Exercises to target specific parts of my chest...

[dviusin10shunz]

It is impossible to completely isolate a particular portion within a muscle. But there are numerous ways to over-emphasis certain areas within a muscle. One of those ways is but it is by stimulating the muscle through a variety of angles.

For example, when performing barbell incline presses , you effectively work the entire chest area. But by lifting the weight from an inclined angle you force the upper chest to resist the weight harder than the chest as a whole. In other words you force the upper chest to take the majority of the load by stimulating uneven distribution of the weight via a sloping angle.

Our bodies are designed to be able to work from a vast amount of positions. It would only make logical sense that our nervous system would have the ability to adjust to these numerous angles and compensate by signaling particular areas within the muscle to contract harder than others.

This would allow the body to focus its muscular energy and endurance to any one particular area of that muscle that would be better equipped to perform the work to complete the given task.

In this instance the work load is being forced at such an angle that the upper chest muscles would be better equipped to handle the force being mustered against it. Thus, the nervous system sends a signal to your upper pectorals to contract harder than the other portions of your chest muscles to better deal with the stress of the inclined resistance.

IN OTHER WORDS.......the chest works as a whole. While you CAN emphasize different areas of the chest by different exercises/angles/grips....whatever, you are still working the WHOLE CHEST. Therefore, it could never be considered a true upper/lower/inner/outer(or whatever other part you think your "isolating") chest isolation exercise. Whether you do them flat/incline/decline gripped wide, superwide, upside down....you are still isolating the chest as a whole, while tryin to EMPHASIZE a certain area of the chest.

[DanB218]

Originally Posted by Mtguy8787

nobody cares what you think. Think what you like.

people say the same thing you are about the world being flat.

There are so many studies, and so much data, that its not even worth digging up.

Your chest grows fine... so what. That means nothing.

If there are so many studies and so much data why don't you post something instead of making retarded remarks like " People say the same thing about the world being flat". You cant disprove that your chest works as one whole muscle good luck working your upper chest. Isolation of your upper and lower chest isn't possible but you can keep beleiving it. I think alot of people are being misinformed by fitness magazines claiming you can completely isolate different parts of your chest muscles. Like I said before to each his own.. believe what you want I will listen to what anatomy says and it proves your chest is one whole muscle. You guys can keep listenting to Flex magazine and when you finally figure out your dick from your nose you might get a clue that isolation of different parts of your chest is not possible.

[sugicalmike]

Originally Posted by dviusin10shunz

It is impossible to completely isolate a particular portion within a muscle. But there are numerous ways to over-emphasis certain areas within a muscle. One of those ways is but it is by stimulating the muscle through a variety of angles.

For example, when performing barbell incline presses , you effectively work the entire chest area. But by lifting the weight from an inclined angle you force the upper chest to resist the weight harder than the chest as a whole. In other words you force the upper chest to take the majority of the load by stimulating uneven distribution of the weight via a sloping angle.

Our bodies are designed to be able to work from a vast amount of positions. It would only make logical sense that our nervous system would have the ability to adjust to these numerous angles and compensate by signaling particular areas within the muscle to contract harder than others.

This would allow the body to focus its muscular energy and endurance to any one particular area of that muscle that would be better equipped to perform the work to complete the given task.

In this instance the work load is being forced at such an angle that the upper chest muscles would be better equipped to handle the force being mustered against it. Thus, the nervous system sends a signal to your upper pectorals to contract harder than the other portions of your chest muscles to better deal with the stress of the inclined resistance.

IN OTHER WORDS.......the chest works as a whole. While you CAN emphasize different areas of the chest by different exercises/angles/grips....whatever, you are still working the WHOLE CHEST. Therefore, it could never be considered a true upper/lower/inner/outer(or whatever other part you think your "isolating") chest isolation exercise. Whether you do them flat/incline/decline gripped wide, superwide, upside down....you are still isolating the chest as a whole, while tryin to EMPHASIZE a certain area of the chest.

I like this answer the best so far... I think it will also double superbly as a thesis for a master's class... Nice work!

[SDFlip]

weight room experience > scientific mumbo jumbo

[Mtguy8787]

Originally Posted by dviusin10shunz

It is impossible to completely isolate a particular portion within a muscle. But there are numerous ways to over-emphasis certain areas within a muscle. One of those ways is but it is by stimulating the muscle through a variety of angles.

For example, when performing barbell incline presses , you effectively work the entire chest area. But by lifting the weight from an inclined angle you force the upper chest to resist the weight harder than the chest as a whole. In other words you force the upper chest to take the majority of the load by stimulating uneven distribution of the weight via a sloping angle.

Our bodies are designed to be able to work from a vast amount of positions. It would only make logical sense that our nervous system would have the ability to adjust to these numerous angles and compensate by signaling particular areas within the muscle to contract harder than others.

This would allow the body to focus its muscular energy and endurance to any one particular area of that muscle that would be better equipped to perform the work to complete the given task.

In this instance the work load is being forced at such an angle that the upper chest muscles would be better equipped to handle the force being mustered against it. Thus, the nervous system sends a signal to your upper pectorals to contract harder than the other portions of your chest muscles to better deal with the stress of the inclined resistance.

IN OTHER WORDS.......the chest works as a whole. While you CAN emphasize different areas of the chest by different exercises/angles/grips....whatever, you are still working the WHOLE CHEST. Therefore, it could never be considered a true upper/lower/inner/outer(or whatever other part you think your "isolating") chest isolation exercise. Whether you do them flat/incline/decline gripped wide, superwide, upside down....you are still isolating the chest as a whole, while tryin to EMPHASIZE a certain area of the chest.

good post.
And yes, when most (non-retarded) people on here say isolate or target, they mean emphasize.

Originally Posted by DanB218

If there are so many studies and so much data why don't you post something instead of making retarded remarks like " People say the same thing about the world being flat". You cant disprove that your chest works as one whole muscle good luck working your upper chest. Isolation of your upper and lower chest isn't possible but you can keep beleiving it. I think alot of people are being misinformed by fitness magazines claiming you can completely isolate different parts of your chest muscles. Like I said before to each his own.. believe what you want I will listen to what anatomy says and it proves your chest is one whole muscle. You guys can keep listenting to Flex magazine and when you finally figure out your dick from your nose you might get a clue that isolation of different parts of your chest is not possible.

1.) Because it is meaningless to try and prove otherwise to you

2.) Because I really dont care what you believe.

you are the retarded one if you seriously think all exercises will work your entire chest the same way.

My statement about people still believing the world is flat is to point out that some people (like yourself) will not believe something no matter how logical the position, or no matter the amount of evidence presented.

[Mtguy8787]

Originally Posted by SDFlip

weight room experience > scientific mumbo jumbo

and (real) science + real world experience = the best combination.

If you can take real world results, and know WHY they worked, then you can improve it in many, many ways.

[dviusin10shunz]

Originally Posted by SDFlip

weight room experience > scientific mumbo jumbo

It's better to have both training experience as well as knowledge of your muscles and how they function. I do have plenty of weight room experience to put up against the "scientific mumbo jumbo".

[dviusin10shunz]

Originally Posted by Mtguy8787

and (real) science + real world experience = the best combination.

If you can take real world results, and know WHY they worked, then you can improve it in many, many ways.

Haha....pretty much what I was thinking!

[DanB218]

Originally Posted by Mtguy8787

good post.
And yes, when most (non-retarded) people on here say isolate or target, they mean emphasize.



1.) Because it is meaningless to try and prove otherwise to you

2.) Because I really dont care what you believe.

you are the retarded one if you seriously think all exercises will work your entire chest the same way.

My statement about people still believing the world is flat is to point out that some people (like yourself) will not believe something no matter how logical the position, or no matter the amount of evidence presented.

1.) You have no studies
2.) Thats all you can say because your wrong

3.) I never said all exercises work your entire chest the SAME way. What I said was you cannot isolate different parts of your chest. I didn't once say that putting emphasis on different regions of your chest doesn't cause alot of the workload to go to that region.

Dvi hit it right on the head.. there is no ISOLATION and thats what Iv'e been claiming the whole time. Isolate and Emphasize is completely different........ RETARD.

[Mtguy8787]

Originally Posted by DanB218

1.) You have no studies
2.) Thats all you can say because your wrong

3.) I never said all exercises work your entire chest the SAME way. What I said was you cannot isolate different parts of your chest. I didn't once say that putting emphasis on different regions of your chest doesn't cause alot of the workload to go to that region.

Dvi hit it right on the head.. there is no ISOLATION and thats what Iv'e been claiming the whole time. Isolate and Emphasize is completely different........ RETARD.

nobody ever said you can isolate just one part.

[DanB218]

Originally Posted by Mtguy8787

nobody ever said you can isolate just one part.

You claimed what I was saying was wrong and a couple other people did as well. I think this discussion is over and that it is cleared up that you cannot isolate different regions of your chest but you can indeed place emphasis on them.

[Mtguy8787]

Originally Posted by DanB218

Your chest is all one muscle.. pectoralis major and pectoralis minor. The way your chest grows is going to be mostly a result of genetics, you cant really control it. Work your chest hard once a week. 2 presses and 1 fly should be enough if your going heavy enough.

So i guess emphasizing one part or another will have no effect on the way it grows... hmm

and even you admit that one part can be emphasized. But here you say that this will have no effect on growth.

Originally Posted by Defiant1

I think you mean pectoralis major clavicular and sternal portions. The pec minor is not normally trained directly in "pec" workouts.

But NO ONE believes the pecs function as 1 muscle. There is no school of physiology that believes that.apparently some people do...

apparently some people do...

Originally Posted by DanB218

Alot of people believe it actually. Theres no proof that you can isolate the upper or lower part of your chest. I'm not trying to argue I'm just saying that it's a myth that people can take one way or another.

And the information "proving" your idea

Your chest muscles are composed of the pectoralis major and minor. The pectoralis major is the bigger chest muscle and travels from the collar bone to the sternum, attaching to the upper arm. The purpose of this muscle is flexion and adduction of the shoulder as well as inward shoulder rotation. The pectoralis minor is a small triangular muscle located under the pectoralis major and also helps with shoulder flexion, adduction and rotation.

How do I target my upper chest?
I don't believe there is a way to target the upper or lower chest. The chest is a group of muscles. Muscles are made of motor units. Motor units either contract or relax, no in between. The only muscle that has been shown to selectively recruit fibers in an area is the abdominal wall. You can't make the upper or lower chest bigger or smaller, this is a myth. What you can do is lose fat (to increase the definition of the cut in the lower chest) and then simply contract the chest to make it larger.

When you do inclines, instead of working the upper chest, testing with electrodes shows the entire chest contracts, but has less load and more tension is shifted to the shoulders. So the incline is great to work the chest and shoulders, it apparently does not target the upper chest according to what research and studies show to date.

Taken from- http://www.naturalphysiques.com/faq/392.html

again, your link is complete bull****.

And again you say that there is no way to target the upper chest, or make one part of it bigger or smaller vs the other.

And the 'pec major' is divided into to major different innervations. All chest exercises will work both heads SOMEWHAT, but the upper and lower head can MAJORLY be emphasized over one another


And now you are saying the emphasizing one part of the chest IS possible.

My only conclusion is that:

1.) You are retarded and forget what you say.

2.) You think that emphasizing one part of a muscle over another will have no effect on growth.

Originally Posted by DanB218

You claimed what I was saying was wrong and a couple other people did as well. I think this discussion is over and that it is cleared up that you cannot isolate different regions of your chest but you can indeed place emphasis on them.

nobody (not in a literal sense) thinks that you can completely isolate one part of a muscle

[DanB218]

I didn't say genetics was the only factor I said you CANT really control it. What I was saying was you cannot isolate maybe the link is bull**** but the rest of my posts aren't. It does make sense that you can emphasize it but your chest is still working as a whole and thats what I said from the beginning.

Why are you trying to go back and look for any flaws in my arguement? So you have something to make yourself look knowledgeable? You don't give up do you? Ohhh and remember Isolate means target and emphasize right.

[Mtguy8787]

Originally Posted by DanB218

I didn't say genetics was the only factor I said you CANT really control it. What I was saying was you cannot isolate maybe the link is bull**** but the rest of my posts aren't. It does make sense that you can emphasize it but your chest is still working as a whole and thats what I said from the beginning.

Why are you trying to go back and look for any flaws in my arguement? So you have something to make yourself look knowledgeable? You don't give up do you? Ohhh and remember Isolate means target and emphasize right.

yes, I am finding the holes in all your posts in this thread, because im in that sort of mood. You are either contradicting yourself, or digging yourself into a much deeper hole by saying that empasizing one part over another wont have any (or basically no) effect on growth.

First you say that it is (basically) impossible to control the way your chest grows. Now you say emphasizing one part over another is possible. So you must either take the position that you contradicted your first post, or that majorly emphasizing a part of the chest over another will have minimal, if no effect of growth.

For some muscles, namely smaller muscles acting on single axis joints, such a large degree doesnt happen.

But for a muscle like the chest, that acts on highly mobile joint, where there are 2 major heads, shaping of the upper lower parts is huge.

If you dont accept the scientific data, there is an unlimited amount of anecdotal data.

[DanB218]

Originally Posted by Mtguy8787

yes, I am finding the holes in all your posts in this thread, because im in that sort of mood. You are either contradicting yourself, or digging yourself into a much deeper hole by saying that empasizing one part over another wont have any (or basically no) effect on growth.

First you say that it is (basically) impossible to control the way your chest grows. Now you say emphasizing one part over another is possible. So you must either take the position that you contradicted your first post, or that majorly emphasizing a part of the chest over another will have minimal, if no effect of growth.

For some muscles, namely smaller muscles acting on single axis joints, such a large degree doesnt happen.

But for a muscle like the chest, that acts on highly mobile joint, where there are 2 major heads, shaping of the upper lower parts is huge.

If you dont accept the scientific data, there is an unlimited amount of anecdotal data.

I see the slight contradiction.. ehh **** happens man we all make mistakes. I'm going to rest my case and what I was getting across from the beginning was that you cannot Isolate the upper or lower chest. I haven't yet said what I think about emphasizing the upper and lower chest regions. Yes I did say it was possible but I'm not saying I agree or disagree that it leads to more growth in those regions. Until I see clear evidence of either or I wont have an opinion on it. I will keep eating and lifting and not worry about trying to work my upper or lower chest because it's non existant in anatomy at least.

I was merely trying to have a discussion but I guess that cant happen here. I think you guys have to stop being so anal about what you think and look at it in different perspectives. I never meant disrespect from the beginning of the discussion but when people start throwing out bull**** I will throw it right back at them if they cant simply say well I dont agree. Grow the **** up.

[Mtguy8787]

Originally Posted by DanB218

I see the slight contradiction.. ehh **** happens man we all make mistakes. I'm going to rest my case and what I was getting across from the beginning was that you cannot Isolate the upper or lower chest. I haven't yet said what I think about emphasizing the upper and lower chest regions. Yes I did say it was possible but I'm not saying I agree or disagree that it leads to more growth in those regions. Until I see clear evidence of either or I wont have an opinion on it. I will keep eating and lifting and not worry about trying to work my upper or lower chest because it's non existant in anatomy at least.

I was merely trying to have a discussion but I guess that cant happen here. I think you guys have to stop being so anal about what you think and look at it in different perspectives.

but you did say it. You said it is a myth, and that you cant control it. Unless you really didnt mean what you said.... several times???

As for "evidence", I go back to my original point.

There is so much of it, both scientific and anecdotal, that one would think that no "evidence" should be required on this. It simply isnt a debatable matter. There arent any other (valid)perspectives on something like this. It simply is. Granted, some people's upper chest will grow more from flat work, but the fact remains that the 2 heads are largely emphasize-able over each other, and that significant size can be added to 1 vs the other. The significance of emphasizing inner or outer chest is another matter, though.


This brings us back to people who still think the earth is flat. They say the same thing you say, which is "show me sound evidence that it isnt".

[DanB218]

Originally Posted by Mtguy8787

but you did say it. You said it is a myth, and that you cant control it. Unless you really didnt mean what you said.... several times???

As for "evidence", I go back to my original point.

There is so much of it, both scientific and anecdotal, that one would think that no "evidence" should be required on this. It simply isnt a debatable matter. There arent any other (valid)perspectives on something like this. It simply is. Granted, some people's upper chest will grow more from flat work, but the fact remains that the 2 heads are largely emphasize-able over each other, and that significant size can be added to 1 vs the other. The significance of emphasizing inner or outer chest is another matter, though.


This brings us back to people who still think the earth is flat. They say the same thing you say, which is "show me sound evidence that it isnt".

I said isolating different parts of your chest is a myth. Certain exercises will hit your pectoralis major more then minor.. I agreed that you can emphasize your upper and lower but that doesn't mean you are neccesarily going to grow in that area. Keep going with that retarded "People think the earth is flat" thing.. it's great.

[Ricky_k]

why doesnt everyone just f*cking workout, its not like you pick your exercsies and that is it for life. You should be switching it up and trying to new things and experiment for yourself to see what works for you every now and then.

[SDFlip]

Originally Posted by Mtguy8787

and (real) science + real world experience = the best combination.

If you can take real world results, and know WHY they worked, then you can improve it in many, many ways.

Originally Posted by dviusin10shunz

It's better to have both training experience as well as knowledge of your muscles and how they function. I do have plenty of weight room experience to put up against the "scientific mumbo jumbo".

it doesn't matter if you know why something works, it just matters if you get results.

a lot of people, especially here, overthink things.

just f*cking lift.

[Mtguy8787]

Originally Posted by SDFlip

it doesn't matter if you know why something works, it just matters if you get results.

a lot of people, especially here, overthink things.

just f*cking lift.

of course.

but that part being the key phrase. If you just go out their and f*ucking 'do it', you really think youre gonna get the best results all, or most of the time? Most people don't. Many work their ass off, dont get any results, and get discouraged. Probably bc someone like you told em "doesm't fuking matter... just get out there and start squatin."

[Defiant1]

This is by far one of the dumbest f*cking threads, in a unique subset of dumb f*cking threads.

Now people are talking about the "semantics" of what is meant by isolation/emphasis like they are schooling people. And people are ACTUALLY giving "props" for it.. c'mon...




It is like arguing if weight training actually causes hypertrophy.

It is THAT stupid.

NO ONE. NO SCHOOL OF THOUGHT.....

DOUBTS THAT INCLINE PRESSES "FOCUS" on the upper pecs relative to the sternal pecs.

Just as NO ONE believes that when the term "isolation" is mentioned...that they literally mean "isolation". That is equally f*cking stupid.

This is really pathetic.

I am going to post the links again that deal with MUSCLE FUNCTION..including compartentalization.

Try reading them this time...good luck.

If you can't extrapolate that EMPHASIZING the upper pecs relative to the lower is possible.. from the information given below...

then you might just be an idiot.

http://icb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/38/4/729.pdf
neuro-muscular architecture

http://jap.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/99/3/1149
triceps surae

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=5334372
biceps

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract
partitioning

http://www.t-nation.com/portal_inclu...-training.html
excellent article by Christian Thibaudeau

http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/magaz...ebuilding2.htm evidence for shape training

http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/anatomy/allornone.htm
compartmentalization

http://www.gravitycheck.com/TrainPro...detoorder.html


http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/magazine03/sculpting.htm


http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/magaz...icepsblitz.htm

From "Science and Practice of Strength Training" Zatsiorsky pg 78

The recruitment order of MUs is relatively fixed for a muscle involved in a specific motion, even i the movement velocity or rate of force development alters. However, the recruitment order can be changed if the multifunction muscle operates in different motions. Different sets of MUs within one muscle might have a low threshold for one motion and a high threshold for another.

This variation in recruitment order is partially responsible for the specificity of training effect in heavy resistance exercise. If the objective in training is the full development of a muscle, one must exercise this muscle in all possible ranges of motion.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Citation
lats

http://www.t-nation.com/readTopic.do?id=459686
http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/magazine03/sculpting.htm Shape training

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...i?artid=449729 lats




http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/magaz...elbowpart2.htm

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=abstract



Jaci VanHeest, World reknown Exercise Physiologist, US Olympic Training Center, Colorado Springs Colorado:

"Muscles contract when tiny levers on myosin, a muscle protein, fit into grooves on actin, another protein, and push it forward exactly like a ratchet wrench. But myosin can latch onto actin in any of several positions, not all of them ideal. Only when the myosin heads are in the right register can the muscle have the optimal tension. But optimizing every actin-myosin pairing is less an achievable goal than a Platonic idea.

Essentially, that means almost every exercise optimizes a different configuration of actin-myosin pairings. While there's some overlap, you have to exercise a muscle in a number of positions to optimize as many of the actin-myosin pairings as possible

[Mark1T]

Originally Posted by Defiant1

This is by far one of the dumbest f*cking threads, in a unique subset of dumb f*cking threads.

Now people are talking about the "semantics" of what is meant by isolation/emphasis like they are schooling people. And people are ACTUALLY giving "props" for it.. c'mon...

Way to lay it all down, Defiant - Rampage Defiant

[Defiant1]

Originally Posted by Mark1T

Way to lay it all down, Defiant - Rampage Defiant

It just gets so old.


We spend so much time re re re re re re re proving the accepted, that nothing new gets brought up.


I feel like I am at an aerodynamics seminar, where people in the audience are debating whether a heavier than air flying machine is actually possible.

Of course, I don't who the bigger idiot is, me for posting in it....

[SDFlip]

Originally Posted by Mtguy8787

of course.

but that part being the key phrase. If you just go out their and f*ucking 'do it', you really think youre gonna get the best results all, or most of the time? Most people don't. Many work their ass off, dont get any results, and get discouraged. Probably bc someone like you told em "doesm't fuking matter... just get out there and start squatin."

pretty much everyone that works hard gets pretty good results.

you know who doesn't get results? the ones that sit here on bb.com arguing **** over and over and over. and the ones looking for the perfect routine that requires the least amount of work.



and for the record, i never said to squat. i said to lift.

[Mtguy8787]

Originally Posted by SDFlip

pretty much everyone that works hard gets pretty good results.

you know who doesn't get results? the ones that sit here on bb.com arguing **** over and over and over. and the ones looking for the perfect routine that requires the least amount of work.



and for the record, i never said to squat. i said to lift.

who ever said anything about looking for the easy way out.

Maybe all the guys you lift around get good results, but as a whole, gyms are filled with people who are working hard, and not getting near the results they could be. Yes, many arent working very hard at all, but there are many that do, and dont get good results at all.

Obviously it is important to work hard, but its not the only piece of the puzzle for getting the best results.