Thunder's Place

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

Bib's LOT Theory

Don’t worry about LOT. Just hang where you feel the best stretch.

I'm a big fan of 50 Cent, or as we call him in Zimbabwe, four hundred million dollars.

Is LOT is only for hanging?

Seriously, people are asking aLOT of dumbass repetitive questions, lol.

They keep saying it over and over again, forget about it. Gheesh!

That's right, the name is 10&Then, but you can call me "TNT" for short. :flame: Warning: I'm coming for your girlfriends, sisters, and if they're 18+, your daughters too lol.

So does all the mean:

Do harder (manual) stretches at the angles which produce the most tugback?

As of 5/1/05 BPEL = 6.50" EG = 5.25" 5/20/05 BPEL = 7.00" (This is at the peak right before an orgasm) EG = 5.38" First Goal BPEL = 8.50" EG = 6.25" FL > 5.00" (haven't done PE since about August of 2005)

Getting back into it for a week now, same goals as before, but..

1/10/2010 BPEL = 6.625", EG = 5.25" ... Really wish I did PE for the last 4+ years. Who knows where I would be at.

The LOT theory is just a theory and so far as I know has never proved out to have any value to PE.



If you want to indulge in this, have a look at “LOT Theory 101” by ModestoMan. Gave me a headache, but explains why avocet is right.

regards, mgus

Taped onto the dashboard of a car at a junkyard, I once found the following: "Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." The car was crashed.

Primary goal: To have an EQ above average (i.e. streetsmart, compassionate about life and happy) Secondary goal: to make an anagram of my signature denoting how I feel about my gains

Since I’m active on this forum, the usual answer to any newbie question regarding LOT is something like: “don’t mean LOT too seriously, better ignore it completely”. I’d like to ask the more experienced members:

1. When did you reach a consensus on LOT never proving any real value to PE? Was that based on some sort of poll where people came to the conclusion that the guidance of LOT didn’t make them gain?
2. I really like the simplicity and consistency of the LOT theory, but I admit that the “beauty” of a theory does not make it necessarily correct. Even if the LOT theory failed to produce results (which I don’t state, just consider it as a possibility), the value of loss of tugback seems to be a reproducible parameter. If such, did anybody think of an alternative explanation for the existence of LOT? In real science, when somebody finds a new reproducible parameter, scientists don’t have rest until the parameter gets studied, correlated and eventually explained.
3. I miss people like Bib, people which are curious and imaginative, capable of advancing new (controversial) ideas. Sadly they are too rare… This wasn’t a question, just a wish :) .

Starting BPEL: 6.9" (Dec.1st, 2008)

Current BPEL: 8.11" NBPEL: 7.63" BPFSL: 9.09"

Current MEG : 5.6"

ModestoMan’s thread, referenced above, gives a very detailed explanation of why the LOT theory doesn’t work. Mine is simpler. It’s based on a false assumption about penile anatomy. It associates ligaments and hanging angles with the contractions of the bulbospongiosus muscle which causes the penis go be pulled into the body (i.e. the “tugback”). The anatomy of the penis and its ligaments is essentially the same for every man. Any slight variation is not going to make much difference regarding hanging angles. Using the contractions of the penis to measure ligament locations doesn’t make any sense. That’s why the conclusion has been reached that the theory wasn’t valid. Each person has to evaluate the objections posted by myself, ModestoMan and others and make his own decision. But as moderators we try to steer newbies away from things that are, frankly, a waste of their time.

Regarding Bib’s absence from these forums - It was his choice. He’s actually still a member, but has decided not to post. And it wasn’t really related to any disagreement about his LOT theory, but mostly because of opposition to his political views. He has his own forums now. You’re welcome to join at:

Thanks, westla!

What about erection angle instead of LOT as an indicator of potential gains by ligament stretching?

Starting BPEL: 6.9" (Dec.1st, 2008)

Current BPEL: 8.11" NBPEL: 7.63" BPFSL: 9.09"

Current MEG : 5.6"

There may be some connection. I’m not a hanger and haven’t really studied it. However, I think hanging is beneficial for some and the direction you hang should be related to basic anatomy. That is, straight out (SO) or between the cheeks (BTC) would seem to put stress on the ligaments in the right direction. Over the shoulder (OTS) hanging seems counterproductive to me. But, as I said, I’m not into it and haven’t really studied it.

So should I completely disregard anything concerning LOT?

I would agree with that. So would some others.

Then you’d have Bib’s supporters, and Bib himself, who would disagree.

Take a look at the arguments for and against. I think those opposed have given a great amount of detail as to why the theory makes little sense and those supporting it haven’t really explained how they think it works or why it would be beneficial.

Ok, newbie here.
I’m not sure I understand what tugback and LOT actually mean, (late and tired from work is my excuse and I’m sticking by it) :D

Does “LOT” mean at what angle I can comfortably push my erection angle to? My erection angle when left untouched and free hanging (with 12 being straight up, and 6 being towards the floor ) is about 10-11.
I can’t push my erection (when at 100%) any further down past 9 (which is horizontal or straight out.) and my erection is usually really hard and firm, even when left naturally at 10-11.
Would this mean I have high/tight short ligs?
If I force the angle as far as it will go comfortably (which is about a 9 ) it snaps back to 10-11 position. Is this my TUGBACK?

I take it that if this means my ligs are short/tight/high, then I hopefully have the chance to gain a lot.
When I stretch , should I be stretching as far down (angle wise, not length of stretch itself ) towards the floor as possible?
What about when I’m stretching straight out or to the left or right?
I would appreciate any help on this very much.
Thanks, Mike.

So this LOT theory is unlikely to work?

My ligs - as I stated earlier - are tight/short/ high, whatever :D

Will stretching down still lengthen these even if not actually adding any growth? I’m unhappy with my erection angle, I’d love it to be closer to 9 oclock rather than 10-11. It’s painful to push it past 9 (feels like it will snap off.

Although from experience in sex, the high tight angle seems to please my partner.

Ahem, Anyway. I would appreciate feedback.

Thanks, Mike.

Measuring the LOT is done flaccid, not erect. The Loss Of Tugback is supposed to tell you the best way to hang weights from your penis.

Besides this thread, there’s another one that attempts to explain what it all means: Bib’s LOT Theory 101

It isn’t about erection angle. It’s about lengthening the penis with hanging weights. That’s not something a newbie should try, BTW. Although hanging can increase penis length, this theory really doesn’t help you determine the best angle since it’s based on an erroneous assumption about penis anatomy.

If you want your dick to stick out lower than 10-11 o’clock just get old. Soon it’ll be pointing at your partner’s knees even when it’s hard. :)


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:24 PM.