The Negatives of Conventional Weight Training

[kester_roberts]

hey browsing the ol net came across this website,

The Negatives of Conventional Weight Training

http://sportsciencelab.com/articles/negatives-conventional-weight-training

there is also articles about why squating, ass to grasss and normal squat is useless for atheltes!? also mentions powercleans dont improve athletisem just cause unessacary joint pain lol..

http://sportsciencelab.com/articles/strengthcoachcom-said-what-about-pre-season-training

i know we shouldnt belive everything we read on net but this guy is fairly reknowned, hes training bj penn at the moment for his fight with ken flo and has trained couple of NFL stars when have been injured back to full strenght

i would be interested in everyone views on this guy opinons!!

should i cut out all conventional weight training i.e. squats, bench, power cleans, olympics???

from what i gathered i think hes saying its detrimental to training for athletes?

that doesnt sound right to me!!???????

[Rosi]

I'm not going to bin the squats and cleans just yet :)

[DetoxGuru.com]

i enjoy weight training plus it gives me muscles which are important for sex appeal purposes, you can injure yourself ( as i did ) not doing the power movements correctly but I dont really see any serious fighters giving this stuff up , its tried and tested.

[Leigh]

I hope my competition take note of this stellar advice

[Smiler]

Uh Oh!

Here I go again...

I actually think that the articles are pretty good when you read the content rather than the sensationalism/sales pitch that the author portrays. He also puts forward a strong argument in respect to carrying out any lifts with the correct form, heavily warning of injuries, and in particular to the age of the persons that are the subject to the article.

I'm of the belief, and put into practice with my clients, that sports specific strength can be hit far more appropriately (appropriately being the appropriate word lol!) by more sports specific moves, rather than more classic lifts.

I think that these lifts DO have a place, but secondary to the more sports specific moves. I feel that they should be used as a base strength perhaps (although I think there are better ways of getting base strength in), but shouldn't be looked at as the be-all and end-all of training.

I had a good discussion on a judo forum about whether it is appropriate to measure squats, bench and deadlift as a test for sport specific strength. In these articles the author puts priority on the sport before the supplementary, and this I feel he should be applauded for.

I may be taking a K1 fight at superheavyweight for the end of June, and will need to put some weight on quick! In order to do so I will be doing Olympic lifts, squats, bench and deadlift, but only to help me pack on mass. I will also be doing my more sports specific work too...

Just adding another side to the discussion...

Smiler

[NeilD]

there's obviously alternatives to them movements, you don't HAVE to include them to be successful.. but to say they can be harmful? What can be harmful about developing max strength, explosive strength, increased co-ordination? Unless its harmful to your opponant of course...

[Smiler]

Hi Neil,

Bit complex to explain this one...but...er...hmmm...lets try and simplify....

The muscle contracts from a signal from the brain starting the reaction.
The muscles fire in a certain order depending on the move.
The more a move is practised the more efficient the system comes.
These exercises often get your muscles to fire often in different orders to the sport specific moves.
Therefore, you may be training your body in ways that may be contrary to how you want your body to move during sport...

He also talks about the fixators being different for the moves compared to sports (fixator being the element you push off of), and as he quite rightly says there are very few sports where your feet are flat on the ground like that...

I think that he's over-simplified in the article for the purposes of sales of his system, and cherry picked certain areas...

Just thoughts to the discussion...

Smiler

[NeilD]

Oh absolutely I agree that there are very few moves that 100% replicate an actual sport, other than the sport itself. I think the problems would arise if you focused SOLEY on those methods of training.. i.e. your strength work consisted purely of olympic lifting to the exclusion of all other options, sandbag work, sled dragging, partner work, bodyweight work etc etc.. as part of a varied routine that you keep changing and mixing up there is definatly benefits and I couldn't see any downsides personally. Even training PURELY in sport specific work could have limitations..

I see where you coming from with the idea of what your pushing off, maybe your feet arn't exactly placed like that, but almost everything starts with you pushing off your feet takedowns, punches, kicks etc..

[Smiler]

Y'know Neil, I subscibe to basically what you've just put!

I think part of the problem is that alot of US college coaches seem to place so much emphasis on these lifts providing the complete strength training for the kids...

As an example, I asked if bench squat and deadlift were appropriate tests of sport specific strength, or were even the optimum exercises for developing sports specific strength on the judo forum...the answer came back was that they had the best increases in strength from training using those lifts...I asked how they were testing the strength increases...to which the answer was the lifts themselves...I also asked whether they were doing other strength training as a comparison...and they said no....

Many coaches are so set in their ways, they do things one way because its the way its always been done...they don't keep questioning...keep experimenting...keep developing...

Although the age issue is a good point in respect to injuries at that stage in physical development...

I like the article because it makes good points and makes us think.

Smiler

[Leigh]

Gary

You often say that training should be more specific to the sport but I disagree. If sepcificity (is that a word?) was most important, the only training we should do is actual fighting. You have posted before that you wear a head guard - sorry, you can't wear one when you fight MMA. Do you box? That's a bit one dimensional as you can't kick...you get my point

To suggest that doing other exercises that aren't sport specific will train your body to move in conflicting ways is a very blinkered view. Of course, if you got a power lifter who has never done any martial arts training to get in the cage, chances are he won't do so well. But if your main focus is MMA and you lift weights to supplement your strength, there won't be an issue.

Let me give you an example. The two things I do most in my life are sleep and work (about 8 hours a day each). Do you think I'll go for an armbar in a fight and suddenly sit up and start mimicking typing on a keyboard? When I'm in guard, will I start to feel comfy and catch 40 winks? I think the 30 mins per week lifting I do isn't going to have too much effect ;)

That said, I do only do lifts that I think will improve my functional strength for MMA. I generally do heavy deadlifts and cleans. I also throw in some squatting on occasion and over head pressing. I feel these movements are useful for MMA

[Duchman]

Uh Oh!

Here I go again...

I actually think that the articles are pretty good when you read the content rather than the sensationalism/sales pitch that the author portrays. He also puts forward a strong argument in respect to carrying out any lifts with the correct form, heavily warning of injuries, and in particular to the age of the persons that are the subject to the article.

I'm of the belief, and put into practice with my clients, that sports specific strength can be hit far more appropriately (appropriately being the appropriate word lol!) by more sports specific moves, rather than more classic lifts.

I think that these lifts DO have a place, but secondary to the more sports specific moves. I feel that they should be used as a base strength perhaps (although I think there are better ways of getting base strength in), but shouldn't be looked at as the be-all and end-all of training.

I had a good discussion on a judo forum about whether it is appropriate to measure squats, bench and deadlift as a test for sport specific strength. In these articles the author puts priority on the sport before the supplementary, and this I feel he should be applauded for.

I may be taking a K1 fight at superheavyweight for the end of June, and will need to put some weight on quick! In order to do so I will be doing Olympic lifts, squats, bench and deadlift, but only to help me pack on mass. I will also be doing my more sports specific work too...

Just adding another side to the discussion...

Smiler

Can you give some examples for sport specific strenght? and how to mimick that in the weight room?

To me the greatest strenght you can gave is postural strenght.. guard passing, g and p, clinch god knows what else.
I realy dont see how this done beter by powerlifting/olympics/plyos and just straight up excelent technque.
There is strenght needed for grappling only in so many odd angles they only can be done by wrestling loads i believe, weights just makes it beter, and prevents injuries.

[Wiegieboard]

Something so fundamental and important as squats shoud never be left out. What a load of bullshit if you ask me.
This article to me almost seems aimed at people who don't know what they're doing in the mentioned exercises. It mentions problems which only really come through improper training and through poor knowlege of how a body adapts to what it's being made to do.
Deads, squats and lunges were always incredibly sport specific to the way that I practiced my takedowns as well as for holding correct posture and as far as for keeping standing when someone has rung your bell, squats always seemed to be pretty damn good for that. How many times has someone smacked you on the button and you've only kept standing because of the power you've developed from squatting?
I was never a high level guy at all, but I sure as hell know that the movements from deads, squats and lunges were all replicated and implemented in my game to a high level. When you perform these movements correctly, you find that it's the most successful way for shifting your absolute maximum poundage. This is why we learn and strive to lift correctly wether it be in Sub wrestling or whatever.

For agility and confidence in movements from all positions, other things must be worked also as you need to know how to move from every position, but these exercises can't be beaten for developing maximum power and strength in core and leg stability.

Personally, Squats and deads in combination with heavy sandbag training got me to my most confident with lifting iron, people, whatever. That's for sure. In my opinion, the difference between having a problem and not is in how you execute the exercise, how you recouperate from the training, how you adapt your body to handle its newfound strength and maybe unfortunate larger size etc etc. I believe that powerlifting is entirely healthy and beneficial if you spend time under the tuition of high level athletes in that sport and if you do the biological research as to find out what's actually happening with your body.

Yes there are more sport specific exercises, but I believe that from my own personal experience, mixing it up week for week is more beneficial than only doing a completely sport specific movement with the sandbags for example. The reason for this is that I believe many parts of powerlifting especially in deads and squats can actually be incredibly sport specific in many areas of MMA.

As I said, I'm no MMA expert, but I know what did work for me in a great way and that was a mixture of Powerlifting and sport specific lifting 1 week for 1 week.

[Oleg]

Russia herd about bad weights long ago.

[Smiler]

Hi!

Just a quick response, longer one when I have a bit more time!

1st point - sports specific training should always come first, anything else should come next.

2nd - The sports specific training I refer to are training methods that directly improve specific elements of ability for the sport. You look at moves as a whole and broken down as elements. See how everything is put together. Then build your sports specific training around it, either strengthening 'local' areas or as a whole. Study, analyse, test, plan and practice to improve.

3rd - my supplementary strength training does include olympic and power lifts. But this is to provide base (and muscle density to help increase muscle mass to pop up a weight class) in support to other strength moves - they aren't directly to increase my sports specific strength, but instead to prepare and strengthen my body in order to practice them.

4th - In sport the conditioning training in respect to increasing strength needs to look at maximal strength, elastic strength, strength endurance, static strength, strength deficit, starting strength, absolute and relative strength...too many people just think of strength of how much weight someone can lift...forgetting the context...

5th - In designing sport's specific strength training you need to refer to the fixators for the move and the exercise ie. how the athlete expresses his force against an external force, such as the cage floor on a shoot...

6th - Conventional weight training will only contribute to improvements in the execution of sports practice if regularly worked through competition specific exercises.* (Leigh, this is a well researched and documented view and why I'm not blinkered - its the end game, the channelling into sport thats the important thing. Training that isn't sport specific can be detrimental and works against that sport. For example, a training programme that greatly increases muscle mass in a marathon runner could slow him down...over simplification but hopefully you get what I mean... Further to this there are ways of taking exercises/training methods that on their own aren't particularly relevant to a sport, and the way that you integrate them into your training can make them very relevant...)

7th - I don't fully agree with the article, I just think he makes some good points and gives reasons, I don't agree with them all, and I really like the way he makes you think. Says something that appears radical, so you read it again, get the understanding of what he's actually saying, then ponder and research...

8th - The article is related to college - these athletes are still developing and this is one of the reasons why injuries can occur with greater frequency.

9th - Taking squats on their own, how do you execute the squat? Do you go for reps? Or one rep max? Do you use them with plyo jumps? Do you use them with uneven or unstable weights? On unstable fixator? Do you execute them quickly, or dead slow? Do you hold positions? Do you execute concentric and eccentric elements differently? Do you do different feet positions, different depths, different floor surfaces (soft/hard), flat feet or on balls? How much rest? Use them in HIIT? Mix with other moves? Carry them out in between sports practice? Each way you carry out the same moves you are hitting you muscles, tendons, ligaments, neurological firing, energy sources etc completely different...what are appropriate to the way you need to train to improve as an individual for your sport?

Too many people forget that it isn't just the exercise, its how you carry out that exercise that's important...

*This is due to the auxotonic muscular activity, the neuromuscular pattern associated with the sports technique. To simplify, this is the specific patterns of movements and actions of the body during a move. Ie. what muscles tense, what relax, what order, what speed of contraction/relaxation...if you want to have the most appropriate sports strength increases you have to load your actions in accordance with this pattern. This is something I've been carrying out alot of research, learning and practice in at the moment.

Doooooch - I definately agree that postural strength is soooo key! I'll post some more sports specific exercises when I have more time...but it isn't just the exercise...its how the exercise is executed that is key.

Lol, a bit longer than I thought I had time for, still more in reserve, but it keeps the discussion moving forward!

Later dudes!

Smiler

[jimmy_bullard]

Great stuff smiler I have the opinion that in striking sports (be it striking a golf ball, boxing, muay thai, tennis) highly specific muscle memories in the cerebellum (as opposed to in a bodybuilding sense) are the more important factor rather than an special physiological features. Although once these neural pathways approach saturation other factors such as muscle fibre type, muscle mass, flexibility become a factor this is assuming the practitioner uses correct technique. That said I have never really understood the different types of strength. Duchman used the example of something as basic posturing up in someone's guard and in my experience there is a huge variation in people of the same weight and build in the strength in which they do this. Although in some cases through repeatedly rolling you may be able to adjust your bodyweight, post with your hands if you see your opponents attempts to break down your posture coming which creates the illusion of strength.

[simonmobiledisco]

A confusion people make about power lifting is that the training is about increase muscle and therefore strength. Much of power lifting is about training the CNS (central nervous system) and teaching the body to 'fire' more of the muscle fibres in a lifting movement.

Although the lifting movements are different in execution from the sport, surely you can see the logic in teaching you body to use more of it's muscle.

In car racing having a higher BHP doesn't necessarily mean it goes faster, suspension, chassis, aerodynamics tyres etc. all are taken into account. But there is no real disadvantage in having it over less if applied correctly. Then surely it offers a potential advantage?

But as stated this is only one part of the puzzle, not the main one, but a very important one

[simonmobiledisco]

i just read the articles. i'm no expert, but 70% of the problems is what happens with bad application rather than squats or cleans being 'bad' themselves. pretty misleading

[jimmy_bullard]

A confusion people make about power lifting is that the training is about increase muscle and therefore strength. Much of power lifting is about training the CNS (central nervous system) and teaching the body to 'fire' more of the muscle fibres in a lifting movement.

Although the lifting movements are different in execution from the sport, surely you can see the logic in teaching you body to use more of it's muscle.

In car racing having a higher BHP doesn't necessarily mean it goes faster, suspension, chassis, aerodynamics tyres etc. all are taken into account. But there is no real disadvantage in having it over less if applied correctly. Then surely it offers a potential advantage?

But as stated this is only one part of the puzzle, not the main one, but a very important one

Great point I think I have been making the mistake you alluded to. I remember seeing that usually the muscles only use around 15% of their maximal capacity at any one point in time. I always find it funny though in a lot of sports you get certain individuals who have a lot of power in single explosive movements. In boxing you have punchers, in tennis some players have a lot more power on their serve, in baseball you have fast pitchers, in golf some people can people can drive the ball a lot further than others off the tee, in football players such as steven gerrard, Robin van persie and jimmy floyd hasselbaink can all really crack the football with 30 yard shots outside the box. Within all these sports the explosive power these athelete's seems very different to weight lifting strength and moreover whilst the bigger athelete's tend to have more power in these movements tend to causing the muslces to undergo hypertrophy through weight training doesn't seem to affect this. This may seem contradictory but it seems the larger athelete's derive their strength through puberty but If someone starts bulking up at 21 then they don't seem to add much power in these movements. I don't subscribe to the idea that weights slow you down but if you look at say Sean sherk he is seems big to me because of hypertrophy through weight training and whilst he is very quick and his boxing is technically good he throws nice combinations he has very limited one punch Ko power although you could say this could be due to him following a bodybuilding routine and not a powerlifting one. In tennis andy murray arrived on the scene as an anorexic 18 year old who could serve the ball at 140 miles per hour which is very quick but because he gassed out in his matches and was made fun of for his overall conditioning he has since weight trained extensively but has made no real improvement on how he hard he can nail the ball with his serve of forehand. Andy roddick has the fastest serve in the history of tennis and he says he doesn't really take weight training seriously similar. If you look at fighters such as forrest Griffin and matt hughes who also love weight training and would probably be fighting at lower weight classes if they hadn't undergone extensive hypertrophy (matt hughes wrestled at 145 in college) they also have limited one punch power. In contrast Freddie roach is an old school boxing trainer in his ideal that weights aren't good for boxers and manny pacquiao under his tutelage has done an unprecedented job of retaining power whilst moving up weight divisions whilst working closely with a nutritionist. My point in the context of this thread titled "the negatives of conventional weight training" is that by weight training in excess you will put on a lot of mass that doesn't benefit your explosive power although I am not sure how this relates to grapplers strength.

[Leigh]

3rd - my supplementary strength training does include olympic and power lifts. But this is to provide base (and muscle density to help increase muscle mass to pop up a weight class) in support to other strength moves - they aren't directly to increase my sports specific strength, but instead to prepare and strengthen my body in order to practice them.

Glad you've seen the light :)

[jimmy_bullard]

I have a theory which is based on limited scientific evidence and could quickly be dispelled that the number of muscle fibres as opposed to the size of those individual muscle fibres is more important for an explosion such as a one punch ko. This would explain why A) weight divisions are important B) hypertrophy produces less increases in power in explosive movements than you would expect although it is definitely a factor. My theory hinges on the fact which I am not sure of that assuming a lightweight and middleweight have done a similar amount of resistance training then the middleweight will have a larger number of muscle fibres as they had better genetics producing more hormones in puberty.

There are two ways to my knowledge that the number of muscle fibres can be increased either through endogenous hormones HGH such as testosterone which are prevalent in puberty or through anabolic steroid use which mimics some of these endogenous hormones. Baseball is a sport (riddled with steroid use) which requires players to have a similar explosion to a one punch ko artist either through a pitcher throwing fast balls or a home-run hitter. I found it odd that since baseball players aren't exactly the most athletic players and aren't in most cases reaching a plateau with their training that they would take steroids as usually I would reserve this to athlete's reaching their max. Since the steroids increase the number of muscle fibres then this could possibly be a factor in a lot of home-run hitters taking steroids as opposed to lifting weights at every possible oppurtunity.

I have no intention of taking steroids I just know a bit about them as I am a human biology student who studies pharmacology modules.

[boxingbrit]

I hope my competition take note of this stellar advice

lol, seconded

[Wiegieboard]

Enjoyed your post there smiler.

[Maccavelli]

Theres been some studies recently with regard to sports specificity vs non specific training.

One of the studies compared single leg movements to their double legged counterparts. Sport is played usually on one leg at a time and you would expect the single leg activities to have more of an effect on sporting performance.

What the studies found was that the double leg squats, deadlifts had more of a carryover into sporting performance due to the forces acting on the joints. It was pretty interesting if anyone wants the study ref pm me.

Suppose it depends on what you mean by sports specific. For me deadlifts and cleans mimic a lot of the stuff i do while sparring.

[SwiftMotion]

That was a great article.I think he was just highlighting how many people stick to a simple training regime(often weights being lifted inapropriately) instead of mixing it up.I just keep it simple (push ups,pesi ball,medicine ball,pull ups,squats,dead lifts) next day plyometric stuff,resistance training and just play around with it to keep it interesting.But Im by no means a full time athlete,Im the average guy in a dojo.
Im seriously considering doing Beach volley ball for plyometric training and strong legs.

[simonmobiledisco]

The reason Steriods are so prevelant in baseball is that it's not clamped down upon. Not long a ago you on received a ban after you was caught for the 3rd time! If boxing, MMA, lifting, tennis, even golf and ping pong had no steriod rules i guanrantee use would be rife.

With so much at stake and knowing the competition is defvinitely using gear. everyone else would fall in line too

[Jay]

The reason Steriods are so prevelant in baseball is that it's not clamped down upon. Not long a ago you on received a ban after you was caught for the 3rd time! If boxing, MMA, lifting, tennis, even golf and ping pong had no steriod rules i guanrantee use would be rife.

With so much at stake and knowing the competition is defvinitely using gear. everyone else would fall in line too

Is this not already the case? You don't think it's 'rife' at the top level already? :rolleyes:

[Jogs D]

One of the best books I've read on weight training is Dinosaur Training by Brooks Kubik....

Basic principle is train hard and heavy on basic lifts (squats, presses, deads etc... using a 2" bar for many lifts), do some odd object lifting (sandbags, anvils etc.) and some work for the grip and that's it....

Short, simple, sweet and fucking brutal....

[OllieR]

Sorry to highjack this so late on in the debate but here's my take on things....

I believe that there is a fundamental need for 'general' strength training movements to be included in ANY athletic performance program. By general i mean your basic fundamentals of squatting, deadlifting chins etc.... How you choose to manipulate the sets, reps, intensities and tempo's will depend greatly on your chosen sport.
Many reasearchers believe that 'max strength' is the underlying physical characteristic that other qualities rely on. Prof Mike Stone is probably the biggest propenent of this concept. There are some other contrasting views, based around developing 'rate of force development' and manipulateing the force / velocity curve. Dan baker and Prof Rob Newton have pioneered this type of training.
In my experience, i have always prioritised the training of athletes to reach an 'optimal' max strength level. (pre-determined depending on which sport is involved) Once they are at this optimal level, other characteristics such as reactive strength, power etc can be developed. This is not to say other characteristics can't be addressed along the way but if there is not a priority established then dilution of the program can occur.

As for 'sports specific' training, i afraid i believe that this is one of the biggest red herrings in the industry. It is completely un realistic to think you can overload movements at the right velocities and intensity levels in order to evoke a training response. Added to that, which movements do you choose to overload and which do you ignore ? Can imagine is someone trying to replicate throwing a triangle up with a cable or a dumbell !!!
Sport specific trainers claim to be able to produce 'functional strength' but in my opinion i prefer athletes to develop their 'mechanical strength' and then transfer this to their sport via improving their technique with their coaches. Most of the time technique will trump strength, however if a trainer can increase an athletes mechanical strength and then a coach can teach the athlete how to apply that strength then you have athletic development.

Conditioning / Endurance however is another matter. I thoroughly believe that this is when specificity is key. If you need to be fit for a sport it is essential that you replicate that sport in your conditioning sessions.


just a thought.....

[simonmobiledisco]

Is this not already the case? You don't think it's 'rife' at the top level already? :rolleyes:

were you refering to a sport in particular or generally sports?

You seemed to have missed the point regardless. The point was refering to people will cheat to the degree they are permitted to cheat. In some sports I imagine there is near perfect adherence to doping at the top level. Only because the doping regulations are so strict. Where it's most prevelent will be where it's most relaxed (and needed).

In fact

S = 1/T x A x R

where S= prevelence of steriod use
T= testing standard
A= advantage using them
R = risk of severse punishment

i should have been a sports scientist

[Smiler]

This thread is developing nicely!

Can't comment on the drugs, don't know enough about them!

Ollie...have a think about your thread...in one moment you are saying that sports specific movements are the biggest red herring...yet in another sentence you refer to how to 'manipulate the sets, reps, intensities and tempos will depend greatly on your chosen sport.' They're sports specific movements!

Too many people just don't look at the end game, in my opinion, you are one who does for sure.

Maccaveli, I'd love to know which those studies are! Be nice to read and learn some more!

Leigh, lol, the light has always been on! Produce strength base, develop strength base relative to sport...thats the pattern I follow...

But the strength base isn't just based on power lifts and olympic lifts, they're just part of it. I also work on strengthening all my cores (every joint has a core) for injury prevention. I've always been taught by my mentors that its just as important to not damage yourself whilst fighting, and the same rings true for training. I think this is one of the main reasons why I have been so injury free throughout my very long career. Again, I think it comes down to a definition of strength.

In respect to sports specific strength training, remembering of course that there are different ways of executing each move for specific training goals, take a look at the amount of sports specific moves you can do with cables. I use them for my kozushi for judo, matching the pulls I execute in judo exactly...

Just a thought!

Smiler

[Leigh]

Gary

I don't see what point you're making. The article said squatting was bad, some of us said that was silly, you said it was a good article and then said you do squats. You then said that it isn't all you do - I don't anyone said it's all you should do

Not trying to be a prick, just trying to understand your point

[Smiler]

No sweat Leigh, I definately didn't read it like that! I like your posts, they get me to ask questions of myself!

Yep, its definately a good article as the points he makes are valid, I feel. He stresses that it is quite easy to incur injuries with squats through the various reasons he puts forward. He also puts forward what I consider to be valid arguments in respect to the fixator and the speed of execution. In the second article he is referring to high school athletes, and again makes valid points about injuries in these young bodies through squatting.

Remember my first post - when you read the points he is actually making rather than the sensationalism of his writing I think he makes good points.

So in training, I feel you need to balance out risk with reward. And if there is a way of getting the same reward for less risk, I'll take that route every time.

Now, in my own training, I use classic squats as a base, but after that base I then go on to more sports specific, such as plyo squats, split squats, squats on balls of feet....

Is that better clarification? Its often hard to write what you mean lol!

Smiler

[Smiler]

Just had another thought...

I like the article because it reminds us of everything bad about squats...which we do need to know and take note of...

Its one end of the perspective.

You could also do another article which puts forward all the good things that squats do.

In doing so, you get the balance.

I do feel we need to remember both sides of the story...

Smiler

[OllieR]

This thread is developing nicely!

Can't comment on the drugs, don't know enough about them!

Ollie...have a think about your thread...in one moment you are saying that sports specific movements are the biggest red herring...yet in another sentence you refer to how to 'manipulate the sets, reps, intensities and tempos will depend greatly on your chosen sport.' They're sports specific movements!



Smiler

Hey mate, i am refering to the classification of strength relative to the sport, when i mentioned manipulating reps, sets etc..... and i don't think that is the same concept as 'sports specific' training attempts to deal with.

The issue i was relating to was, 'exercise selection' when using the sport specific route.

I am convnced that if you were able to measure the force and velocities involved with a judo throw, takedown or any other sports specific movement from any other sport, you will never be able to reproduce those levels using a cable or any other device. On top of that , there is no way you can replicate ALL movements from a sport and therefor you are choosing to neglect certain movements ! Then come competition time, what happens if 1 of the movements that has been neglected is called upon ?

For me, i prefer to strengthen the athlete and let him learn to apply that strength through his technical training. To evoke a training response that will carry over to a sport (especially a sport that deals with dynamic external forces) you have to train with loads that are equal or above those that will be experienced.

If an 80kg fighter shoots and gets sprawled on by another 80kg fighter, he needs to be able to recruit his cns to the level where it can lift the 80kg fighter + the extra force generated by the dynamism of the movement. Depending on the timing i would suggest this could be upto twice the bodyweight of the opposition. Thats upto 160kg of force that needs to be generated to match the combination of the opposition, gravity and the speed of the sprawl. I would suggest it would be very hard to do anything on a cable to match this, but a heavy squat through a full range would elicit the right cns recruitment........ i know this is only 1 example and there are other issues that needs to be considered (technique etc) but the same priniple applies.

Strength and power are general mechanisms, specificity comes in the form of training itself.

(this is almost an adult debate, not even one name been called yet !)

[MikeyL]

this thread is awesome

[Smiler]

Ollie, its good isn't it!

Haven't even stuck my tongue out! Just popping out to a meeting...will post again in a couple of hours!

Best regards,

Smiler

[Maccavelli]

For the people looking for that study...... I cant find the thing.

It was done by Loren Chiu as a presentation at a NSCA conference. What he found was that the magnitude and direction of forces during a single leg squat were significantly different from the athletic actions found in sports (stuff like direction change cutting etc) at the hip and ankle. Bilateral squats which look nothing like the above mentioned movements were more specific to the actions.

Think its illustrates that just because it looks more like a sporting movement doesnt mean it trains the movement better.

I thought it was interesting.

[MikeyL]

I would of found it interesting as well...........

[Maccavelli]

Here is a review of Chiu, Garhammer and schillings work with regard specificity

http://www.nsca-lift.org/Publications/BulletinPdfs/Bull265w.pdf

Its on page 5

[Smiler]

Hi,

Just having a quick munch and surf...I've found loads of articles on sports performance really quickly and each seems to suggest that use the basic lifts to form the base before moving to the sports specific moves...

A further note I tried to make earlier is that specifity to sport is not just the exercise, but how the exercise is executed to give the required results for the sport. I think this is where Ollie and I agree - the specifity of training relative to the sport.

Ollie, taking the judo throw as an example, you can actually utilise the need for more power using a cable than using a 'real' partner. You are right, you can't replicate the entire move in one exercise (unless someone can show me, which would be cool!). But you can piece them together with overlaps to remove the weak spots.

From Ollie: "strengthen the athlete and let him learn to apply that strength through his technical training" - 100% agree mate!

Out of interest, you've suggested the shoot as an example. I agree that there are examples that you can't replicate using 'sports specific' moves, and therefore need to rely on the base exercises to improve. But, this isn't one of them! How about using the bungies, or a sled, add a plyometric move to start with, and I'm sure that you can replicate the shoot loads. Or, add a bit of fun, have a partner with a blocking pad in front of you as you do it...do it on a thin mat and bare foot and suddenly you are working the explosivity of a shoot under great load but with similar technique...just a thought!

I think you can find many inventive ways of improving 'classic' exercises to make them more sport specific. I guess thats the way that some crazy fella invented the slosh pipe! (Incidentally, I broke my slosh pipe over a year ago...don't drop them on concrete! Use your slosh pipe on a soft surface or your gonna get wet!) I think that the principles of plyometrics are great to apply to more moves...

Mind you, adaptability of our bodies is also key, so variety is also the spice of improvement, if not of life...

Just more to the discussion!

Smiler

[Smiler]

Paul - I'm gonna go on a hunt for the research paper, lol, I'll let you know if I can find it!

Smiler

[Maccavelli]

whats a slosh pipe? sounds dirty.

The bungee resisted shot is one of the "sports specific" resistance thingys i really like. When adding load to a sporting technique i think you need to be super tight on technique or the technique itself can get screwed.

I read some research on Russian Boxing where they had great results with small hand weights with regards hand speed but larger weights messed with the mechanics and reduced hand speed.

I see this sort of thing as being in the realm of the sports coach more than the strength coach. The sports coach will have more of an insight into when the technique is off. Like everyone has agreed the maximal strength base should be the strength coaches main concern initially and i have yet to find someone whos performance hasnt been enhanced by them getting stronger.


personall I dont think i am smart enough to put together a progressive program based on sports specific movements. My brain has already fried trying to get a handle on which movements i would try to enhance.

Im sure guys like Smiler who have a extensive background in combat sports AND strength and conditioning can do it and his results speak for themselves.

At this stage I think I am more productive working on general adaptations till i get more info and experience.

By the way your all turbogay.

Having a constructive discussion on the internet was freaking me out.

[OllieR]

we might end up going round in circles here but it still makes us all think a bit......

It's not the ability to replicate the movement i have the biggest problem with, its the ability to mimic the force and velocities involved when that movement is used at competition level. Obviously the idea of training is to improve whichever physical quality you decide needs developing. If you can't perform the movements in training at an appropriate level that causes a stress repsonse then you will never get a supercompensatory effect (thats a big word, therefor i'm right !)
By addressing things using a general st / pwr concept, you can achieve measurable results that mimic the forces / velocities involved in competition. At the force and of the spectrum you have a measureable figure in terms of the actualy weight lifted and at the velocity end, you can use a gym aware or muscle lab to get a measure of the watts being produced.

I'm still a bit bemused about how you would select movements to address if going down the sspecific route ? What do you do with the movements you can't replicate properly ?

Now i can't find the paper i want !! i'm sure there was a study done with baseball pichers overloading their throwing patten and finding it was decreasing their throwing speed !! really need to organise my research file !!

if any one wants a couple of papers by dan baker on developing power let me know.

i don't know what a slosh pipe is either..... sounds awsome though.

[Mr_paulee]

A slosh pip is a pipe filled with water/sand that will move around inside when lifted.

I used one in the states and quite liked it, especially for over head press movements. Can be used in squats also.

Found myself concentrating a lot more on keeping the weight evenly distributed, which is a good thing.

[Joat-Mon]

Shows you how to make a slosh pipe in this months Mens Fitness magazine.

[Waterboy]

Awesome thread.

Just one thing - can anyone please tell me what a bilateral squat looks like when it's at home? Muchos gracias.

[Maccavelli]

Normal double leg squat dude.

[Wiegieboard]

The way that I see it, in a combat sport with moving and unevenly distributed weight loads, sandbag training is great as a sport specific piece of equipment as would be the sloshpipe and also a waterbag which was very awkward to handle. I don't however advocate maximum lifts using many of these training methods. In my opinion, it would be almost a danger to do so with the continually shifting and irregular weight distribution.
Whilst using this equipment, what was taught to me was that the emphasis is placed on still attempting to maintain correct posture for the lift. What was also taught was how to lift these odd objects most effectively in the first place, especially in cleaning and pressing or jerking the heavy sand bag. I find this training to be much more enjoyable than conventional resistance training anyway plus I get to make shit which I love because I'm one of these boy scout type motherfuckers.

My example of odd lifts being important to me. Take half of the weight that you can clean and jerk. Now load a punchbag up to the same weight in sand and attempt the same exercise.

I've found that lifting a human is much closer in technique to lifting a sandbag or punchbag than lifting a bar. Sure this is only a wrestling based example but it's the idea that I'm trying to put across for sport specific resistance training which I used in tandem with my barbell work as lets face it, barbell work will improve my base muscular strength faster due to the element of control and positioning that I have over the shape of the object. As has been said by many people before though, lifting a barbell ain't like lifting a person, hence why the term mat strength is used and why I like sandbags as well as waterbags.

The way I always see it, in using resistance to train more sports specifically, you have to look at the high strength, big money techniques and movements that you always use in the sport. You then have to look at the mechanical processes that go into creating this movement and you have to look at which muscle groups compound to give you this mechanical movement. There are possibly a whole series of compound lifting movements which may already mimic some of these actions and if you have a couple of options, then you should probably be using the movement which gives the largest % IEMG max. reading for example in the way that Squats will give you a reading of 88% IEMG max and Smith machine squats will give you a reading of 60% IEMG max. This is why squats are regarded as superior to Smith squats. Due to the fact that all of these readings and all of this research is jotted down in many strength training books, you should be able to look at what is more effective by balancing your decision between what is most like your sports movement and which exercise is regarded as superior for the muscle groups that are being used in the actual movement itself.

I'm not saying that the way I look at it is correct, but what I'm saying is that I know it helped me a lot. The reason I choose deadlifts, squats, core exercises and even shoulder work for my standard strength training over armwork is because I personally found a lot of replication of these movements when I was on the mat and because of the incredible level of base strength that these exercises offered me. The reason that I choose sandbags and waterbags etc. for my oddlifts and sport specific training was because they better mimic the way that an unbalanced human body moves in training as opposed to what I was doing in the other exercises with a barbell. I felt that I achieved the best of both worlds to an extent even though I was never a good fighter, by mixing up these lifting styles. I could take what strength I gained through my barbell work, and co-ordinate it a little more with the sandbag, cable and sport specific work.

[simonmobiledisco]

Good discussion.

The thread has gone one a few (interesting tangents) a few summeries.

Drugs are bad m'kay and people cheat where they can. End of, lets leave that one for a different debate.

The main article is rubbish. His thesis and theory are about different things. It's says squats and power lifts are bad, because when done bad they risk a lot of damage and counterproductive results. Isn't that irrelevant to his original point. The article should be about bad form and badly programmed routines are bad for a MMAer or athlete in general. Which is quite obvious to anyone except an idiot or beginner

High level performers incorporate these moves into their routines to great success and benefits their performance. When performed correctly of course. It's very rare to see a weight lifter get injured who uses proper form. In fact I've never seen it happen. Thats why it's called proper form.

Also worth adding, most people i've met who said weight training is usely for sports are people who have never followed a tried and tested program for a sustained period of time to see the results for themsleves.

Finally, increasing you strength in various forms increases the potential output for sport specific purposes.

[Waterboy]

Normal double leg squat dude.

Nice one, cheers.

I'm more of a unilateral squat man myself. It has the added benefit of being a flash disco move to bust out on the dancefloor. :D

[Gabriboy]

Are you experiencing some health problems? We can rescue you.
We will be 911 for your health - you can rely on us.
Live life to the fullest (http://www.zroppy.cn/?fidojguifd)


&2@d&d@25#25y

[123 MMA]

Uh Oh



I may be taking a K1 fight at superheavyweight for the end of June, and will need to put some weight on quick! In order to do so I will be doing Olympic lifts, squats, bench and deadlift, but only to help me pack on mass. I will also be doing my more sports specific work too...



Smiler

May I ask why you always change weight classes Gary?

[Smiler]

Hi, sure you can!

My natural walk around weight is around 88-91kg. During the 90's I fought at that weight, although with the sport jujitsu world champs I would often fight at super-heavyweight for GB as we also had Buster Reeves and Paul Grant. Paul would fight at middleweight, pushing Buster up to heavy and me as super - and we would still win, so it was a great tactic!

But my weight was the same...

Then in 2001 I did the London Marathon, my weight was around 86kg, and then I had a car crash...I couldn't train properly for a few months and my weight went up to around 93-95kg. At this time I was also making an assault on K1, as that was where the money was! I moved my weight up to around 100-108kg in order to hold my own without bouncing off - as I had done when I fought Matt Skelton. I threw everything I had at him and had all the effect of a fly hitting a truck windscreen!

I then dropped down last year as the money has evened out accross the weights now, and returned to my weight of 88kg. This means I can really easily cut to 84kg with two weeks notice. I now look to fight in MMA at 84/83kg, although I recently fought in Dubrivnik at 93kg as the incentive was there. I will also fight standup at just about any weight, but if its over 93kg it really needs to be worth my while!

So, I walk around between 88-91kg, making my fight range between 83/84 and 93kg.

But my body shape is also always changing, depending on the training I am doing. I'm lucky that I'm genetically quite gifted in that my body adapts well to changes. Currently my legs are getting bigger due to all the hill running I'm doing!

Hope that helps!

Best regards,

Smiler

Smiler

[Leigh]

I will also fight standup at just about any weight, but if its over 93kg it really needs to be worth my while!

You and me, K1 match, 65kg ;)

[Truthseeker]

Interesting discussion.

I think we need to fully appreciate the multi-layered nature of the motor system. It's many different levels of systems within a system coordinating together to achieve a goal in the environment. You can't fully appreciate the question of sports specific training by just consideration of the PNS and the motor unit. You have to consider the whole CNS because sports specific training involves acquiring , learning, storage and retrieval of information movement patters and their consequences and this only takes place in certain sections of the brain...not the motor unit. That's why the concept of muscle memory is a nonsense. Muscles don't have memory or know what movement they are contributing towards...they are essentially slaves obeying instructions within a hierachical control system.

All movement starts with intention to achieve a goal in the enviroment - either consciously or sub consciously (pick something up, kick , hit somebody, etc). The information to produce the movement is planned and then executed via a whole set of sub-systems working together and according to experience then finer details stored to compare with the actual movement - if theres a problem - and then stored/updated. There's a temptation for the physiologically minded of you to take this bit for granted -but to do so you're missing the most fundamental part of the whole system without which there would be no debate about specificity of training in the first place.

The interesting point is how different intentions produce the retrieval of different information - motor programs if you will - and efferent commands which finally instruct level, order. rate of force of motor recruitment to achieve a specific outcome as well as monitoring the anticipated sensory consquences of achieving the goal. The perception of what we have to do plays a massive role not just in outcomes but in all the finer details.

The types of specificity can rougly correspond to the different levels within the motor system and how information is stored within the brain. If you have the essential elements of the same motor program for different movements then the brain can transfer the information - assuming that certain biomechanical details are similiar.

The key point here is flexibility - which gary alluded to. Because the system is online and continuous and taken in information all the time it can always adapt to instructions from up top and coordinate a response to changing external circumstances - it may do these by modifying certain aspects i.e force, power , timing learned in one movement and then applying this to another movement that is similiar but different or to the same movement in a novel environment. In fact the instructions and internal pattern produced is never the same even for similiar movements. There is inherent variability within the motor system to prepare us for adaptability.

Now for this reason - i don't beleive in the need for training specific movement patterns in any sport in terms of extra weights at a realisitc velocity - Because the motor system is designed to be general not specific. I do believe that you can transfer any general quality acquired in supplementary training to a more specific technical context - but this process is not just a matter of reproducing exact kinematics or even forces although these need to be considered - its as much a matter of understanding the meaning behind the movement and making a connection.

[Jamie Taylor]

Yeah, what he said ^^^^ lol

Mark you fucking brainbox, you lost me on the 2nd line.

[Leigh]

Mark is correct - you do not need to do ground and pound with pulleys etc

[jimmy_bullard]

truthseeker I may be missing the point or taking your point out of context but I don't agree with the idea that the motor system is designed to be general not specific. If I were hitting the bags orthodox throwing a jab and straight right and then if I were to switch to southpaw then you would think that there would be a large overlap in the muscle memories if I again threw a one two but in my experience if I do this it feels slow and weird. Alternatively if I was a tennis player who had played a lot on a hard court and had practiced millions of serves hitting the ball flat without any spin and then when I was 18 came to play on grass for the first time where it would be required to hit the ball with more spin then you would think this would be only a slight tweak in the motor movement but lots of players serves completely fall apart when they do this.

I have interpreted that you are saying that drilling ground and pound is a repetition regardless of whether you do it with or without resistance?

[Truthseeker]

Not following your logic on how those examples refute the idea of general patterns and programs being the foundation for the highly specific and specialised ones we learn in sport. Remember - i was primarly referring to the transfer of general qualities like power , strength gained from carefully designed supplentary training to other gross motor movements where those same qualities are needed. What i'm saying is that the transfer ultimately occurs in the brain - not the motor unit.

1. the one - two example - This is slightly different to what i'm talking about but i'll comment. This is a very specialised motor activity that needs specific practise. Where else in life do you do anything resembling a one-two punch against a bag?One reasons it feels funny is that most people are one side dominant and different regions in the brain control the left and right side during contralateral processing. Because its a specific activity it needs to be practised on both sides (if thats what your want) and the non-dominant side will feel strange because the jrepresentation of right and left in the brain is not equal. There are stages to learning a complex skill like the one-two that will need to be replicated on both sides.

2. tennis example - totally different this! Not sure what you mean by " completely fall apart " If this happens under normal conditions with a practised technique already established then there are numerous reasons why a program can fall apart (conscious thinking interfering with an automatic activity and thus disrupting the program at lower levels resulting in failure ; competitive anxiety causing the individual to focus on irrelevant cues in the environment rather than relevant factors i.e positon and velocity of the ball relative to racket). A motor program - in theory - will also include relevant cues in the environment - in this case the surface may be a relevant factor.

[Smiler]

Hi!

I think I get what you both mean, and I read Jim's the same as Truthfinder says...

Its important to recognise the importance neurological pathways in firing the muscles, I feel, and that is why movements that replicate the ones from sport are important. The more relevence you keep, the more the muscles fire in the right order and quicker.

So in periodisation (simplification!) of training, I would do general moves for forming a base, before moving onto sport specific training. Once both are at the right level I would mix in both to get the complete picture...periodising between one and the other to get the right improvements between base/sport/technique.

I'm just on a 2 week core strengthening (joints/hinges, not just the lower trunk) period, to work on joint areas before blending in with explosivity for the next period. (See core conditioning for MMA thread also). I will then be working on a purely technical period...and so on...

The neurological firing is why I think that visualisation is so important too. Helps make each move more effective for sure.

Love the bit about the 'contralateral processing'...never heard that term before! (Although have heard the argument in this respectand agree.) You also go on to talk about the difference in fixator from grass to clay...something I also feel is important in respect to training for our sport.

Smiler

[jimmy_bullard]

Ok I think we are roughly in agreement I was slightly confused by some of the wording in your previous post. As far as the "Completely fall apart" bit about tennis that was bad wording I was more refering to the effects in the game probably more psychological factors like you mention rather than in terms of the muscle memory i.e if you are making an adjustment in the technique then you would need to probably hit the ball slower but in practice if you do you are going to lose the game so you go a bit out of your comfort zone and end up making lots of errors effectively falling apart.