Thunder's Place

The big penis and mens' sexual health source, increasing penis size around the world.

LOT Theory not right

123

LOT Theory not right

1- Lower Lot like 6 00 doesn’t mean longer ligs every time because maybe there r other factors for the head penis tugback like the length of the flaccid penis maybe shorter one can easily tugback even with shorter ligs .

2 - and I think even if we have longer ligs we can stretch it by BTC angle because It is lower than 6 00 .

3- how we can say people who have lower Lot they have longer ligs and the same time they have upper erection angle (ea) ?

I can not reply to this post as I still find the whole LOT thing confusing!

Hopefully someone that “gets” the LOT theory will read this thread and respond.


Running a Massive Co-Front.

Originally Posted by iamaru
I can not reply to this post as I still find the whole LOT thing confusing!

Hopefully someone that “gets” the LOT theory will read this thread and respond.

I thought I must be the only person to be stupid enough not to understand the LOT theory. I don’t understand how loss of tugback ties in with the ligs at all! I always felt it was more to do with the direction of contraction of the muscles used to produce the tug back. Once the angle of the penis is out of alignment with the contracting muscle you lose tugback. As simple as that IMHO.


Feb 2004 BPEL 6.7" NBPEL ???? BPFSL ???? EG 5.65" Feb 2005 BPEL 7.1" NBPEL 5.8" BPFSL 6.9" EG 5.8" Feb 2006 BPEL 7.3" NBPEL 5.8" BPFSL 7.6" EG 5.85" Feb 2007 BPEL 7.3" NBPEL 5.8" BPFSL 7.5" EG 5.9"

LOT Theory 101

I think this diagram helps understand LOT a lot better. ;)

1)The length of the penis is irrelevant for determining LOT
2)Downwards stretching will still work because it’ll start stretching your tunica more if there isn’t much stretch left in the ligs. Though I think stretching upwards, outwards or over the leg will be more effective at targeting the tunica, and you may even raise your LOT to make some future lig gains.
3)Look at the diagram.


:flame: "If you build it, they will cum."

Redwood\'s Progress Report/Routines Thread.

It may help tet, but I even bought the 90 minute “LOT-Theory” DVD. Still rocket science to me.

mbuc, you are not alone!


Running a Massive Co-Front.

There’s a 90 minute DVD, or was that a joke? (I haven’t slept in nearly two days, the jokes have been flying over my head all morning and through most of yesterday.)


"Only enemies speak the truth; friends and lovers lie endlessly, caught in the web of duty". -Roland, in Stephen King's The Last Gunslinger

I don’t believe in the LOT theory either. The diagram in Redwood’s post (above) assumes a relationship between the suspensory ligament and the action of the contracting BC muscle that doesn’t exist. One loses tugback at the lower angles because the forces can’t be transmitted around a corner, not because the ligs are preventing it. See this post:

westla90069 - SO hanging

Originally Posted by tet
1- Lower Lot like… maybe there r other factors…
2 - and I think even if…
3- how we can say…

Tet, please read the Forum Guidelines. Thanks!

Originally Posted by westla90069
I don’t believe in the LOT theory either. The diagram in Redwood’s post (above) assumes a relationship between the suspensory ligament and the action of the contracting BC muscle that doesn’t exist. One loses tugback at the lower angles because the forces can’t be transmitted around a corner, not because the ligs are preventing it. See this post:

westla90069 - SO hanging

Tet, please read the Forum Guidelines. Thanks!

Maybe I’m not as stupid as I thought! Westla’s explanation and anatomical knowledge make sense to me, of what I felt was happening, from a simple engineering point of view.


Feb 2004 BPEL 6.7" NBPEL ???? BPFSL ???? EG 5.65" Feb 2005 BPEL 7.1" NBPEL 5.8" BPFSL 6.9" EG 5.8" Feb 2006 BPEL 7.3" NBPEL 5.8" BPFSL 7.6" EG 5.85" Feb 2007 BPEL 7.3" NBPEL 5.8" BPFSL 7.5" EG 5.9"

I don’t accept LOT theory either. I just kept quiet about it since I’ve been told by a few members to learn my art before preaching. That and also because many people are heavily invested in isolating tunica or ligament exercises, which is not entirely without merit, but often malpractised. Commitment and Consistancy as Cialdini would say [in both senses :) ].

The more I study PE (and that amounts to several thousands of hours), the more simple it becomes to me. That is, sustained moderate force in the direction you want to grow. Everything else is fluff (maybe helpful fluff to some degree). I reserve the right to change my mind when someone discovers what allows collagen to debundle.

How many exercises does MOS contain today? How much better are the gains compared to a newbie routine? I’d say a basic Newbie routine is the reference series.

I believe that LOT theory has some merit.

I think what Bigger was trying to describe with his LOT Theory was that there is some length of “inner penis” which is not expressed outside the body because the ligaments are holding it back. This is certainly true, and it is the basis for penis lengthening surgery (cut the ligs and “pull out” the inner penis).

At some angle (i.e., your LOT), the ligs become lax just enough to express the full inner penis length. The more you can lower your LOT (by stretching the ligs), the more inner penis is expressed at lower angles. Eventually, your LOT becomes low enough that further lig stretching stops being productive, because the ligs are no longer holding back your inner penis at any normal anatomical angle.

Somebody with a high LOT can make his penis hang lower and perhaps even get a longer erection simply by stretching the ligs. Somebody with a low LOT cannot do this. Tunica growth is required.

LOT is useful to hangers because it shows them what angles are needed to target the different structures. Although, generally, one should hang at high angles for tunica and low angles for ligs, there are a range of angles in between (such as SO) for which it is not always clear what structure is being targeted. If your LOT is 6, you can be pretty sure that SO will target the tunica; if your LOT is 11, you can be pretty sure it will target your ligs.

Some tunica stretching may occur by hanging at downward angles. However, stretching at downward angles is probably not as productive as stretching at upward angles because the ligs shield the inner penis from receiving the full traction force.

I have often wondered whether most tunica growth actually occurs at the inner penis. Inside the body, the corpora cavernosa split into separate crura. I’ve never seen a clear description of the tunicae surrounding these crura. Are longitudinal fibers even present? If not, or even if the longitudinal fibers are simply less dense than they are in the rest of the penis, then this region would likely be less resistant to stretching than the outer areas.

If this were the case, LOT theory would matter even more, because, when targeting the tunica, you would always want to stretch above your LOT to apply traction to this region.


Enter your measurements in the PE Database.

I never bought into the LOT theory either. It’s too scientific and dramatized. Some people here really get hung up on such things.

All you really have to do the exercises correctly, be tenacious, have patience and don’t over do it. You’ll be fine.


JAPP

Observe... learn from other people's mistakes.

I always felt tug back was like pulling on a rope. If you pull on a rope you have to pull along the length of the rope. Moving one end from side to side, at 90’ to the length of the rope, does not produce any pulling effect.

When you angle your penis down to the 7 or 8 o’clock position your pc/bc muscles are pulling at 90’ to the external penis, effectively moving the end near the pubic bone slightly but producing no tug back on the end you are holding.

I think Westla explained things very authoritatively in his previous link

westla90069 - SO hanging


Feb 2004 BPEL 6.7" NBPEL ???? BPFSL ???? EG 5.65" Feb 2005 BPEL 7.1" NBPEL 5.8" BPFSL 6.9" EG 5.8" Feb 2006 BPEL 7.3" NBPEL 5.8" BPFSL 7.6" EG 5.85" Feb 2007 BPEL 7.3" NBPEL 5.8" BPFSL 7.5" EG 5.9"

#11

Yeah, I never bought into the E=mc2 either, too scientific and dramatized;)

#7, #10

I don’t claim to understand neither LOT nor the finer details of my biology. But while the idea that if the penis hanging lower would allow a little more of it to show - since it obviously seems to have a bit of an S-shape - seems reasonable, I agree that I don’t quite get how the BC muscles enter the equation.

BUT when looking at the sections in Westla’s excellent BC-post, I notice that the suspensory ligs protrude from the body (pcorbc.jpg , lower right picture); they attach to the pelvic bone to the upper left, and then the outer penis exits the body and hangs from the suspensory ligs that attach downwards and downwards/outwards to the upper side of the shaft at the base. Thus they are kind of like slings, angled downwards left, pushed out because the very mass of the inner penis pushes them out a bit. Now if the BC is contracted (pulling downward right) the mass of the inner shaft is pulled inwards, and the “slings” will follow along and pull inwards/downwards with the base.

So if the suspensory ligs are really stretched, the flaccid penis is no longer pushed out, but hanging straight down, the “bend” of the flaccid penis is located inwards/downwards, simply because that is where the suspensory ligs end their attachement to the shaft. So when the BC contracts, the base is no longer pulled inwards - in theory the “slings” will pull inwards a little, but since they hang right down, neither they nor the base will move very much. In theory, if the suspensory ligs are really stretched out the penis would no longer hang from them but rest only in the fundiform ligs. You would then have a lot of 5 or 4 or something…

My idea is probably clearest understood if you picture the inner penis shortened so that the suspensory ligs are hanging straight down from the attachement point. Then they only rock a little at the bottom of the pendulum, but if they are resting at an 45 degree angle, then contraction would pull them towards the bottom of the pendulum.

Westla et al, is this in agreement with how things really look down there?

regards,

In my opinion the lot theory holds some water. Just remember people this is a theory not law. As such in my case it has held very true. I had a lot of about 9 to 10 o’clock and experienced good gains this past year of .75 newbie and about .75 since for a total of 1.5 inches. It is interesting to me how people miss one of the most important parts behind this basic physics/anatomy theory.

First case the transferal of force around a curve is a true problem, solution bpfsl(fsl) engorged full, yet not hard at all, rope versus steel pipe, thats how I have always done it. Second for all the lot talk I don’t recall anyone ever bringing up this point in a clear manner, and pardon me if someone has as I do not mean to sound like a know it all, but let me use a simple analogy. Picture a garden hose attached to a faucet underneath a table, now lets suspend this hose by a rubberband to this table. If you pull up the tension goes on the faucet(BC muscle) and the table (pelvic bone); now if we pull down the force is on the rubberband(ligaments) so what is so important about this. Well this is obvious and it depends on the person and not just the lot. The important part is how much slack is in between the rubberband (ligaments) and the faucet (BC muscle) as to how much hose (penis you will gain. The other issue is how high and tight your overall package is to your pelvis. As you can guess my package was high and tight and I had a fair amount of slack I noticed this slack when I first started and since has subsided significantly The first month it went very high and tight even though I stretched straight down and during the summer I took an extended break due to life and it loosened a bit but not as much as before I started. The way I noticed this was if you feel your inner penis with your hand, you due this by pressing against your ball sack and follow your penis all the way back by your butt. To visualize this slack I will show you what I felt now picture felling this with your hand from above (\_/ beginning) (one month /-\) and, (now—-). The other way you gain is a lowering of the overall package. Like I said mine was high and tight I could cross my legs like a girl and not ever have it bother me even though I was fairly large hard 6 3/4BPEL 5.9girth and not bad flaccid 3 inch by 5inch.So as you imagine the overall lowering affect has been quite desirable to me as it feels more comfortable in clothes. Just my thoughts thanks for listening.

I am a newbie here. All I can say is that my LOT is 12 o’ clock and in a week of the newbie routine, I have gained an inch in flaccid length. Isn’t that consistent with the LOT Theory. I am elated. My girth is greatly improved too in the flaccid state.

Top
123
Similar Threads 
ThreadStarterForumRepliesLast Post
Double LOT - is it possible?bilbobagginsPenis Enlargement Basics2108-18-2005 04:01 PM
LOT TheoryJRod8282Penis Enlargement Basics811-24-2004 01:18 AM
Question about the LOT theoryXZLLPenis Enlargement Basics407-31-2004 10:30 AM
My LOT is increasing? WTF789Penis Enlargement707-28-2004 02:54 PM

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:22 AM.