Page 18 of 21 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 210

Thread: Rippetoe's New Article - Must Read If You Have Strength Questions page 18

  1. #171
    RichMahogany's Avatar
    RichMahogany is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,165
    Shop Now
    Quote Originally Posted by Gorbag View Post
    Depends on the individual, some need to have strong legs more than anything else because the squat down in seio-nage, others makes other priorities, so it depends on lots of things...
    Is that your favorite throw? Which seio-nage? Ippon? Morote? Eri?

  2. #172
    Gorbag's Avatar
    Gorbag is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    3,704
    Quote Originally Posted by RichMahogany View Post
    Is that your favorite throw? Which seio-nage? Ippon? Morote? Eri?
    No, I have relative long legs, so Uchi-Mata, O-soto-gari, and yoko-gake. I am also good on counterattacks like Ura-nage and te-guruma...
    Last edited by Gorbag; 04-18-2013 at 06:23 PM.

  3. #173
    RichMahogany's Avatar
    RichMahogany is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,165
    Quote Originally Posted by Gorbag View Post
    No, I have relative long legs, so Uchi-Mata, O-soto-gari, and yoko-gake...
    Nice. I know the first two well enough, but I had to look up yoko-gake. How long have you been playing judo?

  4. #174
    Gorbag's Avatar
    Gorbag is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    3,704
    Quote Originally Posted by RichMahogany View Post
    Nice. I know the first two well enough, but I had to look up yoko-gake. How long have you been playing judo?
    Since the age of nine, and I am now fifty years and fifth dan. I got my first black belt the day I became eightteen, after carrying brown belt for almost four years. I have competed internationally in world cups and championships, and I have trained athletes on all levels, also outside judo...

  5. #175
    quikky's Avatar
    quikky is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,959
    Quote Originally Posted by Gorbag View Post
    And what the heck does a "general adaption" mean? Define it - if I have trained nothing else than my lower body and not my upper body at all and have huge muscular legs and pretty much an untrained upper body, do I then have a "general strength adaption"?
    There are two things that make strength general, only one of which, I think, the argument is about. The first is that strength affects all other aspects of fitness to varying degrees. Becoming stronger will help your endurance, balance, power, etc. Other aspects of fitness don't really affect strength though, ex. building your endurance won't make you stronger. The reason is tied to what strength is, which I have defined for you before, and it is a measure of force production. If I am stronger than you, in whatever test, it means that in that context I can exert more force than you. Since life and movement requires the production of force, improving your force capacity has general applicability to everything.

    The second thing has specifically to do with barbell strength training. What we mean by general adaptation in the context of barbell training is that becoming stronger with barbells will make you stronger with everything else. Once again, this does not mean you will necessarily be stronger than a specialist in some specific movement, but you will be stronger in that movement without ever doing it via barbell training.

    Let's take your favorite exercise the leg press. If you train the leg press without squats, and I train squats without leg press, my strength adaptation will be more general than yours. What this means is that the strength I will develop from squats will have a lot more carryover to other activities than the leg press. I will be good at the leg press, perhaps not quite as good as you, if you specialize in training it, but good nonetheless. You, however, will not be good at squats. The reason, in this particular case is two-fold:

    1. The leg press does not train the body to fire all the leg muscles under a load as well as the squat. Why? The leg press only requires you to press the weight away from your body in a fixed plane. The leg press rack cannot move freely, and so your body does not learn how to fire all the appropriate muscles when the fixed plane is removed and it has to stabilize the load in all directions.
    2. This point is even more important. The leg press essentially removes the upper body from the exercise. So while your legs might train hard pushing the weight up, your upper body is lying down on a padded back. What is a real life scenario where your legs are exposed to a hard resistance without the use of your upper body? Kind of hard to think of one. The squat, on other hand, works your legs tremendously but the force generated by your lower body has to me transmitted to the bar that is on your upper back. With a squat, your body trains to near maximal force production from your legs, while learning how to stabilizing and control this force and transmit it via the spine. I can think of a ton of sports, for example, where this type of movement and force pattern is highly utilized, including your sport of Judo.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gorbag View Post
    Whatever movement(s) that best builds relevant musclefibers for whatever movements that you want a strength carryover for! Got it?
    If you only care about a few very isolated movements, then yes, you can just train those exclusively. So if you just care about having strong biceps and obliques, you can train them exclusively. However, I am not really sure who wants only isolated strength, or even what real life endeavors or sports don't require the use of whole body strength. MMA, football, tennis, rowing, sprinting, being a cop, being soldier, working construction, pushing cars, carrying heavy stuff, whatever, it all requires strength all over. The difference is that some sports and endeavors require more strength in certain areas and are more taxing of certain muscle groups, and you would train those specific extra demands for what you want to do, but you would still train your whole body.

    Barbells train all the major muscle groups, many in unison, train the body to exert force on many joints with free range of motion and through the full range of motion in a stable and controlled fashion, and allow the body to continuously produce more and more force (i.e. strength). This is why they are the most effective tool for strength.

  6. #176
    sunsis's Avatar
    sunsis is offline Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    North Queensland
    Posts
    62
    Thanks for the post. I started his SS program last week.

  7. #177
    RichMahogany's Avatar
    RichMahogany is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,165
    Quote Originally Posted by Gorbag View Post
    Since the age of nine, and I am now fifty years and fifth dan. I got my first black belt the day I became eightteen, after carrying brown belt for almost four years. I have competed internationally in world cups and championships, and I have trained athletes on all levels, also outside judo...
    Very cool. I've been fortunate to be thrown by some very high level judoka in my time, including a 2-time U.S. olympian. It's humbling when someone looks at you and says "I'm going to throw you with harai goshi," and despite all efforts to stop her, she throws you ass-over-teakettle with harai goshi in the first 5 seconds of randori.

  8. #178
    Gorbag's Avatar
    Gorbag is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    3,704
    Quote Originally Posted by quikky View Post
    There are two things that make strength general, only one of which, I think, the argument is about. The first is that strength affects all other aspects of fitness to varying degrees. Becoming stronger will help your endurance, balance, power, etc. Other aspects of fitness don't really affect strength though, ex. building your endurance won't make you stronger. The reason is tied to what strength is, which I have defined for you before, and it is a measure of force production. If I am stronger than you, in whatever test, it means that in that context I can exert more force than you. Since life and movement requires the production of force, improving your force capacity has general applicability to everything.
    So then it follows that an improvement of my force capacity in my upper body, if I only did upper body barbell work, also will improve the work capacity in my lower body, or must I train my whole body to have "a general applicability to everything"? And If I train with barbells only with focus on a few full body movements only as recommended by RIP, do you really think that it is the most optimal, if the explicit and somehow lofty goal is “a general strength applicability to everything”? What about all those muscle fibers that will be under stimulated due to the limitations of a few basic barbell movements only? Even barbells have certain limitations you know…

    Quote Originally Posted by quikky View Post
    Let's take your favorite exercise the leg press. If you train the leg press without squats, and I train squats without leg press, my strength adaptation will be more general than yours. What this means is that the strength I will develop from squats will have a lot more carryover to other activities than the leg press. I will be good at the leg press, perhaps not quite as good as you, if you specialize in training it, but good nonetheless. You, however, will not be good at squats. The reason, in this particular case is two-fold:
    It highly depends, yes and no! Yes, squat is a more all-round movement than leg press, that also works more muscles indirectly. That can be a good thing but can also be a drawback. In my case due to long femurs squats makes a very heavy impact on the lover back, and since I get more than enough lower back training from deadlifts, I focus on leg press instead for better developing the quadriceps, because they are hit much better by leg press. So instead of squat as a total body movement, you can do other things instead that better target your specific goals. And yes, I still think squat is a good exercise, especially if you are a beginner to lifting and have the right anatomy, but it is not a must! I have trained squats on an off since very young age though…


    Quote Originally Posted by quikky View Post
    Barbells train all the major muscle groups, many in unison, train the body to exert force on many joints with free range of motion and through the full range of motion in a stable and controlled fashion, and allow the body to continuously produce more and more force (i.e. strength). This is why they are the most effective tool for strength.
    And so you will with dumbbells, bent over rowing with 100 pound in each hand will do the work also, barbells is the only way? What about weighted chin-ups, pull-ups and dips then – there are people that have developed huge upper bodies almost exclusively on those movements?

  9. #179
    quikky's Avatar
    quikky is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,959
    Quote Originally Posted by Gorbag View Post
    So then it follows that an improvement of my force capacity in my upper body, if I only did upper body barbell work, also will improve the work capacity in my lower body, or must I train my whole body to have "a general applicability to everything"? And If I train with barbells only with focus on a few full body movements only as recommended by RIP, do you really think that it is the most optimal, if the explicit and somehow lofty goal is “a general strength applicability to everything”? What about all those muscle fibers that will be under stimulated due to the limitations of a few basic barbell movements only? Even barbells have certain limitations you know…
    I don't think anyone is suggesting that the bench press will give you strong legs. What I am saying is that increasing force production overall, improves everything else overall.

    Nothing with barbells is under-stimulated for real life tasks because barbells simulate natural movement patterns, i.e. you squat down, you lift something off the floor, you lift something over your head, etc. Now for sports, you still use your barbell strength greatly, BUT if your sport requires more emphasis on certain areas, you specialize more in those areas. The point is that in practically every sport you choose, you will see great improvement in strength, and consequently your performance, from barbells. It does not however mean that barbells are all you need for your particular sport. A gymnasts still needs to work on gymnastics specific strength to be a good gymnast, but he/she will still be benefit greatly be increasing strength from barbells. A linebacker still needs to do drills and work on his football to be good, but increasing his press and squat will make him much better.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gorbag View Post
    It highly depends, yes and no! Yes, squat is a more all-round movement than leg press, that also works more muscles indirectly. That can be a good thing but can also be a drawback. In my case due to long femurs squats makes a very heavy impact on the lover back, and since I get more than enough lower back training from deadlifts, I focus on leg press instead for better developing the quadriceps, because they are hit much better by leg press. So instead of squat as a total body movement, you can do other things instead that better target your specific goals. And yes, I still think squat is a good exercise, especially if you are a beginner to lifting and have the right anatomy, but it is not a must! I have trained squats on an off since very young age though…
    You can train squats and the leg press if you wish, I'm not suggesting to never leg press if it fits your goals. However just doing the leg press misses out on many of the important benefits from squats that have been discussed. Part of the reason why they are a must for sports or even everyday strength is because they not only make the most powerful joint and muscle groups (the hips) strong, but they also train the body to effectively control and transfer that force via the spine to the back, shoulders and/or arms, which then transfer that force to an external resistance, which is always the case in practical applications.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gorbag View Post
    And so you will with dumbbells, bent over rowing with 100 pound in each hand will do the work also, barbells is the only way? What about weighted chin-ups, pull-ups and dips then – there are people that have developed huge upper bodies almost exclusively on those movements?
    Dumbbells are great. I used to do a lot of work with dumbbells too. There are a few problems with them though. One, how do you do the dumbbell heavy squat or deadlift? If you want to squat 300lb, are you going to hold a pair of 150lb dumbbells on your shoulders? What if you squat 400lb? Do you even have access to 200lb dumbbells? How will you lift them initially on your shoulders? If you hold them by the side, the problem then becomes mechanical leverage, your back angle and posterior chain involvement becomes different, and you end up doing more of a front squat. The same with the deadlift, your back angle will be a lot more vertical with dumbbells, which will not provide the same back strengthening effects as the barbell deadlift.

    For pressing movements, the problem is more with progressive loading, and energy wasted on getting into position. For example, improving your bench press or press by 10lb per workout is too hard once you've trained for a little while. However, dumbbells after a certain weight typically go up by 5lb. You can, however, get magnetic micro-plates, or something of the sort. Another thing is, you have to waste energy grabbing them off the rack, or the floor, getting into position with them, and then either dropping them, or getting up with them and putting them back. It can be extra draining to do this when you're working on heavy sets. Same with the standing overhead press, how do you get the dumbbells to your shoulders? More energy wasted.

    As far as chins/pull-ups/dips, they are great. Rip recommends you add chin-ups and pull-ups by about week 3 of Starting Strength. I don't think anyone suggested they shouldn't be done. The only point is that they are not the center of your lifting progression. Essentially, focus on the deadlift, but do weighted pull-ups as assistance; focus on the presses, but do weighted dips.

    Remember too, no one here is saying that barbells are the only way to become stronger, they are simply the most effective.
    Last edited by quikky; 04-19-2013 at 10:00 AM.

  10. #180
    Gorbag's Avatar
    Gorbag is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    3,704
    Quote Originally Posted by quikky View Post
    Nothing with barbells is under-stimulated for real life tasks because barbells simulate natural movement patterns, i.e. you squat down, you lift something off the floor, you lift something over your head, etc.
    And so does dumbbells or sandbags! Many experienced lifters think that dumbbells stimulates an even more natural movement pattern than barbells – why do you think they are wrong about that?

    Quote Originally Posted by quikky View Post
    Dumbbells are great. I used to do a lot of work with dumbbells too. There are a few problems with them though. One, how do you do the dumbbell heavy squat or deadlift? If you want to squat 300lb, are you going to hold a pair of 150lb dumbbells on your shoulders? What if you squat 400lb? Do you even have access to 200lb dumbbells? How will you lift them initially on your shoulders?
    Why do you have to put them on your shoulders at all? You can do hack-squats standing on a block holding heavy dumbbells behind your body. Yes, it gives a somehow different stimulus than a back squat, but if you build overall muscles in your body then you must have a general strength carryover “to life” also from doing that? And you can combine it with leg press also, so barbells squat is still not a must if you are not a competing power lifter.

    Quote Originally Posted by quikky View Post
    Remember too, no one here is saying that barbells are the only way to become stronger, they are simply the most effective.
    Depends on your goals I would say! And why does it have to be either or? Dumbbells, machines and barbells, they all have their pro and cons, use them all is my general recommendation, if you does not have specific goals…

Page 18 of 21 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •