MB Madaera
Lost 31.7 lbs fat
Built 11.7 lbs muscle


Chris Madaera
Built 9 lbs muscle


Keelan Parham
Lost 30 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle


Bob Marchesello
Lost 23.55 lbs fat
Built 8.55 lbs muscle


Jeff Turner
Lost 25.5 lbs fat


Jeanenne Darden
Lost 26 lbs fat
Built 3 lbs muscle


Ted Tucker
Lost 41 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle

 
 

Determine the Length of Your Workouts

Evaluate Your Progress

Keep Warm-Up in Perspective


ARCHIVES >>

"Doing more exercise with less intensity,"
Arthur Jones believes, "has all but
destroyed the actual great value
of weight training. Something
must be done . . . and quickly."
The New Bodybuilding for
Old-School Results supplies
MUCH of that "something."

 

This is one of 93 photos of Andy McCutcheon that are used in The New High-Intensity Training to illustrate the recommended exercises.

To find out more about McCutcheon and his training, click here.

 

Mission Statement

H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy

Privacy Policy

Credits

LOG IN FORUM MAIN REGISTER SEARCH
Triceps Stretch & The Best Exercise
1 | 2 | 3 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

Rikus

I've generally used overhead tricep extensions, as the stretched position is meant ot help target the larger "long" head of the triceps.
But after reading Bill De Simone's Moment Arm Exercise manual (I'm still reading it, so maybe my understanding needs more effort there), it is considered better to find the the middle ground between the stretched and relaxed. Such as lying tricep extensions (skull crushers).

But in such a position the tricep isn't stretched as much, so I am wondering if the long head is getting as good a workout or stimulation as the overhead stretched position.

In layman's terms, Overhead tricep extensions or skull crushers for bigger triceps!

I recall using an old nautilus tricep machine and it had a position not unlike a skull crusher move (but from a seated position with arms out in front.). I always figured it was just easy to make such a machine than one with the arms above.
Open User Options Menu

jastrain

deadmanemailing wrote:
I've generally used overhead tricep extensions, as the stretched position is meant ot help target the larger "long" head of the triceps.
But after reading Bill De Simone's Moment Arm Exercise manual (I'm still reading it, so maybe my understanding needs more effort there), it is considered better to find the the middle ground between the stretched and relaxed. Such as lying tricep extensions (skull crushers).

But in such a position the tricep isn't stretched as much, so I am wondering if the long head is getting as good a workout or stimulation as the overhead stretched position.

In layman's terms, Overhead tricep extensions or skull crushers for bigger triceps!

I recall using an old nautilus tricep machine and it had a position not unlike a skull crusher move (but from a seated position with arms out in front.). I always figured it was just easy to make such a machine than one with the arms above.


i personally like all of my exercises to incorporate the "pre-stretch" in them. i have read a lot of bills stuff and he does not believe that any heavy exercise should have the pre-stretch in it. is true that there is a higher chance of injury when you exercise a muscle from the stretched position. especially if the form is poor. if you are firing in and out of a rep in a haphazard manner. but for me personally, i tend to believe like arthur jones believed that the pre-stretch is one of the core requirements to fully build a muscle. i grew up on all of a,j,s old nautilus machines that all had you exercise from the stretched position. bill is probably correct that you can build almost the same amount of muscle without the pre-stretch and in a much safer manner. but i believe you wll get better results with the pre-stretch.it is important for your "turn arounds" to be smooth . this should be enough to minimize the danger of the pre stretch. everyone must do a risk reward analysis with all the elements in high intensity exercise and decide for themselves what is optimal method for their own personal development. many people agree with bill on this issue. in fact, all of the new nautilus had eliminated the pre stretch out of their equipment design, a properly designed with pre stretch, with a properly designed cam will increase the intensity of the exercise.
Open User Options Menu

jrm850

Interesting topic for me...
I also use the overhead tricep extensions but I have been debating switching to something else (or not using full ROM) because I feel like the mechanical advantage at full stretch is so slight that I reach failure long before I should.

Failure on this excerise for me is always very distinct. I can either do a rep fully or I can't move it at all.
I do like the feel of full extension reps and I notice that my DOMS is focused higher on the tricep near the shoulder, but still wondering if I'm leaving something on the table.
Open User Options Menu

Joseph Anderson

jrm850 wrote:
I feel like the mechanical advantage at full stretch is so slight that I reach failure long before I should.


I think you mean the mechanical DISadvantage at full stretch. Full stretch = passive insufficiency = cannot produce as much force in that position. This is why "failure" normally happens at the bottom of OH tricep press (and feels like you just can't move your arm aymore).

Open User Options Menu

jastrain

jrm850 wrote:
Interesting topic for me...
I also use the overhead tricep extensions but I have been debating switching to something else (or not using full ROM) because I feel like the mechanical advantage at full stretch is so slight that I reach failure long before I should.

Failure on this excerise for me is always very distinct. I can either do a rep fully or I can't move it at all.
I do like the feel of full extension reps and I notice that my DOMS is focused higher on the tricep near the shoulder, but still wondering if I'm leaving something on the table.


most of my training is on machines. i think if a machine has a properly designed cam and the muscle is exercised fully [pre stretch to finish] the intensity is as high as possible. but with free weight there may be a disadvantage in doing a full rep range. the weakest part of the contraction at the start of the rep [pre strech] may cause a disadvantage in leverage and you will fail too early not fully contracting in the strongest position. and this was the brilliance behind the nautilus cam. it allowed a full range of motion-from stretch to finish and at the finish being able to contract the muscle maximally at the strongest position, on the weighted dips [no cam]. i am able to complete a full range of motion with pre stretch and failing nearly at the strongest position of the movement [usually at the top of the rep range near the lockout. but on most free weight it is at the lower to mid range of the rep
Open User Options Menu

Joseph Anderson

deadmanemailing wrote:
But in such a position the tricep isn't stretched as much, so I am wondering if the long head is getting as good a workout or stimulation as the overhead stretched position.

In layman's terms, Overhead tricep extensions or skull crushers for bigger triceps!


The first question that needs to be answered is, "is it REQUIRED to exercise a joint through a full-ROM in order for it to be effective?"

Exercise can be very effective without performing full ROM exercise.

Second question, "is there detriment to training full-ROM?"

Definitely. Safety is a consideration. Also, wasting effort in positions of mechanical disadvantage (active and passive insufficiencies).


To address your specific question: OH triceps press are not required to effectively train the triceps (long head included).

Assuming you are putting the upper arm in a mechaically advantageous position and using equipment that allows the upper arm to travel in a proper path/arc, then the load will determine the involvement of the musculature. Pick an adequate weight and the lateral, medial and long heads will all be involved.

Also, assuming you are performing pullups, pulldowns or straight-arm pulldowns, the long head is getting additional work (assisting shoulder extension).
Open User Options Menu

db144

Have you tried the close grip Tricep Bench Press?

d
Open User Options Menu

krazy kaju

Joseph Anderson wrote:
Also, assuming you are performing pullups, pulldowns or straight-arm pulldowns, the long head is getting additional work (assisting shoulder extension).


I thought the medial head was responsible for assisting shoulder extension.

In any case, this whole discussion isn't warranted unless you're already at an advanced level of development. Unless you already have huge triceps, in which case training the various heads of the muscle MIGHT make a difference, you shouldn't be worried too much about such intricacies. Just do dips until your pecs and triceps are huge. If you ever reach that level of development, then you can worry about training different parts of muscles.
Open User Options Menu

perrymk

db144 wrote:
Have you tried the close grip Tricep Bench Press?

I like close grip BP using a long curl bar in my power rack. The slight curl in the center of the bar really helps avoid wrist stress for me. The power rack is just for safety as I train alone in my garage.
Open User Options Menu

Joseph Anderson

krazy kaju wrote:

I thought the medial head was responsible for assisting shoulder extension.


The long head of the triceps is the only one that crosses the shoulder joint, and therefore is the only one that can act on it.
Open User Options Menu

krazy kaju

But in terms of stretching, maybe you should look up how the DC guys do their extreme training, and simply incorporate those before your sets?
Open User Options Menu

marcrph

Portugal

jastrain wrote:
i personally like all of my exercises to incorporate the "pre-stretch" in them. i have read a lot of bills stuff and he does not believe that any heavy exercise should have the pre-stretch in it. is true that there is a higher chance of injury when you exercise a muscle from the stretched position. especially if the form is poor. if you are firing in and out of a rep in a haphazard manner. but for me personally, i tend to believe like arthur jones believed that the pre-stretch is one of the core requirements to fully build a muscle.


http://arthurjonesexercise.com/...euroFactors.pdf

Open User Options Menu

Mr. Strong

Joseph Anderson wrote:
deadmanemailing wrote:
But in such a position the tricep isn't stretched as much, so I am wondering if the long head is getting as good a workout or stimulation as the overhead stretched position.

In layman's terms, Overhead tricep extensions or skull crushers for bigger triceps!


The first question that needs to be answered is, "is it REQUIRED to exercise a joint through a full-ROM in order for it to be effective?"

Exercise can be very effective without performing full ROM exercise.

Second question, "is there detriment to training full-ROM?"

Definitely. Safety is a consideration. Also, wasting effort in positions of mechanical disadvantage (active and passive insufficiencies).


To address your specific question: OH triceps press are not required to effectively train the triceps (long head included).

Assuming you are putting the upper arm in a mechaically advantageous position and using equipment that allows the upper arm to travel in a proper path/arc, then the load will determine the involvement of the muculature. Pick an adequate weight and the lateral, medial and long heads will all be involved.

Also, assuming you are performing pullups, pulldowns or straight-arm pulldowns, the long head is getting additional work (assisting shoulder extension).



Stop with the safety BS.

If you want to talk about effectiveness the Full Squat is far superior to any partial Squat, or any other partial exercise for the lower body.
Open User Options Menu

Joseph Anderson

Mr. Strong wrote:
Stop with the safety BS.


Sure, cuz safety is irrelevant . . .

If you want to talk about effectiveness the Full Squat is far superior to any partial Squat, or any other partial exercise for the lower body.

But this thread is about triceps (which are not involved in the full or partial squat).
Open User Options Menu

Mr. Strong

Joseph Anderson wrote:
Mr. Strong wrote:
Stop with the safety BS.

Sure, cuz safety is irrelevant . . .

If you want to talk about effectiveness the Full Squat is far superior to any partial Squat, or any other partial exercise for the lower body.

But this thread is about triceps (which are not involved in the full or partial squat).



You said some things that were untrue, I'm merely addressing them.
Open User Options Menu

Joseph Anderson

Mr. Strong wrote:
You said some things that were untrue, I'm merely addressing them.


What did I say that was untrue? You addressed nothing, you started talking about squats?
Open User Options Menu

simon-hecubus

Texas, USA

db144 wrote:
Have you tried the close grip Tricep Bench Press?
d


Good that someone brought this up. I like doing these on the later-generation Nautilus chest press machines, as they provide even more resistance at the top than free-wt CGBs.

To the OP's question, Skullcrushers as they incorporate more weight. However, I bring in overhead moves from time to time for the great stretch. I prefer EZ bar or Cable Machines to the DB version.

Scott
Open User Options Menu

Joshua Trentine

Ohio, USA

Mr. Strong wrote:
Joseph Anderson wrote:
Mr. Strong wrote:
Stop with the safety BS.

Sure, cuz safety is irrelevant . . .

If you want to talk about effectiveness the Full Squat is far superior to any partial Squat, or any other partial exercise for the lower body.

But this thread is about triceps (which are not involved in the full or partial squat).


You said some things that were untrue, I'm merely addressing them.



Mr. Anderson's description of triceps function looks accurate to me.
Open User Options Menu

Rikus

I've considered the close grip bench press but I've ruled it out due to stress on the wrists etc and my home gym is centered around dumbells. Skull Crushers may cause elbow issues but I guess I favour them versus pressdowns which I have found not as good as overhead extensions for growth. I do really like dips, but have been avoiding them as I think they are culprit in two of my worst injuries. A torn muscle in trapezius/rhomboid area and stretched cartilage in the sternum area. Some texts like the 7 minute rotator cuff solution mention the issues with dips and the internal rotation of the shoulders etc.

As far as not worrying about specifically hitting the long head, I am focused on best hitting the larger part of the tricep.

I could, and I will, just experiment and see what the results are. But I am very keen to hear other's experiences, thoughts and ideas.

Do the skull crushers allow more weight and hitting the middle range of the movement allow for better results, or does the pre-stretch of the overhead extension make it the better exercise of the two for results.
Open User Options Menu

Joseph Anderson

Mr. Strong wrote:
If you want to talk about effectiveness the Full Squat is far superior to any partial Squat, or any other partial exercise for the lower body.


Since Mr. Strong brought up the lower body, let's use it as an example. Full squats is not a good comparison to the triceps question asked above. The full squat avoids passive and active insufficiencies.

To make it a better example, look at the quadriceps muscle group alone. Only the rectus femoris crosses the hip and knee joints (similar to how only the long head of the triceps crosses the shoulder).

The theory behind the OH triceps press suggests it's necessary to fully stretch it across both joints (shoulder and elbow in full flexion). This is equivalent to stretching the quadriceps across the knee and hip simultaneously (full knee flexion and full hip extension, i.e. lay on your back with your lower legs folded behind you). Now try to generate enough force from that position to effectively train that muscle group.

I don't think anyone would recommend that position as an effective leg exercise (and there's a reason no manufacturer designs a LE machine like that). However, mechanically, it is the exact same as the OH triceps.

Open User Options Menu

Joseph Anderson

deadmanemailing wrote:
Skull Crushers may cause elbow issues


How so? Guess it depends on the equipment. Dumbbells allow for a proper arm path, and when done with good form are very effective.

I guess I favour them versus pressdowns which I have found not as good as overhead extensions for growth.

How are you doing the pressdowns? Rope vs. bar? Arm positioning? IMO, pressdowns with long rope (or unilaterally with short rope) "feel" the best and have been highly effective. But, like any exercise, little nuances in performance can turn a good exercise into crap, quickly.

I could, and I will, just experiment and see what the results are.

Good idea

But I am very keen to hear other's experiences, thoughts and ideas.



IME, triceps development rarely has to do with which triceps exercise is being performed. In fact, I have many clients who do pretty well with rarely performing any isolated triceps exercises. Triceps are involved in many upperbody exercises and can easily be trained too much or too often.

My advice would be to experiment with volume, not just different exercises. Find out how much additional triceps exercise is really needed (if any). Then pick an exercise that allows you to generate the most force without added strain on joints . . . positions that feel natural/comfortable. No one can discover these things for you- experiment.
Open User Options Menu

Bill De Simone

New Jersey, USA

Joseph Anderson wrote:
Mr. Strong wrote:
If you want to talk about effectiveness the Full Squat is far superior to any partial Squat, or any other partial exercise for the lower body.

Since Mr. Strong brought up the lower body, let's use it as an example. Full squats is not a good comparison to the triceps question asked above. The full squat avoids passive and active insufficiencies.

To make it a better example, look at the quadriceps muscle group alone. Only the rectus femoris crosses the hip and knee joints (similar to how only the long head of the riceps crosses the shoulder).

The theory behind the OH triceps press suggests it's necessary to fully stretch it across both joints (shoulder and elbow in full flexion). This is equivalent to stretching the quadriceps across the knee and hip simultaneously (full knee flexion and full hip extension, i.e. lay on your back with your lower legs folded behind you). Now try to generate enough force from that position to effectively train that muscle group.

I don't think anyone would recommend that position as an effective leg exercise (and there's a reason no manufacturer designs a LE machine like that). However, mechanically, it is the exact same as the OH triceps.



Nice job, Joe.
Open User Options Menu

db144

You could try different types of push ups that emphasize the triceps. You can increase the intensity by raising your feet on a bench or wearing a backpack with weight.

d
Open User Options Menu

simon-hecubus

Texas, USA

deadmanemailing wrote:
I've considered the close grip bench press but I've ruled it out due to stress on the wrists etc...


Avoid too close of a grip and you won't have any wrist problems. Take it from someone who knows.

I used to do the 6" spacing thing and had wrist pain. Now, my hands are just narrower than shoulder width and I get all the triceps benefits w/o the wrist pain.

Scott
Open User Options Menu

Spidercam

Hi Deadmanemailing

You might like to try this routine -

Dumbells kick backs - start as if you were in a ski jumpers position about to take off down the slope.
On contraction with your arms parallel with the floor proceed to raise the dumbells a further six inchs lifting from the shoulder joint. Hold the static for a second in the raised position then come back down into parallel.Then go back to having your lower arms in a vertical position for starting the next rep.
1 set to failure 10 to 12 rep range then straight onto Cheating dumbell pullover.
Much the same as a normal dumbell pullover lying face up with your shoulders supported on a bench. Take this to the limit with the dumbell just missing your nose as you go to complete failure.
1 set to failure 6 to 8 rep range.

Dumbells kick backs with Lift
Cheating dumbell Pullover.

Hope this helps.
Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | 3 | Next | Last
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy