Hanging Debate: Bib- or Vac-type

Ok. It appears that you’re right.

I think he had already gained by the time the testers got the first prototype Bib’s. Not positive, but that’s the way I seem to remember it.

Interesting; as I said, seems to me that noose-style hangers are the more effective answer for the length-gains (after stretching, maybe), altough the dangerest one.Tom Hubbard’s history seem convalidate this point. The reason why is : noose-type hangers mimics manual stretching exercises.

I think you are right; the unquestioned big gains in lenght were done a with similar approach, seems to me.

So, again, the point is: for girth gains, use ischemia-oriented exercises; for length gains, ischemia has little role.

I think we have to never forget the fundamental law of body-adaptation: mini-max law. This means that the body adapt to a stress with the smallest possible modifications. Resembling what happens in better-known situations, we could hazard:

1) if an intense traction is applied to the penis for brief durations, it will be strengthen; so the growth will involve only the structure that really have to support that intense stress. It means not evident hypertrophy.
No elongation will result, because is not economic modifying the shape of the bodypart for so brief stimulus (think to Olympic weight-lifters).

2) if an intense traction is applied for longest durations, the growth will be more evident. Other tissues are strengthening; also, tissues involved needs “food” near them, because the damage is more pronounced : repairs materials will be stored in the tissues itself; the tissues will “eat” just after the effort. We are sending to the penis this message : “The supermarket is going to stay closed for next month, so store a large amount of food” (think to bodybuilders).

This is where ischemia enter on-scene; the metaphor is: if the work is hard, let’s eat, or breath, after it’s done. Is well known that while an intense muscular contraction is happening, the local blood-flow is restricted. So you’re right ttt: ischemia plays his role for growth.

This traction will give an elongation, also, because the stress is prolonged enough for becoming economic the
length-adaption; otherwise said, lenghtening will reduce the intensity of stress: higher has to be hold a weight, more is the work; if the penis is nearest the floor, the stress will be minor.

So, another topic may be this: once we are using enough tension for starting elongation, the weight is not the priority; time under tension is. If this is true, those who focus on adding weight could be missing lenght gains for this reason.

3) If we apply to the penis a light but very prolonged stress, the penis will tend to become longer, for the reason said at point 2); but no girth-growth will be needed. The penis will reshape longer and, maybe, thinner (think to long-distance runners muscles).

I know this sound very non scientific; it’s a rough theory, or maybe a shadow a of rough theory. For now, I think, we should focus on this: this naif-paint accords to what we know about the results of different PE exercises?

There are other threads about “dividing and conquering”, but I must say that I agree with what you have written. To add to your idea, include ads during this phase. Also, I’d follow an IPR macro cyle, and not the micro cycles (I need to read more before I ultimately decide about those micro cycles).

Cool.

Yes. But the noose-type hangers produce even more ischemia because the pressure, transmitted through the relatively thin silicone or whatever, is very high. (I don’t care about bib’s gains - if at all I have some doubts).

And - mainly, at the site of compression; no or almost no ischemia with vac hangers.

I perfectly agree with you. Conceptually, for length and girth increase you would have to stretch the tunica in oppisite directions - therefore exercise for girth would tend to hinder length increases and vice versa.

Marinera - thank you for you input.

It is certainly wise to think of the economy-principle as one that also rules our pe efforts.

Adding weight however makes sens to me since while the body is trying to adapt (by getting stronger, thicker ligs and tunica=) the weight is already higher - so adaptation by getting stronger won’t work as well as with constant weight.

I my thinking progressive high weight stress (short time) plus low weight stress (long time) should be ideal to overcome the adaptation progress.

Yes, I agree; this resemble what lifters do also: they cycle weight and reps (so total time under tension) to send stimulus to different components of body and avoid plateau so well. So a wise approach to PE should be this:
A) macro-cycle focused on length; we are trying to extend time, and weight is a secondary variable;
B) macro-cycle focused on girth; now we are trying to hold higher weights, and time is a secondary variable;
if I am not wrong, seem that there is a general rule of the body/mind adaptations that indicate in 3 months the most beneficial period before stagnation. We should be aware of rush generalization, however.

Regarding the primary topic of this thread, I think could be very difficult to proof the basic hypothesis; seem that ALL PE exercises are made under a partial/total ischemia; we should try to exercise the penis without ischemia at all, and I don’t know how could we do.

Conversely, if we cut-off blood flow in the penis when it is flaccid, there will not be girth growth, don’t you think?
So, ischemia may be more a synergistic factor of tissue growth than a isolated growth-promoter.

P.S. if you are going to win a Nobel price by this research we expect you credit us, memebers of Thundersplace, as members of your equipe.

If this is the case, it is easily tested.

Clamp off the base with a cable clamp and then hang (light or heavy) for sets of 10 minutes (clamping safely!). This way you get maximum strangulation effect of the entire shaft.

Get moving, Gentlemen.

You all, guys, are getting too technical to me: just pull it!

Kojack10,

“Divide and conquer” has certainly been discussed to death but I feel it should be even more specific and I agree with your ADS opinion. Here is what I’ve been doing.

Attack ligs only first for minimum 3 months:

Strtetch Down “ONLY”, down right, down left, down straight, down rotary. 60 seconds-2 sets of each, Twice a day, with warn ups.
ADS also down, 12 hours a day, measure every 30 days. Keep going until you stop gaining. Days off when necessary. When gains cease, assume the ligs have nothing left to give and move to tunica work. Can you elaborate on your “macro/micro” cycle statement?

Pepper

I agree, it will work anyway.

Maybe this thread should be forbidden to newbies; too intricate debates demotivate (..uhmmm…it’s the right word?) people.

Thanks buby. - Best post in this thread. But remember - since we are not / can not be pulling all the time we like to get a little technical inbetween.