Nothing like a good stretch...

J

jwbond

New Member
I decided to change my cycle mid way through today. I am starting my 5's and my 5RM for flat bench is 305lbs. I am pleased as it was a long time personal goal to break 300lbs 1x, but since I don't max out I reached the goal doing it 5x
smile.gif
. My shoulders (not to mention hands) aren't thrilled about the load of 300+lbs so decided to take out flat bench and put in incline bb presses (shoulder width). Mike Mentzor claimed they were the best for training chest due to the range of motion. I did them today for the first time in a long time and only did 220lbs 5x, my 5RM should be 230-235ish. Much to my surprise I can feel that my pecs got a better workout than they have in a long time.

I am currently cutting, so I am trying to keep the weights heavy. After todays workout, my pecs are convinced this is the best way to go, but wanted to hear what others had to say about it.

So what do you think, what is more beneficial? A greater stretch with less load or a greater load w/ less range of motion?
 
Stretch is always going to be a good thing but often the stretch movements require that you reduce the load. I think a combo of a heavy load movement and a stretch movement is the way to go during 5s.
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Mike Mentzor claimed they were the best </div>

Was this actually meant to justify your opinion? I hope not
 
<div>
(codz3 @ Jun. 04 2007,20:35)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"> <div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Mike Mentzor claimed they were the best </div>

Was this actually meant to justify your opinion? I hope not</div>
Clearly I stated to further justify my opinion, why would I say it otherwise? If you disagree with it, then state why, don't just act like snotty know it all, it is not welcome on these boards, that is what all the other bb boards are for.



Now, back on topic...

The DOMS I have today far exceeds what I had at over 300lbs on flat bench. I still feel 225+ is decently heavey for incline close grip and that it will produce better results for me, along with less injuries.

It seems this has stumped some of the best on this board...Where is Dan or Bryan? They would be most qualified to answer this one.
 
I'm also very curious about this. Lots of opinions all over the net on this and its irritating little cousin &quot;predetermined genetic shape vs. hitting from every angle&quot;. With some &quot;scientific&quot; and boatloads of empirical &quot;evidence&quot; supporting both sides, it would be great to get a final word from a trusted source on this.


I've actually gone so far as to base my current cycle (5th w/o of the 10's tommorrow) on trying to resolve this for myself. I have always used flat as one of 4 &quot;big&quot; compounds with great results but curiousity was killing me so I upped the movements to a total of 10 including flat , incline, and 45degree incline for chest altering volume accordingly to try to maintain as much constancy as possible in my &quot;trial&quot; to see if this &quot;hitting from all the angles&quot; had any merit(as opposed to the school of thought that the chest will grow ONLY as geneticly determined shape allows.

It's too early to draw any real conclusion and I'm begining to think I may still be just as curious at cycles end as what I think I see happening may very well have happened anyway with my previous &quot;simplified&quot; routine. Unfortunately (for my experiment anyway) My chest has always had a full shape to it further skewing any real conclusion.
smile.gif
 
I just wish they'd outlined a sample routine. I'll be hunting the Westside forum for threads on it (surely they're there) and see what pops up.
I still don't believe the &quot;easy&quot; part!
laugh.gif
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I think a combo of a heavy load movement and a stretch movement is the way to go during 5s. </div>
I agree with Lol. What I have been doing lately for chest is a heavy compound first (weighted dips or incline bench, heavy loading), followed by DB flyes (for stretch). I don't go terribly heavy with the latter, as this tends to limit somewhat the range of motion and consequently the stretch experienced by the targeted muscle.

Regards,
Dimitris
 
Russ

I tend to fall towards Lol as well, a combo that I use is incline (about 15 degrees only) + Weighted dips as a superset.

My chest has improved ever since I added Dips.

I have always preferred the slight incline because of the shoulders.

But to answer Jw's question I'd say the drop in poundage for better ROM and the DOMS afterwards kinda tells mne it was a good choice, although that is only my opinion.

Let's hear it from the boys
wink.gif
 
personaly i prefer db-incline-bench
its a more natural movement, a fuller range and a better stretch,maybe you are using less load,but using a bb the weight is more evenly distributed,wherase db bench might put more weight on the sepperate pecs&quot;i said might dont know&quot;.

as far as the DOMS it could just be because you are getting a better stretch,doesnt neccessary mean its working the muscle better,if i drop the weight on bench and do 100 reps i would probably get DOMS .
 
<div>
(quadancer @ Jun. 05 2007,19:58)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Okay Russ, not to derail the track you're on, here is a link specifically for JW - it doesn't really set you up a routine, but some interesting principles are at large in it...it's from Westside, an article on getting a 500 lb. bench:
http://www.westside-barbell.com/Article....asy.pdf

I printed it out and it made some great bedtime reading!</div>
Is the basis of that Westside routine that after 6 weeks or so of lifting, you do 8-10 sets, 3 reps each @ 55% of 1RM for bench. The next workout a couple days later, you then try 90% of your 1RM?
 
I'm not familiar enough with Westside to answer any questions on it. It is something I plan to look at for future BB'ing methods - there is some stuff in there that really intrigues me, and the success rate of their gym is astounding. I also wonder what their injury rate is, seeing as how PL's tend to fall apart sooner or later. But for strength, there is a lot of sense I see in their methods. It wouldn't take much tweaking to make it work for hypertrophy and to suit us older lifters to some extent.
...yeah, like less volume!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top