Stronger 24/7 - Stronger Everyday
Stronger 24/7 Forum
ChestSplit Advice

Decline chest/Incline7430

trapsht private msg quote post Address this user
Yes, this is my 1st post and realize I totally screwed up the "quotation"....Science and the human body I'm good...computers---very uneducated.
Post 26 IP   flag post
SRorhrbac0808 private msg quote post Address this user
hmnnnnnnn. I see where your coming from trapsht...... I am guessing that this discussion (with chest) has come up many, many, times and the ones who have been on this sight for a long time get a little annoyed when someone brings it up again. To us its like beating a dead horse for the 1,000,000th time............ And you have to realize where EK is coming from haha. He has put MANY studies up and spent a lot of time and effort teaching ppl on the forum the principals of the "chest" argument.
Post 27 IP   flag post
The Dark
Knight
eknight private msg quote post Address this user
@trapsht honestly I don't care if I come across as quarrelsome. I'd rather put correct information out there and let people get the right knowledge than play nicey nice. Noteworthy, too, is that while you quoted my post, it was @CodyTheClen that started this with

Quote:
Originally Posted by CodyTheClen
@Nyko @eknight

So let me get my anatomy right boys. From the university I study, A&P 1 and 2 states that there is the sternal and clavicular pectoralis (one being major and minor). Self explanitory. You take anatomy and physiology too from what I saw right EK? So in reality, when I said upper chest I meant, 'An isolated clavicular pectoralis major' workout to give my chest a more full look.

I'm sorry, but I thought this was winter break? Why are there such sticklers on here?


If someone is going to pop off in such an intellectualy sanctimonious manner, they can expect to be corrected when they are wrong. -3X
Post 28 IP   flag post
trapsht private msg quote post Address this user
Like I said...totally screwed up the quotation aspect of my reply. I had no intention of quoting, nor insulting anyone. I just don't understand such frivolous arguments...just my .02. Don't worry about origins/insertions. Just lift hard...I guarantee you half of the knuckleheads in the NFL don't have a clue about it..they just lift hard & eat right.
Post 29 IP   flag post
AKK private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by trapsht
Yes, this is my 1st post and realize I totally screwed up the "quotation"....Science and the human body I'm good...computers---very uneducated.


and your post wasnt coded in a egotistical attitude?

"I'm the only person on this site with a doctorate degree. I'll argue anatomy & physiology with anyone all day long. I've spent more time in a cadaver lab than you could possibly fathom(not bragging btw)"


just because you put not bragging at the end does not mean its not bragging..


lets see the doctorates degree because out of anyone you should be the most picky about the correct information being spread around. But I guess you must be the only person who has a doctorates degree who does not care if the incorrect information is posted.

and how do you know you are the only one with a doctorate degree?
Post 30 IP   flag post


The Dark
Knight
eknight private msg quote post Address this user
^^ and use a ton of drugs, lol. They also lift for a specific purpose. Sport-specific training is- as I'm sure you know- a totally different ball game than lifting for hypertrophy. As @SRorhrbac0808 pointed out, this particular broscience topic has been debated ad nauseum and for some reason it won't die. Newcomers may see "Inclines can work my upper chest" and do them all day and night, never realizing why they aren't getting the results they imagined. I was simply pointing out the inaccuracy of this idea.

While you may find it frivolous to argue that parts of a muscle can be isolated or trained at the expense of another, I do not. In fact, diminishing my POV and labeling it as "frivolous" is every bit as know-it-all attitude as anything I've said- it's just more subtle. Food for thought. -3X
Post 31 IP   flag post
AKK private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by eknight
^^ and use a ton of drugs, lol. They also lift for a specific purpose. Sport-specific training is- as I'm sure you know- a totally different ball game than lifting for hypertrophy. As @SRorhrbac0808 pointed out, this particular broscience topic has been debated ad nauseum and for some reason it won't die. Newcomers may see "Inclines can work my upper chest" and do them all day and night, never realizing why they aren't getting the results they imagined. I was simply pointing out the inaccuracy of this idea.

While you may find it frivolous to argue that parts of a muscle can be isolated or trained at the expense of another, I do not. In fact, diminishing my POV and labeling it as "frivolous" is every bit as know-it-all attitude as anything I've said- it's just more subtle. Food for thought. -3X


Bro hes got a doctorates degree, theres no point for him to pass around correct information.
Post 32 IP   flag post
trapsht private msg quote post Address this user
EK..I applaud you on your quest to diminish Broscience & food for thought was well taken.

AKK...the content of my posts had nothing to do with anyone's ego(it surely wasn't my intent to come off as egotistical). I'm not trying to degrade anyone'e intelligence either. If you read it again, I hope you'll find that my purpose was just to be a little kinder to our fellow lifters..that's all.

I hope I can help contribute to posts with a medical/pharmaceutical component to them. I'm done..off to the gym.
Post 33 IP   flag post
NorIda private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by trapsht

I hope I can help contribute to posts with a medical/pharmaceutical component to them.


Yes please. Studys ftw.
Post 34 IP   flag post
chriselkins private msg quote post Address this user
Why am I doing incline then? I need to get rid of these pointy collar bones. I know adding more mass overall will work but I was always told incline will fill in the upper chest. Why have I been lied to?
Post 35 IP   flag post
NorIda private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by chriselkins
I was always told incline will fill in the upper chest. Why have I been lied to?


Bro's will be Bro's!
Post 36 IP   flag post
eventheodds1 private msg quote post Address this user
@chriselkins Its okay dude I had my fair share of bro experiences as well with upper and lower abs etc.

After joining this forum, I learned a shit ton. I mean a shit ton about how to train without the bro stuff.

However, just because now you realize there is no upper pecs, you should not eliminate the incline chest press. Just think of it as you are working your whole pecs, not just trying to "isolate" upper pecs. In essence, it is still a great exercise for your pecs.

Greatest quote I learned from EK, "A muscle either contracts as a whole or does not"
Post 37 IP   flag post
SRorhrbac0808 private msg quote post Address this user
^true dat!
Post 38 IP   flag post
eventheodds1 private msg quote post Address this user
^Rorhbacher has my back!

C what I did thur!! Haha!

Best forum period.
Post 39 IP   flag post
CodyTheClen private msg quote post Address this user
Im here for experience with lifting, not book knowledge. I pay for that.. There is nothing 'subtle' about your postings. I've seen several, so I will be inclined to ignore it. Keep your "small mans complex" out of the forums guy!

@EKnight

Do you drive a big truck btw?

Thanks for those merely sharing your experiences.

Oh hey, @SRorhrbac0808

You have pierced nips bro?
Post 40 IP   flag post
Dirkenhiemer private msg quote post Address this user
EK may be short but it doesn't mean he's weak in his powerlifting days he benched 420 @148 I would love to see you get even close to that. EK is well respected on this forum, and I will take his "book knowledge" as you call it and actually benefit from it unlike the bro science people spew out. I'm not into all of the A and P of the body an I appreciate EK simplifying it for guys like me that have brains for other subject matters. Welcome to the forums!
Post 41 IP   flag post
NorIda private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by CodyTheClen
all I get is corrections and links to more information. Constructive criticism is cool, but being 'told' something is another. Ill read a book if I need to learn something lol.


Quote:
Originally Posted by CodyTheClen
Im here for experience with lifting, not book knowledge. I pay for that..


Quote:
Originally Posted by CodyTheClen
Not here to discuss anatomical features.


Lawl

So you wan't Bro-Knowledge, Not proven Science.

Thats awesome dude, I totally understand, reading Scientific studies can be difficult. Especially when the words are longer than you are tall.
Post 42 IP   flag post
The Dark
Knight
eknight private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by CodyTheClen
Im here for experience with lifting, not book knowledge. I pay for that


Based on your posts so far, I hope you kept your receipt.

Ok, in all seriousness, perhaps if you explain WHY you believe you can target one area of a muscle, I can explain why that's not possible. You don't believe you can work one head of your quads, or only one head of your gastrocs do you? -3X
Post 43 IP   flag post
Maarten private msg quote post Address this user
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19879776

Study from 2010 (>1995) shows that movement form the clavicular head is possible without significant movement of the sternal head.

+ if anyone wants the full article, pm me an email address.
Post 44 IP   flag post
IrishGymSheep private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by CodyTheClen
Im here for experience with lifting, not book knowledge. I pay for that.. There is nothing 'subtle' about your postings. I've seen several, so I will be inclined to ignore it. Keep your "small mans complex" out of the forums guy!

@EKnight

Do you drive a big truck btw?

Thanks for those merely sharing your experiences.

Oh hey, @SRorhrbac0808

You have pierced nips bro?


EK is either the favorite member or one of the favorites of all the people on this forum who post regularly. He backs up everything he says and regularly posts multiple studies to back up what he has to say.
Just a great addition to the forum.

If you want to argue with him do similarly and post journals otherwise ignore him entirely.

Don't be inclined to ignore it, either try to refute it or ignore it, because half measures results in you calling him wrong and then trying to insult him personally.

Also this idea that coming across how EK does is a bad thing baffles me.
This idea that everyones opinion is equal is horseshit.
If the science around our hobby is every going to be taken seriously we need to treat it seriously.
You never see this with hard science, the guys from Nasa don't get interrupted by Joe Soap who has his own opinion that the sky is a carpet painted by God.
Like wise dentists don't have to put up with the opinions of people who do home dentistry with some string and a door.


Now everyone stop fighting look at Maartens post and we continue this like gentlemen.
Post 45 IP   flag post
The Dark
Knight
eknight private msg quote post Address this user
@Maarten didn't read that in the abstract. Can you send me the full paper? Would love to read it, as it contradicts most of what I've read. Eknighttrainer@gmail.com -3X
Post 46 IP   flag post
Maarten private msg quote post Address this user
Send it!

+ I find that all the studies are limited in the variations regarding the execution of a specific exercise. E.g. Internal rotation of the delts (guillotine press), Use of smithmachine, dumbbells, hand positioning, ... .

My interpretation towards this matter is that, you can't isolate your 'upper chest' (in the exact meaning of the verb). But, you can put a focus on the upper chest area by minimising the use of the clavicular head.
Post 47 IP   flag post
The Dark
Knight
eknight private msg quote post Address this user
Got it and quickly reviewed it. I'll read it in depth tomorrow, but the thing that immediately jumps out at me is that the researchers used peak activity level readings, rather than mean activity readings. This is a little unusual, as it is my understanding that mean maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) is used in EMG studies because it measures the average activation throughout an entire movement or rep. Using only peak MVC provides data for the highest point of activation of the muscle, which is a particularly limited portion of a rep/movement. To give you an example of how much a difference this can make, when Bret Contreras published his EMG activity results, he found that the peak EMG activty of the clavicular head of the pecs for incline DB presses was 310.0, while the peak activity for the sternal head was only 286. The mean activity level for the two was 128 & 124 respectively (thus, not a significant difference). My initial thought on this study is that the results were as they were for the same reason, but as I said, I skimmed it and may have missed something. -3X
Post 48 IP   flag post
Maarten private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by eknight
Got it and quickly reviewed it. I'll read it in depth tomorrow, but the thing that immediately jumps out at me is that the researchers used peak activity level readings, rather than mean activity readings. This is a little unusual, as it is my understanding that mean maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) is used in EMG studies because it measures the average activation throughout an entire movement or rep. Using only peak MVC provides data for the highest point of activation of the muscle, which is a particularly limited portion of a rep/movement. To give you an example of how much a difference this can make, when Bret Contreras published his EMG activity results, he found that the peak EMG activty of the clavicular head of the pecs for incline DB presses was 310.0, while the peak activity for the sternal head was only 286. The mean activity level for the two was 128 & 124 respectively (thus, not a significant difference). My initial thought on this study is that the results were as they were for the same reason, but as I said, I skimmed it and may have missed something. -3X


"In summary, only the normalization method that uses MVICs as the reference level can be
validly used to compare muscle activity levels and activation patterns between muscles, tasks
and individuals, provided that maximum neural activation is achieved in all muscles and
individuals tested.
" (Halaki, 2012)

send it to you @EK, plus some other stuff. also an article which states the following: "It may thus be possible to use each head of the biceps brachii as a unique control site."
Post 49 IP   flag post
The Dark
Knight
eknight private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maarten

"In summary, only the normalization method that uses MVICs as the reference level can be
validly used to compare muscle activity levels and activation patterns between muscles, tasks
and individuals, provided that maximum neural activation is achieved in all muscles and
individuals tested.
" (Halaki, 2012)

send it to you @EK, plus some other stuff. also an article which states the following: "It may thus be possible to use each head of the biceps brachii as a unique control site."


^^Re. the above quote, yes, this is true, for the study they prepared (which used activation by external electrical stimulus), but when a person trains, they do not reach maxial neural activation throughout every rep (in fact, it rarey happens unless you're maxing out), which is why the mean and not peak MVC is a better indicator. The article even goes on to point out that "the force output of a muscle during a synchronous activation of the motor neurons, due to the stimulation of a nerve, does not necessarily produce the same force as when the motor neurons are being synchronously activated by the central nervous system."

I got the other studies you sent. It will take me a few days to get through them all, but it appears that the Spinelli and Wattanaprakornkul articles does not deal with the pectoralis, but with shoulder retraction and scapular force. Likewise, the Rahmani article does not use EMG activity at all. Will let you know my thoughts on the others, nonetheless. Thanks! -3X
Post 50 IP   flag post
Nyko private msg quote post Address this user
@eknight @Maarten Could I get a forward of these as well? I would like to take me a ganderrrrr
Post 51 IP   flag post
The Dark
Knight
eknight private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by eknight


Ok, in all seriousness, perhaps if you explain WHY you believe you can target one area of a muscle, I can explain why that's not possible. You don't believe you can work one head of your quads, or only one head of your gastrocs do you? -3X


Still awaiting a response here.

@Maarten finished the one on the biceps, and agree that, yes, in terms of a control site, it may be possible to focus on one head more so than the other, but stand by the fact that heads of a muscle can not be isolated, nor can a significant emphasis by placed on one at the expense of the other via training at different angles, etc. -3X
Post 52 IP   flag post
340737 52 27
destitute