Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
Research Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsResearch Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic

upper and inner chest

Why must everyone make things so complicated? I have built a big and strong chest from doing barbell flat bench and barbell incline bench. Plain and simple. The heck with cables, flyes, and chrome plated machines.


Do try this. Do your inclines with your hands only 24" apart... This will feel strange for about 2 weeks...but then you will see your upper and inner chest grow a bit.

B True

:evil:
 
u guys dont get wat hes saying. hes saying that if u contract ur chest muscle. the entire muscle will contract regardless of where the force of the weight is coming from or how ur holding the weight. which is true. and does make it impossible to isolate a part of the muscle. working the muscle in different ways has benefits. it encourages overall growth of the muscle. because ur stimulating the muscle in a different manner. if u just did flat bench. ur muscles growth would slow because it gets used to the movement. to prove the point. try doing ur flat bench first. then do incline immeadiately after. then the next week. do incline first and ur flat bench immeadiately after. if they were different muscles. ur lifts should be the same. but i kno from experience. theyre not. if u flat bench first. ur incline will be weaker. if u incline first. ur flat will be weaker. however if u bench press and then did curls. ur lifts would be exactly the same regardless of the order. the reason some people have more developed outer. and mroe developed inner is genetic. its just how ur chest grows. if u keep working ur chest it will eventually fully develop. people just grow differently. but the helpmepls guy is full of shit. id love to know what kind of steroid hes taking if he sees noticable growth the day after he works a muscle. and hes such a freak that he can control which part grows week to week. idk why hes nto competin for Mr. O this year.



So based on your faulty rational, your triceps are part of your chest muscle as well. As well as you anterior deltoid head. Right? I mean if I do chest first and then triceps, my resulting "lifts" are different than if I do triceps and then chest! Also if I shift the order of triceps/deltoids, my resulting "lifts" will be different so they are ALL THE SAME MUSCLE! BRILLIANT! I guess we need to rewrite the medical books huh professor?

Furthermore based on your ridiculous, uneducated
logic, the Vastus Lateralis, Vastus Medialis, Vastus Intermedialis, and Rectus Femorus are also all the same muscle too!

The Pectorals are a MUSCLE GROUP RETARD! They work together which is why one gets fatigued when emphasizing the other! Same with your Quadriceps. They are a MUSCLE GROUP! They all work together! You can't emphasize one without fatiguing the other three because bio-mechanically they work in unison! JUST LIKE THE PECTORALS!

People like this should be kicked off the board. What if someone reads this garbage and believes it? It could cause them to train incorrectly for years before they realize that this guy was full of shit!

By the way..., call Dell because obviously your spell checker is NOT working properly.
 
This is getting heated lol.

I'm interested though, as I'd like to after the omega program I'm currently on do a brief stint improving my inner part of the upper chest.
 
here we go again!!!

-You can not target a specific area within a muscle fiber. ( a fiber contracts as a whole, balancing the stress along the entire fiber).
-You can target specific fibers, within a muscle.


Look at the direction that the muscle fibers run, within the muscle. In the case of the pectorals, the fibers run horizontal. This means we are able to target the inferior fibers, and the superior fibers. However, we can not target the medial or lateral aspects of the pectorals.

I'll use another example, Biceps - you can not target upper or lower areas within your biceps fibers. However you can target medial fibers and lateral fibers. Since the fibers of the biceps run vertically.
 
Chill out bro. Why are you attacking this guy? That post is six months old.

So based on your faulty rational, your triceps are part of your chest muscle as well. As well as you anterior deltoid head. Right? I mean if I do chest first and then triceps, my resulting "lifts" are different than if I do triceps and then chest! Also if I shift the order of triceps/deltoids, my resulting "lifts" will be different so they are ALL THE SAME MUSCLE! BRILLIANT! I guess we need to rewrite the medical books huh professor?

Furthermore based on your ridiculous, uneducated
logic, the Vastus Lateralis, Vastus Medialis, Vastus Intermedialis, and Rectus Femorus are also all the same muscle too!

The Pectorals are a MUSCLE GROUP RETARD! They work together which is why one gets fatigued when emphasizing the other! Same with your Quadriceps. They are a MUSCLE GROUP! They all work together! You can't emphasize one without fatiguing the other three because bio-mechanically they work in unison! JUST LIKE THE PECTORALS!

People like this should be kicked off the board. What if someone reads this garbage and believes it? It could cause them to train incorrectly for years before they realize that this guy was full of shit!

By the way..., call Dell because obviously your spell checker is NOT working properly.
 
Chill out bro. Why are you attacking this guy? That post is six months old.

heavydutyhit, I really like and appreciate that you are so passionate about training. It's refreshing actually. Just a couple of thigs to realize in here:

1) The first poster you're replying to hasn't posted here in 8 years, and the second poster you're replying to was a one-post wonder that made his only post here 5 months ago. These guys are long gone bro. lol.

2) A few things are done differently to keep discussions a bit more civil in this forum (all forums really, except chat & conversation - we give more leeway there). While we like having opposing points of view debates here, let's refrain from calling people names like, "dumbass". Keep it civil.

Thanks again for your input bro! I like it, and hope to see you keep posting more in here. I'm a Mentzer fan too btw. :)
 
Muscle shape is genetic.

The existence of the so-called "upper", "lower", "inner" and "outer" pectorals along with the assertion that it is possible to isolate one or more of these to the relative exclusion of the others in training, are among the most firmly entrenched myths in Strength Training and Bodybuilding circles. In fact none of these truly exist as either separate and distinct muscles or regions in a functional sense. Even though it could be argued that there appears to be a structural distinction between the upper and lower pectorals (and some anatomy texts do in fact support this distinction though not all do) because the pectoralis-major does originate from both the sternum and the proximal or sternal half of the clavicle along it’s anterior surface (it also has connections to the cartilages of all the true ribs with the frequent exception of the first and seventh, and to the Aponeurosis of the external oblique muscle), this is considered to be a common (though extensive) origin in terms of the mechanical function of the muscle. Thus the pectoralis-major is in fact for all practical purposes one continuous muscle with a common origin and insertion, and functions as a single force-producing unit. The terms upper, lower, inner and outer are imprecise and relevant only in order to make a vague subjective distinction between relative portions of the same muscle for descriptive purposes. They are vague and imprecise terms because there is no clearly delineated or universally defined border between them.
Further it is not physically possible either in theory or practice to contract one region of a single muscle to the exclusion of another region or regions (as a Biomechanics Professor of mine once demonstrated to a bunch of us smart-ass know-it-all’s taking his course, using EMG analysis). When a muscle contracts it does so in a linear fashion by simultaneously reducing the length of its constituent fibers and thus its overall length from origin to insertion. Even where a single muscle is separated into multiple functional units that are clearly defined such as the triceps (which are referred to as “heads” by Anatomists and Biomechanists), because they share a common point of insertion in order for one head to shorten all must shorten. This only makes sense if you think about it because otherwise there would be “slack” in one when the other shortened, which as we know does not occur. Note that there are some special cases where one head of a muscle must actually lengthen when the other shortens (e.g. the posterior head of the deltoid in relation to the anterior head during the positive stroke of fly’s), the point however is that even in these special cases there is no “slack” because there is in fact contractile activity (whether concentric or eccentric) throughout the muscle.
That is not to say however, that all fibers in different areas, or heads are necessarily shortened to the same degree during a particular movement. Depending on the shape of the muscle, the joint geometry involved, and the specific movement being performed, fibers in one area of a muscle or head may be required to shorten more or less than in others (or even to lengthen) in order to complete the required movement. For example during a decline fly though muscle fibers in all regions of the pectoralis-major must shorten as the upper arm is drawn towards the median plane of the body, because of the angle of the arm in relation to the trunk the fibers in what we commonly refer to as the lower pecs will have shortened by a greater percentage of their overall length than those in the upper region of the muscle by the completion of the movement. Conversely when performing an incline fly there is greater shortening in the fibers towards the upper portion of the muscle than in the lower.
Many proponents of the so-called “isolation” approach to training claim that this proportionally greater shortening of the fibers equates to greater tension in the “target” region than in others, and therefore stimulates greater adaptation; but this is completely at odds with the cross-bridge model of muscle contraction which clearly shows that as fiber length decreases tension also declines due to increasing overlap and interference in the area of the cross-bridges. Some also contend that the fibers called upon to shorten to a greater degree tend to fatigue faster than others and that therefore there is greater overall fiber recruitment in the region where this occurs, and thus a greater stimulus to growth; but there is no evidence to suggest that a fiber fatigues faster in one position than in another in relation to other fibers in the same muscle. In fact it has been shown that Time Under Tension (TUT) is the determining factor in fatigue and not fiber length. In fact fiber recruitment tends to increase in a very uniform fashion throughout an entire muscle as fatigue sets in.
The ability to “isolate” a head, or region of a muscle to the exclusion of others by performing a particular movement, or by limiting movement to a particular plane and thus develop it to a greater degree, is a myth created by people who wish to appear more knowledgeable than they are, and has been perpetuated by trade magazines and parroted throughout gyms everywhere. It is pure non-sense and completely ignores the applicable elements of physiology, anatomy, and physics in particular. Quite simply the science does not support it, and in most cases is completely at odds with the idea.
Regardless of the science however, many people will remain firmly convinced that muscle isolation is a reality because they can “feel” different movements more in one region of a muscle than in others. This I do not dispute, nor does science. There is in fact differentiated neural feedback from motor units depending on the relative length of the component fibers, and this feedback tends to be (or is interpreted by the brain as) more intense when the fibers in question are either shortened (contracted) or lengthened (stretched) in the extreme. However this has to do with proprioception (the ability to sense the orientation and relative position of your body in space by interpreting neural feedback related to muscle fiber length and joint position) and not tension, fatigue, or level of fiber recruitment. Unfortunately it has been seized upon and offered up as “evidence” by those looking to support their ideas by any means available.
Muscle shape is a function of genetics and degree of overall development. As you develop a muscle towards its potential, it does change in appearance (generally for the better) but always within the parameters defined by its inherent shape. A person who tends to have proportionately more mass towards the upper, lower, inner or outer region of his or her pectoralis-major will always have that tendency, though it may be more or less apparent at various stages in their development, and in most cases appears less pronounced as overall development proceeds. That is not to say that training a muscle group from multiple angles is totally without value. In fact we know that even subtly different movements can elicit varying levels of fiber recruitment within a muscle in an overall sense (i.e. in terms of the percentage of total available fibers) due to differences in joint mechanics, and neural activation patterns, as well as varying involvement of synergistic and antagonistic muscle groups involved. So by all means experiment with different angles in your training, but don’t expect to be able to correct so-called “unbalanced” muscles this way, or to target specific areas of a particular muscle. Work to develop each of your muscles as completely as possible and shape will take care of itself. If you want to worry about “shaping” you should pay more attention to the balance between different muscle groups and work to bring up any weak groups you may have in relation to the rest of your physique.

that was like reading a story lol but some good made points there, i too have a unbalanced look to my chest and when i tense the chest ya can clearly see the 'moob' effect taking place as my lower area of the pectorials protrudes out more than the upper, and ive always had this so i think its down to genetics, as you said. i keep my chest workout to flat bench, flat flys, and 3 push up variations (flat, incline and wide arm) and im just gonna hope this is enough workouts to build my chest up.
 
My pecs have always been a problem. Mine are not squared of at the bottom, and are kind of soft-looking even when I'm in the best shape (I'm at 5.3% bf). Veins show on my pecs, and I have very little gyno (just a small spot right around the nipples). The only thing I can tell you is that if I have ANY body fat on my torso, it will show up right away in between my pecs on my sternum, and the definition between them disappears. I'm satisfied fairly OK at 5.3% bf with my pecs definition, but no matter how bulked up I am, this is always the case with me. This is one problem I might consider implants or other surgical help for, if it were that important to me. But it's not that important to me at this point. As others above said, you can work your pecs all you want, and you will get them bigger, but evenly all over.

Charles
 
I know everyone on here says that you cannot target a specific area on your chest that you want to grow. Because i know you can work certain parts that will just not train certain parts as much, hence allowing that part to grow more.
 
Top Bottom