Clamping: Advanced Empirical Discussion

Update: Ordered pump & cylinder. Generic Cialis on the way. I plan to begin pumping at approximately 3 or 4 units of pressure for 10 minutes once per night after the clamping sessions are done. If reactions are good, I plan to add another set of 10 minutes in the morning. I do not plan to increase pressure past 5, nor do I plan to increase time pumped - although that may change. I’m going to stop posting in this thread until I have some relevant updates.

Good luck.

Very interesting post. I am an MD and of course can not recommend it as a rule.

However, I know from my experience in preventive medicine that many people who are in interested in the concept of life extension believe that cialis has very positive “side effects” on the overall vascular system (coronary arteries, e.g.) and recommend low dose cialis for that purpose. At low dose side effects are in fact minor. I don*t think that true physical dependence will develop but there might be some psychological problems in susceptible subjects while off cialis (erections, as you well know, depend on psychological factors, too).

Therefore, if you are taking cialis on a regular basis I would at least plan longer breaks (one month every three months, for example). And - as suggested by beretta - don’t forget to stick with the lowest effective dose.

Thanks tick. Your posts are always helpful - I was just reading some on some older threads in the pumping forum I think. I did not know about the life extension peoples’ ideas…all I’ve ever encountered from those folks was Aubrey De Grey. Interesting guy really.

This is the guy.

LV- Please post your experiences once you have been pumping for a while. I am interested to see if you observe similar things as me. I recommend trying it both ways as I did, pumping before your clamp sets, and doing it the other way around. You will likely see more expansion in the clamp if you do your pumping first, but as I mentioned before, it is fluid buildup. I noticed greated benefits from pumping AFTER the clamp sets, before I finally decided to temporarily suspend pumping as part of my routine.

You will likely observe less expansion clamped if you don’t pump before the clamp sets. I just believe the expansion you get when clamped is much more beneficial if you have not pumped beforehand. I want to see if you and/or others observe similar effects.

I have the Kaplan pump myself. It is a great pump, and I got it pretty cheap off Ebay about 5 years ago. I’ve used it on and off throughout the years. I believe I paid $30 for it new. 1.75” cylinder model. Came with a cockstrap and some other shit in the package. Has great build quality and the guage is accurate. Awesome pump! (The pump anyway, I don’t know about Kaplan himself)

Also, do let us know how that Cialis aids you in your PE. I’ve got a feeling you are going to love it!

Guys,

My stance on gains, my hypothesis at least, has completely changed. I keep mentioning marinera’s talk of the discreteness of whatever gains we are getting in PE (my theory is only with regard to clamping though) because it bothered me, in a good way. This post might be a bit wordy, and I apologize for that, but I think its worth it.

Previously, I thought that overloading fatigue was a bad thing. The reason I hypothesized this is because of Aristocane’s seemingly static routine that lasted two years (didn’t move up and down in volume or intensity), and because I believe I misunderstood Kaan’s post about needing to maintain a clamping schedule for at least 2 weeks. I also judged that an overloading of fatigue would be short (2-3 days), and in my experience with clamping marathons, that had negative effects. I have changed my views on this. Let me provide some empirical reasons, bear in mind, they are few, but I don’t thing there are any trustworthy empirical results to imply this false:

I think that these two quotes are very useful. As for BG, I believe he also overloaded fatigue (also unintentionally) by switching between days of girth and days of hanging, and then by doing marathons on weekends.

What I believe is going on here is this:

PapSmearster went too far. He overloaded on fatigue, did not see negative PI’s, and thought that he was using a continuous routine that could be maintained indefinately. He saw major gains during the over-fatigue time, but went too far and got injured. Kaan on the other hand I believe did not mention the most critical part of his experience: it was not just that short over-fatigue sessions didn’t produce good gains (my experience correlates perfectly to this), but also that going past two weeks didn’t provide additional gains. I am surprised he did not injure himself, but I think the reason was because he took a few off days later on in the third or fourth week.

I believe that whatever gains we are stimulating through clamping do not react as well to consistent continuous systems. I believe the body, due to its natural and nurtured recovery system, has a certain amount of volume and intensity that it can recover from completely in one day. Going past that means you are overloading: you are not starting the next day completely fresh. This does not mean that you have to see negative PI’s (I do sometimes and don’t sometimes) - as was the case with ThePapSmearster. The point, however, is that if you use a routine that overloads fatigue past the one day basis (a day could be two days, I just mean the period between sucessive workout days), you will eventually either injure yourself or need to take days off, or need to go lighter if the fatigue isn’t too high. So, why don’t consistently continuous systems work as well you say? LV, are you ignoring the fact that we have no proof that consistent systems work? No I’m not, I realize they might work. But what I am pointing out is that the major gainers did not use them. The continuous clamping systems did not produce major gainers that we know of. I would call Drilla’s system continuous, despite his rest days - he is not a major gainer (he obviously gained a lot, but I compare him to others). The major growers grew in spurts, and grew particularly during these overloading sessions, as did ThePapSmearster (huge growth but he injured himself) and kaan.

How can we use this optimally? Here are some pointers from experience and from my ideas so far.

1. System: You would have a two-stage system. In one stage, you overload fatigue, while in the other, you overload recovery. In the first stage, you do more than you can completely recover from in one day. How much more? That depends on how long you want the overloading of fatigue period to last. In the second stage, when you have reached the end of overloading fatigue, you begin to overload recovery. How? You don’t completely stop (this has been negative in my experience and also intuitively), but rather, cut down drastically on volume or intensity such that you are able to enter every next day with more recovery of the overloaded fatigue than the previous one. In the first period, you hold fatigue with you, in the second period, you hold recovery with you - you recover for the day’s work, and then some (to chip away at the fatigue you have from the first period).

2. Method of Fatigue and Rest: The amount of fatigue in the overloading period may static or could be linear or nonlinear (stay the same or ramp up continuously or at an increasing rate). I do not know what is ideal here. Recovery also could be either of the three. If its linear on both sides, with FATIGUE on the Y-axis and time on the X-axis, you would have a V. With a static system, you would have a straight line and then a negative slopped drop. With a non-linear system, you could have an upside down U. You can easily imagine that these methods would all have different effects, and not all of them would be optimal. We need more tests to figure out which is the best method.

3. Time for Each Period: The total measure of fatigue needed during the overloading period is dependent on how long the overloading of fatigue period should be. If you want to last two days, as in marathons, you have to overdo it. If you want to last 2 weeks, it will be a smaller overload. I am almost sure that doing it for a small number of days does not work, as kaan was, from my own experience. I think we should be aiming for around 2 weeks. The rest needed per day afterwards also depends on the time allotted to rest - I think that it should be the minimal amount of time to recover fully from the previous period with the constraint that everyday must have at least a proper set (if you go for long times, or a couple, if you are a short TUC type).

This is what I’ve hypothesized so far. I can’t test this out, but this is the big eureka moment of my experience so far. Personally, I still believe that high TUC’s are necessary (BG does not). Ideally, I would still use the method I detailed to a couple of members on PM’s to slowly adapt to large TUC’s (18 minutes) - continuously, before attempting discrete work. I also disagree with marinera here (who quoted sparkyx about this), I believe and am almost sure that the penis properly adapts to clamping, such that 10 minutes in the first month is not 10 minutes to me now, in terms of fatigue. I do not mean to say you can overdo TUC due to adapting, because there are health constraints. However, I do believe that the program I illustrated to reach 20 TUC causes changes in the body’s ability to handle that time. It is not numbness, it is proper adaptation. Therefore, my current hypothesis is that this system MAY be the ideal way to clamp, if TUC has been adapted to at the 18 minute range, and the system is organized such that overloading fatigue period lasts 2 weeks, the second period about 1 week (doing daily work), and recovery is optimized. Optimized = EVO (make sure not to add too much olive oil for a base, I’ve discovered that as I slowly increased the portion of essential oils my healing drastically improved) and good nutrition, sleep, etc. The faster you recovery properly, the more you can overload during the 2 weeks, the more you can gain.

*WARNING: Discrete systems are very dangerous, obviously. If a person hasn’t clamped for long enough, he will not have the intuitive feeling for how much over-fatigue he can hold per day for 2 weeks. He could, as ThePapSmear did, ruin his gains and even lose gains. This system might be ideal for long-time continuous system clampers.

I’ll probably go back to hibernating now, unless there is any discussion. I need to settle my four growth variables before I attempt this system (pumping, clamping, Cialis, EVO), so these are just thoughts now. I do feel that this may be the solution to lasting gains that I was searching for. It says nothing about reasons for growth (I do not know anything medically, penile tissue is dark matter to me - MD’s here could help) to me, but in the end it doesn’t matter.

Finally, this post is not approved by marinera. His very intelligent posts sparked my thoughts, but I don’t know if he will agree with this idea. However, I must THANK him heavily for his posts, otherwise I would not have realized I had misunderstood the empirical experiences. I defined over-fatigue times too shortly, thinking that anything about a week was continuous. Fatigue can accumulate at any rate. Even a routine done for 2 months could accumulate fatigue daily and necessitate a break. Good posts marinera.

Oh, nothing to mention, LV. Nobody needs my approval here, anyway - this is a forum, different opinions are the soul of this site. :)

I’d like to have an answer to this question I made - if you answered before, than I missed, so apologize in advance:TUC = time under constraints? I mean, intensity is not considered in this acronym? Just for sake of clarity.

Yes marinera, TUC = Time Under Clamp.

I consider intensity as standard - which is full. There is no point in my opinion to count clicks as many do, because it is too difficult to ask someone’s girth everytime he mentions the numbers of clicks he uses. Intensity to me is a girth larger than EG, rock hard (while erect at least, if no lymph fluid), and generally the max that is not painful.

Hope I answered your question.

Ok, thanks.

Now, in an old thread me and some fellows reasoned about the chance to get a formula that could predict gains basing on two variables: time and tension (or weight). It wasn’t really possible, because the OP, if I well remember, was basing his assumption on the time needed to get gains under a given pressure with extenders; transferring that formula into hanging or manual stretching wasn’t really possible, IMO.

Let’s base again on the weight training analogy: 100 reps with 1 kg don’t give the same result as 1 rep with 100 kg. But, wait: 2 reps with 50 kg are going to give results comparable to 3-5 reps with 40 kg, maybe.

Hijacking your thread? Maybe. I think the above is somewhat pertinent to the topic of this thread. If we agree that there is a trade off between time and pressure, or, that is the same, we assume intensity as constant, like you are doing, we get the advantage to reduce two variables two one. Instead than having time and intensity, we have the product of the two things. It remains rest between sets.

Let’s define 1 unit of load this way: 2 sets of clamping with 10 minutes rest between a ‘Load Unit’ (or whatever you like to call it). Than we could try applying the advanced supercompensation model used in physical training to PE this way:

1st week: 9 LU (3 LU x 3 times per week);
2d week: 12 LU (4 LU x 3 times week);
3d week: 20 LU; (5 LU x 4 times per week);
4th week 4 LU; (2 LU x 2 times per wek);
5th week: 2 LU; (1 LU x 2 times per week).

Or something like that.
If it works, gains should be seen after the 3d week.

Is this what you do have in mind?

marinera,

I would classify that under my last post as a nonlinear system. The first period (1-3) is the overloading of fatigue (OLF from now on) and the second period is the overloading of recovery period (OLR).

Gains should be seen according to the empirical evidence sighted towards the end of the OLF two-week period. In fact, the gains may end there, due to the necessity to rest (as seen in both of the people I mentioned).

This is exactly what I have in mind. Do you see the difference between this redirection towards the understanding that gains are discrete, and that overloading of fatigue and rest have its part? Previously, I wished to create a system that was static and did not carry any fatigue or rest out of the individual workout day - so that everyday I would start fresh. I am starting to believe that this is not optimal - the tissue we are dealing with, or the method itself (the clamp) do not get stimulated as well with continuous programs as they do with overloading programs that are created with the idea of discrete gains.

Yes I see.

In advanced PEers, it could be that doing the same things again and again doesn’t create the necessary ‘alarming response’ that can lead to gains.

You may know that the predominant idea is that newbie gains are just due to better erections; I always said that I believe that those gains are mostly real gains. The reason newbies got them is because the body doesn’t know what is dealing with, so adaptive reponse is huge and fast.

Over time, doing the same thing leads to a stalling: the body manage the PE stress like it was a boring matter, if it’s clear what I mean.

Ok, I’ll try to divagate less. It could be interesting if we could find some advanced PEers interested in getting involved in an experiment, to test these ideas.

Tried to edit my previous post to make it clearer:

EDIT: Some examples given a continuous, no loaded fatigue program for the individual would include 2 sets per day at 18 TUC (he can recover fully from this in a day). Allow for half sets just to make it easier to show the different between linear (continuous increase rate) and nonlinear.

Static System: Overload of fatigue from each day remains constant through OLF.

Week 1: 3x18 per day
Week 2: 3x18 per day
Week 3: 1x18 per day

Linear Ramping System: Overload of fatigue increases (just once in the example though) by the same amount each time at the same intervals.

Week 1: 2x18 per day
Week 2: 3x18 per day
Week 3: 1x18 per day

Nonlinear Ramping System: Overload of fatigue increases at an increasing rate at the same or shorter intervals (negatively sloped nonlinear is useless here I think).

First four days: 2x18 per day
Next three days: 2.5x18 per day
Week 2: 4x18 per day
Week 3: 1x18 per day

Weeks 1-2 are the OLF days. Week 3 includes the OLR days. I think OLR will probably be between 1-2 weeks if OLF is 2 weeks (which it seems it should be), it should not be longer than the OLF because that would necessitate so much fatigue that damage might be probable.

This may seem like nitpicking, but I am 100% sure that one of these methods is better than the others. If we had enough studies, we would know. Although we don’t know, this point should be made clear so people can be aware of it when trying the OLF/OLR method of attacking discrete gains.

Also, and this is just my convention, sets are always 18, but to get to that level some sort of adaptation continuous program would be ideal. As I said before, I assume sets are spread out, if they are put close together the fatigue will be higher (due to fatigue interaction between sets). Finally, the main concern on this sort of routine is to recover as quickly as possible. The faster you recover, the more fatigue you can handle, the bigger you get. That means nutrition, sleep, EVO (this is seriously necessary - I would never attempt such a thing without EVO), etc.

The ideal system would probably be some sort of nonlinear system, but we might never find it or perfect it. Static is obviously the easiest system, and I would prefer it if/when I try this.

It would be better taking rest days and spreading the length of the OLF phase in 3-4 weeks, IMHO.

Also, the nonlinear system seems to go better along the same logic of discontinous increases of stimuli than the other two models; different amounts of work between days of the same week, so the body (penis in our case) is forced to adapt again when he ‘believes he knows what is happening’ (hope this makes some sense).