Tricep - Outer Head !!

[GFR]

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.

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.

 

[CowPimp]

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

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

The primary function of the Tricep is to extend the elbow (straightening the arm).

The secondary function of the Tricep is fulfilled only by the Long head of the muscle, which is the bring the arm down towards the body (adduction). The Tricep shares this function with the Latissimus Dorsi.

http://www.sonoma.edu/users/b/boda/kin350/anatomy.htm - This is a study guide from Sonoma State University.

Triceps Brachii- elbow extension concentric, elbow flexion eccentric

Exer: tricep curls, bench press

http://www.wheelessonline.com/ortho/triceps_brachii

- action: extends forearm at the elbow. Longe head aids in adduction and extension of the arm at the shoulder;

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

 

[P-funk]

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.

actually, I am not talking about any head of the tricep!! LOL. I agree about the long head if you are asking me about that. However, I was just giving my 2 cents about anecdotal evidence as it applies to training different people. I was not ever really arguing with you or anyone as a matter of fact. I was just brining up points.

sorry to confuse,
"still" lil guy

 

[CowPimp]

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......

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.

 

[GFR]

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

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

 

[CowPimp]

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

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.

 

[buildingup]

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.

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

 

[GFR]

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.

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.

 

[Yanick]

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.

how did you come to this conclusion is my whole point.

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.

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 absoblutely 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. 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.

 

[Yanick]

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

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

 

[buildingup]

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

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

 

[GFR]

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.

You are confusing me with theCurse here......I never said I had proof....
If you read my last 8 or 9 posts you would see that I said it was my opinion only.
this is you talking to theCurse........I think you have us confused......I never did any study or test on this idea with others

origonally 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?

 

[largepkg]

Hey P, AKA:lil guy <---

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

 

[Yanick]

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

your asking me, a guy, to suck your balls and then calling me a faggot?

 

[buildingup]

yep! i meant the sucking of my balls figuratively and your 100lbs ass literally!

 

[GFR]

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.

We just disagree, I said from the start it was just my opinion and you 2 said it was scientific fact. So you can try to tell me my opinion is wrong but to do so you need to prove your point with actual science that applys to this discussion. Anatomy lessons are a good start but you really need much more that that.

 

[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. You guys tried arguing science and got 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

 

[GFR]

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.

 

[CowPimp]

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.

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.

 

[GFR]

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.

So you are retracting this comment?

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

 

[CowPimp]

Let's start fresh here. The original poster said the following:

I'm looking to find exercises that specifically target the outside head (not sure exactly what its name is).

Anyone have any suggestions?

Okay. So, he is looking for an exercise that "specifically targets" the outer head of the tricep. Now, let's look at the basic functions of the tricep:

Extend the elbow
Assist in shoulder abduction/extension (Outer head)

So, the answer is no. You can't activate the outer head without activating other muscles, which is what I'm interpreting "specifically target" as meaning.

 

[CowPimp]

So you are retracting this comment?

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

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.

 

[largepkg]

If anyone has a dead horse this would be the time to beat it!

 

[GFR]

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.

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.

 

[CowPimp]

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.

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.

 

[buildingup]

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.

shut the fuck up cowshit! your losing the argument and being bloody annoying! go surf on a big wave!

 

[GFR]

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.

 

[Yanick]

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."

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, we do not need a study to prove gravity 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.

like CowPimp, i digress. you two can't argue for shit, you just skirt around all of our questions and then backstep and start saying you never presented anything as 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).

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

 

[GFR]

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.

Yes you are very done.

 

[turbine5]

i would think a physio-therapist would be best able to answer this question....aren't kinesiology grads just glorified personal trainers? Physios actually have to apply this stuff and get results...its their livelihood...Is anyone here a physio-therapist?