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
New Chest Exercise
1 | 2 | 3 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

BennyAnthonyOfKC

Missouri, USA

I first reported about this in 2007..... while so-called "front raises" are thought to work the front head of the deltoids, the truth is that the first approximate half of the range-of-motion works the chest, particularly if the trainee is laying supine on their back. Essentially, this beginning half of "front raises" trains the pectoral-muscles much like the [Chest Press] half of the vintage "Nautilus Double Chest" due to the weight held in the hands causes the leverage-factors to place the work upon the chest.

The second half of the range-of-motion of "front raises" does, nevertheless, train the front head of the shoulders. Based upon the aforementioned, therefore, the Nautilus Next Generation "Reverse Pullover" should be separated into two different ranges for training the deltoids & chest in their respective ranges-of-motion, not that the "Reverse Pullover" was an ideally designed machine since it did have flaws mainly pertaining to the hand-grips.

((FIRST TRAINING TIP: the range-of-motion to work the chest, it should stop BEFORE the arms of the trainee are vertical, because it is at that point the muscles of the chest become unloaded. At what precise range-of-motion is this? I can only offer the tip that the trainee should stay in communication with their chest-muscles, and being able to discern that for themselves. SECOND TRAINING TIP: while the picture that I attached depicts a barbell being held by the trainee, a dumbbell held each hand might provide a great range-of-motion for the chest, although when the upper-arms are forced beyond the point of being aligned with the torso the shoulder-joints can become distressed in such a way that the sensation within the chest-muscles is lost.))
Open User Options Menu

BennyAnthonyOfKC

Missouri, USA

The machine from the Nautilus Next Generation line that was named the "Reverse Pullover" had two serious flaws in the design of its movement-arm & handle. The movement-arm should have had an adjustment for the handle to coincide with the arm-length of trainees, as well as for width of the shoulders. To elaborate on the width of shoulders, the handles should have been able to move inward for trainees with more narrow of shoulders, as well as outwardly for the trainees with wider shoulders.

About the second flaw in design, the handle itself should resemble more of an upside-down joystick with the weight bearing atop the thumb & index-finger that is, of course, padded. The handle (or the upside-down joystick) is merely for stabilization of the hand to prevent a hand of the trainee from slipping off the pad. The pad would not need to be bigger than the elbow-pads on the typical machine for regular pullovers, maybe smaller.
Open User Options Menu

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

BennyAnthonyOfKC wrote:
The machine from the Nautilus Next Generation line that was named the "Reverse Pullover" had two serious flaws in the design of its movement-arm & handle. The movement-arm should have had an adjustment for the handle to coincide with the arm-length of trainees, as well as for width of the shoulders. To elaborate on the width of shoulders, the handles should have been able to move inward for trainees with more narrow of shoulders, as well as outwardly for the trainees with wider shoulders.

About the second flaw in design, the handle itself should resemble more of an upside-down joystick with the weight bearing atop the thumb & index-finger that is, of course, padded. The handle (or the upside-down joystick) is merely for stabilization of the hand to prevent a hand of the trainee from slipping off the pad. The pad would not need to be bigger than the elbow-pads on the typical machine for regular pullovers, maybe smaller.


Wow I was just talking about this machine with my spouse. It was one I use to never bother with where I first found Nautilus. Later on though dealing with shoulder issues I discovered it could be useful. Like to find one again I felt it had real potential with a certain common shoulder issue I keep seeing crop up with clients.

Regards,
Andrew
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

Like to find one again I felt it had real potential with a certain common shoulder issue I keep seeing crop up with clients.

==Scott==
To many people focus on pushing movements ( bench press) and not enough pulling like rows etc. The rotor cuffs suffer as the result of this.
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

The rotator cuff suffers from lack of balance, which means a need for EXTERNAL rotation exercises of the humerus. Back exercises do NOT provide this.
Open User Options Menu

indexit

That machine was absolutely horrible on my shoulders... Was ok first half of ROM, then YIKES.
Open User Options Menu

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

indexit wrote:
That machine was absolutely horrible on my shoulders... Was ok first half of ROM, then YIKES.


Was for me as well...at first, over time it got far better and I think helped my battered shoulders.

Regards,
Andrew
Open User Options Menu

BennyAnthonyOfKC

Missouri, USA

indexit wrote:
That machine was absolutely horrible on my shoulders... Was ok first half of ROM, then YIKES.


Partly, your observation is for the reason why I posted, that the chest takes the load for the first half of ROM, although I'm sure the rotary-cuff observations made by others here have validity too. However, I believe the supine-position of the exercise in my picture compared to the upright-position (even though supine too) provides more load upon the chest due to the fact of gravity, and is much easier on the spine laying supine than seated upright.

Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

Brian Johnston wrote:
The rotator cuff suffers from lack of balance, which means a need for EXTERNAL rotation exercises of the humerus. Back exercises do NOT provide this.


==Scott==
Never the less I've known dozens of fellows who had rotor cuff troubles who emphasized bench press. Never a fellow who had rotor cuff trouble who emphasized pulling movements.
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

Yes Scott... since chest presses ALSO involve INTERNAL ROTATION, as opposed to EXTERNAL ROTATION. There still is a LACK of balance in the shoulder joint.
Open User Options Menu

simon-hecubus

Texas, USA

Front Raises with a single DB held vertically and overlapping grip makes a great pre-fatigue upper pec movement.
Open User Options Menu

cokerat

I couldn't agree more Simon. It's the only exercise where I can feel my upper pecs.
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

Try standing cable flyes... with the cables low (near the floor), and as you flye, you angle it upward toward your head (starting from hip level and flye upward with the handles in front of the face or forehead). If you don't feel that in your upper pecs, then not sure what to say.
Open User Options Menu

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

Brian Johnston wrote:
Try standing cable flyes... with the cables low (near the floor), and as you flye, you angle it upward toward your head (starting from hip level and flye upward with the handles in front of the face or forehead). If you don't feel that in your upper pecs, then not sure what to say.


One of my favorite moves. I do the same with DB flys allowing the biceps to help support the move rather than just the shoulders.

Regards,
Andrew
Open User Options Menu

cokerat

Brian,

Lol ... Pretty much the same exercise as the two handed dumbell raise, but thanks anyway !!
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

Not at all... the angle of pull and tension on the pecs are COMPLETELY different. The arms are OUT and then come INWARD... they start off WIDE and end TOGETHER. Not sure how that is the same as with dumbbells. Tension with dumbbells is limited by gravity, whereas tension is at an angle with the pulleys. Two different things. LOL.
Open User Options Menu

cokerat

Brian,

The tension on the upper pecs doesn't happen until the arms are nearing parellel and almost in front of the face. It doesn't matter where you start the exercise.

Gawd...... You're so condescending. You talk like you're the only authority, give me a F&$@king break.
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

You're the one who LOL'd to suggest I don't know what I'm talking about, but the facts remain:

1. The tension is very different

2. Even half-way up, the arms still are moving from an outward to an inward position (unlike dumbbells).

3. If you've actually done the movement, you wouldn't have made such premature and ignorant comments, expert.
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

By the way, I simply gave an option, something different... you're the one who has to open his expert loudmouth to suggest there is no difference, that I don't know what I'm talking about, etc. It's so hard for some to let me suggest an opinion without opposing it (which I don't see occur with anyone else on this forum).

You, and a few others like to make a big stink over nothing and claim that it's me who thinks I'm a know-it-all, when your comments suggest clearly the opposite... either that or some think they are big men by trying to knock me down a peg. Whatever. It would be nice if the 'experts' on here simply ignored my posts so that others who may be interested can get some actual training information rather than the ignorant ramblings from a few whose exercise expertise comes from the latest issue of Men's Health.
Open User Options Menu

cokerat

Uhhm, ya ok. Like no one has ever heard of the bottom position cable cross overs.......with a slight twist/difference.

Great tip !!!!

It's just your personality man, I'm sure everyone feels the same way. You come across as an abrasive pompous ass, it's just the way it is. You're always criticizing but can't take it when it comes your way. You never offer a suggestion, you tell someone. It's just common courtesy, politeness, etc.

Instead of getting into some long oratory or trying to get the last word in, I hope you just think about what I said. No one questions your intellect, but your delivery leaves a little to be desired. If you have time constraints and can't get across what you want to in the written word in the manner you would like, then wait until you do. You'd get a lot more respect.
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

Challenge any of my ideas (although don't try to compare a dumbbell exercise to an angled exercise with cables... holy frig). The problem I have are those who put down something I say without any explanation (as to why it's wrong), an alternative suggestion, etc., but rather... just yammering for the sake of yammering, which I NEVER see with other posters on this site. It's like I'm a top dog that they need to take down to make themselves feel better. I hope you think about that.

Therefore, please explain how lifting dumbbells up straight compares exactly to that of pulling from an angle out toward in and down toward up. Remember, it's about ideas, right? And not people, right?
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

Oh, I forgot... you want courtesy, yet say I come across as a pompous ass. Very nice... very nice... coming from an expert who can't even understand the difference between exercise mediums, LOL. To call someone else names and then request civility is nothing short of being an ass himself. I never once called you a name, but there you have it... can't challenge an idea properly, and so go for the ad hominem attacks. Duh! Super bright barbell boy.
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

cokerat wrote:
I couldn't agree more Simon. It's the only exercise where I can feel my upper pecs.


According to you, the dumbbell exercise is the ONLY exercise where you can feel your upper pecs. I then indicated an exercise that is DIFFERENT by way of tension AND angle that also is very good... one that you must not have known about since the dumbbell exercise is the ONLY one to your KNOWLEDGE that allows you to feel the upper pecs. I make a recommendation to help the likes of you, at no charge and on my time, yet I'm a pompous ass. You then come across as being the pompous ass by laughing (LOL)... that they are the same exercises, then later claiming that the tip was no big deal (to you, while ignoring all the other members, you pompous self-indulgent ass), yet you never did do the exercise, because if you did, then you would feel your upper pecs and that dumbbell exercise would not be the ONLY one that allows you to feel your upper pecs. Now, don't be calling me a pompous ass because I exposed your ignorance or stupidity on things. That's your fault... and to blame others and to call them names merely indicates that you are a pompous ass. Have a good day.
Open User Options Menu

hdlifter

Waste of time and effort...carry on.
Open User Options Menu

cokerat

Brian,

Pay you ???

Lmao........WOW........look at you go.

You get worse as you get older. Should try talking to someone or maybe get laid or .......... I dunno ...... WOW, what an idiot !!!
Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | 3 | Next | Last
Administrators Online: Mod Starr
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy