Bib's LOT Theory Revisited

When Bib started this thread, Bib’s LOT Theory, in March of 2003, it received a lot of attention. There was a lot of confusion regarding the LOT test, the theory itself, as well as the potential application of the theory in one’s training regimen.

For a long time, the LOT Theory was generally accepted and utilized by members here. However, after Bib’s controversial departure from this forum, some began to attack not only the implications of the LOT Theory but the concept itself.

Now, it’s not my “job” to be Bib’s apologist. Admittedly, I seldom exchanged with Bib when he was active in the forum (he ran the Hanger’s Forum, and I was not a hanger; however, I must say, that whenever I did query Bib, he was always generous with his time). Moreover, I also want to disclose that I’ve had no contact with Bib whatsoever after he left the forum.

But in the interest of PE, I must say that I felt that a number of ModestoMan’s contentions – upon which he based his dismissal of LOT – are clearly false. To that end, I thought it was worth revisiting Bib’s theory in that some might benefit from it (especially since a number of ModestoMan’s points are directly contradicted by the medical establishment).

ModestoMan started a thread Testing LOT Theory, in which he attacked the theory from all angles – including a so-called computer model of why the LOT Theory is not valid.

And, from another of ModestoMan’s threads, A Possible Breakthrough. About TIME !

Post #37

ModestoMan:
"…The long tradition of crediting lig stretching for gains makes no sense at all. The ligs just tie the shaft to the pubic bone. Stretching the ligs just loosens the connection. It has no effect on penis size.

Now, that's not to say that downward stretching is worthless. Stretching down might be an effective PE technique because of its effect on penile growth—not lig stretching. There also might be some value in loosening the ligs to allow PE induced stresses to reach the parts of the shaft inside the body. They can grow just like the parts of the shaft outside the body. But loosening the ligs doesn't allow you to "pull out the inner penis." The inner penis, like the outer penis, has a fixed length. It can be made to grow from PE, but it can never be "pulled out" without causing serious injury to its owner."

However, from the websites of board-certified surgeons, accredited to perform phalloplasty, we read the following…

from Dr Whitehead's website:

Q. How much extra length may be obtained?

A. This is a hard question to answer, and absolute promises cannot be made. However, length may be increased by approximately one to two inches. Maximum length is obtained when the surgery is combined with a penile stretching device.

Q. Are the results of penile lengthening permanent?

A. The results of penile lengthening are permanent, and when combined with a penile stretching device added length will occur over time.

Dr Whitehead Q&A

Info about lengthening:

"Approximately one-third to one-half of the penis is inside the body, and is internally attached to the undersurface of the pubic bone. Penis lengthening involves the release of the fundiform ligament and the suspensory ligament that attaches the 2 erectile bodies to the pubic bone. The suspensory ligament makes the penis arch under the pubic bone. Release of this ligament allows the penis to protrude on a straighter path, further outward to give more functional length. I use a 1" to 1½" lower abdominal incision in the pubic hair area for concealment or a new incision in the penile-pubic crease for concealment. This is a relatively minor procedure. There will be no scar on the penis and there is no possibility of pubic hair on the penis. I highly recommend use of specially designed penile weights to maximize penile lengthening and combat possible scar formation."

Penile Lengthening

From the Penis Surgery Clinic:

"The Lengthening Procedure: Your penis is considerably longer than it appears. About 40% of its length is concealed behind the skin where it cannot be seen. It is firmly anchored or tethered to the pelvic bones. It is attached to the underside of the pubic bone by, among others, two thin, disposable, dispensable ligaments—the fundiform and the suspensory ligaments. When these two ligaments are divided with a laser the only result is that the penis will extend forward about 1 1/2 inches. Using the laser hastens healing. The actual true length of the penis is unchanged, but the part of the penis in front of the skin—the part you can see and use— increases about 1 1/2 inches. This does not change the angle of the erection. This does not affect the stability of the penis it is not known why these ligaments are even there, just as it is not known why the appendix is there. Those unfamiliar with the procedure have said that instability of the penis and change in the erection angle will result when these ligaments are cut. This is entirely untrue."

Lengthening

To be sure, Bib’s LOT Theory makes a lot of assertions, and this thread does not address them all. Nor is the above info a “slam dunk” for the LOT Theory (in its entirety).

However, when ModestoMan makes such assertions as…

“There is no ‘inner penis to pull out’, that is clearly false.

“…approximately one-third to one-half of the penis is inside the body….”

Or

“…the long tradition of crediting lig stretching for gains makes no sense at all. The ligs just tie the shaft to the pubic bone. Stretching the ligs just loosens the connection. It has no effect on penis size….”

As the above excerpts clearly state, “…penis lengthening involves the release of the fundiform ligament and the suspensory ligament that attaches the 2 erectile bodies to the pubic bone…” as well as “…when these two ligaments are divided with a laser the only result is that the penis will extend forward about 1 1/2 inches….the actual true length of the penis is unchanged, but the part of the penis in front of the skin—the part you can see and use— increases about 1 1/2 inches.”

(The above statement CLEARLY indicates that an immediate 1.5” of the “inner penis” can be “pulled out/exposed” from the body – solely from those 2 ligaments.

In a different thread, ModestoMan and I traded posts in which I said that I didn’t believe that gains more than an inch or so could be realized from lig gains anyway, but ModestoMan opined that he thought it closer to ½ inch – if that. Well, actually TRIPLE that amount is routinely realized from this surgical technique – so, there IS a considerable amount of the blithely-dismissed “Lig Gains.”)

And

“But loosening the ligs doesn't allow you to ‘pull out the inner penis’.”

Already covered – it most certainly does. Furthermore, it’s not actually “loosening” the ligs, it’s “stretching” the ligs.

Or

“The inner penis, like the outer penis, has a fixed length. It can be made to grow from PE, but it can never be "pulled out" without causing serious injury to its owner."

The surgical technique does NOT “increase the size of the inner penis,” but in fact realizes a length gain of the visible penis by releasing the ligaments to allow the penis to protrude on a straighter path. Furthermore, the one article indicates that there is no danger or even instability associated with this procedure.

In addition, ModestoMan asserted that he didn’t believe there was much variation in any potential “lig gains” (which he put at ½” or less), unless one was (I believe he said) a medical anomaly – or something to that effect (I couldn’t find the precise post – sorry).

However, some of the web sites I scanned were giving immediate gains in the range of one to two inches (a 100% variation!). Therefore, it would certainly appear that some men DO have “more lig gains” than other men.

These procedures certainly include the severing of those ligaments and, as such, result in immediate lengthening of the visible penis (by freeing up the inner penis). However, I still believe that a significant percentage of those gains COULD be realized, in time, by intense downward stretching. While I’d earlier stated that I thought 1” might be the top end of potential lig gains, I would have to conclude that some men might realize as much as 1.5” or more from lig gains (since some men realize 2” of lig gains from the severing technique).

I realize that none of this info addresses some of the aspects of Bib’s Theory – including his clock face model for determining inner lig length – but I do believe this info refutes ModestoMan’s contentions against Bib’s theory…namely,

1) There IS an amount “inner penis” that can be pulled out/forward by the stretching/lengthening of the ligs.

2) This difference can vary between men by as much as 100% (1-2”) – perhaps the difference between a LOT of 6:00 and a LOT of 11:00 or higher???

3) These types of gains are not dangerous, nor do they even result in penile instability.

4) Lig stretching can be VERY beneficial – unlike ModestoMan’s assertion that “…lig stretching for gains makes no sense at all.”

So, don’t be quick to discard Bib’s LOT Theory…you might be cheating yourself out of some real gains.

A few more points…

I do believe that the bulk of one’s PE gains could and should be the result of deformation of the outer penis (both length & girth). But some guys could make some very real lig gains.

In my case, I gained about ½” EL from lig gains (but I always had a low LOT). Furthermore, I do remember my LOT fluctuating at times, between about 6:30 to 7:45 or so (unless I’m completely crazy).

I can’t say whether or not Bib’s “tugback test” can accurately determine whether your ligs are longer or shorter than “average,” but that this varies between men should be clearly obvious by the 100% variance of immediate length gains obtained by the surgical ligament procedure.

Furthermore, they claimed that the laser procedure doesn’t even affect the angle of erection. I find that fascinating.

Wad,
Interesting theory! But, I guess it varies from guy to guy to actually how much inner penis they truly do have, though this photo is an example http://www.dart mouth.edu/~anat … um/VHP/1940.htm
I should have saved the one’s from fleshandbones they where the most detailed photos I have ever seen of the inner penis, but they changed there site all around and did away with the free photos.

T4aC

Looking at the pictures, the surgery seems to add flaccid length, but does it add erect length? If yes, then how much on average?

And I do agree, If we can prove that ligament surgery produces EL gains, then in theory ligament stretching over time would be just as effective.

I’m still not sure how the LOT theory helps. So are you’re saying LOT would tell us when we’ve exhausted our length gains from ligament stretching? It would be interesting to get the before-and-after LOT of people who have had ligament surgery.

BTW, it’s funny how you had a disclaimer so people don’t think you’re biased towards Bib (It would’ve never crossed my mind). On the other hand, you seem to be showing some biased against ModestoMan. As if you hold some animosity against him and want to prove him wrong. In my humble opinion, you could’ve presented your theory standalone and got your point across just as effectively, if not more.

Your point is fair enough. I mention ModestoMan often because he led the charge against Bib’s LOT Theory which, curiously enough, everybody believed when he was here…

…then disbelieved after he left.

I can recall being fairly jumped on once when I referenced the LOT in some other thread. People said that it had been “disproven” - as if that was the final word.

I was dubious at the time; now, I have no doubt that Bib had some very legit ideas (not all of them), and that the literature from those surgeons’ websites supports Bib - NOT his detractors.

But, no, I do not hold “animosity” towards ModestoMan (I think he’s contributed a lot to this forum).

I’m not sure if the LOT theory is correct but I do believe in ligament gains. I also see no reason why they shouldn’t improve the erect length as well. But it’s hard to say how much gains that can come from stretching the ligaments though.

Yeah, I’m pretty sure the consensus is that surgery alone does not produce erect length gains; weights are needed for that. So I’m not sure surgery sheds any light on the question of lig-stretching EL gains. Anybody remember the threads where the surgery experts discussed the expected results from lig-cutting?

Some EL gains are happening due to the penis portion tied close to the pubic bone under the fat bad being able to be released.

Distance from tip to bellybutton won’t change, but measureable distance will change. I believe LOT theory and happen to be a 10:30 LOT guy.

I did weights for the first month, and not as consistent as the guys here, so I’m praying there is .5-1” of lig gains to be had for me that I never got.

wad using surgeon hype to back up an argument?

Hi Wad. I guess I have to read this thread at some point. I hope it will be this weekend.

One quick point: The doc you quoted above admitted that cutting the ligs had no effect on penis length, only the amount of penis extending out of the body.

But the question is, at what angle? Cutting the ligs has near zero effect on how far the penis extends up the abdomen toward the belly button. The ligs are normally lax in this state, so removing them has zero effect. It is only at low angles that cutting the ligs has a noticeable effect on length.

But how useful is that length? Do guys usually have sex straight down? It’s certainly not my favorite position. On the other hand, maybe I could grow to enjoy it if it didn’t make my ligs hurt.

What really convinced me that “lig gains” are primarily illusory was seeing actual human skeletons. I’ve had the privilege in recent years of seeing numerous skeletons of actual deceased people—both male and female. What struck me in regard to this discussion is just how shallow the angle is of the pubic bone in normal anatomy. From Bib’s explanation, one would think that the pubic bone (really public symphysis) is a nearly vertical structure, so that releasing the ligs would allow a good deal more penis to be drawn straight out. However, from the actual skeletons I’ve seen, the pubic symphysis is more nearly horizontal. I’d estimate its angle to be about 30-degrees. This means that releasing the ligament has very little effect on length when the penis is pulled straight out.

I still believe that lig stretching is useful, despite all this, because the ligs invest directly into tunica. Stretching the ligs therefore stretches the tunica, and it can give a particularly good stretch. Also, one should expect that the “inner penis” has as much potential for growth as the “outer penis,” so loosening the ligs somewhat is probably necessary to allow PE induced forces to extend to the inner penis to give that region an opportunity to grow.

I hung all summer and ADS’d in between and gained nothing from “lig stretch”. Now I’m back to my spring loaded extender and seeing good gains. Also, you use a phalloplasty surgeons prescriptive advice to back up your argument. Don’t you think they have a vested interest in trying to convince people that their <expensive> quick fix is the way to penile growth?

OK. I read it.

First, it’s a bit of a distortion to quote me as saying, “There is no ‘inner penis to pull out,” when I clearly talk about the inner penis and even represent it in the computer simulation I developed—with user-controllable length, I might add.

It’s the “to pull out” part that we need to focus on. The inner penis does not float in space but is attached by tendon-like structures to the ischiopubic rami—what yoga people call your “sit bones.” You can’t pull out the inner penis; it’s anchored in bone. All you can hope for is to stretch it or induce it to grow.

The surgeons make a point of saying that “40% of the penis is inside the body.” OK. But how much is still in there after the surgery. My guess is 30%.

If you think of the penis as a string, you can see that releasing it at it’s midpiont (the ligs) allows it to straighten out more. Here I agree with the surgeon. But the 1 1/2” claim seems a little far fetched. A guy would have to be measuring sitting down (with his pelvis tilted way back) or standing with his pelvis angled out as far as he could manage. The point is, if a guy is standing or lying down in a normal position, the penis doesn’t come out much farther. I think 1/2” is about right.

You can simulate this on the LOT Simulator by moving the lig attachment point from “High” on the pubic symphysis to “Lo.” When I try this on the simulator, the x-position of the glans moves from 220 mm to 233 mm. This represents a gain in penis extension of 13 mm straight out. That’s about 1/2”, so it works.

Now, you can certainly get much more if you completely release the ligament. Try “cutting the ligs” in the simulator by setting their length to 150mm. Now the penis extends out to 250 mm, a “gain” of 30 mm or about 1.25” OK, so maybe that’s where the good doctor is getting his numbers.

But is this realistic? Does anybody really want a penis like this? Your dick would stick straight out from your asshole! You would not be carrying your package in front of your crotch, but literally between your legs. Your dick would sink into your scrotum. Moreover, your erection would extend no further up your abdomen than before. You would have no more useful dick for most sex positions.

I highly doubt the doctor’s assertion that that penis would suffer from no stability problems. The penis is normally suspended from 3 points. Cut the ligs and it’s suspended from only two. That seems less stable to me. Also, I can often feel my susp. lig. during sex. I rely on it for upward pressure (good for hitting the G-spot). I wouldn’t want to lose that.

The assertion that erection angle is unchanged also seems far fetched. I’ve seen videos of guys who’ve had lengthening surgery, and some of their erections point straight down. I thought this was a known side effect.

Think of the consequences of having a dick that extended out from your asshole. It would be covered with perineal and scrotal hair and skin. That does not seem to be “a gain” in any realistic sense.

Also, and more relevant to this discussion, I once exchanged emails with Bib in which we talked about lig gains. He never suggested to me that the ligs would be pulled completely off the pubic bone or that that would be desirable. His assertion was always that lig stretching merely lowered the attachment point along the front surface of the pubic bone, so that, for example, one might expect go from “high” to “low” in the simulator’s terms.

You did make the point (both in an earlier thread & in this one) that even downward stretching has value only as in general stretching - i.e., tissue traction. You repeatedly dismissed any notion of “pulling out inner penis” - which is exactly what the surgical technique does. And you did reference inner penis, but stated that any “gains” would be due to the enlargement of the inner penis - not by “exposing” more of it.

I uploaded an image from the one surgeon’s website. I never thought the penis was “free floating” - obviously, that would be ridiculous (if it was, you could pull it out, push it in, move it all around to a huge degree). I know that it’s anchored to the bone. But if you look at that image, you can see the ligaments (the grey colored structures), and how they tend to “draw in” the penis - and upwards also.

I’m not talking about “separating from the bone” the penis structure, but it loosening the restrictive action of those ligaments.

Well, the 1.5” claims were not the top claims - 2” were. I guess if you can prove this guy is lying, you might have the grounds for filing litigation against him.

LOL. That is what I used to think (I even used the same image of having your dick protruding from near your asshole). But that one site asserted - in print - that there was no change in angle of erection? How can this be? Furthermore, is it a deliberate falsehood?

I was not talking about complete severance either, only elongating them. I also believed that one’s AOE would change…but the one site directly contradicts this. I don’t know what the hard numbers would really be.

However, the gist of my rebuttal involved 3 premises:

(1) That “Lig Gains” are real
(2) These gains are the result of “inner penis” being freed from the body - as opposed to actual tissue traction/deformation, etc.
(3) I believe the range of these possible gains may vary widely (by as much as 100% between men).

Nowhere yet have those 3 premises been effectively refuted.

Thunder, I get your point about the surgeons’ financial interests - but then, exactly whom do we regard? We lament the scarcity of expert medical info, then we’re dubious on the rare occasions we find any. So, what’s the point? His financial interest notwithstanding, he has to be careful - if only for legal reasons - about putting out blatantly false info, and in print form.

Para-Goomba,
“Yeah, I'm pretty sure the consensus is that surgery alone does not produce erect length gains; weights are needed for that. So I'm not sure surgery sheds any light on the question of lig-stretching EL gains.”

All of those sites indicated that post-op hanging was required - and that this aids the gains. So, there’s no mystery there. However, those pics (w/tape measures) were post-op (i.e., pre-hanging) - and they showed immediate flaccid length gains. So, I don’t see that there’s any question that the “alteration” of those ligs produced immediate length gains.

And to those who questioned whether or not the FL gains translated into EL gains, I would merely ask you to consider the mechanics of what actually happened. The severance of those ligs freed up the penis to protrude from the body in a more direct path. In other words, the penis was (sort of) shifted forward. Therefore, the erect length gains should nearly mirror the flaccid length gains.

How about doing a little research on the guys that have had the surgery and posted here. And maybe take note of the “skulduggery” employed by most of these “doctors”.

ModestoMan,
The thought just hit me on how it might be possible that a 100% variation of “inner length” might be possible WITHOUT drastically altering the AOE.

The websites gave “inner penis” sizes ranging from 33% up to 50% actually. Suppose 2 men are both “presenting” 6 inches (to the world). If one of them has an inner penis of 33%, however, and the other has an inner penis of 50%, then there is an inner penis deviation of 1 inch between the two “six-inchers.”

Now, if the guy with the longer inner penis also has a slightly higher arch – with a more pronounced “tenting” so to speak – coupled with a shorter, tighter lig bundle, he would have more inner penis to come further out when its protruding in a straighter line.

This could, theoretically, account for the 100% deviation without having his penis exit near his asshole.

And, possibly, the latter guy would also benefit more from lig stretching than would the first guy, even when no surgical procedure was performed on either of them.

:)