starting strength gym
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Lying tricep extension which ?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Uk
    Posts
    1,468

    Default Lying tricep extension which ?

    • starting strength seminar april 2024
    • starting strength seminar jume 2024
    • starting strength seminar august 2024
    The multiplicity of LTE forms is pretty confusing:

    There's the RIP version with vertical arms, bar dropped behind the head and then fired up like a pullover.

    Then there's the arms angled towards the head and the bar dropped behind the head but not being fired upwards, but more controlled with the top of the arms remaining pretty well fixed.

    There are variations which touch the crown of the skull and those that touch the forehead.

    I'm inclined to go with the angled arms, bar dropped behind the head configuration because that seems like it keeps the most tension on the triceps, but I expect that means not utilising the most muscle mass and slightly less ROM than the RIP version. Dropping the bar to the forehead with arms held vertical would seem the worst of all.

    Thoughts ?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    1,541

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nockian View Post
    Then there's the arms angled towards the head and the bar dropped behind the head but not being fired upwards, but more controlled with the top of the arms remaining pretty well fixed.
    Maybe I'm slow, but I'm trying to picture what you're describing. When you say "arms" are you referring to just the humerus or the whole arm?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nockian View Post
    There are variations which touch the crown of the skull and those that touch the forehead.
    Like skull-crushers?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nockian View Post
    I'm inclined to go with the angled arms, bar dropped behind the head configuration because that seems like it keeps the most tension on the triceps, but I expect that means not utilising the most muscle mass and slightly less ROM than the RIP version.
    What's the desired training outcome and why do you think that would have a better effect?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Uk
    Posts
    1,468

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete Troupos View Post
    Maybe I'm slow, but I'm trying to picture what you're describing. When you say "arms" are you referring to just the humerus or the whole arm?


    Like skull-crushers?


    What's the desired training outcome and why do you think that would have a better effect?
    The entire arm instead of being perpendicular to the bench is angled towards the head.

    Everyone seems to have a different definition for skull crushers, but yes.

    If you do the RIP version more weight can be handled and the ROM is greater, so, more muscle mass overall gets trained. With the arms angled towards the head, it's far more biased towards the tricep. It's more like an isolation movement.

    I'm using it as an additional movement to improve my press.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    1,541

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nockian View Post
    If you do the RIP version more weight can be handled and the ROM is greater, so, more muscle mass overall gets trained.
    Why would taking the triceps through a greater ROM (shoulder extension/elbow extension) be less desirable than trying to isolate elbow extension in this position?
    Seems like a lot of work to setup up for an isolation movement where you might as well just do the whole ROM. Isn't the musculature still "working" in the position you described, just isometrically to hold the humerus in place?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Uk
    Posts
    1,468

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete Troupos View Post
    Why would taking the triceps through a greater ROM (shoulder extension/elbow extension) be less desirable than trying to isolate elbow extension in this position?
    Seems like a lot of work to setup up for an isolation movement where you might as well just do the whole ROM. Isn't the musculature still "working" in the position you described, just isometrically to hold the humerus in place?
    I have no idea if it is more desirable, but then it's equally valid to question a movement designed to help the press, by asking, why not just do the press in the first place. I'm trying to understand exactly where this fits as an assistance movement and which version I should do ?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    1,541

    Default

    Your original question was about different variations of LTE's. You said that you were leaning toward a version that used a more limited ROM than the full version in the book so I wanted to understand your thought process for that.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nockian View Post
    I'm trying to understand exactly where this fits as an assistance movement and which version I should do ?
    1-2 times per week in a more intermediate program to drive lock-out strength for the press and the bench. The full version that includes shoulder extension and elbow extension if you have the equipment and capacity. Dips are also helpful for triceps development, but not everyone's shoulders can tolerate them.
    Does that answer your question?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Uk
    Posts
    1,468

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete Troupos View Post
    Your original question was about different variations of LTE's. You said that you were leaning toward a version that used a more limited ROM than the full version in the book so I wanted to understand your thought process for that.

    1-2 times per week in a more intermediate program to drive lock-out strength for the press and the bench. The full version that includes shoulder extension and elbow extension if you have the equipment and capacity. Dips are also helpful for triceps development, but not everyone's shoulders can tolerate them.
    Does that answer your question?
    Yes thank, I think so. Would the book version necessitate the use of increased weight over the limited version ? I'm thinking of the problem of a lack of a spotter might factor in my choice at some stage.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    1,541

    Default

    Any version is going to require a weight increase to be effective. I'd check out the video on the Youtube channel. I don't think you'd need a spotter. Just don't drop the thing on your face and you'll be fine.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Uk
    Posts
    1,468

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete Troupos View Post
    Any version is going to require a weight increase to be effective. I'd check out the video on the Youtube channel. I don't think you'd need a spotter. Just don't drop the thing on your face and you'll be fine.
    I will try my hardest not to. I've watched the RIP version on YouTube.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •