Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Strength good, conditioning bad. Help.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
    quikky,

    Heavy squats, deads, and bench make you stronger in those lift, but they will not help you much if we measure "strenght" in a gymnastic movement or pullups! I have seen lifters that are very strong in deadlifts, but that cant pull themselves up in a chin-up bar, less in gymnastic rings, just to illustrate that "strength" is relative to the movements you are doing. Try to let the biggest squatter in your gym perform a one leg squat if he have not trained it, he probably can't do any!

    I am not against heavy compound lift, and I do them regulary, but they are not the only way, and sometimes it may be a good idea to cycle them, or take them out for a period.

    More reps, sets and in general more volume give a larger protein and energy turn-over, and if you eat enough you will build more muscle that way, it will also train your body to store more glycogen and water inside your muscle. Basically you need all reps intervalls from below 5 to over 20, but everything depends on your goals, if you just want to have impressive 1 RM in deadlifts, then you must train for that, and stay away from high rep work...
    Heavy squats, deads, and presses make you stronger period. Sure, you won't be able to just hop on a set of rings and bust out an Iron Cross, but you will be stronger and more prepared for it. Gymnastics require strength unique to gymnastics, you can't stand on one hand, or do the human flag, or anything like that by just lifting weights. However, the strength from compound weight lifting does carry over. Can you honestly tell me being able to press your bodyweight overhead has no carryover to gymnastics? Or being able to squat 400lb has no implication on jumping ability, or balance, or core strength?

    Another thing, difficult gymnastic movements are not general fitness. General fitness is being able to lift heavy stuff off the ground, push, pull, and carry weights, etc. not walk on hands, swing on rings, or do back-flips.

    Also, whoever you've seen with a very strong deadlift but no chin-ups is either not very strong at deadlifts, or are a professional powerlifter with a bodyweight of 300lb+. I've never met anyone who has a good deadlift but can't pull themselves up. By the way, pull-ups and dips are great exercises, it's just that if someone is starting from zero, it is often beneficial to focus on the core lifts only. Once those are stronger, assistance work like pull-ups can be added in.

    In terms of reps, 1RM carries over to other rep ranges. Who do you think can do more 135lb deadlifts: a person with a 185lb 1RM deadlift, or a person with a 405lb 1RM deadlift? Like Rippetoe mentions in his article, increasing maximum capacity lets you perform more work at a lower capacity. Unless you are doing something that requires minimal force production for a long amount of time, such as long distance running, having higher peak strength makes it easier to do.

    Comment


    • #17
      Short story quikky, according to the principle of specifity in exercise science you get better in exactly what you are training for, and you and Rippetoe seem to forget about just that! Don't expect too much carry over effect to other exercises, not even from compound lifts, because it doesen't work that way. And I repeat what I have said above, there are no exercise that cannot replace the heavy compounds, unless you have a specific goal to perform in those.
      "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

      - Schopenhauer

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
        Short story quikky, according to the principle of specifity in exercise science you get better in exactly what you are training for, and you and Rippetoe seem to forget about just that! Don't expect too much carry over effect to other exercises, not even from compound lifts, because it doesen't work that way. And I repeat what I have said above, there are no exercise that cannot replace the heavy compounds, unless you have a specific goal to perform in those.
        How does general strength from compound lifts not carry over? You're saying if I have strong shoulders and triceps from pressing, as an example, that shoulder and tricep strength won't carry over to another exercise that uses shoulders and triceps? Explain the physiology please.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by arthurb999 View Post
          You lose endurance quickly... and it's a lot of work to keep up.

          For me, it's a lousy return on time invested so I do a weekly hill sprint session and that provides me with more than enough endurance for "life".
          It is a lousy return. More importantly, having this endurance is NOT needed unless you are involved in athletics where it would be needed. A good strength training program will give one all the conditioning they need for the biggest game of all, life. I train for less than 30 minutes a week and I can easily jog up several flights of stairs without getting gassed. I can do all the things one would want to or need to on a regular basis. I have no aches or pains and lots of energy everyday. That is fitness.
          Last edited by Forever Young; 01-22-2013, 04:18 AM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by boomingno View Post
            ...did you even read the article? From HIS fitness perspective, being strong turns what for some people is an all-out effort to do one rep, INTO an endurance exercise. Would you call someone who can spend a day loading 150-200 70lb bales of hay "poorly conditioned" because he or she runs a bad 5 minute mile time?

            EDIT: although it is worth pointing out that Rip's article is mostly talking about untrained individuals, which the OP does not seem to be.

            But I think the point still stands. Add weight to your primary lifts, and eventually what you lift now is just a warmup.
            For what "would i call someone"? Moving furniture? I didnt lift anything heavier than my grocery bag in the last 5 years (apart from training) and i dont see it changing too soon in the future.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by quikky View Post
              How does general strength from compound lifts not carry over? You're saying if I have strong shoulders and triceps from pressing, as an example, that shoulder and tricep strength won't carry over to another exercise that uses shoulders and triceps? Explain the physiology please.
              Because "strength is always more specific than general. The compounds lift will make the muscle stronger if it creates a bigger muscle, but so will every other exercise that does the same! So, you will get a general physiological carry over effect from a bigger muscle. A few years ago I tested some very strong lifters in rope climbing, guys that could pull heavy a** deadlifts. Rope climbs without using their legs, great for pulling and grip-force, exactly what is important in deadlift right? Forget it, they all did very bad, because this was not "their strength", it was a different movement! None of those heavy a** deadlifters could do a single one arm pull-up either, and some of them even failed on doing a full two arms pull-up as well...
              "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

              - Schopenhauer

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Nekron View Post
                For what "would i call someone"? Moving furniture? I didnt lift anything heavier than my grocery bag in the last 5 years (apart from training) and i dont see it changing too soon in the future.
                I probably should have said "describe"... I didn't mean call in the sense of calling someone on the phone because you need help moving.

                And to the OP, I really don't think there is a magical answer other than run more and sprint more. But as quikky said, heavy lifting + hard metcons is going to be very taxing.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                  Because "strength is always more specific than general. The compounds lift will make the muscle stronger if it creates a bigger muscle, but so will every other exercise that does the same! So, you will get a general physiological carry over effect from a bigger muscle. A few years ago I tested some very strong lifters in rope climbing, guys that could pull heavy a** deadlifts. Rope climbs without using their legs, great for pulling and grip-force, exactly what is important in deadlift right? Forget it, they all did very bad, because this was not "their strength", it was a different movement! None of those heavy a** deadlifters could do a single one arm pull-up either, and some of them even failed on doing a full two arms pull-up as well...
                  You gave an example of relative strength, i.e. one dependent on body weight. If you have someone that can bench press 300lb, who weighs 200lb, that does 50 push ups, are they weaker than someone who can bench press 120lb, weighs 130lb, and does 80 push ups? Rope climbing and pull-ups are relative to body weight. If you are very strong, but also heavy, you might do less pull-ups than someone who is actually weaker, but weighs a lot less.

                  Also, once again, I didn't say you shouldn't do pull-ups, or that simply doing deadlifts will make you do 50 pull-ups. What I did say is that deadlifts are more important to focus on for someone starting from scratch because they are a more fundamental, more compound, more strength developing exercise than pull-ups. Once someone progresses to a reasonable level on the core lifts, pull-ups can be added in.

                  On strength being specific vs. general, I leave you with this Rippetoe quote (bolded by me):

                  “Strength is the most general adaptation. It is acquired most effectively through exercises that produce the most force against external resistance, and as such is always best trained with five or six basic exercises. The same exercises that are correct for weak football players and lifters are correct for weak volleyball and baseball players, because the best way to get strong will always be the same. Strength is NOT specific, and cannot effectively be acquired through exercises that mimic sports-specific movements, because these movements lack the potential to produce as much force as general barbell exercises, and therefore lack the capacity to make weak athletes as strong as barbell training. There are tens of thousands of Physical Therapists that do not understand this simple fact, and many of them have written books. Thus, your confusion.”
                  Last edited by quikky; 01-22-2013, 09:11 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by quikky View Post
                    You gave an example of relative strength, i.e. one dependent on body weight. If you have someone that can bench press 300lb, who weighs 200lb, that does 50 push ups, are they weaker than someone who can bench press 120lb, weighs 130lb, and does 80 push ups? Rope climbing and pull-ups are relative to body weight. If you are very strong, but also heavy, you might do less pull-ups than someone who is actually weaker, but weighs a lot less.
                    Yes, but even lifters in lower weight-classes did surprisingly bad, so apparently not a big carry over effect from being good in dead-lifts for those movements alone.

                    Originally posted by quikky View Post
                    Also, once again, I didn't say you shouldn't do pull-ups, or that simply doing deadlifts will make you do 50 pull-ups. What I did say is that deadlifts are more important to focus on for someone starting from scratch because they are a more fundamental, more compound, more strength developing exercise than pull-ups. Once someone progresses to a reasonable level on the core lifts, pull-ups can be added in.
                    Deadlift can be a great exercise, and I am even going to do it myself today, but it all depends on your goals and the context of what you are training for. It is far from a "must" in the world of lifting and it may be counterproductive for some people as well.

                    Originally posted by Rippetoe View Post
                    On strength being specific vs. general, I leave you with this Rippetoe quote (bolded by me):

                    “Strength is the most general adaptation. It is acquired most effectively through exercises that produce the most force against external resistance, and as such is always best trained with five or six basic exercises. The same exercises that are correct for weak football players and lifters are correct for weak volleyball and baseball players, because the best way to get strong will always be the same. Strength is NOT specific, and cannot effectively be acquired through exercises that mimic sports-specific movements, because these movements lack the potential to produce as much force as general barbell exercises, and therefore lack the capacity to make weak athletes as strong as barbell training. There are tens of thousands of Physical Therapists that do not understand this simple fact, and many of them have written books. Thus, your confusion.”
                    I do not disagree with Rippetoe at all that stength exercise that "mimic" sports-specific moments doesen't work well for strength in an actual sport, but I do disagree that barbell compounds give a better carry over effect other than whatever exercise that produces the same effect of myofibrillar hypertrohphy in the relevant muscle..
                    "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

                    - Schopenhauer

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                      Yes, but even lifters in lower weight-classes did surprisingly bad, so apparently not a big carry over effect from being good in dead-lifts for those movements alone.
                      Deadlifts do not have as much direct carryover to a pull-up. What are we arguing about here? If you want to do more pull-ups, do more pull-ups, and with more weight.

                      Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                      Deadlift can be a great exercise, and I am even going to do it myself today, but it all depends on your goals and the context of what you are training for. It is far from a "must" in the world of lifting and it may be counterproductive for some people as well.
                      Why is it not a must, and how can it be counterproductive? If your goal is strength, deadlifts are a must. If you don't care for strength, or for having a strong back, then deadlifts are optional.

                      Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                      ... I do disagree that barbell compounds give a better carry over effect other than whatever exercise that produces the same effect of myofibrillar hypertrohphy in the relevant muscle..
                      What exercises that are not barbell compound movements provide the same effect on muscle strength?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by quikky View Post
                        Deadlifts do not have as much direct carryover to a pull-up. What are we arguing about here? If you want to do more pull-ups, do more pull-ups, and with more weight.
                        Yes, you get stronger for exactly what you are training for and you get a physiological carry over effect from a bigger muscle from whatever exercise that produces hypertrophy.


                        Originally posted by quikky View Post
                        Why is it not a must, and how can it be counterproductive? If your goal is strength, deadlifts are a must. If you don't care for strength, or for having a strong back, then deadlifts are optional.
                        Deadlift may be counterprductive to a given fitness goal if it makes you unable to train with a high enough volume due to overloading on your CNS and need of recuperation. Some powerlifters that compete in deadlift do not even train it regulary due to it is very draining on the ability of recuperation. So it depends on lots of parameters in your goals and exercise setup. And for reasons like that it is not a "must" either! Deadlift gives you better deadlift strength and it creates a general strength carry over when it produces muscular hypertrophy. A lot of other exercises does the latter...

                        Originally posted by quikky View Post
                        What exercises that are not barbell compound movements provide the same effect on muscle strength?
                        Depends on what "muscle strength" your are talking about here, in general "muscle strength" can be a lot of different things, so define "muscle strength" first, and tell me how we are going to test it, then I can answer you...
                        "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

                        - Schopenhauer

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                          Yes, you get stronger for exactly what you are training for and you get a physiological carry over effect from a bigger muscle from whatever exercise that produces hypertrophy.
                          Not sure what you're saying here...

                          Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                          Deadlift may be counterprductive to a given fitness goal if it makes you unable to train with a high enough volume due to overloading on your CNS and need of recuperation. Some powerlifters that compete in deadlift do not even train it regulary due to it is very draining on the ability of recuperation. So it depends on lots of parameters in your goals and exercise setup. And for reasons like that it is not a "must" either!
                          That's the same for every other exercise in existence. Obviously if you don't program it into your routine correctly, such as too often as to negatively impact recovery, it will be counterproductive. However, this has nothing to do with the deadlift itself.

                          I can say pull-ups are bad, because if you do 100 every day, you will overtrain. Running is bad, because if you try to run a marathon every day you will not recover. It's not the exercise, it's the programming in this case.

                          Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                          Deadlift gives you better deadlift strength and it creates a general strength carry over when it produces muscular hypertrophy. A lot of other exercises does the latter...
                          So you're saying deadlifts only make you better at deadlifts, but when they make your muscles bigger, they have strength carryover? And you're also saying other exercises can also make your muscles bigger? What is your point here?

                          Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                          Depends on what "muscle strength" your are talking about here, in general "muscle strength" can be a lot of different things, so define "muscle strength" first, and tell me how we are going to test it, then I can answer you...
                          I wasn't aware of muscle strength having more than one definition:

                          The measure of the muscle maximum force output.

                          Now that it's defined, what exercises that are not compound barbell lifts produce the same maximum force output increase?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Be careful with how you integrate heavy lifting. Hard metcons and heavy lifting are tough to mix, especially if you don't eat enough to promote good recovery. How often do you lift heavy and how often do you do your metcons? Also, what do the typical metcons look like, is it typical CrossFit WOD style workout? Lastly, if you don't mind sharing, what are your strength numbers for the core lifts?
                            I do Crossfit 3x/wk, I do a lifting class 2x/wk, and I usually get an extra lifting session in on Sundays where I just work on whatever's been weak lately (with me, it's usually squats). I think I eat enough and recover just fine--I rarely have any soreness or DOMS, I sleep great, and my numbers keep improving.

                            Quick stats:
                            5'5", female, 154 pounds
                            1 rep maxes:
                            Deadlift - 210
                            Squat - 165 (def my weak spot)
                            Strict press - 85
                            Full clean - 125
                            Jerk - 120
                            I've never attempted a 1RM snatch because my form is still in the works.

                            I should mention that most of the time in my lifting class, we're doing 65%-80% of our max. We retest max lifts every 4-6 weeks and work at 90-100% maybe once every two or three weeks. So it's not like I'm lifting to failure three times a week, plus metcons. That would be folly.
                            Last edited by heatseeker; 01-22-2013, 02:11 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by quikky View Post
                              Not sure what you're saying here...?
                              Hm, lets try again, what I meant to say is that you become stronger for exactly what you are training for and that you also get a general physiological carry over effect when your muscles gets bigger, from deadlift or whatever exercise(s) that produces hypertrophy for the same muscles.


                              Originally posted by quikky View Post
                              That's the same for every other exercise in existence. Obviously if you don't program it into your routine correctly, such as too often as to negatively impact recovery, it will be counterproductive. However, this has nothing to do with the deadlift itself.

                              I can say pull-ups are bad, because if you do 100 every day, you will overtrain. Running is bad, because if you try to run a marathon every day you will not recover. It's not the exercise, it's the programming in this case.?
                              Wrong, heavy deadlifts or ass-to-floor-Squats close to 1RM, is especially taxing on CNS and cannot be compared with high reps pull-ups or whatever high reps stuff you are doing in the weight-room, that's pretty basic knowledge.

                              Originally posted by quikky View Post
                              So you're saying deadlifts only make you better at deadlifts, but when they make your muscles bigger, they have strength carryover? And you're also saying other exercises can also make your muscles bigger? What is your point here??
                              Yep, and the point is that heavy compounds can be replaced with other exercises and give the same strength development, i.e. hyperthrophy, except they will usually not make you better in those lifts...


                              Originally posted by quikky View Post
                              I wasn't aware of muscle strength having more than one definition:

                              The measure of the muscle maximum force output.

                              Now that it's defined, what exercises that are not compound barbell lifts produce the same maximum force output increase?
                              Bah, an abstract definition like that is not much helpful; "maximum force output increase" for what movement I must ask? And yes there are many definitions on "strenght" within exercise physiology...
                              "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

                              - Schopenhauer

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                                Hm, lets try again, what I meant to say is that you become stronger for exactly what you are training for and that you also get a general physiological carry over effect when your muscles gets bigger, from deadlift or whatever exercise(s) that produces hypertrophy for the same muscles.
                                Uhm, ok. I still don't know what exactly you're trying to say. So when muscles get bigger from an exercise, you get strength carryover? Huh?

                                If you're saying that as long as there is muscle growth, there is carryover strength regardless of the type of exercise, then you're quite wrong. When you develop strength within a natural freeweight movement pattern, such as a deadlift, that strength is general and applicable to a wide variety of tasks. When you develop strength, for example, using machines, that strength is largely applicable to using the machines, not real life.

                                Compare the strength attained doing squats vs strength gained using a variety of leg machines. The person with the strong squat will be strong in all leg exercises. The person with the strong leg curl/extension/whatever will be strong at leg curl/extension/whatever. Isolated exercises are poor drivers of overall strength.


                                Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                                Wrong, heavy deadlifts or ass-to-floor-Squats close to 1RM, is especially taxing on CNS and cannot be compared with high reps pull-ups or whatever high reps stuff you are doing in the weight-room, that's pretty basic knowledge.
                                We're not talking about intensity, we're talking about poor programming. You can exhaust muscles using high reps too. Doing 1RM squat attempts before a leg heavy metcon the next day is not going to be much worse than doing a leg heavy metcon before a 1RM squat attempt the next day - they both interfere with each other. You can argue the finer details but the point remains: a deadlift (or any compound lift) is not counterproductive unless programmed poorly, like everything else.

                                Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                                Yep, and the point is that heavy compounds can be replaced with other exercises and give the same strength development, i.e. hyperthrophy, except they will usually not make you better in those lifts...
                                Again, what other exercises produce the same increase in strength as heavy barbell compound lifts? Name them.

                                Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                                Bah, an abstract definition like that is not much helpful; "maximum force output increase" for what movement I must ask? And yes there are many definitions on "strenght" within exercise physiology...
                                Abstract? That's what strength is. I am not sure how much more straightforward of a definition you want. Pick any measure you strength you want - pulling strength, pushing strength, carrying strength, pressing strength, whatever. Then, answer the question I posed earlier about what would work as well as compound lifts.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X