|
goldblum
6,725 posts
36 months
|
didelydoo said: Ok, makes sense. I guess it's a very individual thing.
Still think it's an odd turn of phrase though- increasing overall strength is bound to have a carry over to every function that needs strength. I guess explosiveness and endurance are classed as facets of strength- but all come under the same umbrella.
At what point does and activity stop becoming a strength one and moves to an endurance/explosive one? Like the best cyclists- not really classed as a strength athlete, but excellent endurance etc. Or a boxer, with a very explosive punch, but not neccesarily strong. Strength and explosive power in an individual are both governed by the % of fast twitch muscle fibres and endurance by the % slow twitch fibres.If we look at it in terms of fitness training for an activity then the cyclist with excellent endurance will train mostly aerobically,and a boxer will train more anearobically although the boxer needs good aerobic endurance as well to enable quick recovery of the phosphocreatine and glycolytic (lactic) energy systems.
|
|
|
Hoofy
47,835 posts
151 months
|
Ordinary_Chap said: Halb said: Good post smitters. I am sort of the same. I realise that more than half of my exercises are now bodyweight. Still have bench and press in there though.  I like the idea if being able to deal/cope with anything. Run 6 miles, lift a heavy weight and then storm the castle to rescue the maiden that is hoofy. I can look after myself thank you very much. With my ninja skillz and climbing skillz. That's why I learnt to climb. In the chance that my plane should crash in the Himalayas and I should survive. Functional fitness right there. Benching 500kg won't get you down Everest. We'll ignore the fact I haven't done a long haul flight in 10 years.
|
|
|
didelydoo
2,155 posts
79 months
|
goldblum said: Strength and explosive power in an individual are both governed by the % of fast twitch muscle fibres and endurance by the % slow twitch fibres.If we look at it in terms of fitness training for an activity then the cyclist with excellent endurance will train mostly aerobically,and a boxer will train more anearobically although the boxer needs good aerobic endurance as well to enable quick recovery of the phosphocreatine and glycolytic (lactic) energy systems. So increasing strength generally is more or less the same as increasing functional strength?
|
|
|
goldblum
6,725 posts
36 months
|
didelydoo said: goldblum said: Strength and explosive power in an individual are both governed by the % of fast twitch muscle fibres and endurance by the % slow twitch fibres.If we look at it in terms of fitness training for an activity then the cyclist with excellent endurance will train mostly aerobically,and a boxer will train more anearobically although the boxer needs good aerobic endurance as well to enable quick recovery of the phosphocreatine and glycolytic (lactic) energy systems. So increasing strength generally is more or less the same as increasing functional strength? Functional strength is the strength needed to fulfill a purpose.The phrase is ambiguous but in most cases a gain in strength would be a 'functional' advantage I'd imagine.
|
|
|
Hoofy
47,835 posts
151 months
|
I can't see why there's such a discussion. Functional strength or fitness... strength or fitness that is required for a specific function. Hence you can train for martial arts or train for climbing or train to cycle 100k. There's nothing wrong with functional strength training and there's nothing wrong with strength training. The goals will be different and thus the training might be different.
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Lost_BMW
10,608 posts
45 months
|
goldblum said: Good question. Some use the term 'functional' subjectively: ie as I train in martial arts every day then any exercise that compliments my sport. It's an odd term to use if you only do weights... obviously some weight exercises compliment other kinds of exercise: medium heavy squats will improve hip strength and balance for fell running etc,but the term for this kind of exercise is 'specific'.So pullups are specific to climbing,shrugs are specific to carrying the shopping bags  If I get TESCO to deliver my shopping can I stop doing shrugs now? Seems a lot of pain for feck all benefit...
|
|
|
Juanco20
1,757 posts
62 months
|
Can someone help answer these questions and help me plan the week to maximise best results Pre season training has just started again Tuesday and Thursday and friendlies will soon begin on Saturdays. On all the other days I'll be working out. Will this level of cardio really diminish any gains I might have seen or is that a myth? Should there not be any difference aslong as I keep my calories and protein intake up? What would be the best way to fit the workouts around the football? I've got 2 back/bicep days, chest/tricep day and a legs/shoulder day. I'm thinking: Sunday - Legs/shoulders Monday - Back Tuesday - Football Wednesday - Chest/tris Thursday - Football Friday - Back Saturday - Football And repeat. Hopefully having legs on Sunday should allow enough time to recover for the football on Tuesday. Any advice would be appreciated 
|
|
|
goldblum
6,725 posts
36 months
|
Lost_BMW said: goldblum said: Good question. Some use the term 'functional' subjectively: ie as I train in martial arts every day then any exercise that compliments my sport. It's an odd term to use if you only do weights... obviously some weight exercises compliment other kinds of exercise: medium heavy squats will improve hip strength and balance for fell running etc,but the term for this kind of exercise is 'specific'.So pullups are specific to climbing,shrugs are specific to carrying the shopping bags If I get TESCO to deliver my shopping can I stop doing shrugs now? Seems a lot of pain for feck all benefit... Yes. Because your shrugs wouldn't be functional then. 
|
|
|
Halb
17,844 posts
52 months
|
|
|
Lost_BMW
10,608 posts
45 months
|
goldblum said: Lost_BMW said: goldblum said: Good question. Some use the term 'functional' subjectively: ie as I train in martial arts every day then any exercise that compliments my sport. It's an odd term to use if you only do weights... obviously some weight exercises compliment other kinds of exercise: medium heavy squats will improve hip strength and balance for fell running etc,but the term for this kind of exercise is 'specific'.So pullups are specific to climbing,shrugs are specific to carrying the shopping bags If I get TESCO to deliver my shopping can I stop doing shrugs now? Seems a lot of pain for feck all benefit... Yes. Because your shrugs wouldn't be functional then. Great! Don't like them much so that's good. Could TESCO Online save me any others? In fact, thinking about it, if I don't have to go the the shops there's no risk of a mugging or road rage incident so I could stop training altogether!
|
|
|
Lost_BMW
10,608 posts
45 months
|
Halb said: I actually managed to get through his intro this time! Sounds pretty much like what many s&c coaches in MMA and boxing (increasingly, boxing tending to be a bit behind the times) have been recommending for a while, well part of it. 'Fighting Fit' did some good articles quoting scientific papers/tests a year or so ago on strength and power curves, force development etc. The story seems to be that low reps at a high % of 1 rep max will help develop the nervous system and stimulate greater muscle contraction/force for a given size/mass of muscle. Doing exercises that use the same or similar movement patterns should then help develop the ability to use not just static strength but also the ability to deploy that strength quickly/forcefully when unloaded, like kicking or punching. Most of the top trainers I've read stuff from seem to prioritise this in the 1st few weeks of a training camp/cycle, usually adding in or increasing the plyo moves (whether straight after the weight based exercise in the videos like push ups after bench press) part way through the camp. The thing he didn't mention was that there is both anecdotal and scientific research that suggests moving to (at least more) workouts with lighter weights moved as fast as possible later in a cycle can also help not only with the ability to continue to work for longer (strength endurance) but - building on the strength work earlier - also with the amount of force they can deploy, which seems contrary to the idea that high weight/low reps does this? I'll try to find it but there's been a recent study from some American University into the punch & kick force of fighters and the standing and vertical jump of basket ball players. Their paper reported small but helpful % increases over a control group in those who did do fast work at up to 60% (iirc) of 1rm for a period. I'd moved more to this over the past couple of years, including medicine ball slams and throws, plyo push ups including after a heavy lift, etc. and feel like it probably helped(?) but don't have the equipment to do much heavy stuff these days. Also, the thing I found difficult is stopping after, say 3 reps, which is also recommended, when the weight is so light it feels like quitting when so many more are possible. Probably stubborn and should listen to the experts but do sometimes try to gauge when the speed is starting to slow down and then stop. Funny thing is though, there have been many boxers with excellent KO power who didn't follow such training or even lift weights at all! And there are still some boxing trainers and fighters who don't recommend heavy weights at all but use lighter hand weights, cables and the push ups, plyo work etc.
|
|
|
goldblum
6,725 posts
36 months
|
Lost_BMW said: Funny thing is though, there have been many boxers with excellent KO power who didn't follow such training or even lift weights at all! And there are still some boxing trainers and fighters who don't recommend heavy weights at all but use lighter hand weights, cables and the push ups, plyo work etc. Always a trade off in combat/striking sports. Power = Speed x Strength so if you weight train for power (lift heavy,low reps) inevitably muscle grows and you weigh more,hence you're slower.Some boxers never do weights or do light weights and they're very fast but not so strong.Halfway between are boxers like Tyson who built up his speed hitting heavy bags and shadowboxing.Swings and roundabouts.
|
|
|
Lost_BMW
10,608 posts
45 months
|
goldblum said: Always a trade off in combat/striking sports. Power = Speed x Strength so if you weight train for power (lift heavy,low reps) inevitably muscle grows and you weigh more,hence you're slower.Some boxers never do weights or do light weights and they're very fast but not so strong.Halfway between are boxers like Tyson who built up his speed hitting heavy bags and shadowboxing.Swings and roundabouts. Tyson was a curious example, the fastest heavyweight I've ever seen - some of his training clips are just awesome - but renowned for looking intimidatingly muscular, his relatively low weight being traded off against his short height. Yet Teddy Atlas is adamant that he didn't lift weights, though there are clips of him training in a gym during the very last part of his career and a trailer for one fight showed him squatting and curling some heavy looking weights (if genuine?) so was Atlas right, did Tyson change his training later? Barry McGuigan's son is one of the new breed of trainers - qualified a level 3 PICP coach under Charles Poliquin etc. and he recommends/uses heavier weights, lower reps, jumps, plyo work and and interval sprints. They claim to have added c.5Kg of muscle to Carl Frampton to whilst keeping his body/fighting weight the same, with Frampton competing at 3% bodyfat. Talking of Poliquin, there are a couple of interesting articles on his site about the possible detrimental effects to strength (and other things!) of too much continuous/long span aerobic training and alternatives. He really rates interval training: "Tremblay et al. (2) compared a sprint ergometer group versus an aerobic group. Despite burning 50% less calories, the sprint group lost three times more fat than the aerobic group." - for fat loss. http://www.charlespoliquin.com/ArticlesMultimedia/...and part 2 at: http://www.charlespoliquin.com/ArticlesMultimedia/...
|
|
|
Smitters
522 posts
26 months
|
goldblum said: didelydoo said: So increasing strength generally is more or less the same as increasing functional strength? Functional strength is the strength needed to fulfill a purpose.The phrase is ambiguous but in most cases a gain in strength would be a 'functional' advantage I'd imagine. I think the point is it depends on what function you're thinking of, hence the ambiguity. In my case having big heavy legs capable of squatting 200kg, whilst cool, would hinder my ability to climb and ride a bike up a hill since I'd have to drag the extra muscular weight upwards. Just coming back to what the Scooby chap looks like, I think I just wasn't clear - he has designed some basic circuits that are an alternative to the P90X style plans and annotated them with some no nonsense instructions. I'm not suggesting that's what he does and that you'll look like he does from doing them, just that the website as a whole seemed a pretty straightforward resource for those of us (me) occasionally too lazy to formulate a workout routine. I'll be honest, I quite like his approach to read. His Hall of Shame is quite amusing - "fitness" tools marketed at chubby people with low self-esteem and cash to spare... http://scoobysworkshop.com/hall-of-shame/
|
|
|
Lost_BMW
10,608 posts
45 months
|
I've debated this aspect on here and related threads previously and, for me, the key is 'specificity', i.e. what function does the sport/activity require, what balance of force production/power/speed/time of action etc. and body pattern/movement.
So, for example, a golfer would train differently to a boxer but there would be some similar movements, so exercises to develop the stability and power when exhibiting force through angles/twists whereas these would be of less use to maybe a long jumper... or marathon runner!
The range and choice of exercises (so the movement patterns they involve) and the amount of weight relative to 1rm balanced against the number of reps/ time under load etc. would vary. One thing that seems likely to me after many years around different sports is that many athletes in all sorts of sports tend(ed) when training with weights to train very like a body builder because that what was so common in gyms, magazines etc. as "the way to get big and strong".
Those lucky enough to hook up with a strength coach from a different background - I've seen Olympic level shot putters train for example = different! - had a better chance to escape this and it does seem to be changing now with more s&c coaches who can tailor work to the sport, so probably more athletes training in ways different from the old school bodybuilding style and more matched to their needs.
As I've said before, I wish when I started training - purely as a support for boxing at the time - way back in 1981, I'd had coaching from someone like that rather than following the herd and doing what nearly everyone else seemed to do, so meandering my way through different bodybuilding type routines willy nilly, and nightly 6 to 8 mile runs rather than interval or hill sprints. I gained size and strength but not the ability to deploy it as well as I probably could have if I'd had a specific programme matched to my needs. So, I reckon most of my training history was only partly 'functional'.
|
|
|
Smitters
522 posts
26 months
|
Lost_BMW said: I've debated this aspect on here and related threads previously and, for me, the key is 'specificity', i.e. what function does the sport/activity require, what balance of force production/power/speed/time of action etc. and body pattern/movement.
So, for example, a golfer would train differently to a boxer but there would be some similar movements, so exercises to develop the stability and power when exhibiting force through angles/twists whereas these would be of less use to maybe a long jumper... or marathon runner!
The range and choice of exercises (so the movement patterns they involve) and the amount of weight relative to 1rm balanced against the number of reps/ time under load etc. would vary. One thing that seems likely to me after many years around different sports is that many athletes in all sorts of sports tend(ed) when training with weights to train very like a body builder because that what was so common in gyms, magazines etc. as "the way to get big and strong".
Those lucky enough to hook up with a strength coach from a different background - I've seen Olympic level shot putters train for example = different! - had a better chance to escape this and it does seem to be changing now with more s&c coaches who can tailor work to the sport, so probably more athletes training in ways different from the old school bodybuilding style and more matched to their needs. Now you say it, I realise how true this is. Even in my local gym, there are guys doing plyometric stuff like standing jumps, all the way to a few guys doing strongman and some quite random stuff. One guy is a stuntman and seems to tailor his routines in really imaginative ways. Specificity is such an important aspect. It seems to be scientific thinking applied to the adage that if you want to be good at e.g. cycling, then you should go and cycle. I.e. practice the movements required for the sport you want to do. Thus, high legs weights may not help many cyclists, but would certainly be part of the training for a track sprinter as they need to get a very large gear turning, which is basically repeated single leg presses during the acceleration phase.
|
|
|
Halb
17,844 posts
52 months
|
Some interesting posts here. I am going to read those Poloquin articles. Smitters said: Now you say it, I realise how true this is. Even in my local gym, there are guys doing plyometric stuff like standing jumps, all the way to a few guys doing strongman and some quite random stuff. One guy is a stuntman and seems to tailor his routines in really imaginative ways. I have seen an increase in circuit and crossfit style stuff. Along side the fella who does 20 minutes of isolated curls. What does the stuntman do?
|
|
|
goldblum
6,725 posts
36 months
|
|
|
Sushi
722 posts
69 months
|
Monthly update time again, or soemthing like that. It's been a very good month, I hit a total of 25 kg lost (55lbs), I now weight 103.5kg, so 13.5 to go before September. Overall I have lost 2x's from my shirt size and t-shirts are now just large, no more xxl for this guy. My size 40 trousers are now showing some slack so I will go out and buy a pair of 38's soon (I'm only buying one pair as they only last about 2 months before htey're to big). I have a new training routine specifically designed for me to shed pounds, I'll put it down in detail at the end of this post. Had a pretty funny moment last weekend while mowing the lawn, my old lawn mowing clothes were a little on the big side, specially the shorts as they kept falling down, so as I was already full of grass I couldn't go get a belt, I used man logic and duct taped them up. My wife got this picture of me removing my duct tape belt.  My new routine is as follows: 10 minutes treadmill, 1 minute @ 8.5kph, 1 minute @ 9.5/10kph 10 minutes cross trainer (vario), 2 minutes resistance 6, 2 minutes resistance 12 row 500m, 1 minute rest, row 500m have to beat first set time rest Satanic burpies: lay 2 6kg dumbells (the reebok ones in the gym have a flat edge for this) on the floor, push up position on the weights, row each one up, the jump into squat, in one upward movement lift weights up to shoulder height then shoulder press, then take them back down to squat and jump back to starting position. 10 x 2 mini circuit 10 x 2: 10 x mountain climbers using sliders 10 x bent over row using 16kg Vipr 10 x crucifixes using sliders. This takes about an hour and on avergae kills me every time. Last night I did everything up to the mini circuit, then did a 20 minute power plate fast class, burning a total 1053 calories accordin to my HRM. with an average HR of 148. I can honestly say I've never felt this good, and I owe a lot of inspiration to this thread. Who knows come September, I may even have enough confidence to take a picture with my shirt off. but no gay underwear shots. ETA: you can see in the picture my wedding ring no longer fits and I have to wear it on my middle finger.
|
|
|
Halb
17,844 posts
52 months
|
Great going, 25kg is a red plate!
Keep going.
But give up the weed maaaaan!
|
|
