[quote]austin_bicep wrote:
How will my chest get stronger if my triceps fatigue first? My triceps would need to get stronger in order to force my chest to grow
[/quote]
Also…it would seem some of you don’t get the concept that the goal is to get stronger over time.
Why would your triceps need to get stronger to teach your chest to do more of the lift?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]austin_bicep wrote:
How will my chest get stronger if my triceps fatigue first?
[/quote]
Uhm, how wouldn’t it?[/quote]
If I bench 315 x 10 normally…
And now I train my triceps and can only bench 315 x 6, what stimulus would cause my chest to grow?
Now, if I train chest with flys, then bench 315 x 6…It will force my chest to grow. This is because my chest would now be the weak link in the movement.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]browndisaster wrote:
lol I bench less than 300, but 405 for reps is pretty awesome op
I guess I don’t see this whole huge quest for an mmc, I developed mine easily from just doing things like DB flies, then mimicking the movement essentially on a bench press. For me it’s impossible not to feel my chest stretch and contract if I’m doing a wide bb bench. The same would go for pullovers → close grip pulldowns and BB rows to the hip[/quote]
That’s you in your avatar?
And you bench 400?
yeah, I would think weak mind muscle connection.[/quote]
Was that directed at me or browndisaster? I don’t remember uploading an avatar lol?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
People get trapped by what they THINK is truth. They will fight to death to defend an article…while laughing at the swole fucker right next to them who did something because it felt right without a scientific article…[/quote]
So is the ‘traditional’ approach, fatiguing the target muscles (pecs), incorrect? You seem to be implying that it doesn’t work in terms of stimulating chest hypertrophy?
S[/quote]
I didn’t say that. I said acting like what I wrote is WRONG makes no sense.
You can do what you want…but if I was focused on teaching someone a mind muscle connection, which in my opinion is what is wrong with MOST of these guys, I would choose the way I just wrote about.
The way you wrote it it would seem that a mind muscle connection is not the issue.[/quote]
I find that hard to imagine. A muscle that has just been subjected to a direct stress via an isolation movement (ie. flyes) would likely convey the most feeling (ow! ow! ow!) when being immediately subjected to a greater stress (ie. bench press). As such, it would easily reach the point of hyopertrophy stimulus before the secondary muscles reach their thresholds.
And IMO, while I’m not saying that the MMC isn’t part of the issue (simply moving a weight from A to B certainly isn’t, we can all agree on that), stimulating hypertrophy truly is. If I were (or do, or have done) helping a client address weak pecs this is undoubtedly the way I would choose.
S
I would think since you are pre-fatiguing your tri’s your chest is taking on more of the load, thus making it stronger as your tris are less involved
[quote]austin_bicep wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]austin_bicep wrote:
How will my chest get stronger if my triceps fatigue first?
[/quote]
Uhm, how wouldn’t it?[/quote]
If I bench 315 x 10 normally…
And now I train my triceps and can only bench 315 x 6, what stimulus would cause my chest to grow?
Now, if I train chest with flys, then bench 315 x 6…It will force my chest to grow. This is because my chest would now be the weak link in the movement.[/quote]
That seems backwards though. Because now that your chest is weaker from the get go, would your triceps and shoulders not assist in picking up the slack?
If you were to fatigue your shoulders and or tris first, then bench, your chest would HAVE TO pick up the slack, because it would receive little to no assistance from the tris and shoulders…right?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]browndisaster wrote:
do you use 300 lbs when fresh as well as fatigued? if so that’s impressive
If I’m benching with a focus on the pecs I just widen my grip, reduce the ROM to the bottom half, and focus on squeezing the pecs. I don’t worry much about getting crushed unless I’m doing more of a PL style bench and am going for lower reps + heavier weight[/quote]
Dude, if you bench 300 and your chest isn’t at least pretty big, my guess is you don’t have a great muscle mind connection either.[/quote]
I never said my chest wasn’t big lol. I’m just trying to improve it and more importantly improve my MMC![/quote]
That wasn’t directed at you…but yeah, pushing 300 with a small chest implies weak mind muscle connection.[/quote]
LoL weak? Pushing 300lbs with small chest is BIG MMC obviously.
And ironmanzvw, training ‘hyperthropy’ and ‘strength’ is different too. If you keep your reps low with big rest intervals you will gain alot of strength while hyperthropy is not as much as it could be.
Also, if you dont eat enough you might gain strength broscience through MMC(?).
Think about bruce lee for instance.
“Bruce would take hold of a 70lb dumbbell with one arm and raise it to a lateral position, level to his shoulder and then he’d hold the contraction for a few seconds. Nobody else I knew could even get it up there, let it alone hold it up there”. - Jesse Glover
here’s another ‘small’ guy with ‘weak mmc’:
[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:
[quote]austin_bicep wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]austin_bicep wrote:
How will my chest get stronger if my triceps fatigue first?
[/quote]
Uhm, how wouldn’t it?[/quote]
If I bench 315 x 10 normally…
And now I train my triceps and can only bench 315 x 6, what stimulus would cause my chest to grow?
Now, if I train chest with flys, then bench 315 x 6…It will force my chest to grow. This is because my chest would now be the weak link in the movement.[/quote]
That seems backwards though. Because now that your chest is weaker from the get go, would your triceps and shoulders not assist in picking up the slack?
If you were to fatigue your shoulders and or tris first, then bench, your chest would HAVE TO pick up the slack, because it would receive little to no assistance from the tris and shoulders…right?[/quote]
Coming from a powerlifting background, you’re as strong as your weakest link…Pre-fatiguing makes a weak link…making the weak link bigger/stronger will fix the problem.
Also this study isnt that obvious. If you pre-fatigue your chest muscles before doing benchpress the chest will obviously be FATIGUED and you will have to use more of other muscles to lift up the barbell while still using chest as much as it can anymore(?)
[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:
That seems backwards though. Because now that your chest is weaker from the get go, would your triceps and shoulders not assist in picking up the slack?
If you were to fatigue your shoulders and or tris first, then bench, your chest would HAVE TO pick up the slack, because it would receive little to no assistance from the tris and shoulders…right?[/quote]
It’s not about picking up slack. The mind doesn’t just say “this movement will be completed by any means necessary, you muscles figure out who pulls their share of the weight.” The larger muscles will have a greater work threshold, hence the rationalization behind the method that has been employed for decades.
Austin summed it up perfectly. Only as strong as your weakest link. Pre-exhausting the larger, naturally stronger muscles levels the field to some degree, and already establishing inroads in terms of work being performed by the chest before beginning the compound exercise.
Man,… I can’t believe I jumped back into this thread, but this is just ridiculous.
S
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
[quote]austin_bicep wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
I think my chest would get lackluster workouts because my triceps would be failing a lot earlier.
[/quote]
Oh…You THINK so.
What do you think would happen if you forced your chest to adapt over time?
What do you THINK would happen then?[/quote]
He’s saying…how would his chest adapt if he triceps keep failing before his chest is fully worked?
I’m wondering the same thing.
[/quote]
It would require me to fix the mechanics of the lift, meaning I’m able to focus more on my MMC with my chest while pressing. I don’t see why I can’t just focus on the mechanics of the lift without pre exhausting my triceps.
Either way, at this point it’s all talking in circles. And no one has more puppy dog energy to talk in circles for days and years on end than PX, so you guys have fun with that. :)[/quote]
LOL. I haven’t even posted here in days. All of you seem more intent on proving me wrong than helping anyone.[/quote]
LOL is right.
[quote]NikH wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]browndisaster wrote:
do you use 300 lbs when fresh as well as fatigued? if so that’s impressive
If I’m benching with a focus on the pecs I just widen my grip, reduce the ROM to the bottom half, and focus on squeezing the pecs. I don’t worry much about getting crushed unless I’m doing more of a PL style bench and am going for lower reps + heavier weight[/quote]
Dude, if you bench 300 and your chest isn’t at least pretty big, my guess is you don’t have a great muscle mind connection either.[/quote]
I never said my chest wasn’t big lol. I’m just trying to improve it and more importantly improve my MMC![/quote]
That wasn’t directed at you…but yeah, pushing 300 with a small chest implies weak mind muscle connection.[/quote]
LoL weak? Pushing 300lbs with small chest is BIG MMC obviously.
And ironmanzvw, training ‘hyperthropy’ and ‘strength’ is different too. If you keep your reps low with big rest intervals you will gain alot of strength while hyperthropy is not as much as it could be.
Also, if you dont eat enough you might gain strength broscience through MMC(?).
Think about bruce lee for instance.
“Bruce would take hold of a 70lb dumbbell with one arm and raise it to a lateral position, level to his shoulder and then he’d hold the contraction for a few seconds. Nobody else I knew could even get it up there, let it alone hold it up there”. - Jesse Glover
here’s another ‘small’ guy with ‘weak mmc’:
Oh it totally understand the difference in training for strength and hypertrophy man.
I just start off my workout with lower reps to maintain/increase strength, then as i move on i got to moderate and then higher rep ranges. I aim to hit all rep ranges.
The only reason I lift very heavy in the initial part of my routine (besides it being fun) is that I hope that that strength will trickle down to my higher rep ranges.
[quote]NikH wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ironmanzvw wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]browndisaster wrote:
do you use 300 lbs when fresh as well as fatigued? if so that’s impressive
If I’m benching with a focus on the pecs I just widen my grip, reduce the ROM to the bottom half, and focus on squeezing the pecs. I don’t worry much about getting crushed unless I’m doing more of a PL style bench and am going for lower reps + heavier weight[/quote]
Dude, if you bench 300 and your chest isn’t at least pretty big, my guess is you don’t have a great muscle mind connection either.[/quote]
I never said my chest wasn’t big lol. I’m just trying to improve it and more importantly improve my MMC![/quote]
That wasn’t directed at you…but yeah, pushing 300 with a small chest implies weak mind muscle connection.[/quote]
LoL weak? Pushing 300lbs with small chest is BIG MMC obviously.
And ironmanzvw, training ‘hyperthropy’ and ‘strength’ is different too. If you keep your reps low with big rest intervals you will gain alot of strength while hyperthropy is not as much as it could be.
Also, if you dont eat enough you might gain strength broscience through MMC(?).
Think about bruce lee for instance.
“Bruce would take hold of a 70lb dumbbell with one arm and raise it to a lateral position, level to his shoulder and then he’d hold the contraction for a few seconds. Nobody else I knew could even get it up there, let it alone hold it up there”. - Jesse Glover
here’s another ‘small’ guy with ‘weak mmc’:
??
Since when is powerlifting about the mind muscle connection? It is more about technique and leverage.
What is with these guys arguing just for the sake of it?
It pisses some of you off this much that you need to try this hard?
There are too many people here who do seem to understand what I wrote for that.
[quote]austin_bicep wrote:
Coming from a powerlifting background, you’re as strong as your weakest link…Pre-fatiguing makes a weak link…making the weak link bigger/stronger will fix the problem.[/quote]
If the muscle is firing first it is NOT your weakest link. That is the point.
If someone’s triceps are freaking HUGE from bench presses, you can’t call the triceps the weakest link.
NikH posts nothing but nonsense to get you going X. I’m sure you already know this. I was wondering why he had to bring in olympic lifting where bench pressing is not a part of their lifts…
[quote]MattyXL wrote:
I would think since you are pre-fatiguing your tri’s your chest is taking on more of the load, thus making it stronger as your tris are less involved[/quote]
If your chest and tri’s are dominant throughout bench that would mean on a max effort set that your chest shoulders and tri’s are already working at max capacity to get the weight up right? (hence, max effort set)
By pre fatiguing your shoulders and tri’s you would HAVE to bench less weight (obviously) and would be lowering the weight to a number that your chest could handle as the primary mover… Yet the decreased amount of weight wouldn’t place MORE stress on your chest because in both scenarios your chest is working at max capacity.
In scenario A. You’re fresh and benching 315x8 but when you pre fatigue your shoulders you’re only benching 245x6 (arbitrary numbers, I know) so what logic says that your chest is getting more stimulation from putting up 245x6 as the primary muscle vs 315x8 as a “secondary” muscle?
Don’t you think Matty?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]austin_bicep wrote:
Coming from a powerlifting background, you’re as strong as your weakest link…Pre-fatiguing makes a weak link…making the weak link bigger/stronger will fix the problem.[/quote]
If the muscle is firing first it is NOT your weakest link. That is the point.
If someone’s triceps are freaking HUGE from bench presses, you can’t call the triceps the weakest link.[/quote]
Pre-fatiguing is for your large muscles in compound movements so they are on a level playing field with all the smaller muscles involved in that compound.
Lats should be stronger than biceps.
Chest, stronger than triceps.
When the smaller muscles fail first, the larger muscle still has gas in the tank.
When pre-fatigued, everything fails at the same time, the larger muscle was fully worked.
This is a simple concept. I have no problems with training or growing, so that’s all that I have to say on the matter. This is how it’s been done for years and I just answered the question “what is pre-fatigue?”
I’ll leave it at that.
[quote]Fuzzyapple.Train wrote:
NikH posts nothing but nonsense to get you going X. I’m sure you already know this. I was wondering why he had to bring in olympic lifting where bench pressing is not a part of their lifts…[/quote]
I know…but it seems the same action of following me around to try this hard tio act like everything written is nonsense has spread to some others here.
Bottom line, if your triceps take over the damn movement, calling them your weakest link and acting like your chest can never work and get stronger if you tire them is a little off.
[quote]austin_bicep wrote:
Pre-fatiguing is for your large muscles in compound movements so they are on a level playing field with all the smaller muscles involved in that compound. [/quote]
Wow…it took the whole thread to realize we are NOT talking about the same concept?
[quote]gregron wrote:
By pre fatiguing your shoulders and tri’s you would HAVE to bench less weight (obviously) and would be lowering the weight to a number that your chest could handle as the primary mover.[/quote]
Oh my GOD he’s got it.
[quote]
… Yet the decreased amount of weight wouldn’t place MORE stress on your chest because in both scenarios your chest is working at max capacity.[/quote]
Uh, what? Your chest would have to now get stronger to compensate.
On what world do muscles not get stronger if you train them to be?
Who would get the most chest benefit OVER TIME?