The Penis (smooth) Muscle Theory

[remek]

Iguana: Did you ever make anything of this point?

But where I've been hitting dead end for some time now is this: What about the extreme of option 3 - Same flaccid hang, but dramatic increase in erect size (and increase in hardness)? According to your post (and what I was originally thinking): " #3 means an increase in tunica length but no SM growth (or relaxation.)"

Avocet8 reported he had experienced the same flaccid hang, but a dramatic increase in erect size (and an increase in hardness). He had to exclusively focus on flaccid gains to change the size of his flaccid penis. I find it hard to believe that he both increased hardness and added several inches to his penis size just by increasing the tunica .

[remek]

Thank you for the links, T4aC!

[Time4aChange]

No problem fellas, I'm glad I could help or at least answer some questions.

[Iguana]

Iguana: Did you ever make anything of this point?

But where I've been hitting dead end for some time now is this: What about the extreme of option 3 - Same flaccid hang, but dramatic increase in erect size (and increase in hardness)? According to your post (and what I was originally thinking):
Avocet8 reported he had experienced the same flaccid hang, but a dramatic increase in erect size (and an increase in hardness). He had to exclusively focus on flaccid gains to change the size of his flaccid penis. I find it hard to believe that he both increased hardness and added several inches to his penis size just by increasing the tunica.

remek, I read back through this entire thread hoping to find a clue on this. The only thing that might make sense (other than Avocet8 being some kind of anomaly) might be related to elastic composition. Is it possible he had an unusually high elastic threshold in both the tunica and smooth muscle? Maybe he was only scratching his elastic potential which might explain why he kept snapping back to the same flaccid size? A comment from him might support this

"I had a nice dick in those days. 6 x 5.75, not real long but thick and I was pleased with it, except when I was flaccid. I’ve never been a shower. 2 inches was par and I’ve been extremely self-conscious about that since junior high."

I know it's been hypothesized many times that growers have greater elastic potential. I think wad had a good thread on this.

When I get a few minutes I will go back and read Avocet's story in greater detail to look for more clues. I know he was a huge advocate of pumping and made most of his gains with it.

I notice you made some great additions to the summary. I added another paragraph myself. It is looking good.

[remek]

We only have a few points left.

We're still kind of stuck on this point, unless you have some new ideas: Girth is greater when semi-erect than when erect.

Here's where we left off:

If the length is smaller, I would presume that the tunica is the same size in both states . . . meaning the tunica may still be the limiting factor. If the length is the same as the erect size, and the girth is bigger, then you're most likely right - the tunic can "take" another .25 inches

Great question! I don't think I have ever done a comparison. It was just something I have observed and noted others talking about. This one may be nothing more than a reshaping of the tunica. Measuing both ways should clear this one up.

Any insight on the length size during this phenomenom would take care this point and solidify our reasoning. Do you remember if it was the same, or do you know of anyone who measured in this instance?

[remek]

I notice you made some great additions to the summary. I added another paragraph myself. It is looking good.

Yea, I have a little free time so I'm trying to finish what we started last year. We almost have a good first draft going.

About the flaccid size point (one of the last ones), let's get down to the nitty gritty again. In this post, you go over what might happen to the flaccid size/erect size comparison due to PE. I think this is where we got side tracked. Let's forget about how the flaccid penis reacts due to PE for a second and consider the difference between growers and showers.

What do you think makes a shower a shower? Clearly his tunica isn't as flexible as a grower's tunica. But I'm thinking that might not be the only thing going on. From what we know, the more relaxed the smooth muscle, the bigger the penis is. If we think of it in terms of erection levels, a man at a 0 percent erection level is a clear grower. As his erection level rises, the smooth muscle relaxes more, and the penis gets bigger and bigger until he is semi-erect. Then it starts getting harder.

And a shower's corporal smooth muscle is relaxed much more than a grower's.

Or at least this is the way I'm seeing it. What about you? Why's a grower a grower and a shower a shower?

[remek]

New point.

- Loss of gains when combined with weaker erections, especially loss of girth.
The theory: Let's go through the motions here. If the erection is hard, then that means the smooth muscle is relaxed enough to press against the tunica (and essentially create a suction so blood can't leave the penis). If the erection is weak, a few things could be happening . . . but it most often means the smooth muscle isn't relaxed enough to press against the tunica and cause an erection or there isn't enough smooth muscle to do so (The Penis as a Vascular Organ).

According to this new theory, when gains are made, two things can happen:

1. Both the tunica and the smooth muscle have to be pushed to a new limit
2. Either the tunica or the smooth muscle was already pushed to a new limit, and the other one "catches up" causing the gain

Similarly, when gains are lost, either both fall from their previous limit or just one does (either the tunica or the smooth muscle). If a loss of gains occurs in conjunction with weaker erections, then hypothetically the smooth muscle has decreased while the tunica has stayed the same - and thus the smooth muscle can't relax enough to press against the tunica. A loss of gains can occur in either short-term or long-term.

1. A short term loss of gains is a negative PI. It's caused by overtraining. We can assume that similar to skeletal muscle, when the smooth muscle is overtrained, it experiences fatigue and can't be pushed to the fullest - and thus can't sustain maximum erections.
2. Long term lost of gains due to taking a break or not cementing gains. If erections are weak, then presumably more tunica gains were cemented than smooth muscle gains (thus causing a gap and weaker erections).

Note: According to this theory, weak erections can get tricky real quick. If the tunica enlarges and the smooth muscle doesn't, this creates a "gap" that needs to be filled. This is where the theory gets tricky - are you experiencing weak erection because of muscle fatigue or because you need to catch your smooth muscle limit up to your tunica limit?

Further note: Perhaps a way to test this would be that if your penis is the same size when it's at its peak, then your smooth muscle didn't decrease (or become fatigued) and thus the tunica just enlarged. This might be hard to test, as if the smooth muscle can't relax enough to cut off blood from leaving the penis, then there is no way to reach the "peak."

[Iguana]

If the erection is hard, then that means the smooth muscle is relaxed enough to press against the tunica (and essentially create a suction so blood can't leave the penis).

and thus the smooth muscle can't relax enough to press against the tunica

remek, would it be clearer to say the smooth muscle volume isn't sufficent to press firmly against the tunica?
If we say relaxed, it may imply there could be a biochemical problem imparing SM relaxation, like lack of nitric oxide.

Isn't it more of a SM volume issue than a lack of relaxation. I ask because I haven't had a chance to read your resource links. I may be missing something.

[remek]

Here's just a random thought. One thing that's been bothering me is that although this theory - if proven accurate - has great applicable promises to it, it still leaves the PEer stuck in many instances. . . particularly the men who are at a plateau because they are focusing on one goal (i.e. just girth or just length).

For example, there's one guy who I've worked with over the past year who can't break a plaeau if his life depended on it. He's 9 X 5.5. He only wants girth at this point, as he's trying to make his penis more proportional. . . So he's only used girth exercises for a long time now (AKA smooth muscle exercises in this theory). In align with the theory, his erection strength is amazing - probably a 10 in a scale of 1 to 10. My guess is that he has to work on his tunica. I asked him to measure his BPFSL to BPEL ratio to provide more insight.

In any instance, If his BPFSL is close to his BPEL, then the theory would suggest that he needs to work on his tunica. . . or focus on length (the opposite of what he's been doing). This is great as it explains why he hasn't been gaining (he's been focusing on the wrong thing), but now what? He doesn't want anymore length. Will the focus on length help him with girth too, or will it only take him further away from his proportional-focused girth goal?

I'm not sure if there's a way to overcome this, but some current ideas might be:

• Spend 60 to 70 percent of efforts focusing on the limit (in this case the tunica) and 30 to 40 percent of the efforts focusing on the goal (in this case smooth muscle AKA girth)
• Focus on the tunica with some girth exercises as well. This is just an intuitive guess, but I think some girth exercises might focus on the tunica too. A big one is the O-bend/flaccid bend. It's a lot like the A-stretch, but it's known for acquiring girth. When I do the exercise, it feels as if it's hitting the tunica just as much if not more than the smooth muscle.

As an ending note, I'm going to talk to some other hard gainers over the next week and see if maybe they've been focusing on the wrong area as well.

[Iguana]

remek, if this theory holds water, I think it's going to create tons of questions. Like you had mentioned earlier, we will probably have to "unlearn" half of what we know. We are probably going to have to rethink almost everything. It may even require the creation of some new exercises.

In this guy's case, I think your second point is the key. He will need to stretch his tunica laterally somehow without stretching it longitudinally. I used to do these exercises I called "Hammerheads" which were basically a compression squeeze done at about a 70%-80% erection. They seemed to give great lateral expansion. Like the O-Bend, you feel these in the tunica much more than in the SM. His choice of exercises may be very slim but I think your last recommendation makes the most sense.