Can the shape of a muscle be altered? Is that a stupid question?

[TigerJaw]

For some reason, I've developed a reputation amongst friends and colleague of know of what I speak with regards to fitness. If only they knew the truth. Some of the questions I've been asked have started me thinking though. I know I'm in danger of dredging over old ground but I've had a look through the old posts and I'm still unsure.

Now, I know that you cannot target the upper and lower abs per se because the abdominus rectus is a single muslce and contracts in unison. Fair enough. This principle extends to all muslces in the body unless you're talking about diferent heads of a muscle.

However, I've also read and heard that when training for strength, the muscle gets stronger over the range of motion that you train over. Hence, it's important to do any excercise over the full range of motion. If I understand correctly, this idea is also important in isometric stretchin with proports to strengthen the muslce when it's in a stretched position.

So, will any contraction of a muscle make it stronger and bigger and that's the end of it or does doing an excercise with a diferent range of motion make any difference to how the muslce develops or behaves. If the latter is true then surely, there would be differences in appearence as well. Can you, for example, give yourself pecs that are flat and well developed towards the centre line of your chest, by doing an excercise that has a greater range of motion in the chest, like the flyes or pec-dec. Alternatively, would only doing the leg-press half way down give you leg muslces that bulge out in the middle?

Just a thought.
Phill

[fa_jing]

Well in the case of the quadriceps, if you only do the last 30% of the motion before full extension, you will develop the head of the quadriceps that is located close to the inside of your knee. I know this because I did this exercise for physical therapy and I saw a big difference in size there. You will also feel sore in that part of the quadriceps and not so much in the other three parts.

Likewise, you can target different heads of your deltoid (shoulder) muscle. For any multi-headed muscle, you can target some or all of the heads depending on what kind of motion you perform.

However, it is doubtful that you will be able to affect the shape of a single-headed muscle such as the pectorals.

[Former castleva]

"Now, I know that you cannot target the upper and lower abs per se because the abdominus rectus is a single muslce and contracts in unison. "
Well you train lower and upper separately,don´t you?

"However, I've also read and heard that when training for strength, the muscle gets stronger over the range of motion that you train over. Hence, it's important to do any excercise over the full range of motion. "
I´m not sure if I understand correctly,to go OVER the motion does not make sense.Basically,you just do your form properly and in full range of motion for maximum efficiency.

"So, will any contraction of a muscle make it stronger and bigger and that's the end of it or does doing an excercise with a diferent range of motion make any difference to how the muslce develops or behaves. "
Would be dangerous to generalise but I would have to say yes,to a degree at least.

"Can you, for example, give yourself pecs that are flat and well developed towards the centre line of your chest, by doing an excercise that has a greater range of motion in the chest, like the flyes or pec-dec. "
I´m not sure if I got this right but if we assume that you only bench press,you will mostly develop outer pectorals,if you pec-dec,the pressure is great on inner pecs.
So in this sense,you could make them shine out but as for making sense,no.

"Alternatively, would only doing the leg-press half way down give you leg muslces that bulge out in the middle?"
Hardly I´d think,and would hardly be practical.

[SevenStar]

The shape your muscles will take is pre-determined by your genetics - you're not gonna change it. You can of course make them bigger or smaller, but the shape will remain constant.

[Former castleva]

Good point,should have adressed that.

[Serpent]

fa-jing's post and castleva's post are contradictory. Anyone care to chine in and shift the vote?

[TigerJaw]

Some interesting points so far.

I'm inclined think that fa-jing is closest to the truth. It makes sence to me that in some cases, when you're using a muscle with multiple heads, you can develop one or more head favourably and this might be associated with a restricted range of motin. This would give the illusion that not doing a full range of motion develops only part of the muscle.

I'm disinclined to agree with the idea that you can target your inner-pectorals. It is my understanding that it's impossible to target diferent parts of the same head of a muscle by doing a diferent movement. However, I don't know, that's why I asked. Can anybody shed more light, argument or oppinion on this.

BTW, no, I don't train my upper and lower 6-pack seperately. I thought that this cannot be done. A single head of muscle contracts as one.

Lastly, nobody has yet address the issue of whether there is any truth in the argument that strength can be developed in a certain range of a joints motion and if that makes any diference to how the muscle looks. Some people say that isometric stretches work by making the muscle strong when it is in a stretched position, this implies that you can have a muscle that is strong when it's at 40% of it's total possible length but weak when it's at 70%. Is there any thruth in that at all.

Also, are there any doctors who can tell us what actually makes a muscle grow. Is it stress? Can't be or stretching would work. Is it tensing? Then you should be able to do it without weights, maybe you can.

Thanks everybody for your contributions, keep em coming.

Cheers,
Phill

[Former castleva]

"I'm inclined think that fa-jing is closest to the truth. It makes sence to me that in some cases, when you're using a muscle with multiple heads, you can develop one or more head favourably and this might be associated with a restricted range of motin. This would give the illusion that not doing a full range of motion develops only part of the muscle."
When it comes to training different parts of the same muscle,it has very little to do with restricting the movement designed for it.
It´s still the same full range of motion,for maximum effect (to not do so,may not be that great in long run)

"Also, are there any doctors who can tell us what actually makes a muscle grow."
Damage.The muscle gets damaged trough exercise.Recovery process from this stress allows it to grow (thus muscle cells build up)

[Ford Prefect]

I wasn't going to chime in because this is usually hotly debated, but the truth is that you CAN target a head of a muscle group by the angle of flexion. That being said, you cannot isolate a single head of a muscle group.

It is also true that it is impossible to target parts of a whole muscle. The ENTIRE muscle contracts uniformally. A pec deck will not make you inner pectoral contract harder than your outer pectoral. It will only feel that way do to stress on connective tissue and insertion points. Thus a muscle will undergo hypertrophy (grow) uniformally as well. Sevenstar is 100% correct when he said that you cannot alter the shape of the muscle by doing this. It is all predetermined by your genetics.

These are facts backed up by hundreds of research studies and experiments.

[Ford Prefect]

Originally posted by Former castleva

Damage.The muscle gets damaged trough exercise.Recovery process from this stress allows it to grow (thus muscle cells build up)

This is actually a very popular misconception. Damage and rebuilding is not what causes a muscle to grow.

[Former castleva]

"This is actually a very popular misconception. Damage and rebuilding is not what causes a muscle to grow."
Yeah,well it was a bit confusing explanation.Largely to be taken as a metaphor.

" I wasn't going to chime in because this is usually hotly debated, but the truth is that you CAN target a head of a muscle group by the angle of flexion. That being said, you cannot isolate a single head of a muscle group.

It is also true that it is impossible to target parts of a whole muscle. The ENTIRE muscle contracts uniformally. "
Yeah.but still one does not,realistically,expect one single exercise to do the work for-.What different exercises with varying pressure were for,but that was discussed already though.

[Ford Prefect]

Sorry, bro. The "damage/rebuilding" metaphor or explanation isn't even in the same zip code as why muscles undergo various forms of hypertrophy.

Yeah.but still one does not,realistically,expect one single exercise to do the work for-.What different exercises with varying pressure were for,but that was discussed already though.

?? What do you mean ??

[Former castleva]

Phoney grammar?

I was just forcing the point of training invidual parts of the muscle (not for exact specific invidual isolation)
with varying exercises for desired effect.

[Ford Prefect]

That's impossible though. You can't train the inner or outer pecs, anymore than you can train the upper medial tricep head or the lower medial tricep head or the upper and lower hamstring. A muscle responds to stimuli uniformally. One part doesn't react or grow more than another.

[Former castleva]

That´s a point and I get what you mean but I do have my reasons to entertain this idea.
I would still have to disagree to a degree.