Length First Girth Second.

Is that a good general rule of thumb when it comes to training? I’ve been clamping for 2 months now, I have never tried to gain length I’m 7.5 inch’s NBPEL. But lets say 6 months from now I wanted to go for length gains, am I going at it wrong by going for girth first?

It’s generally best to go for length first. Take a look at Length before girth and follow the link there for further reading.

It does not matter where the penis is concerned, what came first the chicken or the egg?

What’s your evidence that it doesn’t matter? Reciting clichés doesn’t count.

According to many expert clampers, clamping could make future length gains less likely to achieve. The reasons are :

a) clamping is a pretty intense exercise, that strengthen the TA;

b) a fatter unit requires more force to be stretched.

You could achieve some length with clamping, but it shouldn’t be the first technique to try if you are whishing length gains.

It is just common sense from observing results over many years. If you gain significant length; an inch or more, you will naturally lose some girth in the process but can probably make-up for most of it with continued exercises. The penis will respond to jelqing and stretching and the order there applied will not have any significant affect on your outcome. People have freaked out when they lose some girth as a result of gains somewhere else, it is just the natural course of PE, no need to segment the process. But if it makes you feel better, than go ahead.

See around Shilow.

I spent several years (unknowingly) doing some serious girth work and have found it difficult to gain length since then.

These difficulties may be due to a combination of factors, but in general I would say that PE should be approached with either a conditioning, girth, or length strategy, since it seems that the three goals are mutually exclusive.

GM

Wow. I wonder if the phase “bad penny” is in Wikipedia…

GM

There was supposed to be a “you” in there someplace. :)

I’ve been thinking about this lately.
My latest theory is that PE for girth, like clamping, usually involves pretty serious pressure. I think that leads to tissue toughening which in turn makes length gains pretty difficult.

IF however, you used moderate forces in clamping or jelquing for girth gains, I think you wouldn’t find the same difficulty in gaining length.

It would be interesting to ask those that had worked girth first then had difficulty with length, what method they used and see if it correlates.

Off course not, any gains will help you in the volume penis, I have gained mainly girth until now! And I really want badly lenght, just a single inch, I will not give up until see my penis at the 8 NBP.

Wouldn’t gaining length first also make later girth gains more difficult as well? If you want to add an inch to your girth, you will have to add more in volume if your penis is 8” as opposed to 7”. Since we have the rubber band analogy, I’ll offer another: it would take more air to fill up a longer balloon than a shorter one.

Not a bad analogy, wangchun, but the internal structures of the penis really don’t resemble a hollow balloon. It wold be more like your balloons, wrapped in tensor bandages, with a big, partly inflated novelty “balloon animal” balloon wrapping the whole thing, the tail of that balloon being the ligaments attaching to the symphysis pubis.

I’d have to make a search, but I’m pretty sure that I’ve just broken the Thunder’s Place record for “Most Occurrences of the word “Balloon” in One Single Post”.

:D

GM

Well I’m not talking from a physiological perspective. I’m just saying in terms of volume. Adding an inch of length to a 6” girth penis would require a greater volume increase than adding an inch to a 5” inch girth penis. It would make sense that having to add more in volume would take longer or be harder. Just the same, adding girth to a longer penis should be harder than adding it to a shorter penis because it requires a bigger gain in volume to do so. I was just using the balloon analogy to sort of counter the rubber band analogy.