Thread: Question about isolating middle,upper,etc article

It's just one opinion.

But what does the majority believe?

Most here believe what they are told

heres my chest workout:
benchpress 4x6-8
decline press 3x8
incline press 3x8
chest fly's 3x8-10

First of all, the only thing that is debatable is the emphasis, not isolation, of the two heads of the pectoralis major. There is no middle head. There is an upper and lower head, the clavicular and sternal heads respectively.

Very respectable minds are sitting on both sides of the fence. I used to firmly believe that there was no possible way to emphasize one head over the other, but as of now I will refrain from believing anything until I see more convincing evidence of either opinion. Most of the information I see thrown around is theory, conjecture, or purely empirical. Yes, anatomy should be able to dictate it, but the biomechanics of the incline press are debatable to some degree without objective studies.

Just do some inclines in your routine and don't worry about it. Inclines are a valuable exercise, upper chest emphasis or not.

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

Most here believe what they are told

So much for critical thinking huh?

Originally Posted by the_general64

Can someone explain this article to a beginner.......from what i am getting there seems no need to do incline or decline because you can"t isolate the upper or middle or lower.......?????

I think the basic idea is that the muscle itself will grow as a whole, but the "emphasis" placed on the muscle is different with each exercise. For example, by performing incline presses (for the upper chest), the end result is the growth of the whole chest area, but the "emphasis" of the movement itself targets the upper chest region. So even though you use the incline press to develop your upper chest, your whole chest will grow, thereby increasing overall size, including the upper portion.

Someone correct me if I am wrong?

Originally Posted by CowPimp

Very respectable minds are sitting on both sides of the fence. I used to firmly believe that there was no possible way to emphasize one head over the other, but as of now I will refrain from believing anything until I see more convincing evidence of either opinion. Most of the information I see thrown around is theory, conjecture, or purely empirical.

Agreed.

Where have you been Furion? A knowledgeable person and highly objective thinker like yourself needs to spend more time on this board.

Originally Posted by furion joe

So much for critical thinking huh?






I think the basic idea is that the muscle itself will grow as a whole, but the "emphasis" placed on the muscle is different with each exercise. For example, by performing incline presses (for the upper chest), the end result is the growth of the whole chest area, but the "emphasis" of the movement itself targets the upper chest region. So even though you use the incline press to develop your upper chest, your whole chest will grow, thereby increasing overall size, including the upper portion.

Someone correct me if I am wrong?

That makes a lot of sense when I think of it that way. I have been so caught up in the what builds what, but now I can do my incline presses without having that nagging idea in my head about what part of my chest should I be concentrating on.

Originally Posted by the_general64

Can someone explain this article to a beginner.......from what i am getting there seems no need to do incline or decline because you can"t isolate the upper or middle or lower.......?????

you should hit the chest from all 3 angles, the point is you cannot target a specific area of a muscle.

I have a quick nagging question that's probably very simple to answer: Why is it that when doing certain exercises for the abdominals (and correct me if I'm wrong, but the abdominals are really just one muscle), one can usually feel a greater build up of lactic acid in a certain area? In other words, why is there more of a 'burn' in the lower portion when doing leg lifts, for example? I realize lactic acid build up has nothing to do with a productive workout, blah, blah, blah, but why would you feel it more in one area than another if it wasn't hit harder? I'm not saying it is, but why would that be?

Originally Posted by Squaggleboggin

I have a quick nagging question that's probably very simple to answer: Why is it that when doing certain exercises for the abdominals (and correct me if I'm wrong, but the abdominals are really just one muscle), one can usually feel a greater build up of lactic acid in a certain area? In other words, why is there more of a 'burn' in the lower portion when doing leg lifts, for example? I realize lactic acid build up has nothing to do with a productive workout, blah, blah, blah, but why would you feel it more in one area than another if it wasn't hit harder? I'm not saying it is, but why would that be?

The phenomenon of your peripheral nervous system's input system. Certain parts of a muscle can be stretched moreso than others. Your body interprets this input by making you feel discomfort in different parts of the same muscle.

Also, I have a wildly speculative suggestion. I don't see blood flow being entirely uniform throughout a muscle. Therefore, lactic acid buildup could possibly be eliminated quicker in certain parts of a muscle which for one reason or another are predisposed to a larger volume of blood being pumped through it. Lactate is created on the cellular level and releived on the cellular level. I could see surrounding musculature's involvement having some kind of bearing on this.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

Where have you been Furion? A knowledgeable person and highly objective thinker like yourself needs to spend more time on this board.

Thanks CowPimp, I appreciate your kind words. It's good to see that you are still here helping out. I really enjoy reading your posts and digesting all the quality information you present to the board. Keep up the good work.

For myself, I just fell off I guess; life tends to keep you busy with different things, but I have been checking in and trying my best to keep up with what's going on here.

Originally Posted by KelJu

That makes a lot of sense when I think of it that way. I have been so caught up in the what builds what, but now I can do my incline presses without having that nagging idea in my head about what part of my chest should I be concentrating on.

Cool. And I hear what you are saying. Sometimes it's really difficult to keep the "simplicity" of bodybuilding at hand, when in fact; the very "scientific" nature of the endeavor is so complex.

I believe that you can isolate them to a certain degree.

the take home message of this thread (since people wont agree) is this:

Whether you can or can not isolate different parts of the chest doesn't matter. What is important is that you train yourself in a variety of different angles and planes of motion to help build strength and balance around your shoulder joint.

Originally Posted by P-funk

What is important is that you train yourself in a variety of different angles and planes of motion to help build strength and balance around your shoulder joint.

Good point P-funk.

Question: What's your approach to achieving strength and balance?

I understand the concept of different angles and planes of motion, but is there a predetermined way to accomplish this? For instance, do you keep certain exercises (program design) that address the stability of the shoulder joint?

Or is it more of a balance of training the internal and external rotators through a system of sets and exercises. Like doing an equal number of sets and exercises for back and chest. So if you do 3 exercises for back, you would do 3 for chest and the same for total sets?

The over-development of the internal rotators does sacrifice the integrity of the shoulder joint/complex. I learned this the hard way and really had to work diligently (re-gain flexibility and development/strength of the external rotators) to get my shoulders aligned and balanced again.

Am I making sense? I thought you might have a particular take on the best approach.

Originally Posted by furion joe

Good point P-funk.

Question: What's your approach to achieving strength and balance?

I understand the concept of different angles and planes of motion, but is there a predetermined way to accomplish this? For instance, do you keep certain exercises (program design) that address the stability of the shoulder joint?

Or is it more of a balance of training the internal and external rotators through a system of sets and exercises. Like doing an equal number of sets and exercises for back and chest. So if you do 3 exercises for back, you would do 3 for chest and the same for total sets?

The over-development of the internal rotators does sacrifice the integrity of the shoulder joint/complex. I learned this the hard way and really had to work diligently (re-gain flexibility and development/strength of the external rotators) to get my shoulders aligned and balanced again.

Am I making sense? I thought you might have a particular take on the best approach.

.

good question. If you read through some of the threads regarding training splits over the past couple of days Cowpimp and I have more then covered the topic of balancing your pushes to pulls over movement planes while putting together a training program. take a look at those. If you have questions, ask.

Originally Posted by ABLQ2

I believe that you can isolate them to a certain degree.

So do I.....but rather hit one area slightly more....not isolate

Joe, the general idea is to balance the volume of your pushing and pulling movements as well as your hip and knee dominant lower body movements. An example would be if you do 4 sets of 10 repetitions @ 12RM on the bench press, then do the same for your bent rows. Also, spending a good amount of time training on vertical and horizontal planes of motion.

In addition, it is a good idea to train multiple functions for each muscle. So, sometimes you should military press with a wide grip where your arms are out to your sides (Shoulder abduction/Frontal plane) and sometimes you should do it with your arms close like a CG bench press overhead so to speak (Shoulder flexion/Sagittal plane).