Bib's LOT Theory Revisited

I think I have stated that one can expect up to 0.5” from “pulling out the inner penis.” I think I downgraded my estimate to 0.1 to 0.3” after seeing must how shallow the angle of the pubic symphysis really is. The current version of the LOT simulator uses too steep an angle, IMO, so it slightly overestimates the gain. There’s also the fact that the ligs really aren’t so short in most men. They hang down like curtains. The simulator might underestimate lig length for most guys. When you put together the idea that the PS has a shallow angle with the idea that most guys have longish ligs, you see that most guys will gain very little, if anything, from “pulling out the inner penis.”

That said, I think you will probably find a guy here and there who can gain up to 1/2” or so just from releasing the lig. That will be the guy whose ligs are obviously very tight and who has an unusually long or vertical pubic symphysis. I don’t think a LOT measurement will tell you this. The best way to tell is through palpation or MRI.

Even if you were to find such a guy, he would have to work exceedingly hard to strip back his ligs to the base of his pubic symphysis. I don’t know whether one could really ever expect to do that nonsurgically.

Yea, I know you know that the penis isn’t “free floating,” but you’d be surprised how many people don’t. As far as the picture goes, I’m really not sure what you mean. Actually, I think the picture supports my point. It looks like you can pull that penis straight out at 90-degrees and the ligs would hardly resist. A guy with the anatomy shown in the picture might not gain anything by lig stretching (unless the was completely severed). Even then …

They don’t appear to be restricting much.

Not personally. I haven’t suffered any harm. But one of his patients might.

Well, it depends on how you define “erection angle.” If the surgeon leaves some connective tissue behind, near the ischiopubic rami, then maybe a guy could still get a decent erection angle. But he’d have to be really erect. A half-mast erection would probably point straight down—or nearly so.

Is it a deliberate falsehood? That depends on intent. Does the doctor have any data to back up his claim?

Without complete severance, there’s very little to gain by elongating the ligs. And complete severance is insane. So, I’m back to my conclusion: Lig gains are largely illusory. There might be some guys who can gain a little by “pulling out the inner penis,” but they won’t gain much. IMO, their efforts would be better spent on a more well-rounded PE regimen.

I think I’ve answered (1). They are “real,” but they’re also real small. I’ve answered (2). The gains may be the result of the inner penis being freed from the body. But … they’re really small. As for (3), I agree that the range of possible gains may be 100%—maybe greater—but the range in actual inches is between 0” and 0.5”.

Again (I repeat), I think lig stretching as part of a PE regimen is important, perhaps indispensible. We should do it, in moderation. But it’s not the holy grail. It should be part of a balanced routine.

Yes, I suppose we have to agree to disagree (not only do I find your speculations for lig gains to be unrealistically low, but your thoughts about traditional tissue gains are equally abysmal).

I know you believe that my hair climb was merely the result of shaft skin keeping up with my length gains, but I don’t think that comes close to answering the question of “Tree Roots Syndrome.” Both Dino & Piet have written of this, and towards the end of my active PE this began happening to me as well. Others in the Hanger’s Forum have written of this as well, since it appears to be more prevalent amongst hangers.

Though I didn’t hang, towards the end of my active PE, I began to pull very vigorously (perhaps in frustration with my length gains) and I began to notice a disproportionately larger increase in my base girth. As I never did reverse jelqing, BTB jelqing, or BTB clamping (or any kind of clamping), there’s no other plausible explanation for this but that my (thicker) inner penis was being pulled out/exposed from the body.

You can also feel the difference when ligs are being hit by the stretching or when your stretches are angled to minimize the ligs. I would argue that by ignoring the potential for lig gains, a trainee could be cheating himself out of ½” to 1” (or more) of additional usable length (above that achieved by deformation of the outer penis tissues).

* [whereas you regard 0.5” lig gains as a maximum, I regard that as more of the minimum] *

Abe Lincoln once said, “If I had 8 hours to chop down a tree, I’d spend 6 hours sharpening my axe.”

That’s what I’m doing here – sharpening my axe.

I believe that I will resume an intense PE comeback – as soon as my privacy issues are resolved sufficiently to do so. And in preparation for that, I want to amass the most effective, efficient approach possible – to maximize my gains. And that’s why I continue to peruse the forum and debate & discuss things; not out of boredom, but with that end in mind.

I think the 100% variation might be more related to gains from hanging weights post-op than direct “gains” from releasing the ligament alone.

If you actually go to those sites and view the photos, they are clearly post-op (pubis still shaved, green sheets over the patient, even some blood). And the tape measure photos clearly indicate immediate gains in the 1.5” range.

Why is this so difficult? People keep referencing hanging when that hasn’t even come into play yet.

To be sure, those sites clearly disclose that hanging increases these surgical gains, but they also indicate the immediate gains - right after the surgery.

It sounds like you’ve said something profound there, but I can’t figure out what. Are you saying I’m a pessimist?

When I had an MRI done a few years back, I managed to get the data and actually imaged my inner penis using some open source software. I was surprised to see that, at least in the flaccid state, the inner penis was much narrower than the outer penis. I always thought it would be wider, but its was clearly narrower. Given that, pulling out the inner penis (or whatever you want to call it) should reveal a narrower base.

But it doesn’t. Why not?

My thought is that the base of the penis grows and thickens as an inflammatory response to hanging or stretching. It’s getting thicker to become stronger and keep itself from being pulled apart. The more we pull, the thicker it gets. Eventually, we start to see the thickened tissue as “tree roots.”

Another thing might be happening. As we grow, the inner penis lengthens. Where then, do the old lig attachments go? They move farther down the shaft. Where else could they go? So the “tree roots” are probably exposed lig bundles, which have been pushed (not pulled) forward by the growing inner penis, and which have been thickened as an inflammatory response to all the stress.

I’m not suggesting anybody give up on lig stretching. I do it myself and I think it’s great. My efforts here have been directed to understanding where the gains come from.

My advice is decondition, stretch, and jelq. Stretch in all directions. Do it often and intensely enough to feel the tissues get slightly sore. I think they become “plastic” in this state, and that’s when gains come. Good luck with the gains.

The pics I saw here were of flaccid penises pointing down. Many of them involved alloderm grafts, which tend to hold the penis in a more extended state.

This is hardly an objective, verifyable method of measuring. My flaccid size probably varies 50% over the course of any particular day. And then there’s all that post-operative swelling.

It’s probably true, though, that the surgery may help with flaccid size. I haven’t addressed that, but it seems plausible that it would.

1) What is exactly “growing” or “thickening” at the base of the penis? Striated skeletal muscle? Or, perhaps, some mystery structure that we don’t know about?

2) If this is an “inflammatory response to hanging or stretching,” then my “inflammation” hasn’t subsided one bit during my 2-year layoff.

3) “As we grow, the inner penis lengthens…”. It seems that we keep coming back to that, despite the fact that the surgeons unanimously state that this is not happening in their ligament lengthening procedures.

4) The lig attachments don’t “go” anywhere - except in the case of the surgical severing of them. In non-surgical PE, the tension of the ligs is slackened. Picture the cables of a suspension bridge - holding the penis in a slight arch, deviated from a straight line. Lig stretching lengthens those cables, which then flatten out the trajectory of the penis (which is bowed upwards in the body) - causing the penis to exit the body in a straighter line.

5) In my case, the tree roots are definitely NOT the “exposed lig bundles” (I’m not sure if you have a clear mental picture of this…but the unusual girth of my extreme base is upon the penis proper, its not like some tentacles emanating from the pubis mound. Now, there is an appearance of this slightly, as the skin is somewhat angled upwards around the base, but if you squeeze tightly, you feel only solid penis).

ModestoMan, I know you’re a clever guy - but I can’t shake the feeling that much of your skepticism on this is mere sophistry. I know you’ve staked a lot on taking on the “legendary” Bib - and you’re probably in no hurry at all to concede on even the smallest point. I can understand that, but I don’t feel its for the benefit of anybody else reading these posts (particularly newbies).

We see vast individual variations in erect size, flaccid size, girth, glans size, scrotum & testicular size, angle, shape, elasticity, etc. And the doctors state that the variation of inner penis can be as much as 33-50%. Yet, you are fundamentally unwilling to concede any “possible” lig gain of more than 0.5” - for anybody.

Furthermore, when you do refer to these gains, you seem to suddenly relegate them to being rather a size gain of the inner penile tissue - not an actual shifting forward of the inner penis (despite what the surgeons have said and even despite what some members have observed regarding their own experiences).

I get it, I get it…you’re not going to budge an inch. That’s fine.

I see no further need to pursue any more specifics on this. If we use the standard of “reasonable doubt,” I have more than made my case that the premature announcement of the “death” of Bib’s theory has been greatly exaggerated (to say the least).

To others reading this, let me reiterate that I believe the majority of gains are to be had from deformation of the outer penile tissues - but as overall gains are tough to come by, nobody should sneeze at an extra 1/2” or more of potential EL gains from lig stretching.

And while I’ve had my own skepticism regarding Bib’s gain claims (4.00” + EL), as well as the accuracy or universal applicability of his “tugback test,” we have sufficient evidence - for anyone objective - that the 3 premises of his theory are still breathing.

And while those assholes who run paysites have nobody to answer to, those American surgeons are under the auspices of the AMA (they can’t just make whatever wild claims the choose - unlike the payguide hucksters).

I remain convinced that I have “pulled out” a solid 0.5” of inner penis - and this is without ever stressing downward stretching. As ModestoMan referred to earlier, I didn’t want a penis exit point down around my asshole. My vigorous stretching (to which I attribute this 1/2” pop) was all basically at about 8:00 - 9:00, using both hands & mad tension…for as long as I could hold it. Then, resting briefly, I would keep repeating such sets.

Had I then possessed a better understanding of the internal structures, I would not have feared this. Instead, I would’ve focused a lot more on stretching straight down and even BTL stretching, gripping the full penis and pulling intensely and for a lot of time. Furthermore, I suspect that it might help to apply heat to the pubis mound while doing this (either a heating pad or a rice sock).

I wouldn’t expect a “huge” lig gain, but in an endeavor where a total 2” gain is considered exceptional, you shouldn’t sneeze at 1/2” or more.

Lig-gains doesn’t actually enlarge the penis, it simply exposes more of it. If you expose more of your penis how would it still be the same size as before when erect? Now flaccid gains that come from tunica gains (going from grower to shower) however is a different story, that’s just an elasticity trade off.

The suspensory ligament fibers would be my guess. Another possibility is that it’s merely the superficial fascia under the pubic mound that has been pulled forward by the penis as it’s been lengthened.

I wasn’t clear. Inflammation starts the process. Then comes proliferation and remodeling. The result is more/stronger tissue, which might be big enough to actually see through the skin.

I wasn’t talking about surgery. I was talking about natural PE. I was trying to explain the “tree roots” that you, Piet, and others have seen. Are you saying that the inner penis doesn’t grow from natural PE?

Surgical lig cutting is a different thing altogether. Do guys who’ve had the surgery get “tree roots?”

The ligs attach to the shaft. As the inner penis lengthens (or is pulled out), those attachment points move forward. They have to. The penis doesn’t grow from the tip forward; it grows throughout its length. As those attachment points move forward, it’s possible that you can see them through the skin.

It sounds just like mine.

Let’s just stick to the merits of the argument, OK?

The kind of “lig gains” you’re talking about come from moving the attachment of the shaft from the top of the pubic symphysis to the bottom. Geometrically, the largest gain most guys could reasonably expect to see is less than 0.5”. That’s just geometry. Can you see that?

I don’t “suddenly relegate” them. I consistently relegate them out of what I believe is a correct understanding of anatomy. I do not trust the surgeons to give straight answers. Have you verified that these “surgeons” are for real? Do they actually exist? Do they practice in the US, or in some chop shop in Mexico? Have any disciplinary actions been brought against them?

I’ll budge when I see an argument that makes sense. I’m tenacious but I don’t think I’m stubborn when faced with convincing evidence. Come up with something more credible and maybe I’ll believe you.

For anybody who’s interested, here are some labeled MRI shots of my “inner penis,” as well as some other structures. I think these show that the inner penis is actually narrower than the outer penis, at least in my case.

These pics were taken after my first round of PE. I had done a lot of manual exercises as well as a good deal of BTC hanging by this point.

This one is even better. In the top view, you’re looking up my CCs from between my legs. The perineum is cut away. You can see my CCs directly as they split (toward the left) to anchor into the two sides of the pelvis. The middle structure (above and left of the x-mark) is the bulb. Outer penis is not shown, but it would extend down and to the right.

The picture was original submitted in this thread.

By the way, the X-mark is at the back end of the pubic symphysis. This is the internal edge, not what you press on for BP measurements but rather the other side of the bone. All the penile structures to the lower right of the X are either beneath the pubic symphysis (where the ligs primarily attach) or in front of it, but still shy of the exit point.

More evidence that lig gains are illusory, this time from a published article in a urology journal.

I’m not sure if this was meant to be irony or not…hmmmmm…..

Does not every “urology journal” deny that natural PE works at all?

So, do you quote the skeptical experts when a facet of what they’re saying jives with your own views? If you embraced the medical views on PE, you wouldn’t even be a member of this forum.

Now, as you have posted gains, you must know that certain of thier dogmatic pronouncements are bullshit - but not that one, I suppose (unless your claims of gains are bullshit?).

You also base so much of what you believe about PE soley upon your own gains and PE anatomy. Anybody who has ever been in a locker room or watched porn understands the extreme variations in penis size, shape, symmetry…flaccid, erect, etc. (unless you believe these variations are soley external, and not at all affecting the internal penis as well - which is doubtful).

I would never assume that MY experience with PE is also everybody elses.

I will again assert:

(1) I’ve experienced a climb of my hair level on my shaft - after age 37, without shaving, etc.
(2) My base girth has thickened considerably (without doing any “sub-base” girth work or reverse jelqing, etc.).
(3) I have experienced some length gains by doing BTL stretching with a full grip upon my entire flaccid penis - leaving almost no penis exposed between the bottom of my hand and my body.

I’m sure you’ll figure out some way to dismiss those points (the fun is in the rhetorical game, is it not?), but I know what I’ve experienced. And while you may have regarded it as a crowning achievement to have “refuted” Bib’s theory, many members here - not limited to myself - do not believe that you have.

You two boys need some lube here?

Modesto,

Your skepticism of PE gains potential is well known here. For the first time, I decided to take a close look at your stats in the database to see what I might find.

Your initial entry, dated 6-20-04, shows a 6.5 x 5.1 (certainly above average).
Your final entry, only 9 ½ months later, shows an EL gain of 1.125” (very respectable!) and an equally respectable EG gain of 0.8” – all in well under a year!

But then, I suppose, you “hit the wall.” You’ve not made any additional dB entries in over 3 ¼ years.

Unfortunately, you only made the initial FL (nbp) entry of 4.250 inches. However, that caught my eye as being about 65.385% of your EL (bp). If you compared EL nbp or FL bp, that would probably put your flaccid length over 68% of your erect length.

By comparison, most of the survey info I’ve seen put EL roughly around 6” (nbp) and FL (nbp) at no more than 3 ½” (about 58.33% of erect length).

So, it caught my eye that you started out with less-than-average elasticity. You appear to have used that up rather quickly:

EL gain 1.125” - about 17.31%
EG gain 0.8” - about 15.69%

I have no idea what is your present FL (most likely it’s probably an even higher percentage of your EL than when you first began PE). But, based on my F:E Ratio theory, I would suspect two things:

1) You began with low elasticity, which allowed you to quickly exhaust most (if not all of it) in less than 10 months – gaining an impressive 1.125” x 0.8” of erect size.

2) You’ve likely exhausted your PE potential – or nearly so (hence, you’re probably excessively pessimistic regarding EL gains in the 2” neighborhood…or beyond, based upon your personal experiences).

By contrast, when I began PE, my FL was less than 50% of my EL. Even after roughly 2” EL gains and nearly 1.2” EG gains, my FL still isn’t much over 50% of my erect length; however, my FG is a high percentage of my EG.

Personal conclusion: If I really flung myself vigorously back into PE, and stayed with it, I could eke out some more length gains but probably little if any additional girth gains.

I would also suggest that your little “lig gains” could (perhaps) be due to a flatter “arch” to your inner penis, leaving less length to draw out by slackening your suspensory ligament.

P.S., I don't say any of this to be a smart ass - you made very quick erect gains & length & girth. Also, your overall EG gains are significant. I know it's tempting to frame all of our PE ideas based on our own highly individual results - and an occasional article that serves to confirm our opinions - but there's a lot of variation. Much of what you pronounce is, I believe, excessively dogmatic. - wad