Originally Posted by Yanick

you can't isolate parts of a muscle. read the stickies on top of this section, there is one about upper/lower chest isolation and has a great post from a member of another forum about the issue.

Originally Posted by MCPaulyB

So there are no exercises that will recruit more work from the outer head?

Originally Posted by turbine5

bench press with the palms facing your head (underhand grip)

good luck

Originally Posted by MCPaulyB

Originally Posted by HardTrainer

Take the incline bench for example, it dosnt recruit more upper pec muscle at all, your whole muscle contracts as a whole or it donst contract at all, all the incline does is switch the balance to place more stress on the delt and less on the pec (in simplisty its inbetween a seated shoulder press and a flat bench press)

Thats the only thing you can hope for when changing grip placements, angles etc, i.e. the hammer curl places more stress on the forearm and less on the bicep... it dosnt hit the bicep any different!

The same with tricep push downs and reverse press downs, all the reverse one does is give you fingers/forearm muscle extra work as you have to grip it or it will pull out of your hands, it dosnt contract the tricep in a different way.

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

I have to disagree with that.......
Now lets not argue this for 50 posts just do this and then tell me I'm wrong.
Next chest workout do something different....do incline DB press 6 sets of 6-10 reps.
then a few incline flys if you want and thats it......now is your chest sore at the top , middle or bottom?????

Then next workout do the same except decline db press.

Originally Posted by TheCurse

you definately can emphasize one head over the other kids.
it has to do with the position of your humerus relative to your torso.
no you cant 'isolate' any one of them, but you can definately change how the workload is distrubuted throughout the three heads.

Originally Posted by Yanick

you have your opinion, we have our science

i just don't see how you can say the position of the humerus relative to the torso (thats an action of the shoulder joint) will effect the recruitment of the triceps (thats an action of the elbow joint).

shoulders flexed, like in overhead DB extension for example - triceps are still extending the arm

shoulders extended, like in a press down for example - triceps are still extending the arm

your body doesn't say, 'oh shit my shoulders are flexed i need more medial tricep work. all your triceps extend your elbow, no way around it.

however if you extend your elbow and your shoulder simultaneously, like in a pullover/laying tricep extension hybrid type exercise, the long head will assist in extending your shoulder, but once the elbow extension comes into play all of your triceps are working. its basic kinesiology guys, if you don't believe go buy a text book and look it up, i'm not making this shit up and its not something i read in FLEX.

Originally Posted by TheCurse

the long head of the triceps is actually attached to the scapula braintrust, while the other two start on the humerus. elevating your arm puts the long head on a stretch, eliciting a stronger contraction. how many anatomy classes you taken? ive taken several. ive also developed the long head of my triceps to a far greater extent than most people using my findings.

the proof is in the results. lets see your triceps yanick. oh yea its just another internet shit talker.

Originally Posted by TheCurse

i dont care P i still want to eat his children.

Originally Posted by TheCurse

the proof is in the results. lets see your triceps yanick. oh yea its just another internet shit talker.

Originally Posted by TheCurse

the long head of the triceps is actually attached to the scapula braintrust, while the other two start on the humerus. elevating your arm puts the long head on a stretch, eliciting a stronger contraction. how many anatomy classes you taken? ive taken several. ive also developed the long head of my triceps to a far greater extent than most people using my findings.

Originally Posted by Yanick

the exception of course must be mentioned. the long head of the tri's crosses both the elbow and shoulder joint and assists in shoulder extension so you can get a better contraction in the long head by bringing your elbow back more in stuff like kickbacks and similar movements. but that is still not targeting or isolating or w/e that specific head.

Originally Posted by TheCurse

the proof is in the results. lets see your triceps yanick. oh yea its just another internet shit talker.

Originally Posted by Purdue Power

I do cable pushdowns with a rope to hit my outer heads. Be sure to curl your hands outwards at the bottom of the reps to get a full extention and full contraction. I can definately feel it hitting the outer heads more. I don't care what the many previous posts have been saying...I know what I am feeling and know what progress I am seeing.

Originally Posted by P-funk

I want an outer head.

Originally Posted by Tough Old Man

And I want to get some head!





Tough

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

I have to disagree with that.......
Now lets not argue this for 50 posts just do this and then tell me I'm wrong.
Next chest workout do something different....do incline DB press 6 sets of 6-10 reps.
then a few incline flys if you want and thats it......now is your chest sore at the top , middle or bottom?????

Then next workout do the same except decline db press.

Originally Posted by TheCurse

the proof is in the results. lets see your triceps yanick. oh yea its just another internet shit talker.

Originally Posted by TheCurse

another skinny dude tellin me whats up.

keep tryin kid you'll get somewhere one day.

Originally Posted by TheCurse

i dont care P i still want to eat his children.

Originally Posted by Sam40

Science is more about speculation, and experimentation, than it is about the real world. Look it took science millenniums to agree the earth was not flat, then it was a dumb sailor that proved it.

Einstein was a smart man, he figured out the theory of relativity, but had to have someone to lead him to the corner store, and back. Otherwise he would get lost. Then he gave us the A-bomb = SMART!!.

If it wasn't for science the air we breath, might not be killing us. Darwin was a stupid fucker!, he probably did descend from a monkey.

I could keep this up for hours. But for everyone else sake I won't.

The bottom line is, science don't know SHIT!!.

Originally Posted by Sam40

No you don't necessarily have to listen to Ronnie Colman, some of us don't want to be huge just healthy. But if you won't to be huge, he has the credentials to prove it.

Originally Posted by TheCurse

or just go ahead with the insults. lil guys

Originally Posted by TheCurse

well, ill let yanick and all you lil guys resort to these non-related insults.

but answer me this. why are there three heads to the tricep if one will do?
if it simply works one way, on or off, why not just have one muscle preforming the lever and hinge action?

cmon, bust out the PhD and tell us.

or just go ahead with the insults. lil guys

Originally Posted by TheCurse

well, ill let yanick and all you lil guys resort to these non-related insults.

but answer me this. why are there three heads to the tricep if one will do?
if it simply works one way, on or off, why not just have one muscle preforming the lever and hinge action?

cmon, bust out the PhD and tell us.

or just go ahead with the insults. lil guys

Originally Posted by TheCurse

again, all i can say, is what i know.
no i hateschool i dont know anything about anyone except that they always argue with my results. and cant show me any of their own.
were talking triceps here. were talking long head development. studies, what you got. i am my study. not a week or month, years. i put my hypothesis into action and lo and behold it held true. im going to stand behind what i believe.

oh and calling people little ihateschool? i beleive yanick was the one that said he wanted to put his dick in my mouth. i might feel strongly about my practices but i can still maintain a certain level of maturity. plus i thought everyone had heard the mike tyson quote and would know it was for laughs. i really dont care.
i still stand by my methods.

last point:
people ask me about my triceps and arms all the time. several people in my gym, with the standard lateral tricep development but virtually no long head development like most people have, using advice i gave when asked, are now (months later) showing much fatter tricep long heads.

Originally Posted by TheCurse

again, all i can say, is what i know.
no i hateschool i dont know anything about anyone except that they always argue with my results. and cant show me any of their own.
were talking triceps here. were talking long head development. studies, what you got. i am my study. not a week or month, years. i put my hypothesis into action and lo and behold it held true. im going to stand behind what i believe.

Originally Posted by TheCurse

oh and calling people little ihateschool? i beleive yanick was the one that said he wanted to put his dick in my mouth. i might feel strongly about my practices but i can still maintain a certain level of maturity. plus i thought everyone had heard the mike tyson quote and would know it was for laughs. i really dont care.
i still stand by my methods.

Originally Posted by TheCurse

last point:
people ask me about my triceps and arms all the time. several people in my gym, with the standard lateral tricep development but virtually no long head development like most people have, using advice i gave when asked, are now (months later) showing much fatter tricep long heads.

Originally Posted by TheCurse

well you must not read too well. i posted i created a hypothesis, tested it, and it held true. tested it on other subjects. and it proved true. the best knowledge is learned through hard work and experience.

and p, i started at 155 pounds with no arm at all.

Originally Posted by TheCurse

6'1, 30 yrs old. started lifting at 25, looked very stick like. recently found a pic from 2000 im gonna scan and post.
alright yanick, i dont like argueing really, can we just agree to disagree?

Originally Posted by CowPimp

Okay, TheCurse, can you please layout your testing methods for me? I am interested to hear about this study of yours. You are claiming that you have tested your hypothesis on others. Tell me what variables were held constant and what variables were not; tell me how many people were involved in your study; tell me the background information of the people in your study; etc. I'm not trying to be a smartass. If you have a real repeatable scientific method in action here, I would be interested to get more information.

Furthermore, when you completed this study, what was the method you used to verify your results? Did you make sure that the outer head grew appreciably more than the other two heads?

Originally Posted by TheCurse

...

Originally Posted by Yanick

....

Originally Posted by P-funk

...

Originally Posted by TheCurse

umm, i got to 205 before running one cycle of SD, which netted me 10 more pounds which i have already lost foreman. thats all my prohormone/aas experience. the picture of my tricep in my avatar is all natural me at about 204. and as i have stated several times, other people have had success with my methods. i guess they all just happen to have some magic tricep long head superiority genetics?

Originally Posted by TheCurse

do pressdowns, your gonna emphasize the lateral head of the triceps to a greater degree than the long head.
do overhead dumbell presses and skullcrushers and you will emphasize the long head more.

Originally Posted by TheCurse

and as i have stated several times, other people have had success with my methods. i guess they all just happen to have some magic tricep long head superiority genetics?

Originally Posted by TheCurse

and as i have stated several times, other people have had success with my methods. i guess they all just happen to have some magic tricep long head superiority genetics?

Originally Posted by TheCurse

im kinda confused now too p, plus im talking long head not lateral head you numbskull!

and to super cowpimp, look man, i know you got all this superior training knowledge and like to throw around those two dollar words, but looking at what your superior knowledge has produced in you, i dont want any part of it. i believe my goals are different. your aggresive thinly veiled attacks are irritating to say the least when i come across them in so many threads.
yep, ill say it again. i want size and strength. if you look like guys i know who dont even lift, i dont want to follow your program. no matter how many books you've read.

Originally Posted by TheCurse

and to super cowpimp, look man, i know you got all this superior training knowledge and like to throw around those two dollar words, but looking at what your superior knowledge has produced in you, i dont want any part of it. i believe my goals are different. your aggresive thinly veiled attacks are irritating to say the least when i come across them in so many threads.
yep, ill say it again. i want size and strength. if you look like guys i know who dont even lift, i dont want to follow your program. no matter how many books you've read.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

Here is the bottom line. Science says one thing, and you say another. However, you claim to have proof to support your opinion. At the same time, you refuse to present this proof with sufficient detail to be considered. So, explain to me why anyone should believe what you're saying without further information, which is what I have been trying to extrapolate from you in this thread?

Originally Posted by CowPimp

It's not a thinly veiled attack. You are refusing to give any more detail on your tested hypothesis. You just keep dodging my questions. They are valid questions, and questions that I would seek the answer to in any study that I read. Stop trying to get personal. I have not attacked you in any way, shape, or form. You are getting defensive for no reason here...

Also, I want to understand how, even if my goal was pure mass, you expect me to reach the state of someone who has been training more than twice as long as me? I have gained almost 30 pounds of muscle in the past 2 years. I think that rate of muscular gain is definitely respectable.

Here is the bottom line. Science says one thing,Really??? please show us all the scientific studies on lying triceps extensions vs reverse grip triceps extensions and how each exercise develops the muscle differently or exactly the same. and you say another. However, you claim to have proof to support your opinion. At the same time, you refuse to present this proof with sufficient detail to be considered. So, explain to me why anyone should believe what you're saying without further information, which is what I have been trying to extrapolate from you in this thread?

Originally Posted by Yanick

CP, forget it bro. don't you know he has big arms so he's right about everything!

Fuck questioning and researching, we just need to get big arms to know what we're talking about.

Lo and behold, i've always idolized Mel Siff, but TheCurse has opened my eyes. He was a skinny bastard so he couldn't possibly know anything about training, i'm gonna go burn my copy of Supertraining and Fact and Fallacies of Fitness and re-subscribe to Muscle and Fitness because Ronnie can barely put together a cohesive sentence but he has 20+ inch arms so he must be right!

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

Please share with us all the scientific proof that defines exactly how each exercise effects the muscle.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

The proof is that all 3 of the heads of the tricep contract when you extend your elbow...

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

Thats not the question here......now please show us the studies proving your "opinion".

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

Please share with us all the scientific proof that defines exactly how each exercise effects the muscle.

Originally Posted by Gray's Anatomy

Actions.—The Triceps brachii is the great extensor muscle of the forearm, and is the direct antagonist of the Biceps brachii and Brachialis. When the arm is extended, the long head of the muscle may assist the Teres major and Latissimus dorsi in drawing the humerus backward and in adducting it to the thorax. The long head supports the under part of the shoulder-joint. The Subanconæus draws up the synovial membrane of the elbow-joint during extension of the forearm.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

The poster's original question was an attempt to find exercises that "specifically target" the outer head of the tricep. Except in the causes already mentioned (When assisting shoulder adduction/extension), that isn't possible because all of the heads of the tricep contract together during elbow extension.

Originally Posted by Yanick

unfortunately that is way too insignificant of an issue for scientists to actually study. That is an opinion.....................not interested in your opinion....facts please.

BUT, yes there always is a but , established scientific facts prove you guys completely wrong.Please post them.......I'm still waiting as are many others.



gotten from here There is no data about exercises and how they develop the muscles in question.......That is only an Anatomy description......we are debating Physiology here...Anatomy is only a small part of the question

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

You might read this.......take knotice of the Origins.
http://www.rad.washington.edu/atlas/tricepsbrachii.html
Origin Long head: infraglenoid tubercle of scapula
Lateral head: posterior surface of humerus, superior to radial groove
Medial head: posterior surface of humerus, inferior to radial groove
Insertion Proximal end of olecranon process of ulna and fascia of forearm
Action Chief extensor of forearm; long head steadies head of abducted humerus
Innervation Radial nerve (C6, C7 and C8)
Arterial
Supply Branches of deep brachial artery
This is only Anatomy.................we are debating Physiology here.

Originally Posted by Yanick

oh my god its like banging your fuckin head against the wall.

that proves my whole point.

they are even innervated by the same nerve.

they all share one insertion point on the ulna and two of the heads originate on the back of the humerus while one (the long head as stated a million times already) originates on the scapula. now explain to me how many different ways you can extend your elbow, and how each of those recruits each head of the triceps either exclusively or moreso than the others, and forget about the long head being recruited to assist in shoulder extension etc etc.

and another thing. show us your studies smart guy, that state that you CAN isolate, or move the workload over to one head vs the others. How is this achieved, how can you contract (conc, iso, ecc) one head more than the others? show me one piece of evidence, besides i have big arms, that supports your claim.

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

Still no answer.........................again give us the studies to support your opinion.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

I was talking basic textbook kinesiology here. Yanick scrounged up a link though.

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

All you did was post the same Anatomy info that I did....
Now show me some scientific studies to prove your opinion.
And I didnt say you can "isolate."

Again because you cant seem to read.....this is also and to a larger part a Physiology issue.

Originally Posted by swordfish

cowpimp, p-funk, thecurse, foreman rules, and whoever the hell is is talking about this, including the person who posted, all of you guys chill, who cares about the outer head, your not competing, just worry about getting your ARMS GETTING BIG, hit cg, skull-crushers, dips, overhead ext, pushdowns. just pick a couple and hit it hard and heavy, 3-4 sets of 8-10 reps for 2 or 3 exercises. WHO GIVES A SHIT ABOUT THE OUTER HEAD. QUIT OVERANALYZING EACH DAMN MUSCLE FIBER. just keep lifting and hitting it hard with the basics!

and if you want to worry too much about a muscle, worry about your thighs and your back, much much bigger.

Originally Posted by Yanick

its actually a kinesiology issue, but that is semanticsYes it is....and that is no way to prove a point....plus Kinesiology is a branch of Physiology...so your splitting hairs here . we can extrapolate from anatomy, physiology and kinesiology that one head cannot be worked moreso than the others, it is not necessary to study it but if you have a couple of hundred grand and a lab i'm sure you'll find someone willing to do a valid study on it, but that guy won't have big arms When did I bring up arm size?????....nice try buddy so he'll just be wrong.

ki·ne·si·ol·o·gy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (k-ns-l-j, -z-)
n.
The study of the anatomy, physiology, and mechanics of body movement, especially in humans.
The application of the principles of kinesiology to the evaluation and treatment of muscular imbalance or derangement.

Main Entry: anat·o·my
Pronunciation: &-'nat-&-mE
Function: noun
Inflected Form: plural -mies
1 : a branch of morphology that deals with the structure of organisms —compare PHYSIOLOGY 1
2 : a treatise on anatomic science or art
3 : the art of separating the parts of an organism in order to ascertain their position, relations, structure, and function : DISSECTION
4 : structural makeup especially of an organism or any of its parts

phys·i·ol·o·gy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (fz-l-j)
n.
The biological study of the functions of living organisms and their parts.
All the functions of a living organism or any of its parts.

listen bottom line is you dodge every single question i throw at you and return with retarded questions like show me your studies. its is obviously out of my control what kind of studies are being performed out there in the world so its not fault that there aren't any studies that prove my point however there are also no studies that prove your point so its a double edged sword you see?

which brings me back to basic kinesiology and anatomy.

i will post up some basic, undeniable scientific facts which can be found in any text.

1. muscles work by contracting across a joint and bringing the insertion and origin closer together thereby moving the bones that make up that joint.
2. a muscle can only contract, that is all it does.
3. the elbow is a hinge joint and can only move in one degree/plane of motion.
4. the actions of the elbow are flexion and extension.
5. the triceps extend the elbow (and assist in some shoulder/wrist actions)
6. no matter where your humerus is in space (abducted, flexed, extended, ripped off from the body etc), the action of the triceps is still extension.

now tell me which one of these scientific facts you disagree with and we can go from there.

Originally Posted by Yanick

okay, i have no proof obviously because none exists (if there was definitive proof, we wouldn't be having this discussion). all we can do is extrapolate from the basic sciences that moving the workload from one head over to another is impossible.

very true, you never mentioned anything about arms i'm still bitter about yesterday lol.

so, since we both agree there is no definitive proof either way the only thing we can do is present current knowns and use logic to extrapolate a conclusion. the undeniable facts i have posted up above, but you skirt the whole issue.Really??? how do I do that???....I said it was my "opinion" and you 2 began the attack on those who didn't share your beliefs. i have explained how i extrapolated my conclusion from known scientific facts, Not really, all you did was copy some Anatomy terms....and interpret them as you felt necessary now i'm asking you to do 1 of two things. either prove that my conclusion is flawed in some way...that my interpretation of the facts is wrong or present your own conclusion and explain how you came to it in a logical manner.

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

Yes a link about Anatomy only......
Please post some scientific studies supporting your opinions



post 72 by cowpimp
It's not a thinly veiled attack. You are refusing to give any more detail on your tested hypothesis. You just keep dodging my questions. They are valid questions, and questions that I would seek the answer to in any study that I read. Stop trying to get personal. I have not attacked you in any way, shape, or form. You are getting defensive for no reason here...

Also, I want to understand how, even if my goal was pure mass, you expect me to reach the state of someone who has been training more than twice as long as me? I have gained almost 30 pounds of muscle in the past 2 years. I think that rate of muscular gain is definitely respectable.

Here is the bottom line. Science says one thing, and you say another. However, you claim to have proof to support your opinion. At the same time, you refuse to present this proof with sufficient detail to be considered. So, explain to me why anyone should believe what you're saying without further information, which is what I have been trying to extrapolate from you in this thread?



I am just asking of you the same thing you are asking of thecurse

Originally Posted by TheCurse

im kinda confused now too p, plus im talking long head not lateral head you numbskull!

and to super cowpimp, look man, i know you got all this superior training knowledge and like to throw around those two dollar words, but looking at what your superior knowledge has produced in you, i dont want any part of it. i believe my goals are different. your aggresive thinly veiled attacks are irritating to say the least when i come across them in so many threads.
yep, ill say it again. i want size and strength. if you look like guys i know who dont even lift, i dont want to follow your program. no matter how many books you've read.

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

Posting definitions and taking pot shots at me just proves you have no idea what certain exercises do to the triceps muscle.

All you have to say is that its your opinion.....but instead you 2 just keep asking for proof ( when we said from our first posts it was just our opinions from experience)....and yet you 2 still have shown 0 proof to support your opinions.

We are all familiar with Anatomy here but that is not the issue......

Originally Posted by CowPimp

Okay fine. The reason I asked him for proof is because he is talking about a study he performed himself. I am only presenting widely accepted information on what the function of the triceps are; I'm talking kinesiology 101 stuff here. Either way, I will provide you with link listing the aforementioned function, in addition to the link provided by Yanick:

http://www.fitstep.com/Advanced/Anatomy/Triceps.htm
This is just anatomy that I have already posted and in no way proves your opinion.



http://www.sonoma.edu/users/b/boda/kin350/anatomy.htm This is a study guide from Sonoma State University.Anatomy Review....not prof again...just more of the same anatomy lessons



http://www.wheelessonline.com/ortho/triceps_brachiiAgain more of the same anatomy descriptions......please posting the same thing 10 times proves nothing except that you have no real proof to back up all your preaching.



http://www.exrx.net/Muscles/TricepsBrachii.html

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

Thats 4 anatomy reviews....please come up with some valid studies to prove your point.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

All I'm trying to say is that elbow extension causes all 3 heads to contract, no matter how you position the rest of your body.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

All I'm trying to say is that elbow extension causes all 3 heads to contract, no matter how you position the rest of your body.

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

I said it before and I will say it again...From experience over years of training I have found that you can to some small degree target certain areas of certain muscles.

Originally Posted by buildingup

and my penis causes all three of your mums to cum!!!!

Originally Posted by Yanick

stop being a fucktard. if you don't have anything useful to say, stop wasting space on this thread.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

I asked for more detail about your evidence based on experience. I said you already had proof, I just wanted more detail about it.

For example, how did you measure the growth of the long head in the tricep relative to the other heads? Or is it simply that when you look in the mirror you are pretty sure it increased in size at a rate that surpassed the rest of the heads? If that is the case, then just say so.

Originally Posted by buildingup

suck my balls faggot! stop arguing ur stupid point and get ur 100lbs ass in the gym!

Originally Posted by Yanick

how did you come to this conclusion is my whole point.
Well I answered that question but will answer it again.......by training for a long time I have certain opinions on exercise.

my other point with TC was that this whole "years of experience" thing is impossible to verify, because you have no control group to measure your findings against.I didn't realize that opinions needed documented proof

to state it differently, say you needed to bring up your lateral head in the triceps and you spent 8 months doing it. at the end of the 8 months it appears that you have brought up your lateral head moreso than the other two. you need a control group (essentially another 'you') that didn't use your specific method of training (the lateral head) and instead only used CGBP for tri's and its absolutely clear that his lateral head did not hypertrophy moreso than the other two. that is the only way to verify that the different training produced results which are different from any other form of training.

do you get my point now?

and saying anatomy doesn't matter is pure bullshit. I didn't say that it didn't matter...I said it was not just an anatomy issue.....don't try and distort what I said thats just lame. for instance, the delts have 3 heads, each with a seperate function on the humerus and from that we can extrapolate the conclusion that front raises will work the anterior delt concentrically while recruiting the post. delt eccentrically to decelerate the load. we don't need studies to prove this, its basic scientific fact. we are just applying those same principles to the triceps and its very clear that all they do is extend the elbow, not matter if your laying down, holding your arms overhead or next to your sides.

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

I have to disagree with that.......
Now lets not argue this for 50 posts just do this and then tell me I'm wrong.
Next chest workout do something different....do incline DB press 6 sets of 6-10 reps.
then a few incline flys if you want and thats it......now is your chest sore at the top , middle or bottom?????

Then next workout do the same except decline db press.

Originally Posted by TheCurse

you definately can emphasize one head over the other kids.
it has to do with the position of your humerus relative to your torso.
no you cant 'isolate' any one of them, but you can definately change how the workload is distrubuted throughout the three heads.

to work the lateral head best you want to keep your upper arm down at your side or close to it.
press downs mostly, although CGBP hammers the medial head hard too.

Originally Posted by TheCurse

the long head of the triceps is actually attached to the scapula braintrust, while the other two start on the humerus. elevating your arm puts the long head on a stretch, eliciting a stronger contraction. how many anatomy classes you taken? ive taken several. ive also developed the long head of my triceps to a far greater extent than most people using my findings.

the proof is in the results. lets see your triceps yanick. oh yea its just another internet shit talker.

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

I have to agree with this......science is great but I think it is more than incomplete when debating if inclines work the upper chest differanntly than declines, or triceps for that matter.

So I have to rely on both science ( and the tiny amout of research done on how specific exercises hit certain muscles and experiance.

Originally Posted by Yanick

here are the first couple of posts that you and TC posted up, show me where you are saying that that is your opinion. First of all I never said it was a scientific fact....but you did and you failed miserably to prove your point......now go read post 90....I say there that it is my "opinion," just to clear things up for you 2. You guys tried arguing science and got ownedActually we were stating our opinions and you two fools started a fight.......claiming science proves us wrong.......yet you never went beyond a high school anatomy lesson......sorry bro but you are " owned." , so now you are trying to go back and say "oh i said its my opinion, you have you prove your point" well sorry bud it doesn't work that way.

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

Actually this is what you are saying and said.

origonally posted by CowpimpYou see, there is this phenomenon called proprioception. Because certain heads of a muscle group, or even portions of a single muscle, are stretched to a different degree depending on the movement in question, the mind tends to create a reaction via the nervous system to make the lifter aware of that fact. That doesn't mean that the portion of the muscle or the head in question is under a greater amount of tension, will hypertrophy more, is suffering a greater amount of microtrauma, etc.






We agree on basic anatomy only.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

You found the one post out of my 20 in this thread that doesn't have to do with the function of triceps. All that statement was doing is aid in disproving the "I feel it in _____ muscle" explanation as proof that you can isolate a specific head of a tricep.

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

So you are retracting this comment?

This clearly shows your talking about more than just the "Anatomy of the triceps."

Originally Posted by CowPimp

Not at all. However, why would you ask me for proof about something I posted 100 posts ago, instead of the topic at hand? You have to be more specific if you are going to go out of context like that.

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

Look all you are doing here is being a smart ass ( like you said you went being in post 59 on page two ) you keep drilling TheCurse on his opinions asking for scientific data, yet you offer none to disprove him except some basic anatomy.

Why do you feel the need to try and brainwash everyone to agree with you? I have no problem with what you believe, I don't agree with you but thats fine.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

I thought this was a forum? As in an open public discussion... I'm not trying to brainwash, but I merely wanted more info on how TheCurse came to the conclusion that he did. I came to mine based, yes, on simply kinesiology.

You just give the run around. You don't know how to argue. I'm done. I've presented my case, and you presented yours. If TheCurse wants to give me more information on how he tested his hypothesis, then he can. It has nothing to do with you.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

I thought this was a forum? It is but that dosent give you the right to attack those who don't agree with you. As in an open public discussion... I'm not trying to brainwash, but I merely wanted more info on how TheCurse came to the conclusion that he did. No you wanted some scientific data in its appropriate form to show you the results of his opinions........your just trying to be clever about how you disrespect others beliefs......but some of us can see through your arrogance. I came to mine based, yes, on simply kinesiology. Yet all you did to support it was post the same basic anatomy crap 100x.

You just give the run around. No thats what you do.....I stated an opinion, you said I was wrong ( you could have just said you disagreed...but you wanted to pic a fight) and you talked in circles never saying anything new and never showing and scientific facts to back op your bull shit. You don't know how to argue.I'm not the fool who said science proved his opinion and failed to demonstrate those facts. I'm done. I've presented my case, No you just copied some high school anatomy facts. and you presented yours. If TheCurse wants to give me more information on how he tested his hypothesis, then he can. It has nothing to do with you.Thank God I hope this is true.....I am sick to death dealing with an arrogant child with a Napoleon complex.

Originally Posted by foremanrules

First of all I never said it was a scientific fact....but you did and you failed miserably to prove your point......now go read post 90....I say there that it is my "opinion," just to clear things up for you 2. Actually we were stating our opinions and you two fools started a fight.......claiming science proves us wrong.......yet you never went beyond a high school anatomy lesson......sorry bro but you are " owned."

Originally Posted by Yanick

you still didn't show me where you two were stating that isolating heads or w/e was your opinion. the words and tone you used implied that you were stating fact when in fact the science says otherwise. and no for the last time i do not have studies, but studies are not the only way to prove something, I agree 100% experiance can be a great tool . And mine has taught me things that you don't agree with. we do not need a study to prove gravity But we have them but we all know it exists because its a FACT of science. another fact of science is that the triceps extend your elbow, all three heads, no way around it.Yes we agree on basic anatomy.

like CowPimp, i digress. you two can't argue for shit, I'm not arguing you two are....I'm being attacked because I don't have the same opinion as you guys. you just skirt around all of our questions Not at all....name one question I didn't answer! and then backstep and start saying you never presented anything as fact Show me where I said anything I believed on this topic was a "fact." because you can't present a case beyond, it worked for me (and to which we have replied, other training could have produced the same results but there is no way verify it).Yes thats called a personal opinion....you could just have said " ok but I disagree with you"....but that was too hard for you wasn't it.

this was a decent mental exercise, but i'm done now.

Originally Posted by largepkg

Hey P, AKA:lil guy <---

I only have one thing to say. You're a riot!

Originally Posted by Sam40

I think this thread may qualify, as the longest of all time. So I can't resist getting in on it.

The triceps muscle must have a reason in having three heads, of course one being flexibility. But if you hold your arm straight out, and rotate your hand counter clockwise thumb pointing toward the floor; you will notice the triceps contracts. This proves that hand position has an a effect on this muscle. So being that is the case, it then must be possible to strike different parts of this muscle group. By using different exercises, and hand positions.

As far as science goes. The lowly Bumble Bee cannot fly, it is not aerodynamically possible. BUT! somebody forgot to tell the bee. They can hover, fly sideways, and backward, something few flying creatures can do. So it seems they do pretty good, for a bee that absolutely is not supposed to fly. So science stands red faced on this one, who knows how many other things science fails to prove??.

Originally Posted by P-funk

I still don't get it?? Are they arguing with you about the long head or the outer head? If you raise your arms up you will be working the long head as it is placed in its greatests strech. Similiar to if you do a preacher curl and shorten the long head of the bicep you will use less of it. While performing a incline DB curl that stretches that head will activate it to a greater extent.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

Thanks Curse. I honestly just wanted a bit more information on what you meant by tested a hypothesis of yours. I didn't mean it as an attack. In the end, I don't totally disagree with you. I think we ended up arguing about 10 different, but interrelated, things here, and a slightly different variation of each one.

The original poster asked about "specifically targetting" the outer head, which I took to mean as isolate. I said that couldn't happen, and I still stand by it. Not to mention I believe the outer head means the lateral head. The lateral head is on the outside of the body in an anatomically relaxed position (Palms up, arms down to the side).

Now, I understand that you can get a greater stretch of the long head during overhead extensions, but the other heads still contract, and I don't think you can hypertrophy the long head at the expense of the other two heads. That is, all the heads are going to grow if you do elbow extension movements. Their rate of growth is dictated by genetics. That is my opinion. I'm owning that statement so Foreman can relax.

I appreciate your apology too. I felt I was civil during this discussion, but pardon me if I wasn't.

Originally Posted by buildingup

owned!!!

Originally Posted by TheCurse

otherwise this shit is getting ridiculous. ill even apologize for calling anyone little, except for p funk

Originally Posted by Yanick

oh yeah, p-funk is a bitch so don't worry about apologizing to him

Originally Posted by TheCurse

i seem to keep repeating myself over and over. ive put this information out in several other threads and a few dozen PM's.

i never said isolate, i said slightly shift the workload, i think the word i used was emphasize.

look at P funks description of bicep heads being shortened and thus contracting less. sure they all still contract, but in some postitions one head my be called upon more than in other postions.

the actual numbers here, who knows. is it a 1% workload shift? 10%? more?
of course i dont know, never said i did. i just shared my successful training experience and why i think it was successful.

Originally Posted by P-funk

fuck you.

Originally Posted by Yanick

i know you say that with all the love in your heart

Originally Posted by AKIRA

I just love watching these arguments. Pretty damn funny.

Anyway, while we are on the topic. There are 3 heads of the triceps yes? First off, Ive only seen two spoken about here..what about the other? And what is it called again?

Also, I guess I am just confused, but I just dont know which part the outer head is. Is this the part of your tricep that you can see by looking down at your arm? Or is it on the back where youd have to see it with a mirror?

Also, hah! The triceps is a horshoe shape as we all know, but I ve always wondered, what the fuck is in the center of it? What muscle is there?

Originally Posted by AKIRA

I just love watching these arguments. Pretty damn funny.

Anyway, while we are on the topic. There are 3 heads of the triceps yes? First off, Ive only seen two spoken about here..what about the other? And what is it called again?

Originally Posted by CowPimp

I was assuming that the outer head is the lateral head, but I don't really know which head he was referring to. The reason I say this is because in the anatomically relaxed position you have your arms at your sides with your palms facing up. The lateral head is facing away from your body in this position.

Originally Posted by TyGym

I've had some lagging lateral head on my triceps too. What I've done is some serious muscle-head scientific research. :-D
Alright. So every grip you use makes the muscle heads contract. BUT, they also make certain muscle heads contract more so than others. So, try using to T-Bar on a push-down cable. Grip it with thumbs close to you, then push down. Just like a normal triceps push down, but with your hands gripping a T-Bar with thumbs close to your body.
It took me a few times until I really started feeling it.. But once you really get the mind-muscle connection with this exercise, it works. My triceps are now very full and symmetrical.
I hope this movement helps you.

Originally Posted by T_man

I'm tired of hearing genetics.

Else we'd all be the skinny/fat guy we used to be!

And about the exercises, you can definately work certain muscles even though others contract along with it. Take bench press, your triceps contract but your chest takes the bigger load. It's not spread evenely. If you make it close grip, more stress is put on the triceps, and so the triceps grow at a faster rate than chest if you do this exercise only. I know it's not the same muscle but they work together like one muscle just moving different bones.

Originally Posted by T_man

I know but

when doing compounds the muscle groups work together like the different heads of a single muscle group when doing isolation. changing the manner in which you do it changes the head that gets stressed the most

<trying hard to dig himself out of a hole>