Eric Satterwhite - Harmony of Structure & Function: The Pecs.

[webmaster]

Understanding the link between the structure and function of a particular muscle will help you to make the right decision, put together an intelligent program and start adding some high quality muscle mass.

http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/satter16.htm

HOW TO REVIEW: Post Your Review Of This Article - CLICK ON POST REPLY BELOW! You do NOT need to be a registered member to post a reply in this section!

[dharok]

actually, hand position does make a difference to the effectiveness of any particular chest exercise versus another. Take for example Flyes and BP. The author said that the ROM is no significantly different -- agreed, perhaps BP is even better. But what the author misses is that the elbow joint does effect the load that the pecs have to bear. . . it is a matter of leverage.

The hands are usually placed just wider than shoulder width when performing BP, but with Flyes, the hands should extend almost to arms length. So when the author chides that Flyes should be avoided if you can't handle as much weight as you can with dumbbell BP, he really misses the point. The further away from the body that the load is placed, the more difficult -- i.e. heavier -- it is to move it. This is why people cheat by bringing their elbows in when performing Flyes: it lessens the load. The mechanics of this issue are so complex, I could only hope to spur people's thoughts on this matter.

All in all, it was a good article, but it is ridiculous to think that just because a muscle isn't directly affected by the position or movement of a particular joint that it is not indirectly affected. And it is equally ridiculous to think that this indirect affect is not a significant effect. . .

[Beast]

As the chest has always been the hardest for me to improve, I enjoyed the article. Even though I already had the same beliefs, it is good to read them again. I have a couple questions for ya Eric.

What are your thoughts on decline presses? Since you didn't mention them.

and

I've tried doing DB pullovers before, but they seem to put a ton of pressure on my rotator cuffs. My guess is I need to improve the flexibility of my shoulders (well I know I do). Do you think that this inflexibility is what makes this exercise a poor choice for me?

[EricS]

Originally posted by dharok
actually, hand position does make a difference to the effectiveness of any particular chest exercise versus another. Take for example Flyes and BP. The author said that the ROM is no significantly different -- agreed, perhaps BP is even better. But what the author misses is that the elbow joint does effect the load that the pecs have to bear. . . it is a matter of leverage.

The hands are usually placed just wider than shoulder width when performing BP, but with Flyes, the hands should extend almost to arms length. So when the author chides that Flyes should be avoided if you can't handle as much weight as you can with dumbbell BP, he really misses the point. The further away from the body that the load is placed, the more difficult -- i.e. heavier -- it is to move it. This is why people cheat by bringing their elbows in when performing Flyes: it lessens the load. The mechanics of this issue are so complex, I could only hope to spur people's thoughts on this matter.

All in all, it was a good article, but it is ridiculous to think that just because a muscle isn't directly affected by the position or movement of a particular joint that it is not indirectly affected. And it is equally ridiculous to think that this indirect affect is not a significant effect. . .

No I understand what the point of the change in leverage. however, the muscle activation patterns of the fly movement fail in comparision to pressing movements. EMG studies show time and time agine that regaurdless of hand/ foot placement or what ever twists you may decide to put on it, The targeted muscle is activated in a linerar fasion with the amount of weight.

IT has a lot to do with the bi-lateral deficit. Muscle groups, when working together can produce more force than their additive sum. For the same given intenity prescription the pectorals will be placed under a supra-maximal load. This can not be achived with the fly because of the exclusion of the triceps, which bring a great deal of force due to their unique angle of pennation. This effect is even greater when the Barbell is brought into play.

Despite the increased leverage and perceived "heaviness" the fly does not stack up to the press. That in addition to no greater ROM, no greater stretch, and no direct influence on the popular "inner chest" , this exercise is not very effective for stimulating muscle to the greatest degree possible while accumulating a desired volume.

I can do many things to make an exercise harder, that doesn't make it better. If I had you do squats while standing on dyna disks, would that make your glutes, hams and quads any bigger faster? doubtful. But it would be a hell of a lot harder.

But I appreciate your point because it is a good one. And you are right, you do change the leverage and mechanics when you move the weight furthur from your center of gravity.

[EricS]

Originally posted by Beast
As the chest has always been the hardest for me to improve, I enjoyed the article. Even though I already had the same beliefs, it is good to read them again. I have a couple questions for ya Eric.

What are your thoughts on decline presses? Since you didn't mention them.

and

I've tried doing DB pullovers before, but they seem to put a ton of pressure on my rotator cuffs. My guess is I need to improve the flexibility of my shoulders (well I know I do). Do you think that this inflexibility is what makes this exercise a poor choice for me?

Flexibility could be a factor, or it could be a lack of strength around the shoulder capsule. It could be a number of things.

While the pull over is a good way to work the pec minor, it is a fairly small muscle and probably not going to have a major out ward reflection on your qhysique if you do not do them with very heavy loading.

As for declines, again, what is it we are tryignto accomplish with the exercise? The 'lower chest' I find that this exercise does limit yor range of motion quite a bit and it tends to end up becoming more of a tricep exercise. I think it is a good way to impose a new stimulus to your body with out defiating from effective compound movements, but I would not center a chest program around them.

[Mark21087]

Originally posted by EricS




I can do many things to make an exercise harder, that doesn't make it better. If I had you do squats while standing on dyna disks, would that make your glutes, hams and quads any bigger faster? doubtful. But it would be a hell of a lot harder.

So does this mean that you think that even though not locking out on squats or bench presses wil make the exercise harder, it provides no new muscle stimulis?

[EricS]

Originally posted by Mark21087
So does this mean that you think that even though not locking out on squats or bench presses wil make the exercise harder, it provides no new muscle stimulis?

Not locking out is a fundimental of exercise technique. Everyone should have been taught not to lock their joints at the top of a movement. The reasoning steming from preventing injury as a result of potential hyperextension that can result of reciprocal inhibition of the antagonist after a contraction. It can also be a result of muscle imbalances.

Not locking out also increases the amount of time the muscle must maintain a certain level of cross-bridge cycling which of course requires a higher glycolytic flux, leading to a more rapid accumulation of lactic acid, which blocks cross bridge cycling, calcium accumulation which in a sense chokes off mitochondira, there may also be a bit of periferal neural fatigue. You could even go into the theory of muscle wisdom which suggests that our body understands how do down regulate outputs so we have no choice but to lower the intensity so we don't create significant muscle damage. This in itself has shown that muscle fiber recruittment drops significantly as the level of fatigue rises through concurrent EMG and MMG measurments.

harder, sure. fatigue is not a pleasant thing. More muscle, doubtful. If not locking out did create more muscle, then we should just to partials at the top end of the movement or even better, isometrics.

I could figure out things to make a 10 lb DB "hard" doesn't mean we will become massive.

[str8flexed]

Originally posted by EricS
Flexibility could be a factor, or it could be a lack of strength around the shoulder capsule. It could be a number of things.

While the pull over is a good way to work the pec minor, it is a fairly small muscle and probably not going to have a major out ward reflection on your qhysique if you do not do them with very heavy loading.

As for declines, again, what is it we are tryignto accomplish with the exercise? The 'lower chest' I find that this exercise does limit yor range of motion quite a bit and it tends to end up becoming more of a tricep exercise. I think it is a good way to impose a new stimulus to your body with out defiating from effective compound movements, but I would not center a chest program around them.

\

the ROM problem could be fixed with dumbbells no?

[EricS]

Originally posted by str8flexed
\

the ROM problem could be fixed with dumbbells no?

Yeah. But he was talking about Pull overs. From what I got I think he was saying that when he lowered the weight past his head, it felt like his arms were going to come out of the socket and just couldn't get the weight back up. I'm sure as you know, the shoulder is a reletivly fragile joint that can be damaged pretty easily.

But yeah DB are a good way to get the extra ROM.

[Beast]

Originally posted by EricS
Yeah. But he was talking about Pull overs. From what I got I think he was saying that when he lowered the weight past his head, it felt like his arms were going to come out of the socket and just couldn't get the weight back up. I'm sure as you know, the shoulder is a reletivly fragile joint that can be damaged pretty easily.

But yeah DB are a good way to get the extra ROM.

That's about right. I started doing rotator cuff exercises this week, not for pullover purposes, but just for the fact that I feel I need to strengthen them.

[str8flexed]

Originally posted by EricS
Yeah. But he was talking about Pull overs. From what I got I think he was saying that when he lowered the weight past his head, it felt like his arms were going to come out of the socket and just couldn't get the weight back up. I'm sure as you know, the shoulder is a reletivly fragile joint that can be damaged pretty easily.

But yeah DB are a good way to get the extra ROM.

i was referring to decline press

and what are you doing writing articles... you should be working on the ala article! GET BACK TO WORK

Layne "so what if i haven't started yet"

[EricS]

Originally posted by str8flexed
i was referring to decline press

and what are you doing writing articles... you should be working on the ala article! GET BACK TO WORK

Layne "so what if i haven't started yet"

Oh yeah I'll get on that.