Low Erection Angle: How to Avoid

My understanding is that, when one has a high LOT score (as do many newbies), then they will gain length most readily by stretching or hanging straight down. The likely disadvantage to this approach (downward stretching and hanging) is decreased erection angle.

Obviously, this matters more to some than to others. Personally, I would prefer to have slower gains, yet maintain a high erection angle. For me, preserving capacity for maximum EQ is most important thing of all.

Am I correct that in order to minimize loss of erection angle, I should stretch/hang at angles other than straight down?

Thanks.

How long have your been PE’ing?

I’ve been PEing consistently now for just a few weeks.

And your already starting to hang? It’s recommended to do the newbie routine for 3-4 months

And LOT theory is just a theory.

I have not been hanging, though I mentioned hanging in posing a question to further my understanding.

If I understand correctly: two of the more common means of applying a stretch to the ligaments are manual stretches and hanging. With both of these techniques, you can select from a variety of angles. I had heard that when you apply a stretch (either manually or hanging) straight down, that this can lead to a lower erection angle.

So the intent of my post was just to confirm that my thinking is correct, that if one wishes to maintain a high erection angle, they ought utilize other means than stretches or hanging straight down, though these other alternatives may be slower to produce gains.

By the way, I don’t expect to be hanging until many months from now, if ever. My approach is to use the newbie routine, and only very gradually increase the intensity and duration of my workouts. For now, that means manual stretches and jelqing.

I posted my question originally in the newbie forum, and a moderator moved it to here, the hanging forum. Which is unfortunate, because I wasn’t inquiring about hanging, but rather, the effect on erection angle of straight down pulling (either from manual stretch, hanging, or other).

Thanks for the comments.

I had only been PEing about 3 weeks before I started hanging.

I just started at 2.5lbs (extremely conservative), and it’s my 5th week of hanging, and I only started to do 6lbs this week (more experienced PEers start right off with 5lbs and are probably do 6-7 lbs perhaps even their second week of hanging). I’ve only been increasing by about .625lbs per week on average (1/2 lb increments at first, then 1lb later).

I’ve made some minor gains, and have come nowhere close to an injury—

Perhaps I could have gained more just sticking with the newbie routine… but I was too anxious to just get started with hanging.

Back to LOT theory, disproven or not, I don’t know why you worry so much about it Marinera! Its just giving hanging angle recommendations.

It just seems like most of the moderators think it’s the end of the world if someone believes in the theory.

You can probably hang at any angle you want to gain— or if you want some direction about an angle to choose, I believe LOT theory is the only theory that can give you some direction. It may at least be better than choosing a completely random angle to start from.

I think everyone can at least agree that as long as you reach fatigue (without injury) any angle can give you gains :)

To some extent, having a bigger penis will make your erection angle lower. You can thank the earth’s gravity forces for that.

If you already have a really low erection angle, you could try & vary between OTS/ SU/ SO/ OTL types of angles—

I figure hanging SD or BTC probably create the most risk of lowering your erection angle.

In my case, my erection angle is so high, I would actually prefer to lower it :p I’ve been doing a lot of BTC hanging.

Moderators of TP believes that giving rational advises is part of their job.
LOT theory is an un-confirmed hypothesis in most of vets’ opinion.

But, do you think picking a random angle is better than using a theory to pick your angle of attack, even if the theory isn’t perfect?

I do think that if there are proofs that an hypothesis is uncorrect we have to say it. Is it clear?

Yeah, I see your point.

:up: