# Other than your chest, what is the most important muscle to workout for a BIG bench?



## god hand (Nov 6, 2005)

From doing reseach with my own body, I think its the lats.


----------



## Mudge (Nov 6, 2005)

In a compound lift its hard to say just one muscle is more important than another, if there is one weak link in the chain the lift wont happen.

Without triceps there is no lockout.

Forearms should not be doing work on the bench press. Center the weight over the joint so that there is no real stress there.


----------



## LAM (Nov 6, 2005)

triceps, lats are only used to stablize.  when I was 18 benching 400 I did almost nothing for back except lat pulldowns and db pullovers.


----------



## god hand (Nov 6, 2005)

LAM said:
			
		

> when I was 18 benching 400


Really? How much did you weight?


----------



## GFR (Nov 6, 2005)

LAM said:
			
		

> triceps, lats are only used to stablize.  when I was 18 benching 400 I did almost nothing for back except lat pulldowns and db pullovers.


Fucker you hit it a year before I did


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 6, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> Fucker you hit it a year before I did


----------



## Dale Mabry (Nov 6, 2005)

LAM said:
			
		

> when I was 18 benching 400 I




Got it a month before me, I was 19 months old.


----------



## GFR (Nov 6, 2005)

BigDyl said:
			
		

>


don't make me take you out ninja style...


----------



## LAM (Nov 6, 2005)

god hand said:
			
		

> Really? How much did you weight?



5'10 205 lbs @ 7%.  needless to say I got crazy pussy in college !


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 6, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> don't make me take you out ninja style...




My last name is Gracie...


----------



## GFR (Nov 6, 2005)

LAM said:
			
		

> 5'10 205 lbs @ 7%.  needless to say I got crazy pussy in college !


and you were 1lb lighter than I was


----------



## luke69duke69 (Nov 6, 2005)

You need triceps definitely but don't you think since most guys tend to go wide on a big bench and the wider you go the more you rely on the shoulders...??


----------



## Tough Old Man (Nov 6, 2005)

LAM said:
			
		

> triceps, lats are only used to stablize. when I was 18 benching 400 I did almost nothing for back except lat pulldowns and db pullovers.


Strong ass bitch


----------



## Tough Old Man (Nov 6, 2005)

god hand said:
			
		

> From doing reseach with my own body, I think its the lats.


This was just posted a couple of weeks ago by Dale.  Read it will and it will give you all the info you need 
http://www.usapowerlifting.com/newsletter/13/coaching/coaching.html



PT


----------



## gr81 (Nov 6, 2005)

> triceps, lats are only used to stablize. when I was 18 benching 400 I did almost nothing for back except lat pulldowns and db pullovers.



Look her folks, the pec muscles have almost zero bearing on how much you can bench, their function is to spread the rib cage, NOT to press. A big bench is ALL about triceps and upper back, no question about it. And due respect but just b/c one person says that they bench big, which I am sure they did, and they didn't focus on their back training, that means absolutely nothing, its the exception, not the rule. Its simple biomechanics


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Nov 6, 2005)

gr81 said:
			
		

> Look her folks, the pec muscles have almost zero bearing on how much you can bench, their function is to spread the rib cage, NOT to press. A big bench is ALL about triceps and upper back, no question about it. And due respect but just b/c one person says that they bench big, which I am sure they did, and they didn't focus on their back training, that means absolutely nothing, its the exception, not the rule. Its simple biomechanics


 Plenty of people have fairly large benches without back training though. I'm not saying this is ideal, but it's certainly possible.


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 6, 2005)

gr81 said:
			
		

> Look her folks, the pec muscles have almost zero bearing on how much you can bench, their function is to spread the rib cage, NOT to press. A big bench is ALL about triceps and upper back, no question about it. And due respect but just b/c one person says that they bench big, which I am sure they did, and they didn't focus on their back training, that means absolutely nothing, its the exception, not the rule. Its simple biomechanics


----------



## LAM (Nov 6, 2005)

Squaggleboggin said:
			
		

> Plenty of people have fairly large benches without back training though. I'm not saying this is ideal, but it's certainly possible.



you can go to just about any university and I guarantee that 95% of the big benchers do very little back training.  big benching has more to do with technique then it does with overall upper body strength and of course the biomechanics of the individual.


----------



## min0 lee (Nov 6, 2005)

LAM said:
			
		

> triceps, lats are only used to stablize.  when I was 18 benching 400 I did almost nothing for back except lat pulldowns and db pullovers.


Damn, I guess I need a new career. I'm 40 and I am struggling to get to 3 plates on each side.

Oh, and back to the topic I would have to say *triceps* play a huge role.


----------



## LAM (Nov 6, 2005)

when benching PL style the triceps do play a HUGE role...


----------



## AKIRA (Nov 6, 2005)

Squaggleboggin said:
			
		

> Plenty of people have fairly large benches without back training though. I'm not saying this is ideal, but it's certainly possible.




From the age 17-20 I never did back, but did do chest.  But my back was huge.  And I never noticed until my prick friend accidently gave me that compliment.


----------



## AKIRA (Nov 6, 2005)

gr81 said:
			
		

> Look her folks, the pec muscles have almost zero bearing on how much you can bench, their function is to spread the rib cage, NOT to press. A big bench is ALL about triceps and upper back, no question about it.




Hmm.  Cant wait to hear the replies on this one.


----------



## GFR (Nov 6, 2005)

AKIRA said:
			
		

> Hmm.  Cant wait to hear the replies on this one.


I think he was kidding


----------



## min0 lee (Nov 6, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> I think he was kidding


Your cold.


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 6, 2005)

It's whichever is the weak link for you.  I think those who train their bench press properly see triceps as the limiting factor most often.  It used to be lats for me when I was doing Westside.  I worked on starting strength and focused on rowing a lot, and the triceps soon emerged as my next weak link, which seemed to be much harder to overcome.


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 6, 2005)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> Damn, I guess I need a new career. I'm 40 and I am struggling to get to 3 plates on each side.
> 
> Oh, and back to the topic I would have to say *triceps* play a huge role.



Weakling!


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 6, 2005)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> It's whichever is the weak link for you.  I think those who train their bench press properly see triceps as the limiting factor most often.  It used to be lats for me when I was doing Westside.  I worked on starting strength and focused on rowing a lot, and the triceps soon emerged as my next weak link, which seemed to be much harder to overcome.



I think tricepts are also my weak link now.  So here is my theory, tell  me what you think:  If the tricepts are the weak link, why not do close grip bench, until they are NOT your weakest link, then go back to a wider grip.


----------



## min0 lee (Nov 6, 2005)

I do close grips just for triceps, it seems to help my bench.


----------



## juggernaut2005 (Nov 7, 2005)

you forgot to add lowerback/back.  Its just as important as triceps IMO.  My bench went up a few after I started deadlifting


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Nov 7, 2005)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> I do close grips just for triceps, it seems to help my bench.


I was thinking of replacing my bottom benches with CG bottom benches because my triceps seem to be lacking. How close do you usually space your hands for these? I was thinking just outside of the innermost knurl (so about 5-6" apart).


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Nov 7, 2005)

juggernaut2005 said:
			
		

> you forgot to add lowerback/back. Its just as important as triceps IMO. My bench went up a few after I started deadlifting


This could also have been because of the increased release of growth hormones (which I assume can also play some role in strength increases) talked about with the deadlift and squat, unless I'm mistaken.


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 7, 2005)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> I do close grips just for triceps, it seems to help my bench.



Shut up Tranny!


----------



## swordfish (Nov 7, 2005)

LAM said:
			
		

> triceps, lats are only used to stablize.  when I was 18 benching 400 I did almost nothing for back except lat pulldowns and db pullovers.




how was your diet and how long had you been training when you hit 400? what was your bench routine?


----------



## LAM (Nov 7, 2005)

I was in college so I was eating crappy cafeteria food.  I had been training for 5 solid years at that point.  back then I didn't even know what a bench routine was. we always trained heavy, did a lot of forced reps and did a lot of tricep work.


----------



## BulkMeUp (Nov 7, 2005)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> I worked on starting strength and focused on rowing a lot, and the triceps soon emerged as my next weak link, which seemed to be much harder to overcome.


What routine or changes to your routine did you do to over come that?


----------



## swordfish (Nov 7, 2005)

LAM said:
			
		

> 5'10 205 lbs @ 7%.  needless to say I got crazy pussy in college !




At that bf and weight, I bet! 

I always thought that girls didn't like guys that were big and bulk. 5'10 205 lbs is not a runt! lol


----------



## gr81 (Nov 7, 2005)

> Plenty of people have fairly large benches without back training though. I'm not saying this is ideal, but it's certainly possible.



that may be so, everyone has a different hand to play, however I guarantee that their big bench would be EVEN bigger with a strong upper back! do you not agree.


----------



## gr81 (Nov 7, 2005)

> Hmm. Cant wait to hear the replies on this one.





> I think he was kidding



You must be the one joking if you think that the pec muscle helps you bench big. thats a ridiculous thought.
Almost everyone has an example of someone they know who is big and doesn't eat right or lift often or one of the million things that idiots in the gym do (not you LAM), but the fact of the matter is that is just them and their genetics, and they can get away with it. Some can, some can't. Doesn't mean that rules of physics, diet, biomechanics don't apply. Guess what, if those guys did tihngs correctly, then they would be even MORE impressive. Just b/c one person benches big and doesn't train back or tris, does that mean that YOU should not train those vital muscles and still bench big. Most likely not. Go ahead and study physics, biomechanics, and kiniesiology and you will learn that if you strictly want to get a certain weight from point A to point B there are certain things you can do do increase your performance. Building the fundamental foundation of each lift will do that. The bench is a press, which is mostly tricep, the upper back is an antagonist muscle in the lift and is extremely important. I understand the difference between bodybuilding and PL, but if you want to bench as much as yor potential allows, then you need to learn all this. if you want to simply build pec muscle, then the weight doesn't matter nearly as much, it is simply a tool, a means to another goal. In wihch case the flat Barbell bench is NOT the most productive means to that goal of hypertrophy..


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Nov 7, 2005)

gr81 said:
			
		

> You must be the one joking if you think that the pec muscle helps you bench big. thats a ridiculous thought.
> Almost everyone has an example of someone they know who is big and doesn't eat right or lift often or one of the million things that idiots in the gym do (not you LAM), but the fact of the matter is that is just them and their genetics, and they can get away with it. Some can, some can't. Doesn't mean that rules of physics, diet, biomechanics don't apply. Guess what, if those guys did tihngs correctly, then they would be even MORE impressive. Just b/c one person benches big and doesn't train back or tris, does that mean that YOU should not train those vital muscles and still bench big. Most likely not. Go ahead and study physics, biomechanics, and kiniesiology and you will learn that if you strictly want to get a certain weight from point A to point B there are certain things you can do do increase your performance. Building the fundamental foundation of each lift will do that. The bench is a press, which is mostly tricep, the upper back is an antagonist muscle in the lift and is extremely important. I understand the difference between bodybuilding and PL, but if you want to bench as much as yor potential allows, then you need to learn all this. if you want to simply build pec muscle, then the weight doesn't matter nearly as much, it is simply a tool, a means to another goal. In wihch case the flat Barbell bench is NOT the most productive means to that goal of hypertrophy..


 I wouldn't say it's a ridiculous thought at all. All of the information I've ever read has pointed to the bench press as involving the chest heavily. How is one to know differently if the only information available points in one direction? I'm not saying you're wrong, because I really don't know enough about kinesiology to argue, but there's no way I would have thought that the chest has nothing to do with benching had you not said this.

 Oh, and I do agree about a strong back improving the lift. I can't think of any compound lift that wouldn't benefit from a strong back.


----------



## GFR (Nov 7, 2005)

gr81 said:
			
		

> You must be the one joking if you think that the pec muscle helps you bench big. thats a ridiculous thought.
> Almost everyone has an example of someone they know who is big and doesn't eat right or lift often or one of the million things that idiots in the gym do (not you LAM), but the fact of the matter is that is just them and their genetics, and they can get away with it. Some can, some can't. Doesn't mean that rules of physics, diet, biomechanics don't apply. Guess what, if those guys did tihngs correctly, then they would be even MORE impressive. Just b/c one person benches big and doesn't train back or tris, does that mean that YOU should not train those vital muscles and still bench big. Most likely not. Go ahead and study physics, biomechanics, and kiniesiology and you will learn that if you strictly want to get a certain weight from point A to point B there are certain things you can do do increase your performance. Building the fundamental foundation of each lift will do that. The bench is a press, which is mostly tricep, the upper back is an antagonist muscle in the lift and is extremely important. I understand the difference between bodybuilding and PL, but if you want to bench as much as yor potential allows, then you need to learn all this. if you want to simply build pec muscle, then the weight doesn't matter nearly as much, it is simply a tool, a means to another goal. In wihch case the flat Barbell bench is NOT the most productive means to that goal of hypertrophy..



Thats amazing because all I did for chest the first 5 years I worked out was 4 sets of bench and 3 sets of incline press...*no* flys, cables or peck-deck....and my chest was the biggest and strongest muscle of all that I trained..........wonder if the squats I did built up my chest??


----------



## min0 lee (Nov 7, 2005)

BigDyl said:
			
		

> Shut up Tranny!


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 7, 2005)

BulkMeUp said:
			
		

> What routine or changes to your routine did you do to over come that?



Well, I don't think I ever made triceps a strong point after they became the weakest link.  However, to break past plateaus I would do heavy lockouts and accessory tricep work (JM presses, tate presses, CG bench press, etc.)


----------



## gr81 (Nov 7, 2005)

> I'm not saying you're wrong, because I really don't know enough about kinesiology to argue, but there's no way I would have thought that the chest has nothing to do with benching had you not said this.



you said it, you don't know enough to argue. Look, the Function of the pectoral muscles are to spread the rib cage in a fly like motion. I am not saying that the fibers in the pecs are not recruited during a bench b/c they are, do not make that mistake! I AM saying that in terms of pressing weight up, the pecs are not the acting muscle in that movement. Go ahead and break down the movement for yourself.. The motion in itself is a press. Of course it is recruited, but I am talking about the movement as a lift... Can you make that distinction? I understand this may be hard to swallow, but most of the BS that is perpetrated in bodybuilding  is not necessarily true just b/c is is widely thought. Certainly not b/c Foreman can't get his tiny little head around this concept...


----------



## GFR (Nov 7, 2005)

Sounds like Arthur Jones dribble


----------



## gr81 (Nov 7, 2005)

> Thats amazing because all I did for chest the first 5 years I worked out was 4 sets of bench and 3 sets of incline press...no flys, cables or peck-deck....and my chest was the biggest and strongest muscle of all that I trained..........wonder if the squats I did built up my chest??



try to wrap your head around this concept. Just b/c benching recruited fibers in yrou chest and lead to hypertrophy, that increase in pec size is not going to make your bench stronger. Did I say at any point that benching doesn't recruit chest fibers, NO... just save it foreman, b/c we all know how valuable your half witted observational science is to everyone. if you even understand the distinction in my point, go ahead and describe to me exactly how your pecs are the most important muscle to increasing your bench press, this should be entertaining


----------



## GFR (Nov 7, 2005)

gr81 said:
			
		

> *try to wrap your head around this concept*. Just b/c benching recruited fibers in yrou chest and lead to hypertrophy, that increase in pec size is not going to make your bench stronger. Did I say at any point that benching doesn't recruit chest fibers, NO... just save it foreman, b/c we all know how valuable your half witted observational science is to everyone. if you even understand the distinction in my point, go ahead and describe to me exactly how your pecs are the most important muscle to increasing your bench press, this should be entertaining


Sorry but you are totally full of shit on this one......wrap your head around that concept


----------



## swordfish (Nov 7, 2005)

my weight training coach in high school had a HUGE chest and benched 445 raw, he holds oregon powerlifting records for his age, and absolutely believes a big bench press comes from the chest and tris. Obviously you don't know what your talking about if you think it doesn't play much of a role.


----------



## god hand (Nov 7, 2005)

gr81 said:
			
		

> In wihch case the flat Barbell bench is NOT the most productive means to that goal of hypertrophy..


Then what is?


----------



## god hand (Nov 7, 2005)

I been thinkin lately, you can have a suckass chest benching 200, 250, even 315, but I aint never seen anyone with a suckass chest that benches 400+!


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 7, 2005)

A raw bench press has more to do with your chest than a shirted one.  The pecs are really only active at the bottom portion of the bench press, and the shirt "spots" you through this portion of the movement.


----------



## gr81 (Nov 7, 2005)

> my weight training coach in high school had a HUGE chest and benched 445 raw, he holds oregon powerlifting records for his age, and absolutely believes a big bench press comes from the chest and tris. Obviously you don't know what your talking about if you think it doesn't play much of a role.



prove me wronng them. and citing examples of some guy you know so there for it must be true doesn't cut it. The fact of the matter is this you idiots, I have studied the shit, spend some time reading, researching, learning biomechanics and kiniesiology and then come and talk to me


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 7, 2005)

god hand said:
			
		

> Then what is?



Something with a line of pull away from your body.  Cable crossovers would be an example.  Low pulley cable presses would be another example.  Actually, bottoms-up bench presses would probably be more effective as far as pressing movements go because you have to generate more tension in the pecs to overcome intertia instead of using the stretch-shortening cycle.  Also, dumbbell pressing would seemingly be more effective because the additional range of motion, and subsequent stretching of the muscle in question, leads to a stronger contraction.


----------



## gr81 (Nov 7, 2005)

> Then what is?



the db press is MUCH more effective in recruiting muscle fibers for hypertrophy then the barbell is, it allows you to use much heavier weight then a simple fly motion, and it mimics the function of the chest more closely by allowing the rib cage to spread since the dumbells are isolated. It doesn't restrict the movement like a barbell does. 
Another great movement is a bench press with a cambered bar, most gyms don't have one and thats why I mention it second. Think about this, if I am wrong then why is it that every other movement for the chest involves a fly motion?


----------



## gr81 (Nov 7, 2005)

Cowpimp, you studied westside, You should know better then anyone of these people in here should understand the mechanics of the bench. What did you learn when studying westside? How much pec training do those guys do... NONE. Bench day is spent on Triceps and Back, period. 

everyone seems to be mistaking what I am saying. I am NOT saying that the bench doesn't recruit pectoral fibers, but there is a difference between stimulating growth and isolating the strength aspects of the lift! if you all can't understand that then who has the problem.. open a book and stop basing all your information of what some guy at your gym says..the shit is a science, treat it like one


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 7, 2005)

gr81 said:
			
		

> Cowpimp, you studied westside, You should know better then anyone of these people in here should understand the mechanics of the bench. What did you learn when studying westside? How much pec training do those guys do... NONE. Bench day is spent on Triceps and Back, period.



True enough.  However, most Westside guys bench press with a shirt.  That is why I made the distinction.  I believe the pecs certainly play more of a role when bench pressing raw as opposed to shirted, but the triceps, upper back, and shoulders are still king of the hill regardless of the usage of gear.


----------



## gr81 (Nov 7, 2005)

I have been doin westside for oevr a year and two years on and off and I have never used a shirt. your point is valid of course, but your form should be such that your pecs are basically not invloved. you certainly are not going to make great strides in your bench by training pecs, sorry


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 8, 2005)

gr81 said:
			
		

> I have been doin westside for oevr a year and two years on and off and I have never used a shirt. your point is valid of course, but your form should be such that your pecs are basically not invloved. you certainly are not going to make great strides in your bench by training pecs, sorry



I agree with you here.  The pecs are definitely not the big daddy of the bench press.  I just thought I would make the distinction anyway, despite the fact that other musculature is more important regardless of one's use of lifting gear.

Also, I still theorize that a bottoms-up bench press might be a little more effective as far as hypertrophy of the pecs is concerned.  It is similar to the idea of holding calf raises in the bottom position for 5 seconds to dissipate the elastic energy stored during the eccentric portion of the lift.


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Nov 8, 2005)

gr81 said:
			
		

> you said it, you don't know enough to argue. Look, the Function of the pectoral muscles are to spread the rib cage in a fly like motion. I am not saying that the fibers in the pecs are not recruited during a bench b/c they are, do not make that mistake! I AM saying that in terms of pressing weight up, the pecs are not the acting muscle in that movement. Go ahead and break down the movement for yourself.. The motion in itself is a press. Of course it is recruited, but I am talking about the movement as a lift... Can you make that distinction? I understand this may be hard to swallow, but most of the BS that is perpetrated in bodybuilding is not necessarily true just b/c is is widely thought. Certainly not b/c Foreman can't get his tiny little head around this concept...


I didn't say I disagreed with you. I see your point. I am not one to follow anything 'perpetrated in bodybuilding.' No offense, but you're sounding a lot more like an idiot than I think you mean to. There's no need to tell everyone else they're stupid because they haven't studied kinesiology. They know things in other areas that you may have no idea about - not everyone on here is an expert when it comes to this stuff, and not everyone enjoys being talked down to like a five-year-old when asking a question or trying to convey thoughts.

I thought I'd say that before someone gets really pissed off and totally hijacks the thread.

I do have to agree with CowPimp on the bottom benches. I've been doing them lately and it's definitely more effective for strengthening the entire lift. I'll probably change these to bottom CG benches though, because lockout strength is what I really lack in the bench press (I do it PL style so the chest, as discussed previously in detail, is basically minimally involved).


----------



## gr81 (Nov 8, 2005)

> not everyone on here is an expert when it comes to this stuff, and not everyone enjoys being talked down to like a five-year-old when asking a question or trying to convey thoughts.



well then maybe they shouldn't try to pass themselves off as one. in the face of cold hard fact the only thing people can rebut with is some observational BS and yet they somehow vehemently disagree, why would that be. I didn't start off pissed, I get pissed when I clearly explain my position several times and yet people still come back at me attacking my point when they are clearly misunderstanding it entirely. A person is not stupid b/c they haven't studied this or that, don't put words in my mouth.  However it is extremely frustrating when you have put in the time and effort to learn something and then people who have not simply argue with you b/c they don;t like how it sounds, b/c it challenges their ideals and this creates some sort of dissonance for them. All they have on their side is emotion with no logic backing it up. ya know what fuccin good is a training forum when this is what happens when you try and help someone by answering their question. This is the exact reason I have been off these forums for so long. This used to be my home and now its overrun by morons like Foreman who clearly thinks he is some sort of omniscient all star lifter.


----------



## GFR (Nov 8, 2005)

gr81 said:
			
		

> try to wrap your head around this concept. Just b/c benching recruited fibers in yrou chest and lead to hypertrophy, that increase in pec size is not going to make your bench stronger. Did I say at any point that benching doesn't recruit chest fibers, NO... just save it foreman, b/c we all know how valuable your half witted observational science is to everyone. if you even understand the distinction in my point, go ahead and describe to me exactly how your pecs are the most important muscle to increasing your bench press, this should be entertaining





			
				gr81 said:
			
		

> * the flat Barbell bench is NOT the most productive means to that goal of hypertrophy..*




Ok so tell us what is???


This should be good


----------



## GFR (Nov 8, 2005)

gr81 said:
			
		

> the db press is MUCH more effective in recruiting muscle fibers for hypertrophy then the barbell is, it allows you to use much heavier weight then a simple fly motion, and it mimics the function of the chest more closely by allowing the rib cage to spread since the dumbells are isolated. It doesn't restrict the movement like a barbell does.
> Another great movement is a bench press with a cambered bar, most gyms don't have one and thats why I mention it second. Think about this, if I am wrong then why is it that every other movement for the chest involves a fly motion?


Db bench and cambered bar........so two slight variations of the bench  
wow that is lame bro...
And I'm not sure if you are saying flys are also better than bench for hypertrophy but if you are then your dead wrong!!!i


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Nov 8, 2005)

gr81 said:
			
		

> well then maybe they shouldn't try to pass themselves off as one. in the face of cold hard fact the only thing people can rebut with is some observational BS and yet they somehow vehemently disagree, why would that be. I didn't start off pissed, I get pissed when I clearly explain my position several times and yet people still come back at me attacking my point when they are clearly misunderstanding it entirely. A person is not stupid b/c they haven't studied this or that, don't put words in my mouth. However it is extremely frustrating when you have put in the time and effort to learn something and then people who have not simply argue with you b/c they don;t like how it sounds, b/c it challenges their ideals and this creates some sort of dissonance for them. All they have on their side is emotion with no logic backing it up. ya know what fuccin good is a training forum when this is what happens when you try and help someone by answering their question. This is the exact reason I have been off these forums for so long. This used to be my home and now its overrun by morons like Foreman who clearly thinks he is some sort of omniscient all star lifter.


When you explain something that completely contradicts everything others have learned, do you really expect them to accept it immediately? That's foolish. We are curious by nature. I always ask questions. The whole reason science is so valuable is because we understand it, not because we accept it. The only one who really acts like he knows everything is Foreman, but he's usually joking anyways. As the person having studied this area, you should be the one to remain calm because for you this is not unchartered territory. If others are not willing to believe you after you have stated the facts and given examples, then so be it. Not everyone will believe what differs from what they've seen in their own lives. However, most people are probably like me - they see what you have to say and question it (again, science has no value if we all accept everything as true). Then we question what we once thought and try to make sense of it with more questions. Sometimes our logic is incorrect. It happens. No one is perfect. That's one reason why I respect CowPimp so much - he's basically stoic when it comes to posting and is very good at explaining things on basic levels so everyone can understand them. He doesn't tell every member they're an idiot because they can't grasp a concept that contradicts everything they've known.


----------



## GFR (Nov 8, 2005)

I never joke  
and I will take Cowpimps opinion over gr81 any day!!


----------



## min0 lee (Nov 8, 2005)

Squaggleboggin cannot be 16, he's too mature to be that age.


----------



## GFR (Nov 8, 2005)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> Squaggleboggin cannot be 16, he's too mature to be that age.


Thats cold


----------



## min0 lee (Nov 8, 2005)

No really, I don't mean being 16 is bad but at that age most people would have responded differently....but then again your 38 and.......and I'm 40


----------



## GFR (Nov 8, 2005)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> No really, I don't mean being 16 is bad but at that age most people would have responded differently....but then again your 38 and.......


A sexy beast!


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Nov 8, 2005)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> Squaggleboggin cannot be 16, he's too mature to be that age.


 I'll consider that a compliment to my sixteen-year-old self.


----------



## gr81 (Nov 8, 2005)

besides your empty rhetoric can you actually explain to me why I am wrong foreman,  no you can't. you proven that time and time again that you have nothing to contribute but your pathetic little jokes. How many of those posts of yours are substantive contributions.  you say you take cowpimp opinions over mine but tell me when he contradicted my potistion here.. thats right he didn't b/c unlike you he has done research and knows exactly what I am talking about. Look SB, once you've been around people like Foreman as long as I have lets see how sane you still are.I haven't called you an idiot, and I haven't labeled "everyone" here an idiot either. I call em as I see em dude. I understand all your points, and I say to you that I didn't just pop off all of a sudden, this is from years and years of people like this claiming this and that with nothing to back it up. If everyone had teh rational approach that you took I wouldn't explode like that. Look I don't really care what these cats here think about me and whether foreman thinks about my opinion. I have been here for years and have proved my wealth of knowledge time and time again. Its people like that that have ruined this place for any REAL lifter to frequent. Now its basically nothing but younger impressionable lifters being lead by know it all loud mouth clowns.. I don't even know why I bother. hey if you actually want to learn anything of substance, talk to lifters like me who despite my demeanor here is a rational logical and extremely passionate student of the game. if you wanna dick around at play time and stroke some fools insecure ego go ahead and keep siding with clowns like that, its your loss bro


----------



## GFR (Nov 8, 2005)

Do you also want me to prove the ocean is not full of water you fucking retard  

I wont do your research for you but I'll point you in the right direction......look it up in an Anatomy and Physiology book.......................under *Action*


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Nov 8, 2005)

gr81 said:
			
		

> besides your empty rhetoric can you actually explain to me why I am wrong foreman, no you can't. you proven that time and time again that you have nothing to contribute but your pathetic little jokes. How many of those posts of yours are substantive contributions. you say you take cowpimp opinions over mine but tell me when he contradicted my potistion here.. thats right he didn't b/c unlike you he has done research and knows exactly what I am talking about. Look SB, once you've been around people like Foreman as long as I have lets see how sane you still are.I haven't called you an idiot, and I haven't labeled "everyone" here an idiot either. I call em as I see em dude. I understand all your points, and I say to you that I didn't just pop off all of a sudden, this is from years and years of people like this claiming this and that with nothing to back it up. If everyone had teh rational approach that you took I wouldn't explode like that. Look I don't really care what these cats here think about me and whether foreman thinks about my opinion. I have been here for years and have proved my wealth of knowledge time and time again. Its people like that that have ruined this place for any REAL lifter to frequent. Now its basically nothing but younger impressionable lifters being lead by know it all loud mouth clowns.. I don't even know why I bother. hey if you actually want to learn anything of substance, talk to lifters like me who despite my demeanor here is a rational logical and extremely passionate student of the game. if you wanna dick around at play time and stroke some fools insecure ego go ahead and keep siding with clowns like that, its your loss bro


 I'm around my fair share of idiots. I'm in high school.


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 8, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> Do you also want me to prove the ocean is not full of water you fucking retard
> 
> I wont do your research for you but I'll point you in the right direction......look it up in an Anatomy and Physiology book.......................under *Action*


----------



## god hand (Nov 8, 2005)

gr81 from what I've read u think the Flat bench barbell press is manly for strength purposes correct? I DONT GIVE A FUCK ABOUT THAT! I want to know what chest exercise stimulates growth the most! And I'm waiting for your answer! You know how big of an ass I can get, but I did JOIN this site to learn information about this reason and this one only SO IF YOU KNOW ANYTHING PLEASE SHARE!


----------



## ASSPUNCTURE (Nov 8, 2005)

you people still benchpress? lol


----------



## god hand (Nov 8, 2005)

ASSPUNCTURE said:
			
		

> you people still benchpress? lol


dAMN everytime I see that sig!


----------



## gr81 (Nov 8, 2005)

> SO IF YOU KNOW ANYTHING PLEASE SHARE!



I already posted an answer dude, look back at that. and btw the way the question was phrased it sounded like you were asking what would help increase your bench numbers and I answered that to.


----------



## god hand (Nov 8, 2005)

gr81 said:
			
		

> I already posted an answer dude, look back at that. and btw the way the question was phrased it sounded like you were asking what would help increase your bench numbers and I answered that to.


Dumbbell Bench? Because its similar to a fly motion? Fuck the original ?


----------



## gr81 (Nov 8, 2005)

> Do you also want me to prove the ocean is not full of water you fucking retard
> 
> I wont do your research for you but I'll point you in the right direction......look it up in an Anatomy and Physiology book.......................under Action



well thats a permeating analogy foreman yet once again you prove my earlier point. did I ask you to do my research for me you, no. I aked you to back up whatever dilluded point you think you have with some fact and you found a way to weasle out of that with more clowning around. please tell me how having a bigger pec muscle will increase your max bench press, please tell me what role that plays in a pressing motion. once again I am not talking about recruiting fibers for hypertrophy, I am talking about moving the weight from point A to point B. you can't give me a serious answer that descibes this movement without resulting to insults and child remarks can you. I am waiting


----------



## gr81 (Nov 8, 2005)

> Dumbbell Bench? Because its similar to a fly motion? Fuck the original ?



what do you mean fucc the original?


----------



## god hand (Nov 8, 2005)

gr81 said:
			
		

> what do you mean fucc the original?


I mean fuck the original question I asked at the beginning of the thread.


----------



## DOMS (Nov 8, 2005)

god hand, even if you find "the best exercise" for stimulating pec growth you'll body will just adapt to it and it will cease to the "the best exercise" for pec growth. Just do a variety of exercises.

  Personally though, I like Flys.


----------



## god hand (Nov 8, 2005)

cfs3 said:
			
		

> god hand, even if you find "the best exercise" for stimulating pec growth you'll body will just adapt to it and it will cease to the "the best exercise" for pec growth.


That's when I'll add more weight!


----------



## god hand (Nov 8, 2005)

cfs3 said:
			
		

> Personally though, I like Flys.


I just cant get the form right!


----------



## DOMS (Nov 8, 2005)

god hand said:
			
		

> I just cant get the form right!


  How do you know you don't have the correct form?


----------



## god hand (Nov 8, 2005)

I dont know lol. I only feel them in my chest when I do decline flys


----------



## DOMS (Nov 8, 2005)

That sounds like bad form.  Being on a decline can help to enforce good form.  Do you workout with anyone?  Or with people nearby that can you give you a pointer or two?


----------



## god hand (Nov 8, 2005)

cfs3 said:
			
		

> That sounds like bad form.  Being on a decline can help to enforce good form.  Do you workout with anyone?  Or with people nearby that can you give you a pointer or two?


Nope they say youre suppose to act like your hugging a tree right?


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Nov 8, 2005)

god hand said:
			
		

> Nope they say youre suppose to act like your hugging a tree right?


 Elbows slightly bent, don't push arms past upper arm parallel to floor on the negative, lightly tap together at top; repeat.


----------



## Flex (Nov 8, 2005)

My man Gr81,

don't waste your time trying to get your point across to certain people who are just immature 160lb clowns. You know what you know is correct, and i know what you know is correct. If they can't look at something other than their close-minded, opinion-based opinion, then fuck 'em....They'll never make progress and their tires will just keep spinning in the mud so to speak. 

As for the point at hand, my man is correct. There are MANY factors that are important in the bb bench press......back, delts and tri's, genetics, body stature (long/short arms, big/small ribcage etc.) are all just as important as pectoral dev. Not sure if i answered the right question, but i think so.....

And finally, God hand. Do a search of"how to make your chest grow" by yours truly.
Basically states this:
-if you want your chest to grow, learn how to flex it. most people just push weight instead of squeezing it. Once you learn how to squeeze your muscles, it opens up a whole new world.


----------



## Squaggleboggin (Nov 8, 2005)

Flex said:
			
		

> don't waste your time trying to get your point across to certain people who are just immature 160lb clowns. You know what you know is correct, and i know what you know is correct. If they can't look at something other than their close-minded, *opinion-based opinion*, then fuck 'em....They'll never make progress and their tires will just keep spinning in the mud so to speak.


 You know, he's right. Opinion-based opinions are the worst kind of opinions, and only a few idiots in the world are dumb enough to have them.


----------



## GFR (Nov 8, 2005)

gr81 said:
			
		

> well thats a permeating analogy foreman yet once again you prove my earlier point. did I ask you to do my research for me you, no. I *aked* you to back up whatever *dilluded* point you think you have with some fact and you found a way to *weasle* out of that with more clowning around. please tell me how having a bigger pec muscle will increase your max bench press, please tell me what role that plays in a pressing motion. once again I am not talking about recruiting fibers for hypertrophy, I am talking about moving the weight from point A to point B. you can't give me a serious answer that descibes this movement without resulting to insults and child remarks can you. I am waiting


Basic Anatomy and Philology 201......
#1. Look under the " Muscular System" section.  
#2. Look under the " Muscles crossing the shoulder joint: movements of the arm" section.  
#3. Find the " Pectoralis Major."  
#4. Look under " Action"  

#5. Read  

Feel free to *aked* anymore questions If you feel the need.


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 8, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> Basic Anatomy and Philology 201......
> #1. Look under the " Muscular System" section.
> #2. Look under the " Muscles crossing the shoulder joint: movements of the arm" section.
> #3. Find the " Pectoralis Major."
> ...


----------



## Flex (Nov 8, 2005)

My man Gr81,
don't waste your time trying to get your point across to certain people who are just immature 160lb clowns. You know what you know is correct, and i know what you know is correct. If they can't look at something other than their close-minded, opinion-based opinion, then fuck 'em....They'll never make progress and their tires will just keep spinning in the mud so to speak. 

As for the point at hand, my man is correct. There are MANY factors that are important in the bb bench press......back, delts and tri's, genetics, body stature (long/short arms, big/small ribcage etc.) are all just as important as pectoral dev. Not sure if i answered the right question, but i think so.....

And finally, God hand. Do a search of"how to make your chest grow" by yours truly.
Basically states this:
-if you want your chest to grow, learn how to flex it. most people just push weight instead of squeezing it. Once you learn how to squeeze your muscles, it opens up a whole new world.

FLEX


----------



## god hand (Nov 8, 2005)

Flex said:
			
		

> My man Gr81,
> don't waste your time trying to get your point across to certain people who are just immature 160lb clowns. You know what you know is correct, and i know what you know is correct. If they can't look at something other than their close-minded, opinion-based opinion, then fuck 'em....They'll never make progress and their tires will just keep spinning in the mud so to speak.
> 
> As for the point at hand, my man is correct. There are MANY factors that are important in the bb bench press......back, delts and tri's, genetics, body stature (long/short arms, big/small ribcage etc.) are all just as important as pectoral dev. Not sure if i answered the right question, but i think so.....
> ...


Damn you and gr81 just popped out of da blue! And thanks for both of you all advice.


----------



## GFR (Nov 8, 2005)

Flex said:
			
		

> My man Gr81,                             * post  #93*
> don't waste your time trying to get your point across to certain people who are just immature 160lb clowns. You know what you know is correct, and i know what you know is correct. If they can't look at something other than their close-minded, opinion-based opinion, then fuck 'em....They'll never make progress and their tires will just keep spinning in the mud so to speak.
> 
> As for the point at hand, my man is correct. There are MANY factors that are important in the bb bench press......back, delts and tri's, genetics, body stature (long/short arms, big/small ribcage etc.) are all just as important as pectoral dev. Not sure if i answered the right question, but i think so.....
> ...





			
				Flex said:
			
		

> My man Gr81,                         * post#89*
> 
> don't waste your time trying to get your point across to certain people who are just immature 160lb clowns. You know what you know is correct, and i know what you know is correct. If they can't look at something other than their close-minded, opinion-based opinion, then fuck 'em....They'll never make progress and their tires will just keep spinning in the mud so to speak.
> 
> ...




you can say that again

you can say that again


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 8, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> you can say that again
> 
> you can say that again


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 8, 2005)

The best movements for pectoral development would be movements that don't have a line of pull point straight down.  The pectoralis major's primary function is to adduct the arm horizontally across the chest.  Therefore, you need a line of pull that is neither horizontal nor vertical, but somewhere in between.  I read an article not long ago that suggested a 45 degree angle is the optimal line of pull to place the most emphasis on the pectoralis major.

An example of a movement that provides this type of stimulus would be the low pulley cable bench press.  You set up a stand alone bench in between two low cable pulleys.  You press upward like in a bench press, but you will notice that the cables are pulling at a 45 degree angle below horizontal, unlike free weights which provide their resistance via gravity, which always acts in the direction of the center of the Earth (Straight down).


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 8, 2005)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> The best movements for pectoral development would be movements that don't have a line of pull point straight down.  The pectoralis major's primary function is to adduct the arm horizontally across the chest.  Therefore, you need a line of pull that is neither horizontal nor vertical, but somewhere in between.  I read an article not long ago that suggested a 45 degree angle is the optimal line of pull to place the most emphasis on the pectoralis major.
> 
> An example of a movement that provides this type of stimulus would be the low pulley cable bench press.  You set up a stand alone bench in between two low cable pulleys.  You press upward like in a bench press, but you will notice that the cables are pulling at a 45 degree angle below horizontal, unlike free weights which provide their resistance via gravity, which always acts in the direction of the center of the Earth (Straight down).



That's one of the most interesting ideas i've heard....


----------



## Flex (Nov 8, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> you can say that again
> 
> you can say that again




another informative post.

keep it up.


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 8, 2005)

BigDyl said:
			
		

> CowPimp said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## god hand (Nov 8, 2005)

BigDyl said:
			
		

> That's one of the most interesting ideas i've heard....


I must admit that does sounds...........unique.


----------



## god hand (Nov 8, 2005)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> It's something I picked up from a T-Nation article a while back.  I thought it was a pretty good idea.  For some reason it never occured to me to give this a try.  This allows you to stimulate the chest in a compound movement that also allows for a natural range of motion with the utiliziation of cables.


Most people think cables are BS when it comes to growth, what do u think?


----------



## GFR (Nov 8, 2005)

Flex said:
			
		

> another informative post.
> 
> keep it up.


Could you post this again after 4 or 5 posts by other members.....
It really drives the point home


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 8, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> Could you post this again after 4 or 5 posts by other members.....
> It really drives the point home


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 8, 2005)

god hand said:
			
		

> Most people think cables are BS when it comes to growth, what do u think?



I disagree.  If anything, cables are superior to other types of machines because they allow for a natural movement as opposed to a fixed movement.  Assuming that your routine is not put together with total incompetence, and you are allowing for sufficient recovery time, then diet is really going to be the limiting factor in the bodybuilding world.


----------



## P-funk (Nov 8, 2005)

god hand said:
			
		

> Most people think cables are BS when it comes to growth, what do u think?




i think they are great for growth for the same reason hammer strength machines are good.  the force velocity curve is on a continuous up.  When you lift with a BB say on a bench press you lower the weight, at the bottom you move it and then you get a sticking point at little less then half way up as you place your body in the toughest biomechanical position at that point.  Once you clear that sticking point the lock out is easy as shit.  With the cables you are never going to have that happen since as you move through the ROM the resistance keeps on getting greater.


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 8, 2005)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> I disagree.  If anything, cables are superior to other types of machines because they allow for a natural movement as opposed to a fixed movement.  Assuming that your routine is not put together with total incompetence, and you are allowing for sufficient recovery time, then diet is really going to be the limiting factor in the bodybuilding world.



If your not careful this could turn into an argument for a bowflex...


----------



## god hand (Nov 8, 2005)

P-funk said:
			
		

> i think they are great for growth for the same reason hammer strength machines are good.  the force velocity curve is on a continuous up.  When you lift with a BB say on a bench press you lower the weight, at the bottom you move it and then you get a sticking point at little less then half way up as you place your body in the toughest biomechanical position at that point.  Once you clear that sticking point the lock out is easy as shit.  With the cables you are never going to have that happen since as you move through the ROM the resistance keeps on getting greater.


......................................


----------



## P-funk (Nov 8, 2005)

what?


----------



## god hand (Nov 8, 2005)

P-funk said:
			
		

> what?


Nothing I'm...................just thinking.


----------



## P-funk (Nov 8, 2005)

god hand said:
			
		

> Nothing I'm...................just thinking.




ah....Don't think...do.  Just go and do some cabel presses.  You will feel what I am talking about.


----------



## Dale Mabry (Nov 8, 2005)

Don't know if this has been mentioned, but to get back to the original question, "What muscle to train besides chest to get a big bench", the answer is you train a movement, not a muscle.  Thus, for a big bench you bench.


----------



## Flex (Nov 8, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> Could you post this again after 4 or 5 posts by other members.....
> It really drives the point home




try bodybuilding sometime. ya know, weights, a gym etc....you may like it.

until then, stick to open chat and leave the training thread to people who train.


----------



## P-funk (Nov 8, 2005)

Dale Mabry said:
			
		

> Don't know if this has been mentioned, but to get back to the original question, "What muscle to train besides chest to get a big bench", the answer is you train a movement, not a muscle.  Thus, for a big bench you bench.




bingo.  i don't understand what the deabte is over either.  it is just because BBing splits have pushed away from the whole "train your movements" way of thinking to "this is a muscle.  this is what i do to train it."  I don't look as bench as chest. i just look at is as transverse plane push or just upper body push.


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 8, 2005)

Flex said:
			
		

> try bodybuilding sometime. ya know, weights, a gym etc....you may like it.
> 
> until then, stick to open chat and leave the training thread to people to people who train.


----------



## Dale Mabry (Nov 8, 2005)

P-funk said:
			
		

> bingo.  i don't understand what the deabte is over either.  it is just because BBing splits have pushed away from the whole "train your movements" way of thinking to "this is a muscle.  this is what i do to train it."  I don't look as bench as chest. i just look at is as transverse plane push or just upper body push.




Funny how most people don't realize that by just getting the form down that you can add 50lbs to your bench relatively quickly.  I don't get all this BBer training stuff when your goal is strength.  I think when it comes down to it, most peeps with 3 or more years of training behind them have pretty much realized most, if not all, of the strength they are going to see from hypertrophy, the rest is al neuromuscular efficiency.


----------



## AKIRA (Nov 8, 2005)

Flex said:
			
		

> try bodybuilding sometime. ya know, weights, a gym etc....you may like it.
> 
> until then, stick to open chat and leave the training thread to people who train.




I dont like the cocksucker either.
I remember that 19inchpimp guy fucked with him.  Hah, that shit was great.


----------



## GFR (Nov 8, 2005)

Flex said:
			
		

> try bodybuilding sometime. ya know, weights, a gym etc....you may like it.
> 
> until then, stick to open chat and leave the training thread to people who train.


When you can out lift me I might take that advice


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 8, 2005)

Dale Mabry said:
			
		

> Don't know if this has been mentioned, but to get back to the original question, "What muscle to train besides chest to get a big bench", the answer is you train a movement, not a muscle.  Thus, for a big bench you bench.



True enough, although it certainly helps to train body parts which are weak links in the lift.  There is some carryover effect to the bench press even when performing a movement like Tate presses.  However, the biggest gains do seem to come from movements like board presses, floor presses, bottoms-up presses, pause presses, speed/power training, etc.


----------



## Flex (Nov 9, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> When you can out lift me I might take that advice




You have to start lifting first in order to be outlifted.


----------



## Dale Mabry (Nov 9, 2005)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> True enough, although it certainly helps to train body parts which are weak links in the lift.  There is some carryover effect to the bench press even when performing a movement like Tate presses.  However, the biggest gains do seem to come from movements like board presses, floor presses, bottoms-up presses, pause presses, speed/power training, etc.



No doubt.  My approach would be to get the form down with relatively light intensity and high volume, gradually shift to higher intensity and lower volume, then assess weak points based on where your sticking point is or what is most sore, then correct it with assistance stuff later down the road.


----------



## GFR (Nov 9, 2005)

Flex said:
			
		

> You have to start lifting first in order to be outlifted.



Look here skinny, I need 30 minutes 3 days a week in the gym......if it takes you 2 hours 5 days a week to be half the man I am then just be proud that you came that close


----------



## min0 lee (Nov 9, 2005)




----------



## BulkMeUp (Nov 9, 2005)




----------



## GFR (Nov 9, 2005)

min0 lee said:
			
		

>


  
I'm off my meds


----------



## MyK (Nov 9, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> Look here skinny, I need 30 minutes 3 days a week in the gym......if it takes you 2 hours 5 days a week to be half the man I am then just be proud that you came that close




30 mins 3 days, and a needle in your ass!!


----------



## GFR (Nov 9, 2005)

MyK said:
			
		

> 30 mins 3 days, and a needle in your ass!!


Absolutly  
one 8 week cycle in the last 3 1/2 years


----------



## Flex (Nov 9, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> Look here skinny, I need 30 minutes 3 days a week in the gym......if it takes you 2 hours 5 days a week to be half the man I am then just be proud that you came that close




I dont know whats more pathetic........you, or your stupid jokes only you think are funny.
Go ahead and keep on poking fun of people without your own pics posted. Don't worry, you're safe and sound behind mommy's computer.

In your 19,000 some odd posts, have you managed to contribute ANYthing substantial to bodybuilding.......or even life in general for that matter? 
Oh, that's right. You're just a 150lb shit-talking wannabe thats probably never lifted a weight in his (or her) life.


----------



## gr81 (Nov 9, 2005)

you see brotha, you get succed in by these retards. Foreman, please, save it you pussy b/c the only person you are foolin is yourself, and possibly some impressionable younglings. The fact that you think you know more than the gr81, and you think you are bigger and stronger than Flex is proof of your dillusion. The fact of the matter is this, you have to get off the internet and take a break from posting minutia to actually lift weights. Why are you even here beside to hide from your fears. we all know the reason your so confrontational and arrogant is really b/c you are an insecure little bitch that has to constantly try and prove things to yourself in order to be accepted. go get yourself some therapy and leave the iron to the grown men U little one..


----------



## GFR (Nov 9, 2005)

Flex said:
			
		

> I dont know whats more pathetic........you, or your stupid jokes only you think are funny.
> Go ahead and keep on poking fun of people without your own pics posted. Don't worry, you're safe and sound behind mommy's computer.
> 
> In your 19,000 some odd posts, have you managed to contribute ANYthing substantial to bodybuilding.......or even life in general for that matter?
> Oh, that's right. You're just a 150lb shit-talking wannabe thats probably never lifted a weight in his (or her) life.


Listen skinny, I could care less what an uneducated geek like you thinks.
Now get back to the gym and try to put some muscle on that pathetically skinny body


----------



## GFR (Nov 9, 2005)

gr81 said:
			
		

> you see brotha, you get succed in by these retards. Foreman, please, save it you pussy b/c the only person you are foolin is yourself, and possibly some impressionable younglings. The fact that you think you know more than the gr81, and you think you are bigger and stronger than Flex is proof of your dillusion. The fact of the matter is this, you have to get off the internet and take a break from posting minutia to actually lift weights. Why are you even here beside to hide from your fears. we all know the reason your so confrontational and arrogant is really b/c you are an insecure little bitch that has to constantly try and prove things to yourself in order to be accepted. go get yourself some therapy and leave the iron to the grown men U little one..


Go do some cable flys to build up your chest


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 9, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> Listen skinny, I could care less what an uneducated geek like you thinks.
> Now get back to the gym and try to put some muscle on that pathetically skinny body


----------



## Flex (Nov 9, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> Listen skinny, I could care less what an uneducated geek like you thinks.
> Now get back to the gym and try to put some muscle on that pathetically skinny body




Post some pics, tough guy, i mean girl. then and only then do you have the right to call people skinny.


----------



## Flex (Nov 9, 2005)

There ya go, Gr81...........$50, please.

R.I.P. Foreman





You were right, Aaron....
when i got to his house he was dressed in nothing but a red speedo and beating off to gay porn.


----------



## god hand (Nov 9, 2005)

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!! I WILL NOT LET ANOTHER ONE OF MY THREADS GO TO HELL! FLEX I KNOW YOU ARE BETTER THAN THIS! YOU DO NOT HAVE TO PROVE ANYTHING! I WOULD USUALLY LIKE FOR ONE OF MY THREADS TO GO OWN LIKE THIS BUT NOT THIS TIME!


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 9, 2005)

Flex said:
			
		

> There ya go, Gr81...........$50, please.
> 
> R.I.P. Foreman
> 
> ...




0wn3d.


----------



## Dale Mabry (Nov 9, 2005)

Can we stop being fags or no?


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 9, 2005)

Dale Mabry said:
			
		

> Can we stop being fags or no?


----------



## GFR (Nov 9, 2005)

Flex said:
			
		

> There ya go, Gr81...........$50, please.
> 
> R.I.P. Foreman
> 
> ...


Tard


----------



## GFR (Nov 9, 2005)

Flex said:
			
		

> Post some pics, tough guy, i mean girl. then and only then do you have the right to call people skinny.


Have some I will post Nov20th.......still is crappy shape but but I still look better than you and your 15 inch arms skinny.


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 9, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> Have some I will post Nov20th.......still is crappy shape but but I still look better than you and your 15 inch arms skinny.




omg i can't wait...    </gay>


----------



## GFR (Nov 9, 2005)

BigDyl said:
			
		

> omg i can't wait...    </gay>


----------



## Dale Mabry (Nov 9, 2005)

I promised him I wouldn't do it, but here is foremanrules' latest progress shot...


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 9, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

>



I'll be able to run your face through a database that gives me your address... then the fun begins...   

Don't think about defending yourself... remeber i know jiu jitsu....


----------



## GFR (Nov 9, 2005)

Dale Mabry said:
			
		

> I promised him I wouldn't do it, but here is foremanrules' latest progress shot...







*This is me  visiting my family back in Michigan.*


----------



## Dale Mabry (Nov 9, 2005)

Damn, you must get pussy like gangbusters.


----------



## GFR (Nov 9, 2005)

*Here I am doing gr81's special pectoral hypertrophy workout.*


----------



## Flex (Nov 10, 2005)

god hand said:
			
		

> NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!! I WILL NOT LET ANOTHER ONE OF MY THREADS GO TO HELL! FLEX I KNOW YOU ARE BETTER THAN THIS! YOU DO NOT HAVE TO PROVE ANYTHING! I WOULD USUALLY LIKE FOR ONE OF MY THREADS TO GO OWN LIKE THIS BUT NOT THIS TIME!



Sorry GH,
Didn't mean to make a mess.

I just can't help treating someone like a dickhead when they act like one. 
It's too bad some people think others want to listen to what they have to say, when in realit they just like to hear themselves speak.


----------



## P-funk (Nov 10, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> *Here I am doing gr81's special pectoral hypertrophy workout.*




kettle bells are brutal!


----------



## AKIRA (Nov 10, 2005)

Flex said:
			
		

> I just can't help treating someone like a dickhead when they act like one.
> It's too bad some people think others want to listen to what they have to say, when in realit they just like to hear themselves speak.



Fine point and right on the money.


----------



## GFR (Nov 10, 2005)

P-funk said:
			
		

> kettle bells are brutal!


Thats actually a pick from a Westside site.....the guy in the pic is an animal....if I can find the site I'll post it,,


----------



## GFR (Nov 10, 2005)

Flex said:
			
		

> I just can't help treating someone like a dickhead when they act like one.
> It's too bad some people think others want to listen to what they have to say, when in realit they just like to hear themselves speak.


I agree 100%  

Whats sad is that you actually think you are not part of the problem.
Looks like your big ego....or insecurity issues.....have once again clouded your judgment and perceptions.


----------



## Flex (Nov 10, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> I agree 100%
> 
> Whats sad is that you actually think you are not part of the problem.
> Looks like your big ego....or insecurity issues.....have once again clouded your judgment and perceptions.



Sure, i put a little clutter in his thread, and i apologized. 
But it's funny how you think you can judge me over the inernet. You know nothing about me, except by what i post, which has absolutely nothing to do with me having an ego or insecurity issies. 

What we DO know about you (from your posts) is that alls you do is spit incoherent, convoluted bullshit in almost every post. Just b/c you have 20,000 posts doesn't mean you know shit about bodybuilding. 

I'M part of the problem? HA! You ARE the problem. 

I'm done with this clown.


----------



## Flex (Nov 10, 2005)

p.s. Foreman sucks. 






The only good thing he ever did was make a grill.


----------



## AKIRA (Nov 10, 2005)

Flex said:
			
		

> What we DO know about you (from your posts) is that alls you do is spit incoherent, convoluted bullshit in almost every post. Just b/c you have 20,000 posts doesn't mean you know shit about bodybuilding.
> 
> I'M part of the problem? HA! You ARE the problem.
> 
> I'm done with this clown.



Ya know, I just noticed how many posts he has in such little time.  Shit, I work full time, work out 4-5 days a week, study with NASM, drink, shit, and fuck.  How the hell does he have time to post that much?  (or anyone for that matter)


----------



## GFR (Nov 10, 2005)

Flex said:
			
		

> Sure, i put a little clutter in his thread, and i apologized.
> *But it's funny how you think you can judge me over the inernet*. You know nothing about me, except by what i post, which has absolutely nothing to do with me having an ego or insecurity issies.
> 
> What we DO know about you (from your posts) is that alls you do is spit incoherent, convoluted bullshit in almost every post. Just b/c you have 20,000 posts doesn't mean you know shit about bodybuilding.
> ...


19,500+ posts.......hell yes 90% are bull shit!!! so what.

If all you want to do is come and be serious all the time in every room then thats your choice   Personally I think their is more to life than that..
There many Power lifting and BB sites that are all business...if thats what you want then go find them and enjoy the non emotion of the site..

I am the problem???....I might be to you and some other people here....and thats fine.....this is not High school and I could care less if everybody likes everything I say.....

You jump on this thread and bash me...and I'm the clown     thats rich....
I don't agree with your buddy...big fuck-ng deal get over it....I bet your the kind of guy who picks a fight with one guy then you and 2 of your buddy's kick his ass....................pathetic


----------



## GFR (Nov 10, 2005)

Flex said:
			
		

> p.s. *Foreman sucks. *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ali never gave him a rematch......he avoided a rematch with Big George for 3 years.

Foreman destroyed  Ken Norton in 2 rounds....Ken Norton beat up Ali 2 out of 3 fights. 

Ali lost to Joe Frazier once and won twice......Foreman KO'ed him in 2 and in 4 in the rematch...

Foreman is the oldest man to win the heavyweight championship of the world,  Foreman broke two records: He became, at the age of *45*, the oldest fighter ever to win the world Heavyweight crown, and, *20* years after losing his world title for the first time, he broke the record for the fighter with the most time in between one world championship run and the next.

He was the Olympic heavyweight champ (1968).

Foreman is considered top 5 of all time in the heavyweight division by almost every boxing fan and federation, trainer, promoter and Boxing journal......to bash a top 5 of all time just shows your lack of knowledge of boxing and lack of respect for the greatest athletes in the world.....I'm not surprised at all.


----------



## AKIRA (Nov 10, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> Ali never gave him a rematch......he avoided a rematch with Big George for 3 years.
> 
> Foreman destroyed  Ken Norton in 2 rounds....Ken Norton beat up Ali 2 out of 3 fights.
> 
> ...




Hmm.  Impressive.  Other than annoying members, what have you accomplished?


----------



## gr81 (Nov 10, 2005)

> 19,500+ posts.......hell yes 90% are bull shit!!! so what.



.....so what?! so go find something else to do with your time for christs sake, thats what. If 90 percent of your posts are worthless, and that is being quite generous, then you are simply human spam contributing nothing and therefore detracting, which contradicts your arrogant omnipitent attitude. So I will leave you alone to deal with all that dissonance you must be feeling.

heres the real question though, so lets break it down. I am gonna ask you a yes or no question and thats all I am gonna say on the matter, and thats all you need to respond with is a yes or no. Is it your contention that the function of the pectoral muscles is in fact to vertically press and NOT to spread the rib cage?


----------



## GFR (Nov 10, 2005)

gr81 said:
			
		

> .....so what?! so go find something else to do with your time for christs sake, thats what. If 90 percent of your posts are worthless, and that is being quite generous, then you are simply human spam contributing nothing and therefore detracting, which contradicts your arrogant omnipitent attitude. So I will leave you alone to deal with all that dissonance you must be feeling.
> 
> heres the real question though, so lets break it down. I am gonna ask you a yes or no question and thats all I am gonna say on the matter, and thats all you need to respond with is a yes or no. Is it your contention that the function of the pectoral muscles is in fact to vertically press and NOT to spread the rib cage?



Ok you didnt look it up as I suggested so i will write it word for word from a text book,,


*Action of the Pectoralis major*
Prime mover of arm flexion; rotates arm medially; adducts arm against resistance; with scapula ( and arm) fixed, pulls rib cage upward, thus can help in climbing, throwing, *pushing*, and in forced inspiration.

So yes it has more than one basic function.....but its clear it is used in pushing....a movement like the bench, incline, decline and flys...

This is just a simple Physiology explanation of its function but it makes it very clear benching movements are one of the functions of the Pectoralis..

Another and maybe better example is the people who do only or mostly bench movements to train chest....who have huge pecs.....and the opposite of that....people who do peck deck, flys and cable flys who have mediocre or poor chest development.....

You have to use common sense as well as science to come to an educated decision  

*Ok so now answer the question I asked:*

If all I do is bench and incline Barbell press then why are my Pectoralis major muscles my best muscle group.....miles ahead of my triceps and  delts???
I wasn't born that way.....the pecs just grew like crazy and are strong as hell.


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 10, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> Ok you didnt look it up as I suggested so i will write it word for word from a text book,,
> 
> 
> *Action of the Pectoralis major*
> ...



Yes, the pectoralis major is used in the bench press.  I don't think anyone ever argued that it wasn't.  However, I don't think it is one of the limiting factors in a good bench press most of the time.

No one is suggesting that people stop bench pressing for chest development.  However, there are valuable exercises that can be done in addition to bench presses, and variations of the bench press, that are more effective at recruiting the pectoralis major.




> You have to use common sense as well as science to come to an educated decision
> 
> *Ok so now answer the question I asked:*
> 
> ...



You can't use random people, including yourself, to assert one theory as being right or wrong.  There is too much variation in genetics, specific routine, diet, sleeping habits, relative strength of synergistic musculature, etc.


----------



## GFR (Nov 10, 2005)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> Yes, the pectoralis major is used in the bench press.  I don't think anyone ever argued that it wasn't.* It was argued by gr81 that bench was not very effective for hypertrophy.....read back and see * However, I don't think it is one of the limiting factors in a good bench press most of the time.
> 
> No one is suggesting that people stop bench pressing for chest development.  However, there are valuable exercises that can be done in addition to bench presses, and variations of the bench press, that are more effective at recruiting the pectoralis major. *Now here is something that was never contested on this thread....no point to bring it up at all...yes its best to do a variety of exercises....just basic common sense*
> 
> ...


----------



## gr81 (Nov 10, 2005)

> It was argued by gr81 that bench was not very effective for hypertrophy.....read back and see



wow you are unbelievably stupid. Go ahead and go back and read b/c it was made VERY clear that was not my point. Of course the bench recruits fibers, of course, I said that numerous times. You have been arguing this much and you don't even understand the point I was making, jesus christ just save us all teh headache and go stick a pistol in your mouth will you please b/c you have wasted all our time b/c you can't interpret the english language. maybe you need a tutor to help you understand when people speak... ha ha. this is just teh icing on the cake...  I'm out bitches, have a nice day


----------



## GFR (Nov 10, 2005)

gr81 said:
			
		

> *wow you are unbelievably stupid. Go ahead and go back and read b/c it was made VERY clear that was not my poin*t. Of course the bench recruits fibers, of course, I said that numerous times. You have been arguing this much and you don't even understand the point I was making, jesus christ just save us all teh headache and go stick a pistol in your mouth will you please b/c you have wasted all our time b/c you can't interpret the english language. maybe you need a tutor to help you understand when people speak... ha ha. this is just teh icing on the cake...  I'm out bitches, have a nice day


More negativity and personal bashing what a surprise  

Ok I will do that   




			
				gr81 said:
			
		

> *Look her folks, the pec muscles have almost zero bearing on how much you can bench, their function is to spread the rib cage, NOT to press.* A big bench is ALL about triceps and upper back, no question about it. And due respect but just b/c one person says that they bench big, which I am sure they did, and they didn't focus on their back training, that means absolutely nothing, its the exception, not the rule. Its simple biomechanics





			
				gr81 said:
			
		

> You must be the one joking if you think that the pec muscle helps you bench big. thats a ridiculous thought.
> Almost everyone has an example of someone they know who is big and doesn't eat right or lift often or one of the million things that idiots in the gym do (not you LAM), but the fact of the matter is that is just them and their genetics, and they can get away with it. Some can, some can't. Doesn't mean that rules of physics, diet, biomechanics don't apply. Guess what, if those guys did tihngs correctly, then they would be even MORE impressive. Just b/c one person benches big and doesn't train back or tris, does that mean that YOU should not train those vital muscles and still bench big. Most likely not. Go ahead and study physics, biomechanics, and kiniesiology and you will learn that if you strictly want to get a certain weight from point A to point B there are certain things you can do do increase your performance. Building the fundamental foundation of each lift will do that. The bench is a press, which is mostly tricep, the upper back is an antagonist muscle in the lift and is extremely important. I understand the difference between bodybuilding and PL, but if you want to bench as much as yor potential allows, then you need to learn all this. if you want to simply build pec muscle, then the weight doesn't matter nearly as much, it is simply a tool, a means to another goal.* In wihch case the flat Barbell bench is NOT the most productive means to that goal of hypertrophy.*.





			
				gr81 said:
			
		

> try to wrap your head around this concept. Just b/c benching recruited fibers in yrou chest and lead to hypertrophy, *that increase in pec size is not going to make your bench stronger.* That ridiculous statement goes against everything Hypertrophy represents....look it up dummy... Did I say at any point that benching doesn't recruit chest fibers, NO... just save it foreman, b/c we all know how valuable your half witted observational science is to everyone. if you even understand the distinction in my point, go ahead and describe to me exactly how your pecs are the most important muscle to increasing your bench press, this should be entertaining





			
				ForemanRules said:
			
		

> Ok you didnt look it up as I suggested so i will write it word for word from a text book,,
> 
> 
> *Action of the Pectoralis major*
> ...



*
My God your an idiot* 

I see that you argue against basic Anatomy and Philology....pathetic


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 10, 2005)

*Flat Barbell Bench Recruits Zero Fibers.  

Case Closed.*


----------



## min0 lee (Nov 10, 2005)




----------



## GFR (Nov 10, 2005)

min0 lee said:
			
		

>


                                     

I had a dream about you last night


----------



## min0 lee (Nov 10, 2005)




----------



## min0 lee (Nov 10, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> I had a dream about you last night


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 10, 2005)

min0 lee said:
			
		

>




me too.


----------



## min0 lee (Nov 10, 2005)

AKIRA said:
			
		

> Hmm.  Impressive.  Other than annoying members, what have you accomplished?


Akira you should sit this one out and let these guys work this out.
Foreman is not paying any attention to you at this moment, as you can see his hands are full.


you'll have plenty of opportunities to flame him.


----------



## min0 lee (Nov 10, 2005)

BigDyl said:
			
		

> me too.


----------



## GFR (Nov 10, 2005)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> Akira you should sit this one out and let these guys work this out.
> Foreman is not paying any attention to you at this moment, *as you can see his hands are full.
> *
> 
> you'll have plenty of opportunities to flame him.


Full of your ass


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 10, 2005)

_*CASE CLOSED!!!!!!11*_


----------



## min0 lee (Nov 10, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> Full of your ass


----------



## GFR (Nov 10, 2005)

min0 lee said:
			
		

>


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 10, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> * It was argued by gr81 that bench was not very effective for hypertrophy.....read back and see *



I believe he said it wasn't the most productive means.  That doesn't mean you can't or won't see gains.  That just means there are better exercises out there for direction stimulation of the chest.




> *Now here is something that was never contested on this thread....no point to bring it up at all...yes its best to do a variety of exercises....just basic common sense*



Indeed.  My point is that there are movements which are better for hypertrophying the chest.  A movement that requires both shoulder flexion and more emphasis on horizontal adduction of the arm in the same motion would be more effective.




> *I really don't see your point here???....I answered a question that was asked of me then asked for my question to be answered.....I don't expect you to speak for gr81....but if you feel the need to address my questions to him then feel free....but if you do then please give a real answer..*



My point is that your story about how you have a big chest and only do pressing movements doesn't mean anything.  Saying person X peforms Y activity and has a big chest, therefore Y activity is great for producing a big chest is totally invalid without considering the other factors involved.


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 10, 2005)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> My point is that your story about how you have a big chest and only do pressing movements doesn't mean anything.  Saying person X peforms Y activity and has a big chest, therefore Y activity is great for producing a big chest is totally invalid without considering the other factors involved.


----------



## GFR (Nov 10, 2005)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> I believe he said it wasn't the most productive means.  That doesn't mean you can't or won't see gains.  That just means there are better exercises out there for direction stimulation of the chest.
> *Yes a stupid statement!!
> *
> 
> ...


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 10, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

>


----------



## GFR (Nov 10, 2005)

BigDyl said:
			
		

>


Please   Not a chance


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 10, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> Please   Not a chance


----------



## GFR (Nov 10, 2005)

BigDyl said:
			
		

>


That little boy is hot


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 10, 2005)

I already went over a couple of exercises that would do the trick.  Any movements that involve an angle of pull away and down.  This requires both shoulder flexion and horizontal adduction to a large degree, as opposed to primarily shoulder flexion.

Also, how can you just say 85% of people out there with big chests only do pressing movements?  You have a survey to back that up, or are you just pulling numbers out of thin air?  Also, does that mean their chests couldn't be bigger with a more productive movement?


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 10, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> That little boy is hot




FOREMANS FAMILY PIC:


----------



## GFR (Nov 10, 2005)

BigDyl said:
			
		

> FOREMANS FAMILY PIC:


My mommy loves huge black cock


----------



## GFR (Nov 10, 2005)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> *#1..I already went over a couple of exercises that would do the trick.*  Any movements that involve an angle of pull away and down.  This requires both shoulder flexion and horizontal adduction to a large degree, as opposed to primarily shoulder flexion.
> 
> *Also, how can you just say 85% of people out there with big chests only do pressing movements? * *You have a survey to back that up,* or are you just pulling numbers out of thin air?  Also, does that mean their chests couldn't be bigger with a more productive movement?


1. Then please reiterate the exercises that are better than BB bench, incline and decline for chest hypertrophy ans strength..

2. Do you require surveys and statistics that prove weight lifting is better for hypertrophy than swimming or running ???


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 10, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> 1. Then please reiterate the exercises that are better than BB bench, incline and decline for cheat hypertrophy ans strength..



Certain machines that allow for this angle of pull (Free motion chest press) or low pulley cable presses would be examples.




> 2. Do you require surveys and statistics that prove weight lifting is better for hypertrophy than swimming or running ???



Lifting weights isn't necessarily better for inducing hypertrophy.  It just doesn't have a limited level of resistance like swimming or running.  That's the problem with other forms of resistance training; they don't allow for you to continually raise resistance to fit in the intensity zone that is optimal for hypertrophy.


----------



## GFR (Nov 10, 2005)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> Certain machines that allow for this angle of pull (Free motion chest press) or low pulley cable presses would be examples.
> 
> *Sounds like Arthur Jones logic.....no machine can replace free weights....you should be ashamed of this post!*
> 
> ...


----------



## god hand (Nov 10, 2005)

Enough of this bullshit! Just state what you think is the best chest exercise and tell why. One exercise! That's it! For example, I think push ups are the because that's the only thing that then made my chest grow.


----------



## god hand (Nov 10, 2005)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> Lifting weights isn't necessarily better for inducing hypertrophy.  It just doesn't have a limited level of resistance like swimming or running.  That's the problem with other forms of resistance training; they don't allow for you to continually raise resistance to fit in the intensity zone that is optimal for hypertrophy.


I wouldnt say his worst post ever he's just trying to make a point.


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 10, 2005)

god hand said:
			
		

> I wouldnt say his worst post ever he's just trying to make a point.


----------



## Dale Mabry (Nov 10, 2005)

god hand said:
			
		

> Enough of this bullshit! Just state what you think is the best chest exercise and tell why. One exercise! That's it! For example, I think push ups are the because that's the only thing that then made my chest grow.



best for what????hypertrophy????isolation???strength???


----------



## god hand (Nov 10, 2005)

Dale Mabry said:
			
		

> best for what????hypertrophy????isolation???strength???


Hypertrophy..........that's all I care about!


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 10, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> Sounds like Arthur Jones logic.....no machine can replace free weights....you should be ashamed of this post!



I didn't say to replace free weights.  It is just my opinion that it would be a good idea to try one of the aforementioned exercises for maximal chest development.  If all you have ever done is variations of bench pressing movements and you have what you consider a fully developed chest, then you have no need to be performing movements like this.  Otherwise, it would probably be worth a try.




> this has to be your worst and most illogical post ever



My point is that resistance is resistance.  Just because it isn't iron doesn't make it any less effective.  You hit a wall with most other forms of resistance because it becomes impractical to continue adding resistance.  Take swimming for example.  Once it becomes easy to perform a certain stroke you could wear flippers.  However, you can't make a flipper that offers 200 pounds of resistance without it becoming totally impractical to wear.


----------



## GFR (Nov 10, 2005)




----------



## P-funk (Nov 11, 2005)

another great "chest" thread!


----------



## BigDyl (Nov 11, 2005)

P-funk said:
			
		

> another great "chest" thread!



I like your chest.


----------



## Dale Mabry (Nov 11, 2005)

P-funk said:
			
		

> another great "chest" thread!



Shut up queer.


----------



## P-funk (Nov 11, 2005)

BigDyl said:
			
		

> I like your chest.




gay


----------



## P-funk (Nov 11, 2005)

Dale Mabry said:
			
		

> Shut up queer.




also gay


----------



## GFR (Nov 11, 2005)

*This thread is 100% Gay!!*


----------



## P-funk (Nov 11, 2005)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> *This thread is 100% Gay!!*


----------



## luke69duke69 (Nov 11, 2005)

I think the guys posting in "Do black guys have better genes...?" just got bored with picking on each other in that post and decided to do it in this one.

I understand the whole concept of freeweights being better than machines.  But if you limit yourself to simply free-weights because you don't think you get as much benefit out of machines than you're nuts.  Yes, free weights are better overall, but if someone is trying to add some variety and mix things up for their body once in a while, I don't see why not.  Personally, at the gym I go to, for lats, there's this old lat pullover machine that hits my lats in a way no pull up has.  Sometimes when you have say, an injury and you want to still work a muscle without putting stress on another injured muscle, machines are great at isolating a certain muscle group.  Overall are they better? No, but they certainly have their uses.

Oh, and as far as the survey goes, Triceps, but I think the front deltoid houses a lot of the load, too, so I think doing overhead db presses can help someone trying to get over a plateau with their bench.


----------



## god hand (Nov 11, 2005)

P-funk said:
			
		

> another great "chest" thread!


----------



## GFR (Nov 11, 2005)

http://www.ironmagazineforums.com/showthread.php?t=50223


----------

