I do have ) And i do flat bench for the all over development. I also use some of the machines, too. I always finish with cable cross overs.



You do all angles?

Don't let about 4 members see you write that LOL , they will tell you, that you are wrong for doing it.

But I agree with you & you've got a nicely developed chest.

But it's true about women losing their breast tissue which is why many get implants. 

My girlfriend only does incline bench or dumbbells, incline dumbbell flies & just pec dec or cable crossovers.

No flat bench or decline bench for her for this very reason.

Nice to hear your opinions.


----------



## russianalex (Oct 21, 2004)

ok let me get this off of my chest
Johnnny here is a good guy and i dont think you should disrespect him
besides i take everyones advice into gonsideration because nothing bad can really happen from analyzing more than 1 point of view
i think you are all being very hard on him
sometimes he just writes some things that he doesnt mean to and you all jump on him like hes a damn steak
thats kinda wrong and mean and considering ppl made fun of me a lot before i dont really like seeing it all happen again because it reminds me of the bad times
johnnny is the one always giving me advice in private mesages and constantly sending me links that i find very helpful
you may disagree with him but dont make fun of him and make him feel unacepted
people always thought i was gay and im really not
and it maed me feel very bad to be the joke or clown constantly
you all may be more experienced or might have different opinions but there is no reason to call each other stupid and all of that
have some respect for other peoples opinions please
thank you all


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 21, 2004)

russianalex



> ok let me get this off of my chest
> Johnnny here is a good guy and i dont think you should disrespect him
> besides i take everyones advice into gonsideration because nothing bad
> can really happen from analyzing more than 1 point of view
> ...



Nice words once again.

I respect those opinions as well.

I just try to help.


----------



## myCATpowerlifts (Oct 21, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Well, I certainly can tell you that. Let me offer you a "theory" as to why you believe doing an incline press has produced an "upper chest" for you.
> 
> Your anterior deltoid originates on the clavicle (the same as your pec). When you perform an incline press, you put yourself in a position that functionally requires more use of your anterior deltoid than a regular flat bench press. Now as your deltoid hypertrophies (and depending where, genetically, your delt originates) you get what APPEARS to be a developed upper chest. When in fact what you've done is hypertrophied your delt by performing a lift that greater stimulates it than a flat press.
> 
> And really, if you're after appearances, then you have achieved your goal. But I'm arguing that what you're doing is not what you think you're doing. And to top that off, human anatomy would agree with the ability to create this "appearance" via the anterior delt, whereas it disagrees with the idea you have actually developed the mysterious "upper chest."



HA! see now your directly contradicting yourself!

You said that you that you dont need inclines because incline,decline, flat
all work the chest, and you cant specialize a certain section of your chest

but here you go with anterior deltoids...

Doing ANY benching will use them....but you say that doing inclines *emphasizes* them...but wait

Why can you emphasize your delts in a certain section more with incline bench then flat, but you cant emphasize certain sections of your chest????


----------



## myCATpowerlifts (Oct 21, 2004)

p.s. jeanie, you are very hot and sexy


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 21, 2004)

The heads of the deltoids share different origin and insertion points, so it is possible to "isolate" them, as they do not make up one single muscle...


----------



## nmuriqi (Oct 21, 2004)

Oh god damn it, this never fucking gets old man.  I need more isolate upper, inner, outer, lower, under, and over posts.  I love them!  

Oh and Jeanie, you're dead sexy.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 21, 2004)

Jeanie how long have you been on the forum?

With your shape, I'd sure listen to your opinions.


----------



## Cold Iron (Oct 21, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Jeanie how long have you been on the forum?
> 
> With your shape, I'd sure listen to your opinions.



Thats part of your problem right there. Just because someone is big, doesnt necessarily mean theyre knowledgeable. Not saying GP and jeanie arent knowledgeable or even your steroid buddies for that matter but you just seem to listen to anyone who is big and accept their word as gospel


----------



## myCATpowerlifts (Oct 21, 2004)

ill listen to anyone who is 300lb at 6% bf...


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 21, 2004)

You really want to step?

With no knowledge what you're saying? OK.

The pectoralis serves a single functional job for the body. It pulls the shoulders inward (think of hugging a small child when your shoulders must rotate inwards). As such, the moving, and critical thing here is the insertion point at the humerus. Now take that information and reread the FACTS I have provided in this thread egarding muscle recruitment.

Now let's look at the deltoid. In a flat plane, the deltoid is not required to roate the shoulders forward. In an incline plane, the delt IS required to draw the shoulders forward. Hence, there is a GREAT degree of delt recruitment in an incline plane while there isn't much on a flat plane.

Thanks for trying, though.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 21, 2004)

arnie's left nut



> Thats part of your problem right there. Just because someone is big, doesnt necessarily mean theyre knowledgeable. Not saying GP and jeanie arent knowledgeable or even your steroid buddies for that matter but you just seem to listen to anyone who is big and accept their word as gospel



Well all I can say is I think they're doing something right.

What if Arnold came to you even now & said this & that exercise was important for overall development?

Would you say I don't believe you? Steroids or not?


----------



## Cold Iron (Oct 21, 2004)

Johnnny - If I was bigger than you, GP and all your steroid buddies and then told you couldn't isolate your upper chest, would you believe me then?


"What if Arnold came to you even now & said this & that exercise was important for overall development" ....Impossible, I am Arnold's left nut and I come to him


----------



## Ahhhnold (Oct 21, 2004)

You wanna look like a bodybuilder; Train and eat like a bodybuilder.  This includes volume and multiple angles and grips.  If you don't think incline press hits your upper chest fine, cool.

But you all rag like 13 yr olds school girls.

BTW WTF is with insane posy counts, when do you find the time to train, all you guys do is b!tch.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 21, 2004)

cfs3 said:
			
		

> Cowpimp, if doing declines and inclines do not develop the pecs anymore than a flat bench press, then why do them?
> 
> Looking back at the sentence, it sounds a bit harsh, it's not meant to be.  I just don't know how to phrase it any better.
> 
> Oh yeah, and Jeanie...w00t!



There are several reasons for doing the incline press.  

Every exercise has implications in other exercises.  You can transmute the effects of one exercise to another.  For example, there is some positive effect of doing leg curls in terms of how much you can squat.  

Also, the incline press is a very good compound exercise, just as the flat bench press is.  It just places more emphasis on the anterior delts.  As well, it would get boring to simply do the same exercises day in and day out.

However, the incline press is not absolutely necessary for the development of a good chest.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 21, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Don't let about 4 members see you write that LOL , they will tell you, that you are wrong for doing it.



I never said there was anything wrong with the incline press.  All I said was that you cannot isolate the upper chest, and it is not absolutely necessary to do incline presses to see good chest development.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 21, 2004)

russianalex said:
			
		

> ok let me get this off of my chest
> Johnnny here is a good guy and i dont think you should disrespect him
> besides i take everyones advice into gonsideration because nothing bad can really happen from analyzing more than 1 point of view
> i think you are all being very hard on him
> ...



I don't have a problem with Johnnny per se.  It is the way he tries to confirm his beliefs.  He doesn't backup his statement with proof.  For example, he said the following:



> Then how come these guys who just do 5 sets have no upper chest what so ever, never mind a full cleavage.



That is just a plain lie.  You cannot generalize like that.  For example, I believe Mudge only does 6 sets for his chest, and I think his chest is developed quite nicely.

Furthermore, he tries to leech off other people's integrity and credibility.  He says, "Person X, who is credible, believes in idea Y.  Therefore, I am right, and anything you say to me is also directed toward Person X."  In this case, it was gopro.  Sure, gopro believes in upper chest isolation to some extent.  However, gopro presents his case in a more dignified, verifiable, and more eloquent manner.  He doesn't use totally vague anecdotes that sound completely false to support his statements.


----------



## Ahhhnold (Oct 21, 2004)

you all cry like school curls...

do inclines; it won't kill you.

8 sets flat bench press
8 sets flat db press
8 sets incline bench press
8 sets incline db press
8 sets flat flyes
8 sets incline flyes

repeat every 3 days


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 21, 2004)

Ahhhnold said:
			
		

> You wanna look like a bodybuilder; Train and eat like a bodybuilder.  This includes volume and multiple angles and grips.  If you don't think incline press hits your upper chest fine, cool.
> 
> But you all rag like 13 yr olds school girls.
> 
> BTW WTF is with insane posy counts, when do you find the time to train, all you guys do is b!tch.



Oh, you're right, who needs to learn?  Let's all just throw weights around with no knowledge of proper form, diet, splits, etc.  Ignorance is bliss, isn't it?


----------



## Ahhhnold (Oct 21, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> Oh, you're right, who needs to learn? Let's all just throw weights around with no knowledge of proper form, diet, splits, etc. Ignorance is bliss, isn't it?


sure is


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 21, 2004)

Ahhhnold said:
			
		

> you all cry like school curls...
> 
> do inclines; it won't kill you.
> 
> ...



48 sets for your chest every 3 days...  Are you kidding?  Did you take that right out of The Steroid User's Guide to Overtraining?


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 21, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Well all I can say is I think they're doing something right.
> 
> What if Arnold came to you even now & said this & that exercise was important for overall development?
> 
> Would you say I don't believe you? Steroids or not?



Remember, there are also people who have excellent physiques that don't believe in isolating portions of a muscle.  You can't simply discount them.


----------



## Ahhhnold (Oct 21, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> 48 sets for your chest every 3 days... Are you kidding? Did you take that right out of The Steroid User's Guide to Overtraining?


That is what I 'suggest' for the russian noob.

8 sets of cable cross overs should be added every second chest day to the above mentioned routine.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 21, 2004)

Ahhhnold said:
			
		

> That is what I 'suggest' for the russian noob.
> 
> 8 sets of cable cross overs should be added every second chest day to the above mentioned routine.



Russian, absolutely DO NOT listen to this advice.  That is an insane number of sets.  It would take me 2+ hours to complete that workout.  It is not adviseable to workout for more than ~60-75 minutes because your testosterone levels will start to plummet.  Not to mention you are going to overtrain your central nervous system and/or pectoral muscles with a routine like that.


----------



## Ahhhnold (Oct 22, 2004)

_


			
				CowPimp said:
			
		


			Russian, absolutely DO NOT listen to this advice.
		
Click to expand...

_ 
I wouldn't listen to the advice if you wanted to be a 'girly man'...

Too many sets


*WEIDER*

*MENTZER*


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

Arnie's left nut



> Johnnny - If I was bigger than you, GP and all your steroid buddies and then told you couldn't isolate your upper chest, would you believe me
> then?



Depends how big your upper chest region is?

I've seen some juice monkeys in person & in magazines with a completely flat, non cleavaged upper chest region.


Ahhhnold



> I wouldn't listen to the advice if you wanted to be a 'girly man'...
> 
> Too many sets



You think 12 sets total for chest is too much?

Arnold used to do about 14 sets for chest despite the drugs

12 sets total is 4 exercises, 3 sets each for chest. That's minimal.


----------



## Rocco32 (Oct 22, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> 12 sets total is 3 exercises, 3 sets each for chest. That's minimal.


How dumb are you? 3 exercises x 3 sets equals *9 * not 12.


----------



## wtfzor (Oct 22, 2004)

LOL!!
 just do the bloody bench!!

 oh FYI, Arnold did more than 14 sets for his chest.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

rock4832




> How dumb are you? 3 exercises x 3 sets equals 9 not 12.



I think you need to have your eyes checked.


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

#1 SF does not believe in the efficacy of EMG studies, b/c those that he has learned from do not believe in them. Nobody can prove that EMG studies do not hold truth in the real world.
#2 I appreciate SF's "theory" that the upper pecs "appear" to grow from inclines simply because the anterior delts are growing...however, the anterior delts do not run under the length of the upper pectorals and will not make the upper chest look bigger from sternum to shoulder. It is like trying to liken the anterior delts to the brachialis muscle under the biceps, and that when this muscle is made larger it can slightly "push" the bicep up higher. It doesn't work this way.
#3 Regardless of whether muscle soreness is an indication of growth, it is often an indication of damage to muscle fibers. When I perform incline presses ONLY in a workout, my upper chest region gets extremely sore from delt to sternum (incidentally, not much soreness occurs in my actual anterior delt), however my middle pectoral region barely gets sore and my lower pec region does not feel a thing. When I do flat presses ONLY my middle and lower pec region gets extremely sore and my upper pec region is devoid of any soreness. Regardless of what ANYONE says, there is something very different that occurs in the pecs from pressing at different angles.
#4 I am not an inexperienced newbie, a recreational bodybuilder, or even your basic competitive bodybuilder...I have been training for about 17 years and have been a full time trainer (and not a garden variety Bally's rep counter) for 12 years. I am extremely well educated in all aspects of the human body and mind and I have had the opportunity to work with athletes and bodybuilders at all levels. I have spent countless hours observing, studying, recording everything that goes on in the gym and what the outside result is, and my observation over and over is that the upper chest can not necessarily be isolated, but emphasized, and that yes, this emphasis can lead to greater hypertrophy in this area.

I respect the opinion of Robert, DD, SF, CP, and all others that stick rigidly to the "rules of anatomy and physiology" and how this affects the ability to trigger selective growth in the upper chest, but I totally and completely disagree, and will never be convinced otherwise, as in order to do so, you would have to convince me that the sun does not rise and set...something I see happen everyday.

*Jonnny...you cannot quote any of what I just said without my expressed written consent, LOL.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

Gopro



> Regardless of whether muscle soreness is an indication of growth, it is often an indication of damage to muscle fibers. When I perform incline presses ONLY in a workout, my upper chest region gets extremely sore from delt to sternum (incidentally, not much soreness occurs in my actual anterior delt), however my middle pectoral region barely gets sore and my lower pec region does not feel a thing. When I do flat presses ONLY my middle and lower pec region gets extremely sore and my upper pec region is devoid of any soreness. Regardless of what ANYONE says, there is something very different that occurs in the pecs from pressing at different angles.



I am exactly the same way regarding this paragraph.

I wonder if anyone else experiences this as well when doing specified chest exercises.

Sometimes in some workouts I've only done my incline presses & flies b/c of lack of time.

The next day only my upper regioin of the pectorals are sore & I my middle & lower region feel as though they had absolutely no work done at all & don't even hurt.

I know that when I do my close-grip bench press on tricep day, I feel some soreness in the middle region of the pectorals, none in the upper region but mostly in the triceps.

Strange eh?


----------



## wtfzor (Oct 22, 2004)

soreness is not everything, but it is definitely SOMETHING.


----------



## DOMS (Oct 22, 2004)

I have another question for you cowpimp: why is that the pecs on a well developed chest seem to have a crease in the middle (horizontally)?

Thanks.


Ahhhnold, you are a fucking moron. Do you think the Russian has been at bodybuilding for 10 or more years and is on steroids?

Dumbshit.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

cfs3



> Ahhhnold, you are a fucking moron. Do you think the Russian has been at bodybuilding for 10 or more years and is on steroids?



Check out the routine he wrote in Alex's Bicep inquiry thread. It's absolutely absurd & insane.

Over 30 sets for biceps 3 times a week.

I sure as hell hope he's joking.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 22, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> You think 12 sets total for chest is too much?
> 
> Arnold used to do about 14 sets for chest despite the drugs
> 
> 12 sets total is 4 exercises, 3 sets each for chest. That's minimal.



Why is 12 sets minimal?  I want to know the answer to this question.  Please show me a study, a scientific opinion, or something!


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 22, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> I know that when I do my close-grip bench press on tricep day, I feel some soreness in the middle region of the pectorals, none in the upper region but mostly in the triceps.
> 
> Strange eh?



Now you're just making things up.  If, in a hypothetical situation, someone did isolate their upper chest, then they would be isolating the calvicular head of the pectoralis major.  There is no separate head running up the center of the chest for you to isolate.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 22, 2004)

cfs3 said:
			
		

> I have another question for you cowpimp: why is that the pecs on a well developed chest seem to have a crease in the middle (horizontally)?



I think you mean vertically?  I have never seen a horizontal crease.

Horizontal = ----------

|
|
| = Vertical
|

In either case, it would be the result of genetics.  Some people don't get a very nice crease in the middle of their chest.


----------



## DOMS (Oct 22, 2004)

Nope, I meant horizontal.

I've seen shot of bodybuilders (usually in the most muscular pose) who have a horizontal crease about midway up the pecs.  I'm not talking about sternum.


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> I think you mean vertically?  I have never seen a horizontal crease.
> 
> Horizontal = ----------
> 
> ...




Haven't you ever seen Franco Columbo do a crab shot...upper and lower pecs severely delineated.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

CowPimp



> Why is 12 sets minimal? I want to know the answer to this question. Please show me a study, a scientific opinion, or something!



Well don't expect to have your chest grow doing only 4 or 5 sets.

If that's the case I'd be done my whole chest workout in 10mins



> Now you're just making things up. If, in a hypothetical situation, someone did isolate their upper chest, then they would be isolating the calvicular head of the pectoralis major. There is no separate head running up the center of the chest for you to isolate.



I peronsally am beginning to think you have know idea what you're talking about.

I'm wrong, Gopro is wrong, Jeanie is wrong, but Cowpimp happens to be right? Whatever dude.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 22, 2004)

How ironic. Johnnny accusing someone of nt knowing what they're talking about. The biggest dumbass on any site I've ever seen says other people don't know what they're talking about.

You ARE wrong. gopro IS wrong. Jeanie IS wrong. Cow DOES happen to be right. And yes, Johnnny, I'd like fries with that.


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> How ironic. Johnnny accusing someone of nt knowing what they're talking about. The biggest dumbass on any site I've ever seen says other people don't know what they're talking about.
> 
> You ARE wrong. gopro IS wrong. Jeanie IS wrong. Cow DOES happen to be right. And yes, Johnnny, I'd like fries with that.



Gopro IS right...thats all I do KNOW.


----------



## Rocco32 (Oct 22, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> rock4832
> 
> 
> 
> ...


First off it's quoted before you changed it numbnut. And second when you change a post it shows as does yours.    Just some more idiocy from the forum idiot.


----------



## DOMS (Oct 22, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Well don't expect to have your chest grow doing only 4 or 5 sets.



OK, this is wrong. How do I know?  

Did I read it in a magazine?  No.
Did I see a bodybuilder talking about it on the tele? No.
Did I read this on some website? No.

Then how do I know?

Because I only do four sets for the pecs and my chest _is growing_.  That's how I know.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 22, 2004)

I discredited EMG tests in this thread. 

See here's where the problem lies. I can prove my point. You can't. If you could, you would have an answer to counter my statement regarding EMGs. You can't. Instead you counter with "well you wouldn't believe what I tell you..." You're absolutely right. Things that are true can be proven. It's simply the way the world works. If I explain how EMGs aren't valid, counter. And when I counter back, counter again. If your point is valid and true, then you will have endless counters and I will run out. But that has never been the case. The case is always, "I've seen this...I've seen that." That's wonderful. Now see to getting some salt on my fries.


----------



## P-funk (Oct 22, 2004)

> Now see to getting some salt on my fries




can I have fries also??


----------



## Rocco32 (Oct 22, 2004)

P-funk said:
			
		

> can I have fries also??


I want some curly


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> I discredited EMG tests in this thread.
> 
> See here's where the problem lies. I can prove my point. You can't. If you could, you would have an answer to counter my statement regarding EMGs. You can't. Instead you counter with "well you wouldn't believe what I tell you..." You're absolutely right. Things that are true can be proven. It's simply the way the world works. If I explain how EMGs aren't valid, counter. And when I counter back, counter again. If your point is valid and true, then you will have endless counters and I will run out. But that has never been the case. The case is always, "I've seen this...I've seen that." That's wonderful. Now see to getting some salt on my fries.



Problem is, what you counter with I feel is worthless...just like your anterior delt theory.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 22, 2004)

That's great. You just proved my point. You "upper chest" magicians can't prove shit.


----------



## DOMS (Oct 22, 2004)

I still don't understand something.

If the chest is just one big muscle, then...

-  Why do they say that there are two muscles, the pectoralis clavicle and pectoralis sternum?
-  Why can I see a horizontal crease in bodybuilders who have a well developed chest?


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> That's great. You just proved my point. You "upper chest" magicians can't prove shit.



Neither can you SF. My proof is something YOU (a person with some education and some experience, not a God) do not happen to believe, and YOUR proof is something that I happen to think is proof of nothing. Science is often up for interpretation, what I see before my eyes is not.

Get off your high horse SF, your arrogance about what you know almost rivals CM's.


----------



## Rocco32 (Oct 22, 2004)

How can I make my armpit muscle big?!?


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

cfs3 said:
			
		

> I still don't understand something.
> 
> If the chest is just one big muscle, then...
> 
> ...



There is a clavicular and a sternal head to the pec major. The split you see is between these two heads on very defined bodybuilders, with some having this much more prominently than others.


----------



## DOMS (Oct 22, 2004)

So, doesn't that mean that you can train one head at a time?  Like I do with my delts?


----------



## Arnold (Oct 22, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Now see to getting some salt on my fries.



you really should not add salt to your food, it puts extra stress on your kidneys.


----------



## Mudge (Oct 22, 2004)

cfs3 said:
			
		

> Because I only do four sets for the pecs and my chest _is growing_.  That's how I know.



And what about all the HIT freaks. I often do 4-6 sets only. If I am doing lighter weights the volume will go up.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

Saturday Fever



> How ironic. Johnnny accusing someone of nt knowing what they're talking about. The biggest dumbass on any site I've ever seen says other people don't know what they're talking about.
> 
> You ARE wrong. gopro IS wrong. Jeanie IS wrong. Cow DOES happen to be right. And yes, Johnnny, I'd like fries with that.



So I guess we are all dumbasses here & you & cowpimp know everything.

Well this is when Gopro's quote will come in handy, "some ppl are too smart for their own good"

I think this applies to you & CowPimp.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

All hail oh great & mighty SaturdayFever


----------



## DOMS (Oct 22, 2004)

This is what I was referring to:


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> Haven't you ever seen Franco Columbo do a crab shot...upper and lower pecs severely delineated.



There you go...see post above


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

I doubt Franco did only flat bench presses while Arnold, Franco & Lou did a shitload of incline presses & look a their fully developed (yes with steroids) chests.


----------



## Ahhhnold (Oct 22, 2004)

Refer to my 'top secret training' thread if you wanna build big chest.


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> I doubt Franco did only flat bench presses while Arnold, Franco & Lou did a shitload of incline presses & look a their fully developed (yes with steroids) chests.



Their chests would have looked EXACTLY THE SAME even without inclines!


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 22, 2004)

That's my contention.  Show me anyone moving 450 pounds for reps along a good range of motion on a bench press, and I'll show you someone with great "upper" and "lower" pecs. 

Incline presses offer benefit, but I'd always considered the amount of weight moved to be more important than "switchin it up".


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

Duncans Donuts said:
			
		

> That's my contention.  Show me anyone moving 450 pounds for reps along a good range of motion on a bench press, and I'll show you someone with great "upper" and "lower" pecs.
> 
> Incline presses offer benefit, but I'd always considered the amount of weight moved to be more important than "switchin it up".



You know I was being facetious, right


----------



## camarosuper6 (Oct 22, 2004)

Johnnny, please quit sucking GoPro's dick everytime he says something. Im sure he has a very attractive female at home for that exact purpose.

Im also sure her "inner pecs" are much more developed than yours.


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 22, 2004)

Man I hate these threads


----------



## camarosuper6 (Oct 22, 2004)

GoPro, if I were you, I would sue Johnnny for taking every piece of advice youve ever given, and throwing it completely out of context.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

Gopro



> Their chests would have looked EXACTLY THE SAME even without inclines!



Probably 

Duncans Donuts



> That's my contention. Show me anyone moving 450 pounds for reps along a good range of motion on a bench press, and I'll show you someone with great "upper" and "lower" pecs.



At that point the dude's probably on heavy roids so everything will develop at that point. I mean look at Ronnie Coleman?

His upper chest would develop from doing military presses from all the GH & anabolics


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 22, 2004)

Agree to disagree, it seems


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

I guess that's what it is.


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

camarosuper6 said:
			
		

> Johnnny, please quit sucking GoPro's dick everytime he says something. Im sure he has a very attractive female at home for that exact purpose.
> 
> Im also sure her "inner pecs" are much more developed than yours.



LOL...and when she is dong it I could care less about incline, declines, or any other kinds of press.


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

Duncans Donuts said:
			
		

> Agree to disagree, it seems



Sometimes thats all you can do my friend


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

camarosuper6



> Johnnny, please quit sucking GoPro's dick everytime he says something. Im sure he has a very attractive female at home for that exact purpose.
> 
> Im also sure her "inner pecs" are much more developed than yours.



How old are you 12?

Your brother is being more mature than you are now.

Get real man.

Oh I bet Jeanie's upper pecs are more developed than yours.

Woops, I'm acting like an immature jackass just like camaro is.


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

Does anyone think I should close this thing down?


----------



## P-funk (Oct 22, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> Does anyone think I should close this thing down?



No!!!  I love reading this shit!  it is better than television.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)




----------



## russianalex (Oct 22, 2004)

na man keep it alive i need this advice
adn its pretty damn hilarious on top of things
lol


----------



## nikegurl (Oct 22, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> But it's true about women losing their breast tissue which is why many get implants.
> 
> My girlfriend only does incline bench or dumbbells, incline dumbbell flies & just pec dec or cable crossovers.
> 
> No flat bench or decline bench for her for this very reason.



so Johnny - you and your girlfriend think a woman doing flat and/or decline presses is what causes them to "lose breast tissue"?

i really doubt you'll find ANYONE to back you on that one.  it's a loss of bodyfat plain and simple that will cause a "loss of breast tissue" and NOT training (especially not training angles)

wow


----------



## Mudge (Oct 22, 2004)

Women lose breast mass from dieting down and from using anti-estrogens to further help reduce bodyfat, not from spot reduced fat via a bench press.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

nikegirl



> so Johnny - you and your girlfriend think a woman doing flat and/or decline presses is what causes them to "lose breast tissue"?
> 
> i really doubt you'll find ANYONE to back you on that one. it's a loss of bodyfat plain and simple that will cause a "loss of breast tissue" and NOT training (especially not training angles)
> 
> wow



Most of the fitness women or female bodybuilders have implants. 

I've seen them before they started training & they had breasts & I saw them a year later & they basically developed masculine pectorals & I've seen them post breast enlargement surgery.

I even asked one female trainer at my gym who I had a free session with for being a new member & she said that all her breast tissue disappeared & they turned into a more masculine chest & she wanted implants to get her breasts back.


----------



## pmech (Oct 22, 2004)

You didnt address a single thing Nike said


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> nikegirl
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Had to be because she severely lowered her bodyfat though Johnnny.


----------



## Ahhhnold (Oct 22, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> Does anyone think I should close this thing down?


If you close it they will start another one.  It is hopeless.

Open you flex mags to p. 666 and let us pray.

*WEIDER*


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 22, 2004)

myCATpowerlifts said:
			
		

> p.s. jeanie, you are very hot and sexy


Oh, thanks for the compliment on my Pec development and my routine ...That is what you meant isn't it?


Oh, and *JOHNNNY, *i have been here only since September but I do know _*some stuff. *_


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

Saturday Fever



> How ironic. Johnnny accusing someone of nt knowing what they're talking about. The biggest dumbass on any site I've ever seen says other people don't know what they're talking about.
> 
> You ARE wrong. gopro IS wrong. Jeanie IS wrong. Cow DOES happen to be right. And yes, Johnnny, I'd like fries with that.



So again you are calling myself, Gopro, & Jeanie dumbasses?

You are ignorant.

I'm going with them on this one sorry.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

All hail oh great & mighty Saturday Fever has spoken


----------



## nikegurl (Oct 22, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> Johnnny...you cannot quote any of what I just said without my expressed written consent, LOL.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

Jeanie



> Oh, and JOHNNNY, i have been here only since September but I do know some stuff.



I bet you know some stuff.

It sure looks like you do.

Say what do you think of this rubbish & Saturday Fever's comments?

He basically has said that myself, Gopro & you Jeanie are dumbasses & wrong about our beliefs in doing incline bench presses.

I think it's pathetic.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

Gopro



> Johnnny...you cannot quote any of what I just said without my expressed written consent, LOL.



Nice one Gop


----------



## Vieope (Oct 22, 2004)

russianalex said:
			
		

> na man keep it alive i need this advice
> adn its pretty damn hilarious on top of things
> lol


_Welcome to IM. This is going on for months.  _


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 22, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> #1 SF does not believe in the efficacy of EMG studies, b/c those that he has learned from do not believe in them. Nobody can prove that EMG studies do not hold truth in the real world.
> #2 I appreciate SF's "theory" that the upper pecs "appear" to grow from inclines simply because the anterior delts are growing...however, the anterior delts do not run under the length of the upper pectorals and will not make the upper chest look bigger from sternum to shoulder. It is like trying to liken the anterior delts to the brachialis muscle under the biceps, and that when this muscle is made larger it can slightly "push" the bicep up higher. It doesn't work this way.
> #3 Regardless of whether muscle soreness is an indication of growth, it is often an indication of damage to muscle fibers. When I perform incline presses ONLY in a workout, my upper chest region gets extremely sore from delt to sternum (incidentally, not much soreness occurs in my actual anterior delt), however my middle pectoral region barely gets sore and my lower pec region does not feel a thing. When I do flat presses ONLY my middle and lower pec region gets extremely sore and my upper pec region is devoid of any soreness. Regardless of what ANYONE says, there is something very different that occurs in the pecs from pressing at different angles.
> #4 I am not an inexperienced newbie, a recreational bodybuilder, or even your basic competitive bodybuilder...I have been training for about 17 years and have been a full time trainer (and not a garden variety Bally's rep counter) for 12 years. I am extremely well educated in all aspects of the human body and mind and I have had the opportunity to work with athletes and bodybuilders at all levels. I have spent countless hours observing, studying, recording everything that goes on in the gym and what the outside result is, and my observation over and over is that the upper chest can not necessarily be isolated, but emphasized, and that yes, this emphasis can lead to greater hypertrophy in this area.
> ...


*Thank you Gopro.....these are my EXACT thoughts!  *Oh, when I do incline I also do a twist with the dumbells and squeeze each time......feels so good


----------



## nikegurl (Oct 22, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> nikegirl
> Most of the fitness women or female bodybuilders have implants.
> 
> I've seen them before they started training & they had breasts & I saw them a year later & they basically developed masculine pectorals & I've seen them post breast enlargement surgery.
> ...



and none of that has anything to do with using flat/decline bench for chest work.  it's ALL about bodyfat and nothing to do with the bench angle.  i promise - no bench has ever made breast tissue disappear.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

Jeanie all I can say is that you have better developed pectorals, especially upper pectorals than many kids at my & men at my gym.

What is your current chest routine?

I'm interested?

Maybe your routine will help shock my upper pecs?

I've currently been doing decline bench, incline bench, horizontal incline db flies & dips.

Any suggestions?

I need to change my routine next week as I've been doing the same one for 4 weeks now & I change my routine's every 3-4 weeks.


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

Jeanie said:
			
		

> *Thank you Gopro.....these are my EXACT thoughts!  *Oh, when I do incline I also do a twist with the dumbells and squeeze each time......feels so good



I'm glad my chest and your chest are in agreement. I think they should hug


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

nikegirl



> and none of that has anything to do with using flat/decline bench for chest work. it's ALL about bodyfat and nothing to do with the bench angle.



Than why is it that many women won't touch flat bench chest work? Only inclines & maybe some cable crossovers & pec dec?


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 22, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> How ironic. Johnnny accusing someone of nt knowing what they're talking about. The biggest dumbass on any site I've ever seen says other people don't know what they're talking about.
> 
> You ARE wrong. gopro IS wrong. Jeanie IS wrong. Cow DOES happen to be right. And yes, Johnnny, I'd like fries with that.


If I am wrong then why did I not have good upper pec development until I started doing incline?  Let's see yours Don't make me have to kick your a**    Just Playen!


----------



## DOMS (Oct 22, 2004)

Hell yes, that's why I like using dumbbells for chest exercises.  The squeeze!





			
				Jeanie said:
			
		

> ...i have been here only since September but I do know _*some stuff. *_



And it _shows_.


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

nikegurl said:
			
		

>



Yeah, that was a knee slapper


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> nikegirl
> 
> 
> 
> Than why is it that many women won't touch flat bench chest work? Only inclines & maybe some cable crossovers & pec dec?



Usually this is b/c only the upper and inner regions of a females pecs are visible, as the mid/lower portions are covered by either breast tissue or an implant. Thus, they only focus on the areas that can be seen.

But of course this is a silly strategy b/c you cannot selectively cause the upper pecs to grow     Yes, sarcasm rules!


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 22, 2004)

Jesus, the training section is starting to look like open chat.  Quick, someone save the good part IRONMAG!

Of course you can selectively cause your upper pecs to grow!


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 22, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Women lose breast mass from dieting down and from using anti-estrogens to further help reduce bodyfat, not from spot reduced fat via a bench press.


FYI..I don't use any type of anti-estrogens.  I have always been a barely B cup. 
Johnnny, you are starting to sound kinda ignorant ....the only thing any pec exercise does is build the muscle which would actually increase the look of the breast size if no fat has been lost.  losing breast tissue is just like what Mudge said...


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

Duncans Donuts said:
			
		

> Jesus, the training section is starting to look like open chat.  Quick, someone save the good part IRONMAG!
> 
> Of course you can selectively cause your upper pecs to grow!



I asked if I should close this down but the answer was a resounding NO! Besides, I'm still waiting to hear if I can hug Jeanie...highly developed upper pec to highly developed upper pec.


----------



## DOMS (Oct 22, 2004)

Help me out with this Duncans Donuts.

Look at the picture of Franco (page 7 of this thread).  Look at his chest.  It looks like the pecs have an upper and a lower section.  They even call these by name, pectoralis clavicle and pectoralis sternum.  So why can't a person do an exercise that works one head more than another?

Thanks.


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 22, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> I'm glad my chest and your chest are in agreement. I think they should hug


 
Please, don't get me excited.  You are married arent you?  Thats cool though cause you look very NICE  Just the thought of that gets me excited 
Johnnny, go to my journal and you will see my routines.


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 22, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> Usually this is b/c only the upper and inner regions of a females pecs are visible, as the mid/lower portions are covered by either breast tissue or an implant. Thus, they only focus on the areas that can be seen.
> 
> But of course this is a silly strategy b/c you cannot selectively cause the upper pecs to grow  Yes, sarcasm rules!


 
  I think I am in love


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

Jeanie said:
			
		

> Please, don't get me excited.  You are married arent you?  Thats cool though cause you look very NICE  Just the thought of that gets me excited
> Johnnny, go to my journal and you will see my routines.



No sweets...I am NOT married! Let the hugging begin!!


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 22, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> No sweets...I am NOT married! Let the hugging begin!!


Damn it!   I am married....but maybe not for long ..good thing we live so far apart or I could be in some SERIOUS trouble.  Hey, be sure to stop by my journal sometime.


----------



## largepkg (Oct 22, 2004)

Whoa Doggy!

Do I need to refer you to the married thread?


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 22, 2004)

largepkg said:
			
		

> Whoa Doggy!
> 
> Do I need to refer you to the married thread?


Trust me, I don't need advice on this.  I know where I am headed.  My marriage SUCKS, its just a bad time to exit, but i have always remained faithful......


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

Jeanie said:
			
		

> Damn it!   I am married....but maybe not for long ..good thing we live so far apart or I could be in some SERIOUS trouble.  Hey, be sure to stop by my journal sometime.



Trouble is my middle name...trust me...


----------



## DOMS (Oct 22, 2004)

Going a bit off topic here...

Hey Jeanie, I hope I'm not being rude, but I've got a question for you.

When a marriage goes wrong, there are usually more than one reason.  Is your husband a bodybuilder like you?  If not, do you find that your physical development exacerbates the problem?


----------



## nikegurl (Oct 22, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> nikegirl
> 
> Than why is it that many women won't touch flat bench chest work? Only inclines & maybe some cable crossovers & pec dec?



ignorance.  plain and simple.  your gf avoids them b/c that's what you've told her.    sadly many women have bfs training them who don't know much.

(and for the record - while i love incline work i sure as heck don't avoid flat or decline for fear of losing breast tissue and neither should other women.  that issue is all about diet / bodyfat levels)


----------



## largepkg (Oct 22, 2004)

Jeanie said:
			
		

> Trust me, I don't need advice on this.  I know where I am headed.  My marriage SUCKS, its just a bad time to exit, but i have always remained faithful......




Relax Jeanie! 

I won't judge. That is not my job!


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 22, 2004)

cfs3 said:
			
		

> Going a bit off topic here...
> 
> Hey Jeanie, I hope I'm not being rude, but I've got a question for you.
> 
> When a marriage goes wrong, there are usually more than one reason. Is your husband a bodybuilder like you? If not, do you find that your physical development exacerbates the problem?


 *Gopro..*that has always been my middle name too! 
Okay, my husband does lift and he is big, (not like Gopro...darn it!)  the thing is that when we met i was a lifter, but I wasn't this lean.  I was about 25 pounds heavier.  He hates the way i look now.  But i think it is a combination of jealousy because he made a comment about me being "the top dog in the house".  In addition, he has an assosciates degree and I recently went back to school to get my masters degree and ever since he is a mean and hurtful SOB.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

Jeanie



> If I am wrong then why did I not have good upper pec development until I started doing incline? Let's see yours Don't make me have to kick your a**  Just Playen!



Good point.

But if you missed it in a reply just above, I had asked you what your current chest routine was as I need to change mine next week?


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

Jeanie said:
			
		

> *Gopro..*that has always been my middle name too!



Damn, you ARE lucky you live so far away...but luckily I own a private jet! 

(Ok, I don't really, but that would be pretty cool though)


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 22, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> Damn, you ARE lucky you live so far away...but luckily I own a private jet!
> 
> (Ok, I don't really, but that would be pretty cool though)


damn, i thought you were serious  and you got me even more excited don't tease me like that


----------



## largepkg (Oct 22, 2004)

My goodness, the sexual tension is so thick in here I'm getting wood!


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

Jeanie said:
			
		

> damn, i thought you were serious  and you got me even more excited don't tease me like that



Hey, its nothing that Jet Blue can't fix for us... :bounce:


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 22, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> Hey, its nothing that Jet Blue can't fix for us... :bounce:


what is that?  
you are right *largepkg*, this is the most excited I have been in years


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

Jeanie said:
			
		

> what is that?
> you are right *largepkg*, this is the most excited I have been in years



Its an airline sweetie


----------



## Mudge (Oct 22, 2004)

Jeanie said:
			
		

> In addition, he has an assosciates degree and I recently went back to school to get my masters degree and ever since he is a mean and hurtful SOB.



Is it not so simple as talking some sense into him? Love is not a competition, its support and encouragement.


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 22, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> Its an airline sweetie


Oh, i feel stupid !  I think I need to get to the gym now, I need to get rid of some of this tension  in a productive way  .  I shall return soon.  Hopefully my husband will fall asleep on the couch again tonight so I can get back on here  .


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Is it not so simple as talking some sense into him? Love is not a competition, its support and encouragement.



Ideally, yes. Unfortunately this is missing in many relationships, and when that happens, everything breaks down.


----------



## gopro (Oct 22, 2004)

Jeanie said:
			
		

> Oh, i feel stupid !  I think I need to get to the gym now, I need to get rid of some of this tension  in a productive way  .  I shall return soon.  Hopefully my husband will fall asleep on the couch again tonight so I can get back on here  .



Cool, lets have some PM sex!


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 22, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Is it not so simple as talking some sense into him? Love is not a competition, its support and encouragement.


i wish it was that simple.  He refuses to listen to me.  He wants some young girl that lives to please him and I refuse.  He confuses love with dependency.  What the heck was I thinking about when i married him.  his ex was 7 years his junior, had a GED and took a job as a stripper to buy him stuff.  She would lay in bed until he got up because she just couldn't see the use of starting her day without him.  That is the kind of "girl" he wants...Sorry babe, but I am a woman and a strong one at that...in all aspects!


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 22, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> Cool, lets have some PM sex!


Slow down big man, my husband does security and cameras, he has been known to wire tap and hide camera's in his past. But you sure as heck will be on my mind for a while.  Until then, I am


----------



## DOMS (Oct 22, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Is it not so simple as talking some sense into him? Love is not a competition, its support and encouragement.




Speaking as someone who's in a position similar to Jeanie's.  It's not that easy.  Short of violence you can't make anyone do _shit_.   Even with violence you can't _make _them like you. You can't _make _them love you.  And you sure as hell can't make them _respect _you.

That's what it comes down to: respect.  Even more than "love", it comes down to respect.  Respect can only be given, it can't be taken.


On a lighter note: you can buy love, but you can sure as hell rent it.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

Saturday Fever



> How ironic. Johnnny accusing someone of nt knowing what they're talking about. The biggest dumbass on any site I've ever seen says other people don't know what they're talking about.
> 
> You ARE wrong. gopro IS wrong. Jeanie IS wrong. Cow DOES happen to be right. And yes, Johnnny, I'd like fries with that.



Are you still posting this crap?


All hail to the great & Mighty Saturday Fever


----------



## Mudge (Oct 22, 2004)

cfs3 said:
			
		

> Speaking as someone who's in a position similar to Jeanie's.  It's not that easy.



I believe you should not have to try to change anyone, but that is why you hold "interviews" before you get married   An understanding partner, however should try to, understand and be sensible. Obviously I dont know the situation, but its also obvious there are maturity issues - and I have my own as well


----------



## DOMS (Oct 22, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> I believe you should not have to try to change anyone, but that is why you hold "interviews" before you get married   An understanding partner, however should try to, understand and be sensible. Obviously I dont know the situation, but its also obvious there are maturity issues - and I have my own as well




I think she lied on her application...   

People change and not always for the better.


----------



## Vieope (Oct 22, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> :bounce:


_You cannot bounce around here without my expressed written consent. _


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 22, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> I believe you should not have to try to change anyone, but that is why you hold "interviews" before you get married  An understanding partner, however should try to, understand and be sensible. Obviously I dont know the situation, but its also obvious there are maturity issues - and I have my own as well


For sure there are maturity issues. And insecurity issues. There is a teacher at the school that I intern at and he is also a professional photographer. He does a lot of bodybuilding photos. I talked to my husband about the possibility of maybe me getting some pics or even us getting some pics together and the first thing he said was, "I suppose he approached you about this?" He thinks that every man that I see or talk to has an alterior motive to sleep with me. He acts like I am just average and that there is nothing special about me. He said, "there are many women out there who are leaner then you". Why would he have to say that? He is driving me away every day. Honestly, if I had the money I would walk out NOW.


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 22, 2004)

cfs3 said:
			
		

> I think she lied on her application...
> 
> People change and not always for the better.


I think you meant he not she  i was up front and honest about who i am.


----------



## DOMS (Oct 22, 2004)

Jeanie said:
			
		

> I think you meant he not she  i was up front and honest about who i am.



You misunderstand, I meant _my _wife.  Mudge was replying to me.

Ouch...


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 22, 2004)

cfs3 said:
			
		

> You misunderstand, I meant _my _wife. Mudge was replying to me.
> 
> Ouch...


Oops, my bad!


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 22, 2004)

Johnnny, you need to start adressing what people are saying.  I said that you don't need to do 12 sets to develop a good chest.  4-5 sets is sufficient assuming the level of intensity is right.  Neither Jeanie or gopro stated otherwise.  They mentioned nothing about that.  You just change the subject and ride other's cotails.  How many times have you mentioned gopro so far?  Jesus Christ.

Also, just because you feel soreness in your upper pecs doesn't mean that you're experiencing an additional level of hypertrophy in them.  There are only two possible ways that you think you can be experiencing upper chest growth:

-Your anterior delt is hypertrophying and making it appear as though your upper pecs are growing.

-One word: psychosomatic.  You are so sure that the upper chest can be isolated that you believe it really is.

Otherwise, you are defying anatomy.  You can't just take some principles of anatomy that you like and disregard the others.  That doesn't make sense.

I want to hypertrophy the area of the pectoral directly underneath my nipple so that I can poke people's eyes out.  Can you tell me how to do that?  Apparently, isolation of certain parts of a muscle is possible; I should be able to do this.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

Cowpimp



> Johnnny, you need to start adressing what people are saying.  I said
> that you don't need to do 12 sets to develop a good chest.  4-5 sets is
> sufficient assuming the level of intensity is right.



4-5 sets for a chest work out is like doing only 2 exercises or 5 exericises with 1 set per exercise.

Not enough.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 22, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Cowpimp
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes it is enough!  It depends on the person.  You cannot generalize like that.  There are plenty of people on these very forums that are doing low volume routines like that and experiencing growth.  In fact, I believe Duncan Donuts does less than 3 sets for his chest per week, and he is pretty massive.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

Cowpimp

So let me get this straight, I do 2 sets of flat bench press, & 2 sets of incline bench press or incline DB presses & my chest workout for the week is done?

Now you're making things up.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 22, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Cowpimp
> 
> So let me get this straight, I do 2 sets of flat bench press, & 2 sets of incline bench press or incline DB presses & my chest workout for the week is done?
> 
> Now you're making things up.



No, I am not.  Have you ever heard of HIT?  It is a training method that is successfully used by many, which involves very low volume at very high intensity.

Also, you still never mentioned how you decided that 12 sets is the optimal number of sets for everyone's chest.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 22, 2004)

cowpimp



> No, I am not.  Have you ever heard of HIT?  It is a training method
> that is successfully used by many, which involves very low volume at very
> high intensity.
> 
> ...



Yes I have heard of hit & that's what I do during my chest routine that takes 20-30mins tops.

As far as 12 sets going, I used to do 14 sets & found that to be too much so I cut it down to 12 b/c I need to do at least 3-4 chest exercises.

Pretty simple.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 22, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> cowpimp
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Actually, that's not what you do.  If you did HIT, then you would only be doing 1 or 2 total sets for your chest every week.


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 23, 2004)

I have to step in on this HIT discussion

Johnny, all debate aside, 1 set (3 if you include supersets DC style) is enough if appropriate intensity is used.  I do that one time a week, one exercise (Close Grip bench press).

If you feel it is the best wayor not is your opinion; to dismiss it as not working is outright wrong.


----------



## DOMS (Oct 23, 2004)

No one has done it yet, but could someone still explain how you can not work "a part" of a the pecs when Franco clearly shows two sections?

This just doesn't make sense.  If there are two head, why can't you work one more than another during a given exercise?

Thanks


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 23, 2004)

cfs3 said:
			
		

> No one has done it yet, but could someone still explain how you can not work "a part" of a the pecs when Franco clearly shows two sections?
> 
> This just doesn't make sense.  If there are two head, why can't you work one more than another during a given exercise?
> 
> Thanks



Although there are two heads, in terms of functionality, they are the same muscle.  Because they share the same insertion points, it is not physically possible to contract one head at a time.  

The same goes for the biceps.  There are actually two heads: the short and long heads.  However, because of their shared insertion points, they cannot be contracted separately.  Functionally, they are the same muscle.


----------



## myCATpowerlifts (Oct 23, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> You really want to step?
> 
> With no knowledge what you're saying? OK.
> 
> ...




i already know all of this 
Its common knowlegde if you've ever read any kind of magazine or book


----------



## russianalex (Oct 23, 2004)

see now you are all geting along


----------



## gopro (Oct 25, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> Also, just because you feel soreness in your upper pecs doesn't mean that you're experiencing an additional level of hypertrophy in them.  There are only two possible ways that you think you can be experiencing upper chest growth:
> 
> -Your anterior delt is hypertrophying and making it appear as though your upper pecs are growing.
> 
> ...


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 25, 2004)

Gopro

Can't argue with that


----------



## gopro (Oct 25, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Gopro
> 
> Can't argue with that



But "THEY" will.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 25, 2004)

Gopro



> But "THEY" will.



Here, here!!


----------



## Mudge (Oct 25, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> 4-5 sets for a chest work out is like doing only 2 exercises or 5 exericises with 1 set per exercise.
> 
> Not enough.



Worked great for me. HIT is targetted mostly at people who know how to train with balls. I am certainly not a true HIT freak, but if you lift heavy, with true intensity, then you dont need to do 20 sets to tax a muscle.


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 25, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Gopro
> 
> Can't argue with that


I won't either, what ever it was he just said.  I though we changed the subject already?


----------



## gopro (Oct 25, 2004)

Jeanie said:
			
		

> I won't either, what ever it was he just said.  I though we changed the subject already?



Just keep agreeing with me girl...flattery will get you everywhere


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 25, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> Just keep agreeing with me girl...flattery will get you everywhere


Whatever you say  Where are we going now?


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 25, 2004)

Gopro

Hey guess what?

I did just decline bench press today & you know what?

My upper chest area was sooo majorly pumped & sore after the end of the workout b/c you know that the upper chest portion develops from decline & flat bench   


The only possible way that the upper chest could develop from flat bench press is if you're bringing the bar to your neck & this method is very stressful & hard on your rotator cuffs & delts & even potentially dangerous.

I've done these before & even with those, my upper pecs still didn't develop as much as they would with incline presses.

I would only feel shoulder & overall deltoid pain but "not" the good kind.


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 25, 2004)

> The only possible way that the upper chest could develop from flat bench press is if you're bringing the bar to your neck & this method is very stressful & hard on your rotator cuffs & delts & even potentially dangerous.



Wrong.  Didn't we all agree to disagree?


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 25, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> The anterior delt thing is not a good explanation, as it would mean you are only seeing increased growth on the outer edge of the pecs b/c the delts do not insert into the sternum.
> 
> I am well beyond the psychosomatic, so I know thats not it.
> 
> There is something going on here that "textbook" anatomy is not explaining.



I don't think your observations supercede science.  However, you can believe whatever you want.

Let's just say that the flat and incline bench press are both good compound exercises that help one develop their chest, anterior delts, triceps, and lats.  Both should be incorporated into your routine at one time or another.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 25, 2004)

Duncans,

I'm just messn' around.

If you do flat bench to your neck it will hit the upper pecs more as oppose to doing flat bench just bringing the bar to your middle chest area.

But this way is much more stressful on the shoulders & rotator cuffs.


----------



## gopro (Oct 26, 2004)

Jeanie said:
			
		

> Whatever you say  Where are we going now?



You pick the place.


----------



## gopro (Oct 26, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> I don't think your observations supercede science.  However, you can believe whatever you want.



Well, they must b/c you believe that scientifically that you can't selectively work the upper chest or cause semi-isolated growth in the upper chest...and since I KNOW you CAN, this therefore must supercede whatever "science" you believe in...although I am sure that there is a scientific explanation for this (even better than EMG recordings) that will explain it one day.

Sometimes reality occurs first and THEN science catches up later and explains why.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 26, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> Well, they must b/c you believe that scientifically that you can't selectively work the upper chest or cause semi-isolated growth in the upper chest...and since I KNOW you CAN, this therefore must supercede whatever "science" you believe in...although I am sure that there is a scientific explanation for this (even better than EMG recordings) that will explain it one day.
> 
> Sometimes reality occurs first and THEN science catches up later and explains why.



As I said, believe what you want.  Just leave it at what I said following that sentence: use inclines in your routine and call it a day; upper chest isolation or not.


----------



## gopro (Oct 26, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> As I said, believe what you want.  Just leave it at what I said following that sentence: use inclines in your routine and call it a day; upper chest isolation or not.



I WILL believe what I know to be true, and thus I WILL include plenty of incline work into my routine for the simple reason that it does cause hypertrophy in the upper pec region far more effectively than flat presses do.

And you believe what you want too.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 26, 2004)

Gopro



> WILL believe what I know to be true, and thus I WILL include plenty
> of incline work into my routine for the simple reason that it does cause
> hypertrophy in the upper pec region far more effectively than flat
> presses do.
> ...



Here, here


----------



## DOMS (Oct 26, 2004)

Here's a simple question: 

Why do I feel lactic acid burn and muscle fatique in the upper area of my pecs, but not the lower area when I do inclines?  If the whole muscle was getting worked out equally, why don't I feel the lactice burn and muscle fatique in the lower area as well?


----------



## gopro (Oct 26, 2004)

cfs3 said:
			
		

> Here's a simple question:
> 
> Why do I feel lactic acid burn and muscle fatique in the upper area of my pecs, but not the lower area when I do inclines?  If the whole muscle was getting worked out equally, why don't I feel the lactice burn and muscle fatique in the lower area as well?



Because inclines are affecting the fibers in the upper chest more strongly...thats my answer.

The answers of the other camp with say either:

-its the anterior delts you are feeling
-its psychosomatic
-it doesn't matter as this will not affect more growth in the upper pecs

Or something to that effect...


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 26, 2004)

Tear your skin off and check out your anterior delt's origin. That should answer your question.


----------



## gopro (Oct 26, 2004)

The anterior deltoid originates on the lateral third of the clavicle. It does not come across the pecs and the feeling of a pump, soreness, or burn in the upper pec region is totally different than a front delt pump, soreness, or burn. The only way this argument would hold is if the anterior delt originated from the sternum or complete inside of the clavicle.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 26, 2004)

So you're claiming that everyone in the world, genetically, does not have an origin point further in on the clavicle?


----------



## gopro (Oct 26, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> So you're claiming that everyone in the world, genetically, does not have an origin point further in on the clavicle?



Ok, some might have it over slightly further, but this does not account for soreness that goes right to the sternum or hypertrophy across the entire upper chest.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 26, 2004)

cfs3



> Why do I feel lactic acid burn and muscle fatique in the upper are of
> my pecs, but not the lower area when I do inclines?  If the whole muscle
> was getting worked out equally, why don't I feel the lactice burn and
> muscle fatique in the lower area as well?



I'm sure someone other than Gopro will have an intelligent explaination  

Gopro



> Because inclines are affecting the fibers in the upper chest more strongly...thats my answer.
> 
> The answers of the other camp with say either:
> 
> ...



I think you've hit it right on Gop


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 26, 2004)

Sternum? The "upper chest" doesn't attach to the sternum. If there is soreness at the sternum, that would indicate the pec as a whole is being worked, no? 

And what does this really have to do with what you said 2 posts ago that I responded to with my question about the origin of the anterior delt? You're changing topics.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 26, 2004)

Johnnny talking about intelligence. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


----------



## gopro (Oct 26, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Sternum? The "upper chest" doesn't attach to the sternum. If there is soreness at the sternum, that would indicate the pec as a whole is being worked, no?
> 
> And what does this really have to do with what you said 2 posts ago that I responded to with my question about the origin of the anterior delt? You're changing topics.



The upper pec originates at the medial portion of the clavicle and covers the entire portion of the upper pec area, from armpit area and across. This entire region is where an incline press is "felt." This is MUCH different from where a front raise is felt, for example.

The above answers your question about your post (2 posts ago)...I was saying that YOUR answer had no bearing on the question that cfs3 asked.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 26, 2004)

The clavicular head inserts in the same exact point the sternal head inserts. It runs right alongside the sternal head. The only difference between the two is the clavicle and sternum. As such, the muscle bellies are shortened anytime the shoulders rotate forward/in because the insertion point of both heads rotates forward/in as well.

However, the anterior delt can insert anywhere on the clavicle that it wants (more or less) based on your genetic makeup. However, due to the plane an incline works through, it is recruited to a great degree during an incline press.

That being said, and already knowing your response will be based on your opinion, how is it possible that your theory is true and my theory isn't? Logically, and physically, how can that be possible?


----------



## gopro (Oct 26, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> The clavicular head inserts in the same exact point the sternal head inserts. It runs right alongside the sternal head. The only difference between the two is the clavicle and sternum. As such, the muscle bellies are shortened anytime the shoulders rotate forward/in because the insertion point of both heads rotates forward/in as well.
> 
> However, the anterior delt can insert anywhere on the clavicle that it wants (more or less) based on your genetic makeup. However, due to the plane an incline works through, it is recruited to a great degree during an incline press.
> 
> That being said, and already knowing your response will be based on your opinion, how is it possible that your theory is true and my theory isn't? Logically, and physically, how can that be possible?



I must answer this simply...its obvious that the anterior delt works hard during an incline press. And you can even build decent front delts with only incline press. However, your contention that it is the anterior deltoid that is growing and making it "look" as if the upper chest is growing might be true for a few, whose front delt inserts further along the clavicle, but this is the minority. You simply cannot generalize this to everyone and use this as the reason all people grow larger upper chests from doing inclines.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 26, 2004)

ALL people do not grow larger "upper chests" from doing inclines. In fact, MANY people do not ever develop the appearance of an upper chest. Are they just slackers or is there perhaps a genetic difference?


----------



## BigDyl (Oct 26, 2004)

I was wondering if someone could further explain the HIIT training method.  When you refer to "intensity" do you mean quick rest periods, heavy weights, forced reps, and or negatives?  I'm assuming its a combination of those training methods.  I did some research on HIIT cardio, and what i got from it was fast tempo, slow tempo, fast tempo, etc.  Is this the same with HIIT weight training?


----------



## DOMS (Oct 26, 2004)

I know what my anterior delts are.  I know what they feel like when I work them as a targeted muscle.  I also pretty sure that my anterior delts don't run the length of the my upper chest, which is where I feel the sensation mentioned previously.


----------



## gopro (Oct 26, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> ALL people do not grow larger "upper chests" from doing inclines. In fact, MANY people do not ever develop the appearance of an upper chest. Are they just slackers or is there perhaps a genetic difference?



Ok, I cannot argue this with you any longer SF. You THINK you know it all and there is nothing I could do about it. I will say this...every client I have ever trained has absolutely changed the look of there chest after I reworked their routine to use various incline angles. The upper chest always takes on a fuller appearance and is thicker from top to bottom. I teach my clients how to press properly and they can not only feel the burn and pump isolated to the upper pec area during the incline press, but the soreness is isolated to that area when DOMS sets in. And I haven't trained a dozen people, but hundreds upon hundreds. I don't waste time with exercises or methods that don't work or I wouldn't get paid what I do...nor would I want anyone to not achieve their goals. Inclines emphasize hypertrophy in the upper pecs...period. Its not the anterior delts, its the pecs. Yes, some anterior delt growth occurs, but it is clearly defined from the upper chest.

I'm done with this.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 26, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> I'm done with this.



Somehow I doubt this.


----------



## gopro (Oct 26, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> Somehow I doubt this.



You are probably right, but it was fun to say...kind of like slamming the door behind you after saying, "GOODBYE!" after a big argument.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 26, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> You are probably right, but it was fun to say...kind of like slamming the door behind you after saying, "GOODBYE!" after a big argument.



Hehe, yeah.  I don't think it's actually good to give up debating on a topic like this.  A lot of good information has resulted from this conversation.  Granted, a lot of useless banter has been elicited as well, but that doesn't detract from the valuable knowledge adjacent to it.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 26, 2004)

Unlike some people on this board, I've admitted before (and have no problem admitting now) when I'm wrong. Or even that I simply don't know. But when someone says something and all they can back it up with is "I've seen it!" that doesn't sit right. Especially when I present a theory based on appearances and the response is, "That's not right."

Well if all you can justify it with is what you've seen, isn't that an appearance? Isn't that exactly what I'm saying?


----------



## camarosuper6 (Oct 27, 2004)

I know quite a few people who have built massive chests and never done any kind of work for the chest (directly anyway) except for flat bench press (my brother Duncans Donuts) is quite the shining example. 

On the contrary, I see MANY people daily at the gym doing incline work for their pecs, that will never build a single strand of chest muscle, simply because they will never really increase their weight.

The chest will grow from heavy muscle overload, no matter what form it is in. Your best bet would to bank on the exercise you can use the most weight in, and pound it hard. 

A full chest comes from does NOT come from any specific exercise. It comes from HEAVY, INTENSE OVERLOAD and a strong diet. Period.


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 27, 2004)

camarosuper6 said:
			
		

> A full chest comes from does NOT come from any specific exercise. It comes from HEAVY, INTENSE OVERLOAD and a strong diet. Period.


I disagree about the growth from heavy, intense overload.  Until i started doing inclines and other upper pec exercises with proper form, my upper pecs were flat.  
But, I think we are all different  What ever works for you and your brother..well, works for you guys.  What works for me and GP and many others, works for us.


----------



## MTN WARRIOR (Oct 27, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> The clavicular head inserts in the same exact point the sternal head inserts. It runs right alongside the sternal head. The only difference between the two is the clavicle and sternum. As such, the muscle bellies are shortened anytime the shoulders rotate forward/in because the insertion point of both heads rotates forward/in as well.
> 
> However, the anterior delt can insert anywhere on the clavicle that it wants (more or less) based on your genetic makeup. However, due to the plane an incline works through, it is recruited to a great degree during an incline press.
> 
> That being said, and already knowing your response will be based on your opinion, how is it possible that your theory is true and my theory isn't? Logically, and physically, how can that be possible?




Ah, you mention "YOUR" theory.  I belive the same as GP.  Science proves point of o/i, however, it hastnt gone looking for different angles = different fibers recruited.  IT has in the sense of EMGs.  I know, you will say EMGS are crap.  But they are a part of science.  EMGs dont prove this point, they just demonstrate more or less fibers are recruited with different angles.  But they dont discuss location of those fibers.  So far, in discussions with my medical personnel at my unit, they all say different angles will induce different fibers.  I know, they are idiots you will say.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 27, 2004)

Gopro



> Ok, I cannot argue this with you any longer SF. You THINK you know it all and there is nothing I could do about it. I will say this...every client I have ever trained has absolutely changed the look of there chest after I reworked their routine to use various incline angles. The upper chest always takes on a fuller appearance and is thicker from top to bottom. I teach my clients how to press properly and they can not only feel the burn and pump isolated to the upper pec area during the incline press, but the soreness is isolated to that area when DOMS sets in. And I haven't trained a dozen people, but hundreds upon hundreds. I don't waste time with exercises or methods that don't work or I wouldn't get paid what I do...nor would I want anyone to not achieve their goals. Inclines emphasize hypertrophy in the upper pecs...period. Its not the anterior delts, its the pecs. Yes, some anterior delt growth occurs, but it is clearly defined from the upper chest.
> 
> I'm done with this.



Preach it bro.... 

Like you said some ppl "are just too smart for their own good".

Yes genetics plays a huge part in the development of different muscle regions in individuals, but Gorpro is right, anyone can change the appearance of their chest by doing inclines, declines, flat bench presses, dips, cross overs & so on just as they can change the appearance of any muscle with the proper work.

God this is getting tired & boring, but some ppl "are just too smart for their own good" & there's no arguing with them as  they are always right no matter what.


----------



## gopro (Oct 27, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Unlike some people on this board, I've admitted before (and have no problem admitting now) when I'm wrong. Or even that I simply don't know. But when someone says something and all they can back it up with is "I've seen it!" that doesn't sit right. Especially when I present a theory based on appearances and the response is, "That's not right."
> 
> Well if all you can justify it with is what you've seen, isn't that an appearance? Isn't that exactly what I'm saying?



The problem SF is that you and I don't agree scientifically either. I DO agree that the entire pectoral contracts during an incline press or a bench press, just as I agree that the entire tricep contracts during and overhead extension (with elbows by ears) and a lying extension (with elbows even with nipples), but I also believe that areas of muscle fibers can fire more intensely and growth can be affected more so in that area. Incline press = more growth in upper pectoral region...overhead tricep extension = more growth in inner tricep head.

You believe that muscular EMG studies are bunk, and I believe they are extremely valuable in learning how different angles, grips, and exercises affect areas of muscles and muscle fibers differently. EMG studies are part of the scientific world...but you pick and choose which areas you want to believe in.

I also feel that while muscle soreness is not a definite indicator of hypertrophy, it certainly is an indicator of muscle fiber damage (which is needed to lead to remodeling), and when a specific exercise or angle can lead to soreness in one portion of a muscle over another, this is evidence that muscles/fibers are affected differently from these varied exercises/angles.

Further, I do believe in what I see before my eyes. While seeing something happen once or twice is not necessarily meaningful, seeing a pattern for years on end with dozens and dozens of subjects is pretty good evidence that any idea or theory might hold some water.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 27, 2004)

Gopro

All I can say is results from training speak louder than words.

But with these guys, even results don't matter.


----------



## Yanick (Oct 27, 2004)

Johnnny,

shut the hell up already, you have yet to produce any factual information in this thread or any thread that you participate in for that matter.  When reading your posts i get a picture in my head of you being GP's dog and running around all excited trying to get his attention.  Either bring forth some info, another opinion, anything other than "gopro says this, that means i'm right" or "yea gopro you're cool."  As we say in my neck of the woods "jump of his cock buddy"


----------



## gopro (Oct 27, 2004)

Yanick said:
			
		

> Johnnny,
> 
> shut the hell up already, you have yet to produce any factual information in this thread or any thread that you participate in for that matter.  When reading your posts i get a picture in my head of you being GP's dog and running around all excited trying to get his attention.  Either bring forth some info, another opinion, anything other than "gopro says this, that means i'm right" or "yea gopro you're cool."  As we say in my neck of the woods "jump of his cock buddy"



Ok, these references are getting disturbing now..."jump off his cock buddy?" GP is feeling a little


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 27, 2004)

yanick



> Johnnny,
> 
> shut the hell up already, you have yet to produce any factual information in this thread or any thread that you participate in for that matter. When reading your posts i get a picture in my head of you being GP's dog and running around all excited trying to get his attention. Either bring forth some info, another opinion, anything other than "gopro says this, that means i'm right" or "yea gopro you're cool." As we say in my neck of the woods "jump of his cock buddy"



You are such a tard man.

I think there's something wrong with you.

These comments are disturbing.

Just b/c one member is in agreement about something very strongly with another member doesn't mean anything.

This guy must be 15yrs old.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 27, 2004)

> You believe that muscular EMG studies are bunk, and I believe they are extremely valuable in learning how different angles, grips, and exercises affect areas of muscles and muscle fibers differently. EMG studies are part of the scientific world...but you pick and choose which areas you want to believe in.



I explained why they can't be taken seriously in the context of this discussion. You simply choose to ignore that fact.

And again you mention what you see. What you see is an appearance, as I've said. I have no doubt your clients, friends, self have seen development with the inclusion of inclines. I disagree with WHY you're seeing it.


----------



## Yanick (Oct 27, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> Ok, these references are getting disturbing now..."jump off his cock buddy?" GP is feeling a little



lol, GP i think you took that the wrong way...its a funny way to take it but its not how i meant it.  Its just stuff i hear people my age spewing forth all the time (although i loath pop culture and all that shit, i can't stop myself from hearing all that stuff).  Like for example, have you heard of people saying ''1'' instead of goodbye?


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 27, 2004)

Saturday Fever



> I explained why they can't be taken seriously in the context of this
> discussion. You simply choose to ignore that fact.
> 
> And again you mention what you see. What you see is an appearance, as
> ...


----------



## Yanick (Oct 27, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> yanick
> 
> You are such a tard man.
> 
> ...



I'm am not talking about this thread in particular, although it really is a prime example.  Although i might not agree with GP on certain subjects i will still never call him a moron because he backs his opinions up with either scientific or empirical evidence, each of which have their place in bb'ing discussions.  Gp is a respected member of this community, do you want to know what he DIDN'T do to become a respected member of this community?  He didn't come to this forum, pick a 'guru' to follow and start saying "oh you disagree with me, that means you disagree with (insert forum guru here)."  He earned his respect by helping members and participating in debates/arguments with scientific empirical evidence not "(guru) says that i can isolate my upper chest so i must be able to isolate my upper chest"

EDIT: you were a bit off with my age, i'm actually 19 years old and i'm not afraid to admit it either, because age is just a number.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 27, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Just b/c one member is in agreement about something very strongly with another member doesn't mean anything.



The difference is that you don't even know why you are in agreement with him.  All you know is that you believe something; yet, you lack credibility and knowledge of the subject.  Therefore, you jump all over the fact that someone with knowledge and credibility agrees with you.  Meanwhile, you offer nothing useful in this discussion.

Also, stop saying that the people disagreeing with you are "too smart for their own good."  You've quoted that line countless times in this thread.  It is nonsense.  We know too much about the subject being debated.  Therefore, our arguments are moot.  Right...


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 27, 2004)

Johnnny, you should stop trying to play the role of an intelligent human being. It really doesn't fit you. And until you can ever say anything that makes any sense, I suggest you play the quiet game.

Oh, and check out the award you're winning in Open Chat. Biggest Douche Bag. Fitting, no?


----------



## P-funk (Oct 27, 2004)

Johnny is the man.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 27, 2004)

P said it. If you disagree with it, you disagree with P.


sarcasm owns.


----------



## P-funk (Oct 27, 2004)

Saturdayfever



			
				Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> P said it. If you disagree with it, you disagree with P.
> 
> 
> sarcasm owns.




Look man, you are such a tard.  What are you like 15??  If you don't agree with P-funk and everything he says you are stupid dood!!!


----------



## Yanick (Oct 27, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> P said it. If you disagree with it, you disagree with P.
> 
> 
> sarcasm owns.



Oh yea well this one guy in my gym who is a world class powerlifter says that Johnnny _isn't_ man


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 27, 2004)

Well does this powerlifter have 20 years experience in the iron game and does inclines from 47 different angles to develop the ultimate upper chest? If he doesn't, then he is nothing. Even if he benches 900, he is nothing because I heard P say it. And if you disagree, you are disagreeing with P.


----------



## gopro (Oct 27, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> I explained why they can't be taken seriously in the context of this discussion. You simply choose to ignore that fact.
> 
> And again you mention what you see. What you see is an appearance, as I've said. I have no doubt your clients, friends, self have seen development with the inclusion of inclines. I disagree with WHY you're seeing it.



And you do not remember, but when you wrote why you did not think EMGs could be taken seriously, I wrote back why you were wrong. YOU chose to ignore THAT fact. And, do you think that just b/c YOU think that EMGs are not pertinent to this discussion that you are right and I and all of the coaches, trainers, athletes, and scientists that DO believe in EMG are wrong. Wait, of course you do...you are more educated than all of us...put together!

And as far as appearences...yes, I know you think its all from anterior delt development, but again, I believe you to be completely wrong (although in some cases it might be a contributing factor...contributing).

Ok, seriously, I think this subject has been exhausted. Believers in incline's potential to build the upper pecs...INCLINE AWAY!!! Believers in the theory that the entire chest can be maximally built without inclines...COOL, THATS ONE LESS PERSON TAKING UP THE BENCH I NEED, LOL!!!


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 27, 2004)

Last I checked I got a vague "I can find this with a google search" kind of answer. Certainly nothing that would pass as a proof. But if you'd care to repost the statement, I'll happily reread it.

However, as we all know, an EMG can't show mechanical tension in the muscle. Only an MRI can do that. So would anyone care to try again?


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 27, 2004)

> And, do you think that just b/c YOU think that EMGs are not pertinent to this discussion that you are right and I and all of the coaches, trainers, athletes, and scientists that DO believe in EMG are wrong.



You are a trainer. You have a vested interest in your clients never becoming intelligent enough to train themselves. If they reach that level, they don't need you. And more importantly, they don't need to PAY you. So yes, I believe coaches and trainers like you are wrong and I am right. But as I mentioned, you all have a vested interest in people hearing you mention big words or scientific sounding acronyms and being mesmerized by what sounds like an abundance of knowledge. And as such, you will all continue to swear by EMG studies done by people just like you, and you'll all continue to take lots of uneducated people to the bank. And that's fine. Everyone has to make money. But that doesn't make you right, or me wrong.


----------



## DOMS (Oct 27, 2004)

Coaches are also about motivation. Even experienced bodybuildingers benefit from motivation.  And a good training partner.

Additionally, if you train a person in bodybuilding and send them on their way when they've become experienced, how likely do you think it is that they'll bring you business through word of mouth?


----------



## P-funk (Oct 27, 2004)

> You are a trainer. You have a vested interest in your clients never becoming intelligent enough to train themselves



LMAO....this is the opposite of me.  I try and get my clients to a level that they don't need me and can train themselves.  I can't stand most of them so I am happy to see them go....lol


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 27, 2004)

cfs3 said:
			
		

> Coaches are also about motivation. Even experienced bodybuildingers benefit from motivation.  And a good training partner.
> 
> Additionally, if you train a person in bodybuilding and send them on their way when they've become experienced, how likely do you think it is that they'll bring you business through word of mouth?



You're proving my point. gopro, and coaches and trainers like him are "for profit" trainers. They don't train for free. So they keep their clients just dumb enough to need a trainer. And then, as they progress, surely word of mouth helps. That's their goal. Mesmerize people, keep them just dumb enough to need a trainer, and take these people all the way to the bank.

P, I meant no offense, you don't strike me as this kind of trainer.


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 27, 2004)

cfs3 said:
			
		

> *Coaches are also about motivation. Even experienced bodybuildingers benefit from motivation.* And a good training partner.
> 
> Additionally, if you train a person in bodybuilding and send them on their way when they've become experienced, how likely do you think it is that they'll bring you business through word of mouth?


Exactly, most people don't need a trainer just to get through a workout.  They learn what to do.  Do you think they need a trainer to remind them what exercises to do everyday?  NO, most use them to learn, then motivate.  
Can you guys just please stop now?  SNF?  GP?  Everyone?


----------



## Arnold (Oct 27, 2004)

P-funk said:
			
		

> I can't stand most of them so I am happy to see them go


----------



## P-funk (Oct 27, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> You're proving my point. gopro, and coaches and trainers like him are "for profit" trainers. They don't train for free. So they keep their clients just dumb enough to need a trainer. And then, as they progress, surely word of mouth helps. That's their goal. Mesmerize people, keep them just dumb enough to need a trainer, and take these people all the way to the bank.
> 
> P, I meant no offense, you don't strike me as this kind of trainer.




LOL, no offense taken.  I just thought it was funny.   Actually I am not like that at all.  I have lost lots of money becasue I train and help so many people for free a lot of the time.


----------



## DOMS (Oct 27, 2004)

Did you miss the part about experienced bodybuilders still needing motivation and a good training partner?  Or the part about clients leaving when they are experienced and sending clients to the trainer via a good word?

Making money does not equal evil intent.


----------



## gopro (Oct 27, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> You are a trainer. You have a vested interest in your clients never becoming intelligent enough to train themselves. If they reach that level, they don't need you. And more importantly, they don't need to PAY you. So yes, I believe coaches and trainers like you are wrong and I am right. But as I mentioned, you all have a vested interest in people hearing you mention big words or scientific sounding acronyms and being mesmerized by what sounds like an abundance of knowledge. And as such, you will all continue to swear by EMG studies done by people just like you, and you'll all continue to take lots of uneducated people to the bank. And that's fine. Everyone has to make money. But that doesn't make you right, or me wrong.



Well, from this statement I see that you not only think you are superior to me and others like me, but that you have ABSOLUTELY no clue what I'm about and what I truly do. I will make one statement regarding this issue...my MAIN goal is to educate my clients for the very purpose of allowing them to go out on their own, so as not to need to hold my hand for long. After a while, and when I think they are ready, I actually try to ENCOURAGE my clients to train on their own. So, once again, you actually know sh%t about sh%t. SF, you seriously need to stop right now and look in the mirror and understand that you are not all that bright, not all that educated, and have a ridiculous amount to learn. People like you that can read from a textbook and then write down what it says on a discussion board are a dime a dozen. So, get off your high horse...plant your feet back on earth, and focus on getting your lifts up. Don't try and pretend that you know how to train everyone, and that goes especially for bodybuilders.


----------



## Jeanie (Oct 27, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> So, once again, you actually know sh%t about sh%t. SF, you seriously need to stop right now and look in the mirror and understand that you are not all that bright, not all that educated, and have a ridiculous amount to learn. People like you that can read from a textbook and then write down what it says on a discussion board are a dime a dozen. So, get off your high horse...plant your feet back on earth, and focus on getting your lifts up. Don't try and pretend that you know how to train everyone, and that goes especially for bodybuilders.


AMEN.  You may all be excused now.


----------



## gopro (Oct 27, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Last I checked I got a vague "I can find this with a google search" kind of answer. Certainly nothing that would pass as a proof. But if you'd care to repost the statement, I'll happily reread it.
> 
> However, as we all know, an EMG can't show mechanical tension in the muscle. Only an MRI can do that. So would anyone care to try again?



Forget google...you ability to read from a textbook is what is truly impressive


----------



## gopro (Oct 27, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> You're proving my point. gopro, and coaches and trainers like him are "for profit" trainers. They don't train for free. So they keep their clients just dumb enough to need a trainer. And then, as they progress, surely word of mouth helps. That's their goal. Mesmerize people, keep them just dumb enough to need a trainer, and take these people all the way to the bank.



And SF is a "non-profit" intellectual...b/c nobody profits from anything he says.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 27, 2004)

Yeah. You're right.

But what really sucks is that you've been doing this for 18 years and two things are true:

1) 18 years and STILL an amateur.
2) It took me 16 years less than you to achieve strength numbers you can't touch.

But I'm the clueless one. Good call.


----------



## gopro (Oct 27, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Yeah. You're right.
> 
> But what really sucks is that you've been doing this for 18 years and two things are true:
> 
> ...



Hehehehe...hilarious!

Lets see...I NEVER EVER trained specifically for strength in my life and outdid your bench press in my early twenties...squatted 500 for several reps during workouts (never went lower than 4 reps, so I never maxed)...and deadlifted 575 while doing it once per month as part of my back workouts. All of this within my first 7 years of training while never focusing on power and never doing any of these movements more than twice per month.

And, in my 4th year of training I won my pro card in an organization called the ANPPC, which was at one time the dominant natural bodybuilding organization in the industry. Yes, they ran into financial problems and could not support the pro division, but I won my card, nevertheless.

So once again, please remove your big ass foot from your mouth!


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 27, 2004)

> was



That is past tense. As in, not anymore. Hell, I was a 4.0 student in college, can I then say that I am now? Nope, but nice try.

And great. If you accomplished those feats within 7 years, you're only 4.5 behind me.


----------



## gopro (Oct 27, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> That is past tense. As in, not anymore. Hell, I was a 4.0 student in college, can I then say that I am now? Nope, but nice try.
> 
> And great. If you accomplished those feats within 7 years, you're only 4.5 behind me.



Try to read my posts like you do your text books...I am a bodybuilder, not a powerlifter. If I focused on powerlifting when I was your age, I would have buried your lifts. These days, I don't care what I lift at all...only what makes my physique grow. But at any time, I can quickly get back to max #s if I had a desire to. Your #s are excellent, but nothing extraordinary.

Lets see...how about some bodybuilding movements just for fun...have you...

-barbell curled 225? I have.
-done slight cheat side laterals with 100s? I have
-upright rows with 245? I have.
-dumbell curls seated with 90s? I have.
-cg bench press with 405? I have.
-one arm rows with 180 lb dumbell for 12? I have.
-dumbell bench press with 160s for 8-10? I have.

Please SF, you are losing your cool now, which you always had before. This has been fun, but I will not get into a complete pissing match with you b/c all I consider you is a punk kid, and nothing more. You are not a man as of yet, but a child. And if you don't adjust your attitude, you always will be...even if you eventually bench press a bus.


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 27, 2004)

You know what, I think SF is a lot smarter than you give him credit for.  He's being ridiculed by a pair of people in open chat.  I remember that people once observed the sun revolving around the Earth...observations mean shit when stood up (or confronted, rather) to science.

So my question is, why is the science not being debated?  What do anecdotal observations have to do with anything?


----------



## gopro (Oct 27, 2004)

Duncans Donuts said:
			
		

> You know what, I think SF is a lot smarter than you give him credit for.  He's being ridiculed by a pair of people in open chat.  I remember that people once observed the sun revolving around the Earth...observations mean shit when stood up (or confronted, rather) to science.
> 
> So my question is, why is the science not being debated?  What do anecdotal observations have to do with anything?



In all seriousness, I want you to know that I think that SF is smart, and is knowledgable...he is just not as smart and knowledgable as he thinks he is, and not about ALL areas related to resistance training. The science HAS been debated, and the anecdotal facts HAVE been debated (and they are equally as important as the science), and we have gotten nowhere. Well, actually, maybe enough info has been presented so that people can make intelligent decisions about this on their own, and that is good.


----------



## DOMS (Oct 27, 2004)

Duncans Donuts said:
			
		

> What do anecdotal observations have to do with anything?



Scientist call it an eperical study.  Equations without oberservation in the real world are just theory and not a law.


----------



## camarosuper6 (Oct 27, 2004)

From www.ast-ss.com

Dips, incline presses and decline presses are essentially variations of the flat bench press. They all work the same muscles; the pectorals (chest), delts (shoulders) and triceps (rear of the upper arm). However, each of these exercises utilizes different posture, limb and torso positioning and range of motion about the joints involved. These anatomical differences mean each exercise differs in its motor-neural recruitment pattern, and therefore offers a unique method for overloading these muscles and stimulating growth.

Each exercise is an excellent choice.* However, if I were cornered into recommending only one of these exercises, it would be the flat barbell bench press. The flat barbell bench press exercise is probably the most effective, purely because more weight can be utilized. More weight means a greater overload. Greater overload means a larger number of muscle fibers are recruited to execute the movement. This means more effective stimulation and growth.*


----------



## camarosuper6 (Oct 27, 2004)

So in effect, all the exercises above could be integrated into an effective system, however, your main focus for maximum size would exercise you can use the most weight for (as I said earlier). Bench Press.


----------



## gopro (Oct 27, 2004)

camarosuper6 said:
			
		

> So in effect, all the exercises above could be integrated into an effective system, however, your main focus for maximum size would exercise you can use the most weight for (as I said earlier). Bench Press.



But if you follow this line of reasoning 100%, then in effect, you must then feel that the leg press is a more effective exercise than squats for quads. Do you?


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 27, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> In all seriousness, I want you to know that I think that SF is smart, and is knowledgable...he is just not as smart and knowledgable as he thinks he is, and not about ALL areas related to resistance training.



I have seen you say something along these lines to multiple people who contradict you on several occasions; most notably, SF and chris mason.  I don't mean to be rude, but your ego is just as inflated as either of theirs, if not more so.  I have never seen you admit that you might be wrong, or even that you may be partially wrong.




> The science HAS been debated, and the anecdotal facts HAVE been debated (and they are equally as important as the science), and we have gotten nowhere. Well, actually, maybe enough info has been presented so that people can make intelligent decisions about this on their own, and that is good.



I think this debate has been very useful.  As I said previously, there is a lot of useful information that has been extrapolated from this difference of opinion.


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 27, 2004)

The resistance and overload that actually is experienced on heavy squats would probably be more than on a leg press.  Contributing factors (maintaining balance, for example) make squats much more exhausting than leg presses, for me at least, in that with leg presses I'm seated, I've only got one joint range of motion (the knee), and I'm not feeling the 1000 pounds (or whatever) falling vertically on my body.


----------



## camarosuper6 (Oct 27, 2004)

Ahh, Touche!  Although you may be able to use more weight on Leg Presses, at least as far as putting on plates...compared to the leg press, the barbell squat requires a much greater need for stability during force production. When more muscle is recruited, a more powerful and potent stimulus for muscle growth is achieved. 

Barbell squats trigger the highest anabolic hormonal response during training. A number of studies have demonstrated the barbell squat???s remarkable ability to stimulate anabolic hormone secretion more effectively than other resistance training exercises.


----------



## gopro (Oct 27, 2004)

camarosuper6 said:
			
		

> Ahh, Touche!  Although you may be able to use more weight on Leg Presses, at least as far as putting on plates...compared to the leg press, the barbell squat requires a much greater need for stability during force production. When more muscle is recruited, a more powerful and potent stimulus for muscle growth is achieved.
> 
> Barbell squats trigger the highest anabolic hormonal response during training. A number of studies have demonstrated the barbell squat???s remarkable ability to stimulate anabolic hormone secretion more effectively than other resistance training exercises.



I wasn't disagreeing with you...I just wanted to see what you would say   

However, I am not so sure I believe that the most hypertrophy producing exercises for each individual muscle group are necessarily the ones where you can simply move the most weight.

Will barbell curls necessarily build more muscle in the biceps over time than concentration curls? I'm not so sure. And neither could anyone else be. Interesting though.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 27, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> But if you follow this line of reasoning 100%, then in effect, you must then feel that the leg press is a more effective exercise than squats for quads. Do you?



Well, the leg press doesn't actually require that you push more weight.  You see, the weight is not under the full influence of gravity.  You have to take into consideration that your bodyweight is not being lifted, the friction and mechanical resistance of the machine, and most leg presses are on about a 45 degree angle (Meaning the weight is only under the influence of about 70.7% of gravity a la the sine of 45 degrees).  So, you use more mass, but not necessarily more weight.  The two are distinctly different.


----------



## camarosuper6 (Oct 27, 2004)

> I wasn't disagreeing with you...I just wanted to see what you would say


 Its all good 

It would seem to me BB curls would do the best job, but the one thing concentration curls bring to the table is the constant tension, even at the peak of contraction that you wouldnt get with BB curls.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 27, 2004)

> Barbell squats trigger the highest anabolic hormonal response during training. A number of studies have demonstrated the barbell squat???s remarkable ability to stimulate anabolic hormone secretion more effectively than other resistance training exercises.



Studies? I've read lots of stuff on websites like this one but I've never seen a real study. Got a URL?

As far as weight and hypertrophy being related... Hypertrophy is NOT a complex thing. Eat and lift, in a nutshell. However, if there is any relevance to time and tension with regards to hypertrophy, which I'd wager to say only a fool would deny, then there is great merit in the idea that more tension will always create more hypertrophy given consistent time.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 27, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> So, you use more mass, but not necessarily more weight. The two are distinctly different.



Oh my, Cow is quoting physics.


----------



## camarosuper6 (Oct 27, 2004)

> *Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 33:1552-1566, 2001.



Damn it, I cant get it to cut and paste.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 27, 2004)

That's cool. I can find it with just that. Thanks camaro.


----------



## camarosuper6 (Oct 27, 2004)

I was reading about it on the AST website, which is a site I use all the time. It was discussing a study done at Duke, that examined the extent and degree of muscle fiber recruitment of muscles within the lower body during these two exercises.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 27, 2004)

Got a link to the article at AST that cites the Medicine & Science in Sports and Exercise volume? I only ask because the MSSE article cited is entitled:

Effects of technique variations on knee biomechanics during the squat and leg press.

I'm curious if the author pulled something way out of context or if the title is really misleading.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 27, 2004)

> Effects of technique variations on knee biomechanics during the squat and leg press.
> Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 33(9):1552-1566, September 2001.
> ESCAMILLA, RAFAEL F.; FLEISIG, GLENN S.; ZHENG, NAIQUAN; LANDER, JEFFERY E.; BARRENTINE, STEVEN W.; ANDREWS, JAMES R.; BERGEMANN, BRIAN W.; MOORMAN, CLAUDE T. III
> 
> ...



Here's the abstract of the study cited.


----------



## gopro (Oct 27, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> Well, the leg press doesn't actually require that you push more weight.  You see, the weight is not under the full influence of gravity.  You have to take into consideration that your bodyweight is not being lifted, the friction and mechanical resistance of the machine, and most leg presses are on about a 45 degree angle (Meaning the weight is only under the influence of about 70.7% of gravity a la the sine of 45 degrees).  So, you use more mass, but not necessarily more weight.  The two are distinctly different.



I know this buddy...I just felt like spurring on a new and fun debate


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 27, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> I know this buddy...I just felt like spurring on a new and fun debate



Right on.  I didn't mean to downplay the effectiveness of the leg press either.  It is one of the few machines that I advocate using on a regular basis.


----------



## camarosuper6 (Oct 27, 2004)

Basically, what I take from that is the Squats generates more force on the body... ??


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 27, 2004)

camarosuper6 said:
			
		

> Basically, what I take from that is the Squats generates more force on the body... ??



Tell me what you squat and what you leg press.  I will do the calculations.  Also, include your bodyweight.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 27, 2004)

Be careful Cow. You're going to have to calculate the force of gravity as the body's center drops and raises.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 27, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Be careful Cow. You're going to have to calculate the force of gravity as the body's center drops and raises.



I suppose, but then I would have to create a function to represent the all the instantaneous force numbers.  Instead, I could just calculate for the maximum force, which would be easier for everyone to comprehend.


----------



## LAM (Oct 27, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Hypertrophy is NOT a complex thing. Eat and lift, in a nutshell. However, if there is any relevance to time and tension with regards to hypertrophy, which I'd wager to say only a fool would deny, then there is great merit in the idea that more tension will always create more hypertrophy given consistent time.



no offense SF as you do have a lot of knowledge.  there is a LOT more to hypertrophy than that I assure you.  there are no constants when it comes to hypertrophy.  strength training plateaus are a lot easier to overcome than those of the tape...


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 27, 2004)

LAM said:
			
		

> no offense SF as you do have a lot of knowledge.  there is a LOT more to hypertrophy than that I assure you.  there are no constants when it comes to hypertrophy.  strength training plateaus are a lot easier to overcome than those of the tape...



I agree with that as well.  I have argued vehemently with SF on that subject.  I do feel that diet is the most important factor, but training certainly makes a difference.


----------



## BigDyl (Oct 27, 2004)

ok... nevermind then...


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 27, 2004)

You guys should probably expand on your statements. You know me. Just saying "That isn't all there is to it" is obviously not enough. If you're going to say that you've got to back it.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 28, 2004)

Saturday Fever



> You guys should probably expand on your statements. You know me. Just saying "That isn't all there is to it" is obviously not enough. If
> you're going to say that you've got to back it.


----------



## pmech (Oct 28, 2004)

Johnnny:

You know, here they are having a legitimate discussion and you are still just putting in nothing useful but more posts to insight more arguments. Shut up already.


----------



## Yanick (Oct 28, 2004)

pmech said:
			
		

> Johnnny:
> 
> You know, here they are having a legitimate discussion and you are still just putting in nothing useful but more posts to insight more arguments. Shut up already.



Johnnny never adds any useful info to any thread.  I've been a member here for over 2 years and he has almost double the post count that i do in only a couple of months because most of his threads/posts are some stupid observation of him seeing a big guy doing a certain exercise a certain way and then saying that its the only way to train, hence leading to a 10 page long argument thread where everyone tells him that he's a moron and him answering "if you disagree with my you disagree with precious...er gopro"


----------



## LAM (Oct 28, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> You guys should probably expand on your statements. You know me. Just saying "That isn't all there is to it" is obviously not enough. If you're going to say that you've got to back it.



well you stated that "Hypertrophy is NOT a complex thing. Eat and lift, in a nutshell".

why then do people whether training natural or on anabolics just stop growing for periods of time ? even when their diet and training are near perfect and especially since we know that androgen receptors do not downregulate.  

to me it just seems like a rather bold statement for someone who has never trained specifically for hypertrophy...


----------



## Yanick (Oct 28, 2004)

LAM said:
			
		

> well you stated that "Hypertrophy is NOT a complex thing. Eat and lift, in a nutshell".
> 
> why then do people whether training natural or on anabolics just stop growing for periods of time ? even when their diet and training are near perfect and especially since we know that androgen receptors do not downregulate.
> 
> to me it just seems like a rather bold statement for someone who has never trained specifically for hypertrophy...



I remember reading a study, it was almost a year ago so it might be outdated by now, where the researchers stated that the key to hypertrophy was a form of IGF-1, which they names MGF (mechano growth factor or something like that).  I'm gonna see if i can dig up an abstract atleast, but i also remember them saying that there are is at present no 'key' to hypertrophy and the only thing that leads to it for sure is weight training (mechanical loading), beyond that your on your own.

EDIT: Can't find it on pubmed, i'll have to check my favorites when i get home as it was probably on one of those other medical journal sites.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 28, 2004)

Yanick said:
			
		

> I remember reading a study, it was almost a year ago so it might be outdated by now, where the researchers stated that the key to hypertrophy was a form of IGF-1, which they names MGF (mechano growth factor or something like that).  I'm gonna see if i can dig up an abstract atleast, but i also remember them saying that there are is at present no 'key' to hypertrophy and the only thing that leads to it for sure is weight training (mechanical loading), beyond that your on your own.



Just because at present there is no known key, besides the obvious of lifting and eating the right food, does not mean one won't be revealed at some point down the road.  It's all just speculation right now, as no one can really say for sure.  However, the collective of bodybuilder experiences that I have read, heard, seen, and experienced, leads me to believe that there is something more to it.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 28, 2004)

pmech



> Johnnny:
> 
> You know, here they are having a legitimate discussion and you are
> still just putting in nothing useful but more posts to insight more
> arguments. Shut up already.



If you're telling me to shut I guess you're also telling Gopro & all the other members who share the same belief about the importance of incline presses to shut up.

So maybe you should take your own advice.

You want something useful?

Fine, Hitting the pectoral muscles from all angles & grips will build a larger, powerful chest.

IMO those who think that incline presses & incline work in general aren't necessary for pectoral development are just being lazy.

Some ppl "are just too smart for their own good".

 Now with that said this is subject is getting tired


----------



## camarosuper6 (Oct 28, 2004)

> If you're telling me to shut I guess you're also telling Gopro & all the other members who share the same belief about the importance of incline presses to shut up.



No Johnny, we are not telling GoPro or anyone else to shut up. We are telling YOU to shut up. You bring nothing to the conversation. You don't even know WHY you believe what you do. You just jump on some poor soul's coat-tail and ride it all the time (cough GOPRO cough). You are the ultimate follower, and by now, many people are beginning to understand why everyone can't stand you.



> IMO those who think that incline presses & incline work in general aren't necessary for pectoral development are just being lazy.



Johnny, what the fuq does not doing Incline Presses have to do with lazy? 
Lazy defined is: Resistant to work or exertion; disposed to idleness. People that use flat bench work very hard for their chest, do you think THEY are lazy?

These guys were just having a discussion, and you had to chime in with your worthless piece of shit, know-nothing comments about who's jock your riding for the day. If your not going to contribute to these discussions, go find another board to annoy. Your like a pesky little fly that no one can swat.

Why dont you take your ephedra-induced (my ass) hypothyroid condition and go play in traffic?


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 28, 2004)

CamaroSuper6



> No Johnny, we are not telling GoPro or anyone else to shut up. We are
> telling YOU to shut up. You bring nothing to the conversation. You don't
> even know WHY you believe what you do. You just jump on some poor
> soul's coat-tail and ride it all the time (cough GOPRO cough). You are the
> ...



All I am going to say to you is that you are one of the biggest A$$holes on this planet. 

Why don't you take your night stick & put where the sun don't shine.

& yes the ephedrine/ephedra did cause my "hyperthyroid as you made a mistake & said it was hypo.

But in reality they are telling Gopro, Jeanie & anyone else who believes the same as I about the importance of incline work.

Like I said IMO laziness, they don't want to spend an extra 15mins on incline work.

Your brother is much more mature than you are & he's even confided in me that he's tired of this sh!t.

Your attitude sticks like yesterdays garbage.


----------



## camarosuper6 (Oct 28, 2004)

> Like I said IMO laziness, they don't want to spend an extra 15mins on incline work.



I'll bet you havent had a truely hard workout in your entire life. If you really have a ball-busting workout, an extra 15 minutes may-be too much Johnny. But you can believe whatever you want. We all know you probably have a bird-chest anyways, so why does it matter.



> Your brother is much more mature than you are & he's even confided in me that he's tired of this sh!t.



My brother, along with the rest of the forum in general thinks your a piece of shit too, trust me.



> Your attitude sticks like yesterdays garbage.



So does your mom


----------



## pmech (Oct 28, 2004)

Actually I havent agreed nor disagreed with either side of this argument because I dont know the truth of it, therefor I wont argue it. What I do know is for the last 20 posts you have made on here you have done nothing but make little jab comments and praise Gopro. I dont think you are being fair to Gopro by being on his side.

So in essence:

1) Gopro crowd and/or SF-Cowpimp crowd may be right, I wont argue the merits of either side
2) No offense to Gopro, because I do respect him, but back up for a minute and pull your tongue out of his a55!
3) I asked YOU to shutup, NOT GoPro, NOT Jeanie, YOU, not for your opinion on the press issue, which you may or may not be right, but even if you are right you dont know why, but because all you have done is tried to stir up more shit. Leave it be.


----------



## DOMS (Oct 28, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> pmech
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Johnnny you are not gopro.  You and he state your side differently.

Nothing personal, but every post you've made so far in this thread has either been a rant or mentioned gopro.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 28, 2004)

camarosuper6 



> I'll bet you havent had a truely hard workout in your entire life.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I could easily say the same for you.

I bet you're one of those cops who spends all his free time & breaks at Krispy Kreme eating donuts & bothering j-walkers & ppl doing u-turns instead of real crime.

As for my Mother, she's been ill in the hospital with Lupus since 1984 a$$hole!!!!!!!!


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 28, 2004)

cfs3



> Johnnny you are not gopro.  You and he state your side differently.
> 
> Nothing personal, but every post you've made so far in this thread has
> either been a rant or mentioned gopro.



No I'm not Gopro, but we along with many other members including Jeanie happen to very strongly believe & support the importance of incline presses & incline work to develop a more developed & stronger chest


----------



## camarosuper6 (Oct 28, 2004)

> I bet you're one of those cops who spends all his free time & breaks at Krispy Kreme eating donuts & bothering j-walkers & ppl doing u-turns instead of real crime.



People doing U-Turns are committing crimes. And where I live, they dont have Krispy Kreme 
But seriously, I hope you dont think your physique could hold a candle to me. If you do, feel free to post some pics, as will I 



> As for my Mother, she's been ill in the hospital with Lupus since 1984 a$$hole!!!!!!!!



Well, sorry to hear that. Doesnt change my opinion of you though.


----------



## camarosuper6 (Oct 28, 2004)

> No I'm not Gopro, but we along with many other members including Jeanie happen to very strongly believe & support the importance of incline presses & incline work to develop a more developed & stronger chest



Geezus, you'd think he was talking about God or something...


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 28, 2004)

I said I was tired of arguing Johnnny...I didn't say I was tired of my brother.  I said I didn't care to get involved with your beef.

My brother doesn't eat donuts, he is in impecable shape.  A very good cop if I must say so.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 28, 2004)

LAM said:
			
		

> well you stated that "Hypertrophy is NOT a complex thing. Eat and lift, in a nutshell".
> 
> why then do people whether training natural or on anabolics just stop growing for periods of time ? even when their diet and training are near perfect and especially since we know that androgen receptors do not downregulate.
> 
> to me it just seems like a rather bold statement for someone who has never trained specifically for hypertrophy...



Diminishing returns. Nobody can continue to grow and/or get stronger forever. If that were possible, there would be guys squatting in the tons by now. And imagine how big Ronnie Coleman would be. 

This is evidenced by a specific reference in the Hypertrophy Formula:



> 5: Strength and hypertrophy is minimal unless a certain minimal threshold load is imposed regularly.
> 
> 6: The minimal threshold is not fixed, but increases with level of adaptation and level of experience, which ensures that rate of progress slows down or ceases.


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 28, 2004)

> IMO those who think that incline presses & incline work in general aren't necessary for pectoral development are just being lazy.
> 
> Like I said IMO laziness, they don't want to spend an extra 15mins on incline work.



Careful, Johnnny...you're back into the territory of general ad hominem attacks...let me tell you, if you tried one workout that I do, you would never refer to someone who trains with high intensity as being "lazy"...


----------



## DOMS (Oct 28, 2004)

camarosuper6 said:
			
		

> People doing U-Turns are committing crimes. And where I live, they dont have Krispy Kreme



If Burbank, California, most of the cops eat bagels. 

And just for fun, the Police Answering Machine (the MP3 of it is great):


Hello, you have reached the Police Dept.'s Voice Mail. Pay close attention, as we have to update the choices often as new and usual circumstances arrive. Please select one of the following options:

To whine about us not doing anything to solve a problem that you created yourself, press 1.

To inquire as to whether someone has to die before we'll do something about a problem, press 2.

To report an officer for bad manners, when in reality the officer is trying to keep your neighborhood safe, press 3.

If you would like us to raise your children, press 4.

If you would like us to take control of your life due to your chemical dependency or alcohol, press 5.

If you would like us to instantly restore order to a situation that took years to deteriorate, press 6.

To provide a list of officers you personally know so we will not take enforcement action against you, press 7.

To sue us, or tell us you pay our salary and you'll have our badge, or to proclaim our career is over, press 8.

To whine about a ticket and/or complain about the many other uses for police rather than keeping your dumb ass in line, press 9.

Please note, your call may be monitored to assure proper customer support and remember.....we're here to save your ass, NOT kiss it!


----------



## camarosuper6 (Oct 28, 2004)

LMAO 

Nice.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 28, 2004)




----------



## camarosuper6 (Oct 28, 2004)

Whats wrong Johnnny. Bored by the truth yet again?


----------



## camarosuper6 (Oct 28, 2004)

Johnnny... I am calling you out.

With all your knowledge, you should have your damn pro-card by now.... I'll post my pics against yours and well have a IM vote. 


I'm DEFINITELY no bodybuilder, so you have nothing to worry about.  What do ya say?


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 28, 2004)

He can't compete with you man, he just got through a big fight with hyperfullofshitism.


----------



## camarosuper6 (Oct 28, 2004)

Im posting an official challenge in open chat. Just for fun.. no hard feelings.

12 weeks of his training... vs 12 weeks of MY training....

All natural...

May the better man win


----------



## Rocco32 (Oct 28, 2004)

Hey Johnnny, here is the link. Go check it out- http://www.ironmagazineforums.com/showthread.php?t=38396


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 28, 2004)

Johnnny, you have to realize something.  When somebody insults you, is annoyed by you, or expresses any other emotion directed toward you, it is just that: directed towards you.  It doesn't somehow transmute into a comment directed at someone who shares your beliefs on the topic of clavical chest isolation.

People have issues with the way you argue your point of view.  They don't have issues with the view itself.  Please, understand this.  It has been explained countless times now, yet you refuse to comprehend this information.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 28, 2004)

I just find this to be all to boring yet somewhat humorous.

But more on the sides of being boring.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 28, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> I just find this to be all to boring yet somewhat humorous.
> 
> But more on the sides of being boring.



Translation:

"I don't like it when people tell me that my vague anecdotes about unknown gym-goers aren't sufficient to prove my point.  That's the only knowledge I have!"


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 28, 2004)




----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 29, 2004)

Translation:

"Hi, welcome to McDonald's, my name is Johnnny. May I help you?"


----------



## DOMS (Oct 29, 2004)




----------



## MTN WARRIOR (Oct 29, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> I explained why they can't be taken seriously in the context of this discussion. You simply choose to ignore that fact.
> 
> And again you mention what you see. What you see is an appearance, as I've said. I have no doubt your clients, friends, self have seen development with the inclusion of inclines. I disagree with WHY you're seeing it.



That is your opinion of EMGs (science).  Again, no proof though.


----------



## MTN WARRIOR (Oct 29, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Yeah. You're right.
> 
> But what really sucks is that you've been doing this for 18 years and two things are true:
> 
> ...



No you mean strength numbers you CLAIM.  Dont quote what isnt proven fact, again.  Having higher numbers means nothing, but glad to see that you are stupidly perpetuating that myth.  You said before that numbers mean nothing in relatioon to the pros.  You just be be a heavy steroid user like those pros you slam (because you know it all and they are stupid steroid users).


----------



## MTN WARRIOR (Oct 29, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> That is past tense. As in, not anymore. Hell, I was a 4.0 student in college, can I then say that I am now? Nope, but nice try.
> 
> And great. If you accomplished those feats within 7 years, you're only 4.5 behind me.



Wheres your Pro Card?  If you have one, I would like to know what the standards are, cause I dont see shit in your gallery.  Not that I am anything special, but I dont claim to be.  My dad taught me a long time ago that he who cuts down others to make himself look good will go no where and must have serious self esteem issues due to true, self confessed shortcomings.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 29, 2004)

MTN WARRIOR said:
			
		

> That is your opinion of EMGs (science).  Again, no proof though.



No proof? Are you dense? It is a FACT that an EMG does not measure muscle tension. What other proof do you need?


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 29, 2004)

MTN WARRIOR said:
			
		

> No you mean strength numbers you CLAIM.  Dont quote what isnt proven fact, again.  Having higher numbers means nothing, but glad to see that you are stupidly perpetuating that myth.  You said before that numbers mean nothing in relatioon to the pros.  You just be be a heavy steroid user like those pros you slam (because you know it all and they are stupid steroid users).



It's cool. My numbers and my stats will be public record November 13th. You can try your futile claims then, if you'd like. But again, you'd be making a fool of yourself.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 29, 2004)

MTN WARRIOR said:
			
		

> Wheres your Pro Card?  If you have one, I would like to know what the standards are, cause I dont see shit in your gallery.  Not that I am anything special, but I dont claim to be.  My dad taught me a long time ago that he who cuts down others to make himself look good will go no where and must have serious self esteem issues due to true, self confessed shortcomings.



Nothing you said has any relevance to what you quoted. You don't make any sense.


----------



## MTN WARRIOR (Oct 29, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> No proof? Are you dense? It is a FACT that an EMG does not measure muscle tension. What other proof do you need?



Dude,

Saying "It is a fact" doesnt mean shit.  Show someone all these facts.  You always claim science and fact but dont prove anything.  Come on man, Im'm trying to work with you, but you dont help.  I say it isnt fact that EMGs cant measure muscle tension.


----------



## MTN WARRIOR (Oct 29, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Nothing you said has any relevance to what you quoted. You don't make any sense.



Sorry, you are correct, the whole quote from you which you claim he is far behind you even though he had a pro card, is the one I am referring to.  My bad for not usingthe quote thing right.  So, wheres yours?  And what is so special about Nov 13?


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 29, 2004)

MTN WARRIOR said:
			
		

> Dude,
> 
> Saying "It is a fact" doesnt mean shit.  Show someone all these facts.  You always claim science and fact but dont prove anything.  Come on man, Im'm trying to work with you, but you dont help.  I say it isnt fact that EMGs cant measure muscle tension.



You say that because you don't understand what an EMG does, what an EMG is for or how an EMG is done. I'm not your Medicine 101 professor, but I'll give you a brief synopsis of what an EMG is all about.

An EMG measures electrical discharges made by the muscles. It is done with two electrodes, a reference electrode and a recording electrode. The reference electrode is a flat metal disc attached to the skin near the testing area. The recording electrode is a small needle inserted into the muscle to record electrical output and is attached via wires to a recording machine. The recording machine can be either an oscilloscope, speaker or magnetic tape. Typically the testing takes between 1 and 3 hours.

Under normal circumstances there will be no electrical activity when the muscle is relaxed. There will be smooth, wave-like readings when a muscle is flexed and/or flexing. The amount of electrical output recorded from the muscle will vary from person to person and is subject to outside interference. A nervous person, for example, may put off a lot of electrical signals when he flexes the tested muscle slightly while a calm person may put off very light electrical signals when he flexes a muscle as hard as he can.

An MRI, on the other hand, can detect changes in the normal structure and characteristics of organs or other tissues (think muscle).

So, how do you like them apples?


----------



## Duncans Donuts (Oct 29, 2004)

It is a fact that EMGs are not able to evaluate muscle tension.

It is incontrovertible.


----------



## DOMS (Oct 29, 2004)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromyography


----------



## Mudge (Oct 29, 2004)

MTN WARRIOR said:
			
		

> I say it isnt fact that EMGs cant measure muscle tension.



How would you plan to go about measuring muscle tension in an individual muscle?


----------



## camarosuper6 (Oct 29, 2004)

I thought they said you could do it by an MRI.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 29, 2004)

He's busy yanking his foot out of his mouth after the ownage I laid on him.

They're doing some really interesting stuff with EMGs nowadays. They're actually able to do an EMG on individual muscle fibers now using really tiny needles. But that doesn't deter from the fact that it isn't measuring muscular tension.


----------



## MTN WARRIOR (Oct 30, 2004)

With the ability to "target" specific muscle fibers eith EMG studies, during an exercise or muscle flexion from an exercise, you can determine which fibers are "firing".


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 30, 2004)

If you'll reread my post, you'll notice that a person simply being nervous can give off the impression (to you anyways) that certain fibers are firing. Electrical output is NOT in any way, shape or form similar to muscular tension. And as we all know, it is TENSION not ELECTRICAL OUTPUT that determine hypertrophy. Hence the terms "time under TENSION" not being referred to as "time under ELECTRICAL OUTPUT."


----------



## MTN WARRIOR (Oct 30, 2004)

Doing some more research on your last post, however I did find a pic of howthe pec major joins the humerous.  Its fibers appear to join over a few inches of space, which in my mind shows that because of their slightly different location, they could be "tensioned" differently.  (example) like a screen attached to its frame, if you pull near the top of the frame outward, some "Screen fibers" would have more tension and some would have less.  I know you dont agree, but do you understand my anology?


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 30, 2004)

Saturday Fever



> "Hi, welcome to McDonald's, my name is Johnnny. May I help you?"



Can you say Computer Science Corporation? 

No?

Well I work for them doing photoshop work & I will aslo be doing some of their networks once I finish their course

Sorry, but the only time I'm in McDonald's is to use their washroom when I'm on the road somewhere nor do I eat there.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 30, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Saturday Fever
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Just out of curiosity, would you care to give an overview of the network design?


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 30, 2004)

Cowpimp



> Just out of curiosity, would you care to give an overview of the network design?



I guess you can't read as I said "I will aslo be doing some of their networks once I finish their course".

But since you asked it really depends on the company's or office's needs.

For home & small offices peer-to-peer networks are usually the best way to go as this type of network can hold no more than 10 computers at a time & doesn't require a server. 

Large companies & corporations usually use server based networks usually with NIC's or Network Interface Cards, cabling, & other wireless technology depending on your budget. With this type of network, staff have one log on & one password.

Server based networks can distribute the workload among specialized network servers such as file & print servers.

Special servers like web servers for instance can expand the ability of the entire network to have communication outside its own location.

One of the most common network set up is the star topology & it's also the easiest to expand.

There is of course the ring topology which is an active topology b/c the computers on the ring feed or pass through a token. The token is very important if any data is to be sent to the network.

& there is a Bus Topology which is by far one of the simplest topology & it uses a passive methodology for computers accessing the network.

As for attachments wireless connective accessories are preferred as with cabling, there's always the possiblity of a problem of wires breaking & short circuiting & sometimes it is hard to find the main problem.

But wireless technology can exceed some companies budgets so you really have to figure out which type of network your office or company needs before you go and pay a networker to set one up.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 30, 2004)

I am aware of this information Johnnny.  However, I was curious as the specifics of this network.  I suppose you haven't been given adequate information to formulate an appropriate setup.  Are you engineering the network?


----------



## Mudge (Oct 31, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Large companies & corporations usually use server based networks usually with NIC's or Network Interface Cards, cabling, & other wireless technology depending on your budget. With this type of network, staff have one log on & one password.



A P2P network requires the very same, unless we are only talking about 2 machines using a null modem connection. Single login and password depends greatly on the programs being used. Since I do not use Exchange server on our Windows network, this is not true. All our databases are seperate from Windows authentication, so again, not true in my case nor many others. It depends greatly on the organization and the software they run. With PKI becoming more common and less expensive this all will go away someday.



> Server based networks can distribute the workload among specialized network servers such as file & print servers.



This is not distribution of load (load balancing) nor is it QoS or anything else fancy, printing is just plain old damn printing. File servers do not distribute load unless there is replication. If we are quite simply classifying load as either a file or print request, even a P2P network can do that, since the client directs its own request to whereever a print server lies, or a file lies.



> Special servers like web servers for instance can expand the ability of the entire network to have communication outside its own location.



A web server gives the outside world the ability to see what your company is about, if said company has a website. For a network to have communications outside of its own network you hook up your LAN to a WAN, like perhaps, the internet. This does not require a web server, FTP, Gopher, Archie, Socks, or any other served up protocol extinct or current.



> There is of course the ring topology which is an active topology b/c the computers on the ring feed or pass through a token. The token is very important if any data is to be sent to the network.



Token Ring is what you are trying to describe here, in which a token is required to speak on the network at ALL - it is not contention media like ethernet. Networks that require further security such as banking/cash registers will use this kind of network access often.



> & there is a Bus Topology which is by far one of the simplest topology & it uses a passive methodology for computers accessing the network.



I dont know where you are going with that, but the old vampire tap setup was a bus setup, as are coax ethernet networks which you would hardly see anywhere.


----------



## Mudge (Oct 31, 2004)

camarosuper6 said:
			
		

> I thought they said you could do it by an MRI.



How does a magnetic scan read back how much contractile strength is exerted? I can see perhaps a comparison from one movement to another, but I dont see anyone saying "this person can bench press 512 pounds" from something like that.


----------



## Mudge (Oct 31, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Cowpimp
> 
> 
> 
> I guess you can't read as I said "I will aslo be doing some of their networks once I finish their course".



Maybe before you jump on someones back, you should read the word "the." No offense man but you are a bit quick on the draw to jump on people.



			
				CowPimp said:
			
		

> Just out of curiosity, would you care to give an overview of the network design?



He wasn't asking for a dissertation on network design.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 31, 2004)

cowpimp



> I am aware of this information Johnnny.  However, I was curious as the specifics of this network.  I suppose you haven't been given adequate
> information to formulate an appropriate setup.  Are you engineering the
> network?



Like I said I guess you can't read.

"Well I work for them doing photoshop work & I will aslo be doing some of their networks once I finish their course"


Which means that I don't do any network work for them as of now as I'm still in the learning process.

I haven't even began the company's course yet.

I am still & only doing photoshop work for them.

But a year from now I will most likely either be an apprentice to someone or if someone leaves the company I will be taking over some of the networking load as they have a few ppl.

Personally I prefer photoshop, but I find the networking world to be intriguing with the things I've already taken the time to learn on my own.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 31, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Like I said I guess you can't read.



See, I'm trying to be friendy, but then you make asshole comments like that.  I was just curious about the number of clients of the network, if it requires VPN access from remote locations, the type of equipment being used, etc.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Oct 31, 2004)

Wow. Mudge, are you Professor Mudge formerly of the Boston area?

OK, back to the topic at hand. MTN, I understand your analogy but it does not accurately apply to the pecs. The clavicular head and the sternal heads both insert at the same point on the humerus. Even taking nto account genetic differences, you would literally have to be a freak for these muscles to insert apart, especially far enough apart, to use them independantly.

The MRI will not show how much one can lift. The MRI will show tension. Lets say for example they could rig an MRI to be done while someone was doing an incline press. Even if said person only lifted the bar, it would detect where there is muscular tension. That would end this whole dilemma.


----------



## Mudge (Oct 31, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Wow. Mudge, are you Professor Mudge formerly of the Boston area?



Peter Mudge Zatko?  no, BUT I had exchanged emails with him when he found this board, and found why I was using the handle. I still have those emails, its like talking to damn Batman or something


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 31, 2004)

Cowpimp



> Just out of curiosity, would you care to give an overview of the network design?



Here you make it sound like I'm trying to show off that I know everything.

I had already stated that



> Well I work for them doing photoshop work & I will aslo be doing some of their networks once I finish their course



Which brings me to this point, how would I be able to give my overview of my companies network if I haven't even started their course?

This leads me to my next point that if you had seen that originally you would not have asked me to give my overview for the companies network design as I don't have enough knowledge to outline their network to the exact detail.

But I do know the obvious that they use a server based network with Windows 2003 Server edition & they had used Windows 2000 Server Edition prior.


----------



## BigDyl (Oct 31, 2004)

Damn it seems like everyones a frickin networking expert these days...


----------



## Mudge (Oct 31, 2004)

Experts? We touched on page 3 of a Net+ book   But yeah, the market is just a tad saturated.


----------



## Johnnny (Oct 31, 2004)

BigDyl



> Damn it seems like everyones a frickin networking expert these days...



I don't know about an expert, but I will know much more than I do a year from now & will have the appropriate knowledge to do networks for companies.

I'm already gaining a lot of hands on experience at work prior to their course.

When I don't have photoshop work to do, I work along side one of their networkers to learn as much as I can & he gave me a lot of information to read so I am prepared for the company's networking course in January.


----------



## camarosuper6 (Oct 31, 2004)

Johnnny, I think you should join the IM competition.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 31, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> But I do know the obvious that they use a server based network with Windows 2003 Server edition & they had used Windows 2000 Server Edition prior.



I didn't expect great detail about how the forests, OUs, etc. are arranged.  I was just curious a general size estimate (100 clients, 1000 clients, etc?), maybe the NOS, the hardware provider for various things.  Just some basics.  I thought that you may have had some idea as to what the network required despite your new entry into the networking field.


----------



## CowPimp (Oct 31, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Experts? We touched on page 3 of a Net+ book   But yeah, the market is just a tad saturated.



That's why I'm switching my major to exercise science.  Not to mention that computer networking isn't on the level that I like to deal with computers.  I like getting deeper inside a single computer.  I thought networking would be more interesting, but it just isn't cutting it for me.


----------



## Johnnny (Nov 1, 2004)

Cowpimp



> I didn't expect great detail about how the forests, OUs, etc. are
> arranged.  I was just curious a general size estimate (100 clients, 1000
> clients, etc?), maybe the NOS, the hardware provider for various things.
> Just some basics.  I thought that you may have had some idea as to what
> the network required despite your new entry into the networking field.



As I said I'm only learning now & haven't started the company's technical support/networking course yet.

So I never payed attention until now as I was supposed to start their course in August with a buddy but they had no more room for us so we have to waite until January.

So it's only been the last month or 2 that I've started to care about networking.

As for the staff ratio, I really couldn't say b/c the building is about 20 floors high & there are many floors I don't even go to.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Nov 1, 2004)

I think we need to get back to the real debate here about isolating heads of the pecs. To date the only defense anyone on this site has offered that you CAN isolate parts of the chest are EMG tests. I've squashed that pretty conclusively. So let's return to the topic at hand and see what else can possibly be argued.


----------



## Johnnny (Nov 1, 2004)

Saturday Fever



> I think we need to get back to the real debate here about isolating
> heads of the pecs. To date the only defense anyone on this site has
> offered that you CAN isolate parts of the chest are EMG tests. I've squashed
> that pretty conclusively. So let's return to the topic at hand and see
> what else can possibly be argued.



Boring


----------



## Saturday Fever (Nov 1, 2004)

Wow, I would have thought having your ass handed to you on a platter would be exciting. But you're basically doing what I expected. The TRUTH is handed to you in plain english but rather than admit you are wrong, you post useless garble.


----------



## MTN WARRIOR (Nov 1, 2004)

I'm about done arguing this point for now.  I am still not convinced.  EMGs measure electrical stimulation in the muscle which can be caused by muscle contraction.  Yes it can be caused by other things also.  But once a baseline of electrical stimulation is determined, then the muscle contracts and send electrical stimulus.  If it contracts, then it is under tension of a certain level, via just "flexing" or actually moving an object.  So I don't agree that EMGs dont measure tension.  They may not determine level of tension, but that tension exists via the stimulation that exercise (and yes other things) induce.  BTW, do you think that you could make a point and then not say "gees you all are dumb and I slam dunked you".  Neither are correct.  You are just proving other things.  But I will be nice.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Nov 1, 2004)

> EMGs measure electrical stimulation in the muscle which can be caused by muscle contraction.



It can also be caused by a healthy fart. Hence, you cannot use electrical output as a measure of anything but exactly that. A measure of electrical output.



> But once a baseline of electrical stimulation is determined, then the muscle contracts and send electrical stimulus. If it contracts, then it is under tension of a certain level, via just "flexing" or actually moving an object.



The baseline is no electrical output under normal conditions. If you're relaxed and an EMG senses electrical output, you have a disease or some other malfunction/disorder. OR maybe you're nervous. Or maybe you have an injured knee and the throbbing is causing strange activity across your nervous system. Are we beginning to understand?



> So I don't agree that EMGs dont measure tension.



Disagree all you want. It DOES NOT measure muscular tension. And no electrical signal can be correlated with muscular tension. Here's a simple example of why. For me to squat 405 does not require intense firing by my nervous system. It just isn't enough of a physical load anymore, for me, to require intense electrical output. a 405 squat WOULD require intense electrical output from you because you are not adapted to that type of loading. Does this mean you're using more muscles than me or that you're applying more tension to your muscles? Not at all. The force required to move 405lb is going to be the same, regardless of our neural (electrical signalling by the nervous system, detectable by EMG) adaption. So it most certainly is not, in any way, a measure of muscular tension.



> BTW, do you think that you could make a point and then not say "gees you all are dumb and I slam dunked you". Neither are correct. You are just proving other things. But I will be nice.



Johnnny deserves it. Otherwise I don't call people dumb unless they refuse to read what I'm saying. If what I'm saying is too difficult to understand, one could say so and I would simplify it.


----------



## Johnnny (Nov 1, 2004)

Saturday Fever



> Johnnny deserves it. Otherwise I don't call people dumb unless they refuse to read what I'm saying. If what I'm saying is too difficult to understand, one could say so and I would simplify it.



I find this comment to be very childish & immature.

Why single me out? Who knows, but there's more than one member who believe what I believe about the importance of incline presses.

To name a couple of course Gopro & Jeanie.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Nov 1, 2004)

Great. I proved you and gopro and Jeanie all wrong beyond a reasonable doubt. I single you out because you are the most outspoken, wrong person I've ever met. And the hell of it is, you don't even understand that you're wrong, that I've proven to you you're wrong or even WHY you're wrong. Instead you drop names as if somehow that makes what I've proven here any less than what it is. Unfortunately, it doesn't.


----------



## Johnnny (Nov 1, 2004)

SaturdayFever



> Great. I proved you and gopro and Jeanie all wrong beyond a reasonable doubt. I single you out because you are the most outspoken, wrong person I've ever met. And the hell of it is, you don't even understand that you're wrong, that I've proven to you you're wrong or even WHY you're wrong. Instead you drop names as if somehow that makes what I've proven here any less than what it is. Unfortunately, it doesn't.



Bravo

All hail the great & mighty SaturdayFever has SPOKEN


----------



## Saturday Fever (Nov 1, 2004)

Indeed.

But hey you know what would be great? If you ever said anything. Or if you never said anything.


----------



## Johnnny (Nov 1, 2004)

SaturdayFever



> Indeed.
> 
> But hey you know what would be great? If you ever said anything. Or if you never said anything.





All hail the great & mighty SaturdayFever has SPOKEN


----------



## P-funk (Nov 1, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> SaturdayFever
> 
> 
> 
> ...




hahahahahahahaha..........genious!!  genious!!!!


----------



## Johnnny (Nov 1, 2004)

P-Funk



> hahahahahahahaha..........genious!! genious!!!!


----------



## MTN WARRIOR (Nov 1, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Great. I proved you and gopro and Jeanie all wrong beyond a reasonable doubt. I single you out because you are the most outspoken, wrong person I've ever met. And the hell of it is, you don't even understand that you're wrong, that I've proven to you you're wrong or even WHY you're wrong. Instead you drop names as if somehow that makes what I've proven here any less than what it is. Unfortunately, it doesn't.




Yes my friend, however, all you say is " Ive proven you wrong, so I'm right".  All you have given is opinion (that is all I have given though, with a little fact, such as what you have done).  You disagree with EMGS (you may be right but I dont believe that they cant help prove our point).  In my attempts to prove my sources of info right (by the way, they are BBers, doctors, medics, at least 50% of the people on here, and 100 years of normal thinking), I have not argued successfully, however I still believe everyone else.  You and a couple of others disagree.  I dont know enough about all aspects of the body to prove you wrong.  You know enough to out-argue me, thats about it so it appears.  I'm not name dropping or quoting that moron trainer from the gym.  These are all people whom I respect their opinion because of their knowledge.  So, I could be cutting edge and believe you (and probably be wrong) or believe the COUNTLESS other sources who disagree.  I belive its called empiracal evidence.  You cant rely on science alone.  Science can only prove what is HAS studied, not what it hasn't studied.  By the way, I appreciate the discussion.  You are certainly a prick with a piss poor "nener nener nener, I win" attitude, but you are also somewhat educated and a decent person, so it seems.  Thanks for making me research things more.  We remain in disagreement with neither proving their point to be right.  I know, you think you did.  LOL


----------



## Mudge (Nov 1, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> That's why I'm switching my major to exercise science.  Not to mention that computer networking isn't on the level that I like to deal with computers.  I like getting deeper inside a single computer.  I thought networking would be more interesting, but it just isn't cutting it for me.



Its probably not too exciting until you become a CCIE, if you are looking for that $150k+ paycheck anyway. Otherwise its kind of like being an installer I suppose. My Tcom buddy does a lot of networking stuff now, so Tcom and networking have been coming together over the last 5 years or so. I see a lot of IT jobs requiring Tcom experience and know how, and I've been watching that trend for awhile. Its always nice to have something to fall back on (personal training etc).


----------



## Saturday Fever (Nov 1, 2004)

I'm a CCIE and I never made $150k working for someone else. 



> All you have given is opinion (that is all I have given though, with a little fact, such as what you have done).



Uhhh, sorry to burst your bubble, but I provided facts with regards to EMGs. Facts you can verify at any time by asking a doctor, webmd.com, etc.



> In my attempts to prove my sources of info right (by the way, they are BBers, doctors, medics, at least 50% of the people on here, and 100 years of normal thinking), I have not argued successfully, however I still believe everyone else.



OK, let me issue you a small challenge with regards to these people you believe. Find a study on the internet that claims an EMG can dictate muscle isolation. Cite the URL for me. I will contact the author and shred him and I will paste the conversation verbatim on these forums.



> So, I could be cutting edge and believe you (and probably be wrong) or believe the COUNTLESS other sources who disagree. I belive its called empiracal evidence. You cant rely on science alone. Science can only prove what is HAS studied, not what it hasn't studied.



What you're failing to acknowledge is the COUNTLESS people who agree with me. You're letting a few undereducated people from this site pursuade you to believe they are the majority. As far as the science bit goes, nothing I have argued with regards to science is anywhere near unstudied.


----------



## Mudge (Nov 1, 2004)

You. Bastard.


----------



## DOMS (Nov 1, 2004)

I think may add to the conversation: http://www.emedicine.com/neuro/topic332.htm


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 1, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Its probably not too exciting until you become a CCIE, if you are looking for that $150k+ paycheck anyway. Otherwise its kind of like being an installer I suppose. My Tcom buddy does a lot of networking stuff now, so Tcom and networking have been coming together over the last 5 years or so. I see a lot of IT jobs requiring Tcom experience and know how, and I've been watching that trend for awhile. Its always nice to have something to fall back on (personal training etc).



I don't need a $150K+ paycheck, although if I were to continue down the line of networking, then I would shoot for the CCIE despite it's 95% failure rate or whatever it is.  However, I don't have to worry about it anymore.  If I do decide to get back into the world of computers as a career, then I think I would delve into something more interesting like microprocessor architecture or something of the sort.


----------



## Mudge (Nov 1, 2004)

I used to be pretty facinated by EE stuff, then programming, then eventually just stuck to keeping the damn things functioning, so I do sys admin stuff.


----------



## LAM (Nov 1, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> I thought networking would be more interesting, but it just isn't cutting it for me.



It can be if you get into the right field.  That's why after I finished my masters I  got into R&D/testing in telecom...


----------



## camarosuper6 (Nov 2, 2004)

I once played Kong on a DOS computer. It was hard.


----------



## MTN WARRIOR (Nov 2, 2004)

""OK, let me issue you a small challenge with regards to these people you believe. Find a study on the internet that claims an EMG can dictate muscle isolation. Cite the URL for me. I will contact the author and shred him and I will paste the conversation verbatim on these forums."

I may not have proven my point yet, but your arrogance belittles you and takes away your credibility, sorry, just MO.  At least I am sticking to Q&A and seeking facts.  You just think you are smarter than anyone, including a doctor because of your little science book. LMAO.  Open your eyes son, or this world WILL eat you.  Just advice, not a slam, take it for what it is worth.  I am sure because you "are smarter than me", you will not even accept it, but turn it around instead.


----------



## Mudge (Nov 2, 2004)

camarosuper6 said:
			
		

> I once played Kong on a DOS computer. It was hard.



Gorilla.BAS from DOS 5.0 was fun. I bet those Silverbacks bench press like a mother.


----------



## Johnnny (Nov 2, 2004)

MTN Warrior



> You are certainly a prick with a piss poor "nener nener nener, I win" attitude,



I didn't think this before, but Saturday Fever is slowly changing my opinion of him until he proves otherwise.

I have gotten along with him before this disagreement & enjoyed discussing things with him especially the West Side way of training.

But however until recent days of his insults & singling me out has caused me to "BEGIN" changing my opinion of him.

Saturday Fever



> What you're failing to acknowledge is the COUNTLESS people who agree with me. You're letting a few undereducated people from this site pursuade you to believe they are the majority



But this is exactly what you say I do.

You're just giving the opinions of a few ppl w/o proof.

I will say the same thing as you have just said here, what you're failing to acknowledge is the COUNTLESS people who agree with me.

But these ppl are not undereducated.

So you are saying that Gopro is undereducated.

This brings me to my next point, "some ppl are too smart for their own good".


----------



## Saturday Fever (Nov 2, 2004)

Without proof? You can't read. I squashed your idea with plenty of proof. You just don't want to see it because you'd have to admit you're wrong.


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 2, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> I used to be pretty facinated by EE stuff, then programming, then eventually just stuck to keeping the damn things functioning, so I do sys admin stuff.



I like keeping solo PCs functioning, but networks are different.  I find that the more you get into a network, the further away from the inner workings of a PC you get.  I dislike this correlation.  However, I certainly respect your choices.


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 2, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> But this is exactly what you say I do.
> 
> You're just giving the opinions of a few ppl w/o proof.
> 
> ...



Johnnny, you are the one without proof.   Your proof consists of worthless anecdotes about a few select people from your gym with far too many variables to be considered an accurate study.

SF, however, is providing facts about the kinetics of the human body.

Which one do you think is more substantial proof?


----------



## Johnnny (Nov 2, 2004)

Saturday Fever



> Without proof? You can't read. I squashed your idea with plenty of proof. You just don't want to see it because you'd have to admit you're wrong.



& we've squashed your idea.

I still think it's b/c ppl are lazy & don't want to spend an extra 15mins doing incline work or they don't have the equipment to do incline work.

I've seen ppl with a 400lbs bench press who are very underdeveloped in the upper chest region.

There cleavage just stops once it starts reaching the upper region & looks flat.


----------



## Johnnny (Nov 2, 2004)

Cowpimp



> Johnnny, you are the one without proof.   Your proof consists of
> worthless anecdotes about a few select people from your gym with far too many variables to be considered an accurate study.



Sorry but you haven't provided proof either.

We are not the ones w/o proof.

Why have bodybuilders, football players & other pro atheltes have been doing incline presses & incline work FOR YEARS NOW?

Supply a link that says regular nipple area flat bench presses will build the upper chest region alone.

Supply it.


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 2, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Saturday Fever
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It has nothing to do with being lazy.  As I said, I do incline work.  Inclines presses are still a good compound exercise that hit your shoulders hard.  However, I don't feel it's absolutely necessary to develop a full chest.



> I've seen ppl with a 400lbs bench press who are very underdeveloped in the upper chest region.
> 
> There cleavage just stops once it starts reaching the upper region & looks flat.



More worthless anecdotal evidence.  Have you heard of something called genetics?  If your genetics don't cut it, then all the incline presses in the world aren't going to give you a full "upper chest."



> Sorry but you haven't provided proof either.
> 
> We are not the ones w/o proof.
> 
> ...



Because incline presses are still a good compound exercise.  Just because it isn't necessary, doesn't mean they're worthless.  You need to stop viewing things in black and white.  Just because I don't believe in the necessity of inclines to build a good chest, doesn't mean I think they have no place in a resistance training routine.

As well, we already laid out the proof.  The proof is that the clavical and sternal heads share insertion points.  During internal shoulder rotation, both muscles contract.  Even your beloved Gopro did not say that you can isolate the upper chest.  He knows anatomy, and therefore realizes that even if this were possible, hypothetically speaking, you could merely emphasize the upper chest.


----------



## Johnnny (Nov 2, 2004)

Cowpimp



> It has nothing to do with being lazy.  As I said, I do incline work.
> Inclines presses are still a good compound exercise that hit your
> shoulders hard.  However, I don't feel it's absolutely necessary to develop a
> full chest



You don't feel it's necessary to develop a full chest?

Well that's your opinion which all it is, an opinion.



> More worthless anecdotal evidence. Have you heard of something called genetics? If your genetics don't cut it, then all the incline presses in the world aren't going to give you a full "upper chest."



You & your buddy Saturday Fever haven't supplied any links which proves otherwise so all of your opinions & statements are worthless.




> As well, we already laid out the proof. The proof is that the clavical and sternal heads share insertion points. During internal shoulder rotation, both muscles contract. Even your beloved Gopro did not say that you can isolate the upper chest. He knows anatomy, and therefore realizes that even if this were possible, hypothetically speaking, you could merely emphasize the upper chest.



Show the proof so you know some biology big deal.

I want to see written proof from qualified ppl

One thing I will say is that one thing Gopro has stated also, When I'm doing my incline bench press or DB's I don't feel my lower or middle region being worked at all. He said the same thing.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Nov 2, 2004)

I can't handle the idiocy anymore.

Johnny


>


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 2, 2004)

http://www.exrx.net/Articulations/Shoulder.html#anchor109903

Internal shoulder rotation involves both heads of the pectoralis muscle.

Are you trying to say that inclines only use the clavicular head, while flat bench press only uses the sternal head?


----------



## Johnnny (Nov 2, 2004)

Cowpimp



> Here is one detailed description of incline presses
> 
> http://www.exrx.net/WeightExercises/PectoralClavicular/BBInclineBenchPress.html
> 
> ...



Saturday Fever

With that "You're a homo pic"

Right back at you dude.

I can't take any more of your idiocy anymore either.

I want you to provide a link that clearly states that incline work won't help develop the upper chest region more than regular nipple area flat bench presses you say do.


----------



## DOMS (Nov 2, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> Are you trying to say that inclines only use the clavicular head, while flat bench press only uses the sternal head?




Isn't it possible that inclines work the clavicular head *more *than the sternal?


----------



## Mudge (Nov 2, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> I like keeping solo PCs functioning, but networks are different.



I'm not at a huge corporation, so I do this and that. We do have fiber going to several buildings though, thats about as exotic as it gets here. Things I saw as having a place in the future, were networks, databases, and of course securing the whole thing. Maybe before I die IPv6 will finally roll out.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Nov 2, 2004)

> I want you to provide a link that clearly states that incline work won't help develop the upper chest region more than regular nipple area flat bench presses you say do.



Aside from the facts I've already posted? Just shut up now.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Nov 2, 2004)

cfs3 said:
			
		

> Isn't it possible that inclines work the clavicular head *more *than the sternal?


----------



## gopro (Nov 2, 2004)

Incline press advocates...please stop straining yourselves from trying to convince SF that the upper chest can be emphasized over other areas of the chest, cause it ain't gonna happen. Thus give up and spend time on more important and productive endeavors.


----------



## Johnnny (Nov 2, 2004)

Gopro



> Incline press advocates...please stop straining yourselves from trying to convince SF that the upper chest can be emphasized over other areas of the chest, cause it ain't gonna happen. Thus give up and spend time on more important and productive endeavors.



Don't forget about Cowpimp, he's one of SF's buddy's on this LOL ridiculous thread.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Nov 2, 2004)

Yes. Instead I encourage you to educate yourselves so you stop making absolutely ridiculous claims such as "You can work your upper chest."


----------



## P-funk (Nov 2, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> Gopro
> 
> 
> 
> Don't forget about Cowpimp, he's one of SF's buddy's on this LOL ridiculous thread.




What are you, like three years old?  calling people out and telling on them.  You are such a moron.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Nov 2, 2004)

Just to reiterate, you folk have used one thing as your proof there is this mysterious upper chest, and I squashed it. Feel free to come up with some bullshit responses.



			
				Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> An EMG measures electrical discharges made by the muscles. It is done with two electrodes, a reference electrode and a recording electrode. The reference electrode is a flat metal disc attached to the skin near the testing area. The recording electrode is a small needle inserted into the muscle to record electrical output and is attached via wires to a recording machine. The recording machine can be either an oscilloscope, speaker or magnetic tape. Typically the testing takes between 1 and 3 hours.
> 
> Under normal circumstances there will be no electrical activity when the muscle is relaxed. There will be smooth, wave-like readings when a muscle is flexed and/or flexing. The amount of electrical output recorded from the muscle will vary from person to person and is subject to outside interference. A nervous person, for example, may put off a lot of electrical signals when he flexes the tested muscle slightly while a calm person may put off very light electrical signals when he flexes a muscle as hard as he can.
> 
> ...


----------



## camarosuper6 (Nov 2, 2004)

Hey Johnnny, I got this real nice place on a swamp in Florida....but anyways... on to other subjects..

So SF, ready to get your ass handed to you at the IronMag Olympia bud


----------



## Johnnny (Nov 2, 2004)

P-Funk



> What are you, like three years old? calling people out and telling on them. You are such a moron.



Naw, just saying it how it is dude.

& just for your information, I'm not calling anyone out. Just asking for proof.

Saturday Fever



> Yes. Instead I encourage you to educate yourselves so you stop making absolutely ridiculous claims such as "You can work your upper chest."



I think I will stick to what I & many other ppl have been doing for years as it's working.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Nov 2, 2004)

Haha, I'm really looking forward to the whole thing. I do plan, however, to mop the floor with everyone.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Nov 2, 2004)

Saturday Fever for the 3rd time said:
			
		

> An EMG measures electrical discharges made by the muscles. It is done with two electrodes, a reference electrode and a recording electrode. The reference electrode is a flat metal disc attached to the skin near the testing area. The recording electrode is a small needle inserted into the muscle to record electrical output and is attached via wires to a recording machine. The recording machine can be either an oscilloscope, speaker or magnetic tape. Typically the testing takes between 1 and 3 hours.
> 
> Under normal circumstances there will be no electrical activity when the muscle is relaxed. There will be smooth, wave-like readings when a muscle is flexed and/or flexing. The amount of electrical output recorded from the muscle will vary from person to person and is subject to outside interference. A nervous person, for example, may put off a lot of electrical signals when he flexes the tested muscle slightly while a calm person may put off very light electrical signals when he flexes a muscle as hard as he can.
> 
> ...



That's called proof, dipshit. I assume you keep missing it because you're busy swinging from a certain moderator's nuts.


----------



## camarosuper6 (Nov 2, 2004)

Listen Johnnny, the reason people are frustrated with you is not because you follow a plan that has worked well for you. They are not frustrated because you agree with GoPro. They arent frustrated because you do incline bench press. 

They want to know the science behind it.


----------



## gopro (Nov 2, 2004)

I have one simple question for anyone that might want to answer this:

Why, when I do incline presses do I get sore ONLY in the upper pecs, with relatively no soreness in the mid and lower pecs?

Why, when I do flat presses do I ONLY get sore in the mid and lower portion of the pecs, with relatively no soreness in the upper pecs?

If the chest works as a whole, as we know it does, why this odd difference in the location of soreness, which is indicative of damage to muscle fibers? Why would my entire pec region not get sore from top to bottom from simply doing flat presses?

And if SF says its the anterior delts getting sore I am going to projectile vomit all over my computer.


----------



## camarosuper6 (Nov 2, 2004)

I would answer that, but at the moment I am too busy focusing on winning my first IM competition


----------



## DOMS (Nov 2, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> I have one simple question for anyone that might want to answer this:
> 
> Why, when I do incline presses do I get sore ONLY in the upper pecs, with relatively no soreness in the mid and lower pecs?
> 
> ...



That was my question as well, but I think we've been told that what you "feel" doesn't constitute proof or have much meaning.

Other than the fact that it's empirical proof that is.


----------



## Johnnny (Nov 2, 2004)

camarosuper6



> They want to know the science behind it.



Well I want real proof that supports what he is saying as that last bit he just posted doesn't even mention the upper chest region or the shoulders.


----------



## DOMS (Nov 2, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Saturday Fever for the 3rd time



When astronomers take reading from outer space, the fact that there is background interference means that anything that they find has no meaning?  The distant galaxies, quasars, and such don't really exist because there is background interference?  

No, that's not how it works.  Scientists can compensate for such things.  Just like a scientist can compensate for the effects of a fart on muscle fibers.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Nov 2, 2004)

Great. That still doesn't take away the fact that an EMG doesn't and can't measure muscular tension. What are you getting at, anyways? That the upper chest can be worked in outer space? Now I'm intrigued.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Nov 2, 2004)

Johnnny, 2+2=4. Figure it out Einstein.


----------



## gopro (Nov 2, 2004)

cfs3 said:
			
		

> That was my question as well, but I think we've been told that what you "feel" doesn't constitute proof or have much meaning.
> 
> Other than the fact that it's empirical proof that is.



But soreness is not something that you can only feel. There is a physiological reason for this soreness, as one of the reasons it occurs is b/c of damage to muscle fibers. Small microtears in the fibers can cause this pain, so it goes beyond simply "what you feel."

And while EMGs cannot measure muscle tension, it does measure electrical activity in the muscle, which is an indicator of what is going on within a muscle during contraction. While it is not diffinitive proof of anything, it does have value in telling us the difference in what is happening electrically within portions of a muscle during different exercises.

A puzzle has many pieces, and each piece adds to complete the puzzle. No one piece can do it on its own...but they each provide their own value.


----------



## DOMS (Nov 2, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Great. That still doesn't take away the fact that an EMG doesn't and can't measure muscular tension. What are you getting at, anyways? That the upper chest can be worked in outer space? Now I'm intrigued.




When someone smart-mouths in reply to a valid question, that usually means that person cannot coherently backup their position, if at all.   

If you had read the link I provided you would have found the following:

"The needle *EMG examination cannot assess anatomic size or degree of tension of a motor unit*. In an EMG study, the term "size" of a motor unit usually refers to the amplitude of the motor unit action potential (MUAP). The size principle is also true to a limited extent for the EMG study. In rather general terms, the later recruited type II fibers, especially the FF type, have larger diameter muscle fibers generating higher potentials than the smaller, slow twitch type I units. Because of the small uptake area of standard EMG needle electrodes, however, the size of consecutively recruited MUAPs during an EMG study varies considerably." 

This, somewhat, makes your point.  Not entirely though, give it a read.

Whether or not EMG accurately shows the fiber recruitment in a muscle has no bearing on on the question that I've asked before and that gopro justed asked.  Why does one feel the various pains from a workout on the upper pecs on not on the lower?

Saying that what a bodybuilder feels means nothing, negates the entire scientific practice of empirical studies.  This basically means that it's not enough to create a formula in a lab, you have to prove it in the real world.


----------



## Johnnny (Nov 2, 2004)

I want proof. Until then leave it at that.


----------



## MTN WARRIOR (Nov 3, 2004)

Just a final (yeah right) note.  I am not an incline advocate.  I could care either way about them.  I'm certainly weaker on them than flat or decline of course.  And I am not saying that there is more than one chest muscle or that you can completely isolate one part of the muscle.  I am saying you can work different parts of that muscle more through different angles.  I am saying you can cause hypertrophy more in a certain area.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Nov 3, 2004)

I'm done getting frustrated with people. I'll present facts and people will just continue to make their own decisions. I sincerely hope the best for everyone.


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 3, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> I have one simple question for anyone that might want to answer this:
> 
> Why, when I do incline presses do I get sore ONLY in the upper pecs, with relatively no soreness in the mid and lower pecs?
> 
> ...



How come when I do the flat bench press, sometimes I only get sore in the clavicular head?  Soreness, as we all know, is not a definite indicator of hypertrophy.  Maybe the flat bench press isolates the upper head too?


----------



## DOMS (Nov 3, 2004)

Consistently?  More often than not?  If feel the pain (both lactic acid and swelling of the fibers) in my upper pecs when I do inclines.  Not just sometimes.


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 3, 2004)

cfs3 said:
			
		

> Consistently?  More often than not?  If feel the pain (both lactic acid and swelling of the fibers) in my upper pecs when I do inclines.  Not just sometimes.



Most of the time I don't even get sore from bench pressing.  I just happened to a few weeks ago because I had taken a week off the week prior.


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 3, 2004)

The bottom line is I feel that the rules of anatomy outweigh the following explanations for upper chest isolation:

- Some dudes with really big chests at my gym do incline presses.
- I feel sore in the upper chest when doing inclines.
- EMGs.

If you feel that basic principles of anatomy are defeated by that explanation, then incline press that upper chest into a bulging mass of muscle fibers.  If not, then incorporate inclines into your routine anyway, because it is still a good compound exercise that results in more tension being placed on one's shoulders.


----------



## DOMS (Nov 3, 2004)

"If you feel that basic principles of anatomy are defeated by that explanation, then incline press that upper chest into a bulging mass of muscle fibers. If not, then incorporate inclines into your routine anyway, because it is still a good compound exercise that results in more tension being placed on one's shoulders." - CowPimp

Fair enough.

On a side note, how is it that you are on at 09:30 PST?  

I'm a programmer and live on the computer.


----------



## Mudge (Nov 3, 2004)

Vince Taylor had great chest balance, and again no incline pressing. Not adding to an argument here, just stating that "big guys" have built a fine chest without inclines.

I used to start out my workouts with inclines, I'd go up to 9 sets just for those and I felt pretty sure they hit my upper chest. Now I do 1-2 sets, not as heavy, and I dont feel that I have lost anything from this.


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 3, 2004)

cfs3 said:
			
		

> On a side note, how is it that you are on at 09:30 PST?
> 
> I'm a programmer and live on the computer.



I work 2-10:30PM.  Also, my off days from work aren't Saturday and Sunday, they are Wednesday and Thursday.


----------



## DOMS (Nov 3, 2004)

Ah, swing shift.  I remember those. 

I used to work at a the Denny's on Lankershim and Burbank in North Hollywood, California as a waiter.  Then I moved to graveyards.

How I miss that job...the naked women, the whips, the swords, and the drunk women.  Oh, and let's not forget the strippers from Hollywood.

Sigh, I miss those days...


----------



## Johnnny (Nov 3, 2004)

Mudge



> Vince Taylor had great chest balance, and again no incline pressing. Not adding to an argument here, just stating that "big guys" have built a fine chest without inclines.



You mean the anabolic enhanced "big guys" right? LOL.

No offense, nor am I referring to you.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Nov 3, 2004)

Contrary to popular belief, lactic acid buildup is not why you feel sore days after a workout, as has been eluded to a few times in this thread.


----------



## DOMS (Nov 3, 2004)

I know that lactic acid has nothing to do with the soreness that you experience from 24 hours and on.  Swelling is one of the reasons you do feel pain, however.  Though, not the only one.

http://sportsmedicine.about.com/cs/injuries/a/doms.htm


----------



## gopro (Nov 3, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> How come when I do the flat bench press, sometimes I only get sore in the clavicular head?  Soreness, as we all know, is not a definite indicator of hypertrophy.  Maybe the flat bench press isolates the upper head too?



Its an indicator of damage...and damage is a stimulus tissue remodeling. And if you are TRULY feeling soreness in your upper chest from benching, which I bet you are not, than you are lowering the bar to the upper chest, and not the nipple region.

When you get sore in different areas of a muscle from a change in grip or angle, it IS an indication that SOMETHING unique is taking place from each movement. More studies need to be done on this for sure. But many times the real world has proved things that science only figured out later on.


----------



## gopro (Nov 3, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Vince Taylor had great chest balance, and again no incline pressing. Not adding to an argument here, just stating that "big guys" have built a fine chest without inclines.
> 
> I used to start out my workouts with inclines, I'd go up to 9 sets just for those and I felt pretty sure they hit my upper chest. Now I do 1-2 sets, not as heavy, and I dont feel that I have lost anything from this.



Mudge, you look like you dropped bodyfat judging by your avatar. You look awesome in that pic...nice work.


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 3, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> Its an indicator of damage...and damage is a stimulus tissue remodeling. And if you are TRULY feeling soreness in your upper chest from benching, which I bet you are not, than you are lowering the bar to the upper chest, and not the nipple region.
> 
> When you get sore in different areas of a muscle from a change in grip or angle, it IS an indication that SOMETHING unique is taking place from each movement. More studies need to be done on this for sure. But many times the real world has proved things that science only figured out later on.



No, I lower the bar to my upper abs/lower chest.  I used to do otherwise, but I haven't in a while.


----------



## gopro (Nov 3, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> No, I lower the bar to my upper abs/lower chest.  I used to do otherwise, but I haven't in a while.



Alright, I give up...I've changed my opinion...inclines are not going to build the upper chest. Ok, done.


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 3, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> Alright, I give up...I've changed my opinion...inclines are not going to build the upper chest. Ok, done.



Haha.  No reason to pretend for my sake.  Believe what you want.  As I have stated numerous times throughout this thread, the argument is somewhat moot because incline presses are good to incorporate into any routine.


----------



## P-funk (Nov 3, 2004)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> Haha.  No reason to pretend for my sake.  Believe what you want.  As I have stated numerous times throughout this thread, the argument is somewhat moot because incline presses are good to incorporate into any routine.




I like incline presses in my routines.


----------



## MP fit (Nov 3, 2004)

bulletproof1 said:
			
		

> ummmmm decrease the weight?



cmon bro- if he cant even get the bar off- how is he gonna take weight off the bar when there is none?....

your response- if educated- should have been: try using lower weight dumbbells that you can lift instead of the bar- or try getting a less heavy bar- if your gym has them


----------



## Mudge (Nov 3, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> Mudge, you look like you dropped bodyfat judging by your avatar. You look awesome in that pic...nice work.



Thanks GP  I'd love to cut up but it doesn't come easy, I'm actually doing some treadmill now finally.


----------



## Mudge (Nov 3, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> You mean the anabolic enhanced "big guys" right? LOL



Well, I dont consider myself big if that helps you figure where my mind is.


----------



## gopro (Nov 3, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Thanks GP  I'd love to cut up but it doesn't come easy, I'm actually doing some treadmill now finally.



Seriously, you look great! You look in much better condition. What do you weigh now and how tall are you again?


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 3, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> Seriously, you look great! You look in much better condition. What do you weigh now and how tall are you again?



I agree.  He's looking pretty damned huge.


----------



## Johnnny (Nov 3, 2004)

Here is my new chest routine

5 sets of flat bench press
3 sets of weighted chest dips
3 sets of decline bench press


----------



## Mudge (Nov 3, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> Seriously, you look great! You look in much better condition. What do you weigh now and how tall are you again?



 now your just making stuff up. I am 6'2", around 250 even, I'm not that lean believe me but I'd like to work on it. Most pix that I would post I'd generally be holding some water, that coupled with unstellar BF levels, aren't so great.

I should note I have a 40" gut, I was around 38.5" some months ago so I'd like to get down to maybe 37" this time if I can. I have a hard time cutting for extended periods because I want to grow... Anyhow, I look better from the side probably than the front or back in terms of waist.


----------



## Johnnny (Nov 3, 2004)

Mudge



> I should note I have a 40" gut, I was around 38.5" some months ago so I'd like to get down to maybe 37" this time if I can. I have a hard time cutting for extended periods because I want to grow... Anyhow, I look better from the side probably than the front or back in terms of waist.



Are you serious? A 40" gut?

You don't appear to be anywhere close to that from your pics or are you joking?

B/c I had a 41 inch waist back in my fat days in grade 8, although I had no muscle at that point weighing 220lbs.


----------



## Mudge (Nov 3, 2004)

I'm dead serious, the height hides it, and partially the 51" chest.


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 3, 2004)

It's all relative.  A 40" waist doesn't do your physique harm.


----------



## Mudge (Nov 3, 2004)

Its not the prettiest that I promise, but yes many people are shocked - mostly of course because people are slightly shorter. I did have a 35" waist many moons ago.


----------



## JerseyDevil (Nov 3, 2004)

Is this thread still going .

I agree you look great in that avatar Mudge .


----------



## gopro (Nov 3, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> now your just making stuff up. I am 6'2", around 250 even, I'm not that lean believe me but I'd like to work on it. Most pix that I would post I'd generally be holding some water, that coupled with unstellar BF levels, aren't so great.
> 
> I should note I have a 40" gut, I was around 38.5" some months ago so I'd like to get down to maybe 37" this time if I can. I have a hard time cutting for extended periods because I want to grow... Anyhow, I look better from the side probably than the front or back in terms of waist.



No I'm not making stuff up. I saw the avi and thought you looked great and wanted to tell you so. Sometimes getting an "unprovoked" compliment like that can make a person's day, so I like to tell people when I think they deserve one. I am quite surprised by that pic that you have a 40" waist. I would have guessed 35-36 at the largest. Well, anyway, you look great and keep it up...inclines or not


----------



## Wannabebig.com (Nov 3, 2004)

Mudge, you do look good. Give yourself some more credit.


----------



## Johnnny (Nov 4, 2004)

Mudge



> I'm dead serious, the height hides it, and partially the 51" chest.



Mudge do you have large hip bones & general a large bone structure?

B/c some ppl have a larger hip bone structure that obviously make their waste line bigger even with lower BF%.

But since nobody commented on my new chest routine I only do 5 sets of flat bench, 3 sets of weighted dips, & 3 sets of decline bench now.


----------



## Mudge (Nov 4, 2004)

At 6'2" a 34-35" waist would not be considered large, but I am of Celtic decent so the hips would not be narrow. As for my bone structure I am not "big boned" by any stretch of the word, I always feel very narrow shouldered but some of that could be a long upper half. My right wrist is 7.75" so again, definitely not large boned for my height. I wear a 36 waist pant, but yes its a 40" midsection, for now.


----------



## GIZmo_Timme (Dec 17, 2004)

hey Johnnny, why dont you incline bench? vbmenu_register("postmenu_809839", true);


----------



## Johnnny (Dec 17, 2004)

GIZmo_Timme



> hey Johnnny, why dont you incline bench? vbmenu_register("postmenu_809839", true);



I do.

This thread is pretty old  & hasn't been replied to for awhile.

I've stated many times how important I feel incline presses & incline work in general are.


----------



## Hutz (Dec 17, 2004)

sup russian

 yeha i think ur talking gynecosdemastia

 dont think i spelt it right tho

 i had it in one of my nipples looks like fat but when u grab it its har and u can move it around ( i thought it was almost tumor like) 
 but my friend had i before me..

 im from Canada i know our health care covers the surgery to remove it so u end up not payin anything and its a easy quick procedure but dont plan on workoin out for 2 months after it....

 most guys actually get gyne but most of the time it naturally goes away 
 now u cant even tell tht i had surgery unless u know cause one of my nipples is a little darker now

 but check it out and get it done man did wonders to my confidence haha i had girls joke about how their tits were bigger then mine.... my gyne wasnt tht abd but it was definally noticeable with a shirt on


 get him boyz


----------



## BigDyl (Dec 17, 2004)

Johnnny said:
			
		

> GIZmo_Timme
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Why don't you go into exersize science and teach people the inherent goodness of training the upper pectoralis muscle(s), then?  Instead of becomming a n3+w0rk 3ng1n33r?


----------



## camarosuper6 (Dec 18, 2004)

Here we go again...


----------



## Wallsy72 (Jan 13, 2005)

I split my Chest routine up, I was doing bloody shit loads of it!! So now on my major chest day I do Incline Press, Decline Press, Incline Flies, Cable X Overs and press ups and sometime throw in the pec deck, I now only do Flat bench press on my CV day with some wide grip chins, I'm getting a much better overall chest workout by this, I think you need to do all three but whether or not you do them all in the same day is another question, just for the record.
Flat Bench 275ilb
Incline 220ilbs
Decline 275ilbs


----------

