The Intelligent & Relentless Pursuit of Muscle™
Bodybuilding
 
Question About Pre-Fatiguing
 

cueball
Level 3

Join date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1554

Sentoguy wrote:

cueball wrote:
No. Traditional pre-exhaust is used to fatigue a dominant muscle that is ALSO the target.



1. Pre-fatigue (isolation first, compound second): Advantageous if you have problems recruiting a muscle group during a compound movement. Pre-fatiguing the muscle group will make it fail first during the compound lift.

Pre-fatiguing the muscle will also increase the mind-muscle connection as you'll "feel it" more because of the pre-existing fatigue/burn. So if you have problems "feeling" or recruiting a certain muscle group, pre-fatigue might be the solution. The downside is that you'll have to use less weight for the compound movement because of the pre-fatigued state of the muscle.

-Christian Thibaudeau


Not according to CT.



Ok. Because CT described it this way, this means that it is the "traditional" definition of a technique used by bodybuilders for decades?

There have been several posts that suggest otherwise.

You were suggesting employing this technique to remedy an overpowering assistance muscle. Not to remedy "feeling it" more with regards to the target muscle.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

cueball
Level 3

Join date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1554

Sento, I think we've probably taken this to it's logical end. At this point we are disputing what the traditional definition is and are beyod discussing it efficacy in the gym. I have no doubt that it could be beneficial the way it's laid out by CT.

The most important take-away I get from all of this, is that pre-exhaust should be used for the target muscle, not an assistance muscle.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Sentoguy
Level 3

Join date: Nov 2005
Posts: 6154

I agree, I don't think there is really any more to add on either of our ends.

Again, I plan on testing out X's method and seeing how it pans out. That's the only way to be sure either way.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Professor X
Level 5

Join date: Oct 2002
Posts: 51898

Sentoguy wrote:
I agree, I don't think there is really any more to add on either of our ends.

Again, I plan on testing out X's method and seeing how it pans out. That's the only way to be sure either way.



In the end, it isn't "X's way". It helped my biceps get bigger...and I know others who did it for chest development and they now have chests bigger than anyone in this thread claiming that this concept isn't worth discussing.

I think the take home message is if you plan on throwing out ideas that don't come from training internet authors but are coming from big really muscular lifters...maybe listening and taking what you can use is the best method over arguing what is SUPPOSED to happen.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

cueball
Level 3

Join date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1554

Professor X wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
I agree, I don't think there is really any more to add on either of our ends.

Again, I plan on testing out X's method and seeing how it pans out. That's the only way to be sure either way.



In the end, it isn't "X's way". It helped my biceps get bigger...and I know others who did it for chest development and they now have chests bigger than anyone in this thread claiming that this concept isn't worth discussing.

I think the take home message is if you plan on throwing out ideas that don't come from training internet authors but are coming from big really muscular lifters...maybe listening and taking what you can use is the best method over arguing what is SUPPOSED to happen.



Just had to, didn't you? I do believe it's a compulsion.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Sentoguy
Level 3

Join date: Nov 2005
Posts: 6154

Professor X wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
I agree, I don't think there is really any more to add on either of our ends.

Again, I plan on testing out X's method and seeing how it pans out. That's the only way to be sure either way.



In the end, it isn't "X's way". It helped my biceps get bigger...and I know others who did it for chest development and they now have chests bigger than anyone in this thread claiming that this concept isn't worth discussing.


Fair enough, but is there a term (other than "pre-exhaust/pre-fatigue", since that's already taken) that you would rather call this concept/training technique by?

Also, since you're still checking the thread, and hopefully will read this. I just want to make sure that I've got the basic format of what you're talking about down so I don't screw it up and misrepresent it during my little experiment.

Which of the following would better describe your method if I wanted to say hit my chest better when benching (and Matty or anyone else familiar with this method, please don't hesitate to add your experience, take on this):

1) I train my triceps directly and shoulders direction (nothing special, just like I normally would train both) and then when they are both fatigued, I move onto chest and hit bench (obviously having to use less weight than normal to start with) and whatever other chest exercises I normally would.

2) I do a few pump/fatigue sets for my triceps and shoulders, not the normal amount of volume or intensity that I would if I were really focusing on them, but just enough to make them somewhat tired. Then, when they are "fatigued", I move into bench and then finish my chest workout as normal.

3) I do a tri-set where I start with an exercise for triceps, then one for shoulders, and then the third one I bench (or would you suggest only perhaps doing a superset where I pick either triceps or shoulders and bench?) and then finish my chest workout as usual.

Also, if it's option 2, do you warm-up on bench as usual? I generally start with just the bar (even though it's obviously painfully light) and do a bunch of reps to get a lot of blood into the muscles, then add a plate each side, do some more, and so on until I reach my "working weight". Not sure if this would result in the fatigue that I had built up in my triceps and shoulders still being present by the time I got to my working weight though.

Anyway, thanks for any clarification or advice you can offer.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Professor X
Level 5

Join date: Oct 2002
Posts: 51898

Sentoguy wrote:


Also, since you're still checking the thread, and hopefully will read this. I just want to make sure that I've got the basic format of what you're talking about down so I don't screw it up and misrepresent it during my little experiment.

Which of the following would better describe your method if I wanted to say hit my chest better when benching (and Matty or anyone else familiar with this method, please don't hesitate to add your experience, take on this):

1) I train my triceps directly and shoulders direction (nothing special, just like I normally would train both) and then when they are both fatigued, I move onto chest and hit bench (obviously having to use less weight than normal to start with) and whatever other chest exercises I normally would.

2) I do a few pump/fatigue sets for my triceps and shoulders, not the normal amount of volume or intensity that I would if I were really focusing on them, but just enough to make them somewhat tired. Then, when they are "fatigued", I move into bench and then finish my chest workout as normal.

3) I do a tri-set where I start with an exercise for triceps, then one for shoulders, and then the third one I bench (or would you suggest only perhaps doing a superset where I pick either triceps or shoulders and bench?) and then finish my chest workout as usual.

Also, if it's option 2, do you warm-up on bench as usual? I generally start with just the bar (even though it's obviously painfully light) and do a bunch of reps to get a lot of blood into the muscles, then add a plate each side, do some more, and so on until I reach my "working weight". Not sure if this would result in the fatigue that I had built up in my triceps and shoulders still being present by the time I got to my working weight though.

Anyway, thanks for any clarification or advice you can offer.



First, I have doubts that someone is having difficulty in both triceps and shoulders both taking over a bench press from focusing on the chest as the primary mover. For someone like that, I would have them make sure their form is correct before anything else.

The point of this is to force your chest to work during that exercise....which can be taught in my opinion by fatiguing whatever muscle group is taking over the most during that movement.

Once again, this is no recommendation for all people in all cases. The goal of this is to fix a muscular imbalance where the target muscle is doing less work than it should.

If I knew someone with that problem, I would also have them focus on more decline movements and possibly move away from even using the bench press that much for a while.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

MattyXL
Level 1

Join date: Jun 2008
Posts: 9451

I always went with option #1...with front raises and pushdowns...nothing crazy and the term is fatigued is the operative word here, not exhausting the muscles simply weakening it to the point where it may not interfere with the chesticles taking the load lol.

I'm very curious of your thoughts and results, and am confident your results will be w/o bias.

Prefacing the above with now knowing the correct and tried and true method of pre-fatiguing

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Professor X
Level 5

Join date: Oct 2002
Posts: 51898

MattyXL wrote:
I always went with option #1...with front raises and pushdowns...nothing crazy and the term is fatigued is the operative word here, not exhausting the muscles simply weakening it to the point where it may not interfere with the chesticles taking the load lol.

I'm very curious of your thoughts and results, and am confident your results will be w/o bias.

Prefacing the above with now knowing the correct and tried and true method of pre-fatiguing




That point needs to be highlighted...the goal is NOT to all out have your shoulders or triceps on fire.

I got past the injury to my forearm by tiring those muscle first before doing biceps work.

It worked....after several years of being limited by it.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Professor X
Level 5

Join date: Oct 2002
Posts: 51898

And Matty...good triceps in that avatar.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

NikH
Level 1

Join date: Feb 2011
Posts: 500

Ultimate Chest workout by X:

Workout A
Warmup: over head presses, tricep extensions, frontraises, skull crushers,

wide grip bench press.


Workout B
Warmup: barbell row, lat machine, biceps curls, reverse flys

close grip chinups

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

MattyXL
Level 1

Join date: Jun 2008
Posts: 9451

Professor X wrote:
And Matty...good triceps in that avatar.



Thanks X! See I told you I was Tri dominant!!!

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

MattyXL
Level 1

Join date: Jun 2008
Posts: 9451

NikH wrote:
Ultimate Chest workout by X:

Workout A
Warmup: over head presses, tricep extensions, frontraises, skull crushers,

wide grip bench press.


Workout B
Warmup: barbell row, lat machine, biceps curls, reverse flys

close grip chinups



Thats probably the exact opposite of what his ultimate chest workout is...

Trolling hard now, admit it Nik now your just busting balls

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Professor X
Level 5

Join date: Oct 2002
Posts: 51898

MattyXL wrote:
NikH wrote:
Ultimate Chest workout by X:

Workout A
Warmup: over head presses, tricep extensions, frontraises, skull crushers,

wide grip bench press.


Workout B
Warmup: barbell row, lat machine, biceps curls, reverse flys

close grip chinups



Thats probably the exact opposite of what his ultimate chest workout is...

Trolling hard now, admit it Nik now your just busting balls



LOL. Either way, I have a big chest. That speaks for itself.

I think you contributed to this thread very well. Your input is appreciated.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Sentoguy
Level 3

Join date: Nov 2005
Posts: 6154

Thanks guys, got it.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

ronald1919
Level 1

Join date: Jul 2010
Posts: 271

the dumbest training concept ever created, shouldnt even be qualified as one....
either you pre-exhaust or fix your form or drop the move altogether and chose something where you feel the target muscle.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

MattyXL
Level 1

Join date: Jun 2008
Posts: 9451

ronald1919 wrote:
the dumbest training concept ever created, shouldnt even be qualified as one....
either you pre-exhaust or fix your form or drop the move altogether and chose something where you feel the target muscle.


Unless your Ronald Coleman, what qualifies you to make that statement?

Whatever training method I use, will be a method that I find works for me. No faceless poster that has no more credentials than I do would make me change that.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report