15 Questions for TC Luoma

By Bret, February 24, 2012 6:21 am

TC Luoma is someone I have tremendous respect for. In fact, I consider him to be one of the most influential individuals in the history of Strength & Conditioning. He’s had a tremendous impact on spreading “non-bodybuilding” strength training methodology with more of a strength, power, functional, or joint-friendly flare to it. Where other publications would have ignored the various writers and article submissions in their quest to promote hypertrophy-based, traditional training practices, TC saw potential and gave guys like me and methods that don’t fit the “bodybuilding-only” mold a chance.

I’m certain that had I submitted my first article, Dispelling the Glute Myth, to other sites or magazines, I wouldn’t have heard back from them. But TC saw potential and agreed to post the article, and two-and-a-half years later the hip thrust is popular around the world. When I think of it, a vast majority of what I’ve learned today as far as strength & conditioning practices are concerned come from reading TNation. I recently reached out to TC to see if he’d conduct an interview for my blog and much to my chagrin he agreed. Here’s the interview:

1. Hi TC, thank you for agreeing to conduct this interview. First off, what does TC stand for, and why do you go by “TC” instead?

Well, if you go to Wikipedia, or at least the last time I checked it, it suggests that the “T” stands for the descriptor, “Ten-Inch,” and the “C” stands for, well, use your imagination. Seriously. That’s what it said on my Wikipedia entry. Kinda’ makes you doubt the authenticity of some of the other info, doesn’t it?

Anyhow, TC is just the two initials of my first and middle name: Terrence Christian. I’ve always preferred to be called TC and I’ve always used it as my pen name.

2. I’d like to know how you stumbled into the fitness field. Were you always a fitness nut or did a job just fall into your lap?

I’ve worked out as long as I can remember. I remember wanting to start lifting weights when I was ten years old but my mother wouldn’t let me – she said it would stunt my growth. So it wasn’t until high school that I started lifting in the basement. I also read the earlier Weider Magazines and somehow thought I was the only one who liked Arnold and Frank and the rest of the California bodybuilders because nobody I knew in real life in Michigan had ever picked up a weight or even knew who those guys were.

I remember hearing that Arnold was going to do a book signing in a nearby town when I was growing up and I drove a couple of hours to see him. I’d stood in line for about an hour, finally got to the head of the line and some woman started talking to him about some business proposition. He took my book, signed it, and never even looked at me. I was seriously bummed.

I finally met him when I got into the biz, but it wasn’t the same.

Anyhow, years later, I hooked up with a bodybuilding photographer named Ralph DeHaan. He worked for all the mags and when I told him I write, he said he always needed articles to go with his pics. I tried writing one, sent it to MuscleMag, and they bought it. Then I sent one to Muscular Development and they bought it.

I started sending articles to mags all over the country, including some in Europe. Pretty soon I was writing 15 articles a month. I got to know everybody in the business, and then I hooked up with George Snyder and Bill Phillips and started writing most of their magazine, Muscle Media 2000. Within a year, they made me editor-in-chief. A few years later after Phillips decided he wanted to go mainstream, I left and hooked up with Tim Patterson, who had the weird and wonderful idea of starting a website called “Testosterone.”

3. It seems that those Muscle Media days were bitter-sweet times for you. Looking back, what important life-lessons did you learn from the experience?

That everybody in this business has something seriously, seriously, wrong with them. Dat’s a fact, Jack. I learned that business, almost invariably, will eventually exploit people, resources, or the environment. I learned that lots of money, earned very quickly, corrupts people as few things do. I learned that most people climb the corporate ladder by being sniveling, obsequious little worms. I learned that many girls, given enough money, will take their clothes off and do wonderful things, especially in Vegas (Bill used to take groups of us there for recreation).

And those were the good things I learned.

Nah, just kidding. I made a name for myself at Muscle Media 2000, earned enough money to put a down payment on a nice house in San Diego and honed any writing skills I had by writing tens of thousands of words in articles (both under my name and ghost writing for others), books, pamphlet, and ad copy. I also met Tim Patterson, which later turned out to be a very good thing because we started Biotest and T Nation together.

4. You started Biotest and TNation with Tim Patterson out of his garage in Colorado. What was your and Tim’s initial vision for the company?

A small correction, Bill Phillips started his company out of his mother’s garage in Colorado. We started Biotest and T Nation out of a small office building in Colorado Springs. Tim, along with Dr. Mike Leahy, were running a medical practice that was built around ART. Tim started building Biotest out of that same building while concurrently running the day-to-day doings of the ART business.

Our first “warehouse,” however, was a former gas station right next door to the ART practice.

Anyhow, we initially wanted to be a better version of the old Muscle Media 2000 had been, before it went mainstream – an entertaining and innovative source of ground breaking information on training, diet, and supplementation that didn’t suffer fools gladly but liked to make fools suffer. Similarly, we wanted to make hugely effective supplements that WE wanted to use; if anybody else wanted to use them, i.e., customers, than great. We’d have our protein cake and eat it, too.

5. Did you ever think back then that TNation would end up being so popular, and how did your and Tim’s vision for the company morph over time?

Yeah, I did think it would be as popular as it is. And as far as how our vision has morphed, it really hasn’t. We’re still passionate about training, whether it’s strictly bodybuilding training, or training to be as functionally brutal and bad-ass as the type MMA fighters. We also still build supplements WE want to use. If you want to use them, too, great.

That’s something that kills me. A lot of times people contact us and ask whether we used such-and-such a crappy or inferior ingredient in one of our products and I think to myself, “You moron. Why would Tim or I put some crappy ingredient in a product that we built for ourselves?

6. Do you feel that TNation is the crème de la crème for strength & conditioning writers? If so, why?

Absolutely. Just about anybody who’s anybody either started out with us or writes for us now. It sounds bad, but sometimes people ask me about if I’ve heard of some obscure coach and I think, perhaps mistakenly, “Hell, if he were anybody I’d already know about him and he’d be writing for us.”

7. Several years back you wrote a book titled Atomic Dog: The Testosterone Principles. I actually bought four copies; one for me, one for my twin bro, and one for each of my two step brothers. The book resonated with me because I feel that most men these days lack integrity, fortitude, and testicular-power. What’s wrong with our current generation of men?

Thanks! That’s really gratifying to hear.

What do I think is wrong with today’s men? Where do I start? Fear. Uncertainty. Lack of identity. Lack of true self worth. Obsession over any perceived slight. A lack of a definition of what true manhood is. Believing that money or material possessions are synonymous with accomplishment. I could write a book. Wait, I have!

8. I suppose you’ve seen it all when it comes to strength training. Since TNation’s inception in 1998 (then it was Testosterone.net) we’ve seen articles from the likes of Ian King, Charles Poliquin, Paul Chek, Dave Tate, Christian Thibaudeau, Dan John, Chad Waterbury, Alwyn Cosgrove, Eric Cressey, Mike Robertson, Michael Boyle, Joe DeFranco, Nick Tumminello, Tim Henriques, Tony Gentilcore, Jim Wendler, Ben Bruno, and even some asshole named Bret Contreras. It’s basically a laundry-list of S&C rock stars. What 3 individuals have made the most significant impact on your training?

Man, I feel like a Hollywood starlet who’s been asked which of her leading men was the best lay. This sounds like I’m being diplomatic, i.e., being a slimy politician talking out of both sides of his mouth, but I’ve stolen from all the guys you’ve listed. Each one of them has things to offer to T Naiton and to me. Otherwise, their stuff wouldn’t have been posted on T Nation.

For instance, I was just doing Bret Contreras glute thrusts yesterday. I’m using some of Wendler’s 531 stuff, too, and I routinely use Christian Thibaudeau’s methodologies, too.

I will say that Poliquin was the first to make me radically change my approach. Before Poliquin, it was 3 sets of 8 for not only me, but virtually everyone who lifted weights. (Bret’s note: I think Charles Poliquin, and possibly more so Ian King, influenced strength coach practices more than any two individuals in S&C)

9. Speaking of strength training, how do you currently train? Are you a bodypart split guy, a lower/upper split guy, or a total body training guy, and what are your goals?

I’m a push/pull guy. After all these years, after trying everything, it’s what makes the most sense to me and what works best for me. I lift 3 or 4 days a week and I have to confess, I’m a grinder (even though Christian and Tim are trying to cure me of this habit). I like extended sets, drop sets, multiple no-rest, make everything burn so at the end you have to drop the weights and make an ugly face until the pain goes away. It’s just my nature. Otherwise, I don’t feel like I worked out.

I also work the Prowler one or two days a week, along with riding a modified mountain bike up and down the local thousand-foot “mountain.”

My goals right now – and they may change in a few months, such is the nature of the beast – is simply to get as strong and conditioned as I can while remaining essentially the same weight. I have virtually no cartilage in my left knee – the result of a football injury – and I find that I can keep the nagging pain away if I stay reasonably light.

10. Here’s a random question. Have you ever noticed that many “gurus” in S&C seem to get really strange over time? What’s up with Gurus Gone Crazy?

I know, I know. Here’s what I often tell new writers. “Here’s how it will be. You’ll start writing for us. You’ll gradually grow to be very popular and make a lot of money. You’ll adore us. Then, things will change. The fame will affect you. You’ll star to castigate us for not treating you like the star you are. Your shipment of Anaconda and Indigo-3G will be a day late and you’ll threaten to sue us. You’ll leave, thinking you don’t need us, and at least 5 out of 10 times, you’ll fade into obscurity and spend your days in the park trying to teach pigeons how to Bulgarian squat.”

11. What irks you the most in regards to article submissions by prospective contributors, and what sort of writers and articles catch your eye?

The thing that bugs me is guys who submit articles without having studied the T Nation site. They send me articles on stuff that we’ve written about the week before. They’ll send me articles that are too simplistic for the Parade Magazine that comes bundled up with the Sunday paper. I don’t get it.

As far as what catches my eye, I usually defer to one thing, and that’s if the article makes me want to try whatever it is they’re writing about. If I’m interested in it, chances are the readers will be, too.

12. Do you have any advice for upcoming S&C writers?

Don’t get too immersed in studies. Instead, use experiential evidence. In other words, studies aren’t the end-all and be-all. I read them and they’re fascinating to me, but studies are often poorly designed. They’re often overlooking or missing certain intangibles. For instance, I bet if some researchers took a group of test subjects and decided to test Westside barbell’s methodologies on them, they wouldn’t get nearly the results that the real Westside does. The real training has intangibles that the research would lack, like being screamed at by a bunch of guys who look like stone killers, or having heavy metal music blasting out at 110 decibels.

Studies are great, but if you depend solely on studies, you’re just writing book reports. A literate high school kid could do the same thing. I prefer guys who read stuff and then test it out themselves.

Similarly, I sometimes get PhD nutritionists writing for us who simply can’t, because of their formal education, make a deductive leap about something. They’ll stammer that the research hasn’t proven it yet, and while every piece of evidence points to a certain conclusion, they’re unable to make the small leap. You want to smack them on the head. Hell, this sport or activity or passion, whatever you want to call it, was built on deductive leaps.

13. Word on the street is that you’ve just written a new book titled Manhood and Other Stuff: The Testosterone Principles II. Is this correct?

Oh, finally, my reward for doing this interview! I get to plug my new book!

Yes, that’s true. The alleged national campaign kicks off in April, but the book is currently available on Amazon and Barnes and Noble in both hard and soft cover. Like the first book, it’s about manhood.

As far as what it’s about, I’ll just give you the synopsis I just sent to the publishers. It’s probably a little longer than you expected, but what the hell, we’re not killing any trees here:

This book is about manhood, and, well, other stuff. But let’s address the manhood thing first.

And I know what you’re thinking. You’re thinking the type of manhood that worships monster truck rallies and nacho fries and fast cars; that paints its bare chest green and sits in the subzero stands of Lambeau Field with a hunk of plastic cheese on its head while bellowing like a gutted Klingon; that communicates largely by grunting, belching, or telling fart jokes.

You know, all that stereotypical crap.

But that’s not what I had in mind. In fact, I had this notion of manhood that combines the do-goodedness of the Boy Scouts with some heaping doses of self-determination and pragmatism, sprinkled with a dollop of Testosterone, and seasoned with a few fistful-size pinches of Howard Stern.

From my experience and observations, men and boys are in some serious need of a new definition of manhood. Men by and large don’t have a masculine identity that’s much different from the one-dimensional and infantile masculinity epitomized by professional athletes or by the characters in Hollywood action movies or, worse, yet, television sitcoms.

But there’s a yin to the masculine yang I just described, and neither side is very pretty.

There’s a whole other breed of man who, despite rejecting silly Maxim Magazine notions of manhood, has gone completely in the other direction, only slowing down to do some occasional antiquing. Their balls were either cut off metaphorically by society, circumstance, or disapproving wives who put them in a Mason jar and stored them in the shed behind the pickled beets.

As a result, many kids don’t have fathers anymore; the traditional American family consists of two “moms,” one with a traditional vagina and one with a penis and testicles that acts like a mom. A lot of wives don’t have husbands anymore – they gave their wedding vows to yet another son who, despite being in his 30′s or 40′s or beyond, has to be told what to do and scolded when he’s bad.

The other type of man I described earlier, the beer-swilling, monosyllabic slobs? Oh, he gets married and has kids, too, but he doesn’t stay married very long — if his wife has any sense, that is.

So I wrote the columns that make up this book. Most of the articles are about some aspect of my version of manhood, along with the occasional observation about new developments in science or psychology, along with a healthy dose of popular culture and sex (the “other stuff” referred to in the title).

I’m hoping against all odds that it helps, at least a little bit, to set things right, or at least generate a little discussion and a lot of laughter.

14. I believe that TNation has been the single most influential website in the past two decades in terms of positively influencing the training practices of lifters worldwide. We have you to thank for helping spread sound training methods, and for this you should feel a sense of achievement. What’s your most proud accomplishment in life thus far?

Thanks! That’s nice of you to say.

As far as being “proud,” I have to take issue with that word. Don’t worry, I’ll be brief. I think pride is an immature emotion. It means I allegedly have done something (or even bought something) that I hope will convey superiority over someone else. I prefer the word “satisfaction,” as in what accomplishment has given me the most satisfaction? In other words, what have I done that was truly useful or life affirming?

First, it’s immensely satisfying when I hear you say that my first book helped your brother “man up.” I hear that type of thing a lot and it’s enormously satisfying. Secondly, I’m happy that it seems that I’ve helped spread what is often –not always – a healthy life style. From what I can see, a lot of people are healthier, fitter, able to enjoy life more, and happier because T Nation exists.

That’s very cool.

15. Thanks again for your time TC. I have one last question. My last several dogs were Min Pins, Dachshunds, or Chihuahuas – all small dogs. I imagine that you’re a Pit Bull, Doberman, or Ridgeback type of guy. Am I correct?

I’ll admit, I have a weakness for masculine dogs. I have two English Staffordshire Bull Terriers and they’re regarded as second cousins to pit bulls. Truth is, they were originally used for fighting in the pit in England by the coal miners that developed the breed, and they would tie a bear to a wall and have a small group of these dogs fight the bear. Pretty weird, huh?

But this breed has been domesticated over the years. In fact, they’re now called “nanny dogs” in England because of their reputation with children. That’s good, because it’s frowned on when you have dogs that actually eat kids.

Anyhow, I like the dogs because they’re relatively small, but with very thick, muscular bodies. They’re canines with the bodies of bodybuilders, coupled with the athleticism of an NFL running back. My male, Tommey, was born from the frozen sperm of a champion dog that had been dead for over ten years. I feed him organic meats, vegetables, and Biotest supps. Hell, we should put him on the label of some of our products.

Wikio

Wikio

The Contreras Files: Volume II

by Bret Contreras – 1/17/2012

Most of you likely spent the holidays relaxing with family and friends while assaulting your senses with food, alcohol, and the new Justin Bieber Christmas album. But while you were out decking the halls in your gay apparel, I was poring over the latest strength and conditioning research so you can kick off 2012 on the right foot. The typical lifter, athlete, personal trainer, strength coach, or physical therapist is bound to find something useful in this article.

Stretching and DOMS

DOMS (delayed-onset muscle soreness) typically arises within a day of exercise and peaks in intensity at around 48 hours. Many strength & conditioning practitioners believe that stretching before or after exercise will reduce soreness.
Henschke and Lin (2011) reviewed the research on this topic and concluded that stretching does not affect muscle soreness. Twelve total studies were included with a combined 2,377 participants. Pooled estimates showed that pre- and post-exercise stretching reduced soreness on average by one point on a 100-point scale one day following exercise, increase soreness on average by one point on a 100-point scale two days following exercise, and had no effect on soreness by day three.
Findings were consistent across settings (lab vs. field studies), types of stretching, intensity of stretching, populations (athletic, untrained, men, women) and study quality, so the conclusions are not likely to change with future research. To reiterate, stretching doesn’t affect muscle soreness.

Power Lifts versus Olympic Lifts – Peak Power Outputs

For decades coaches have argued about whether Olympic lifting is mandatory for athletes seeking maximal power production. Some coaches are strong advocates of Olympic variations based on the premise that Olympic lifts produce much higher power outputs compared to the powerlifts (Garhammer, 1993).
This may be true for maximal Olympic lifts compared to maximal power lifts, but this is because maximum power is derived with differing loads in the Olympic lifts compared to the power lifts. Maximum power is obtained with much heavier loads relative to 1RM with Olympic lifts, whereas with power lifts, maximum power is achieved with much lighter loads relative to 1RM.
Data from Garhammer (1980) showed that the highest peak power outputs involved in elite Olympic weightlifters belonged to lifters from the 110kg weight class. These lifters developed 4,807 watts of power during certain phases of the Olympic lifts. Examining the power clean, Winchester et al. (2005) reported maximum power values of 4,230 watts while Cormie et al. (2007) reported maximum power values of 4,900 watts.
A recent study examining 23 powerlifters and rugby players showed that deadlifts at 30% of 1RM produced 4,247 watts of power (Swinton et al., 2011a). This is slightly less than values reported by the same researchers in another recent study, which showed that peak power in a straight bar deadlift was 4,388 watts (at 30% of 1RM) while peak power in a hex bar deadlift was 4,872 watts (at 40% of 1RM). In fact, some individuals were able to reach values over 6,000 watts in the submaximal deadlifts (Swinton et al., 2011b).
The Olympic weightlifting versus powerlifting debate will undoubtedly continue to rage, but this emerging research should provide some interesting fuel to the equation. Considering the available research, it appears that dynamic effort hex bar deadlifts with 40% of 1RM can match the Olympic lifts – including the power clean – in peak power production.

Full ROM Versus Partials for Hypertrophy

Several studies have been conducted measuring the effects of full range of motion (ROM) lifts versus partial ROM lifts on maximal strength, but until now no study had measured the effects of full ROM lifts versus partial ROM lifts on hypertrophy.
Ronei et al. (published ahead of print) found that performing two sessions/week of preacher curls for ten weeks with full ROM (0° to 130° of elbow flexion) resulted in significantly higher muscle thickness gains in the biceps compared to the partial ROM group (50° to 100° of elbow flexion). The full ROM group increased hypertrophy by 9.52%, whereas the partial ROM group only by 7.37%, although the volume for the full ROM group was 36% lower than that of the partial ROM group.
The subjects used in this study lacked resistance training experience, so conclusions should be limited to newbies. Based on this research, newbies should use a full ROM to maximize hypertrophic adaptations.

Sprint Acceleration – Everything Works

Australian researchers recently came up with a very cool study – they examined the effects of four different protocols (free sprinting, weights, plyometrics, and resisted sprinting) on sprint acceleration performance (Lockie et al., published ahead of print). Subjects consisted of field athletes who were already training at least three hours per week. Respective additional training sessions were performed twice per week for 60 minutes each for six total weeks.
Here are the highlights:

• All groups significantly increased their 0-5 meter and 0-10 meter velocity by 9-10%.
• All groups significantly increased their mean step length.
• The weights and plyometrics groups also significantly increased their 5-10 meter velocity.
• The free sprinting group significantly increased their 5-bound test, a measure of horizontal power.
• The free sprinting, plyometrics, and resisted sprinting groups significantly increased their reactive strength index (jump height divided by contact time), a measure of elastic strength.
• All groups significantly increased their 3RM squat and relative 3RM squat, with the weights group showing the largest increases in strength.
• All groups increased their speed through increases in stride length, not by way of increases in stride frequency or decreased contact time.

This study showed that the underlying mechanisms for improvements were protocol-specific. Prior research has shown that combined training yields even greater results than using one specific method (Kotzamanidis et al. 2005), so chances are even better results could be realized if multiple protocols were trained concurrently.
Moreover, the weights group performed just vertical plane exercises consisting of squats, step ups, hip flexion, and calf raises. It’s possible that the weights group could have seen even better results had the researchers added in a horizontal hip strengthening exercises such as a hip thrust or a back extension.

The Kettlebell Swing

Brand new research by McGill and Marshall (published ahead of print) has taken a close look at the kettlebell swing. Swings were performed one arm at a time with a 16kg kettlebell and were initiated with the participant in the squat position with a neutral spine. Participants were cued to “initiate the swing through the sagittal plane by simultaneously extending their hips, knees and ankles and to use the momentum to swing the kettlebell to chest level and return to their initial starting position.”
Here are the highlights:

• Lumbar spine ROM ranged from 26 degrees of flexion at the bottom of the movement to 6 degrees of extension at the top of the movement.
• Hip ROM ranged from 75 degrees of flexion at the bottom of the movement to 1 degree of extension at the top.
• Knee ROM ranged from 69 degrees of flexion to 2 degrees of extension.
• As the movement progressed from the bottom of the swing to the top of the swing, back muscle activation peaked first at around 50% of MVC, followed by abdominal/oblique activation at around 20-30% of MVC, followed by gluteal muscle activation at around 75% of MVC.
• The glutes were closely associated with end-range hip extension torque.
• Spinal loading was greatest in the beginning of the swing (461N of shear and 3195N of compression), which dropped significantly as the ROM progressed to the middle of the swing (326N of shear and 2328N of compression) and finally to the top of the swing (156N of shear and 1903N of compression).
• The effort is mostly concentric as gravity assists most of the eccentric component of the swing.
• Muscle activation ramps up during a half-second interval in the concentric phase and then transitions to almost complete relaxation during much of the eccentric phase.

Russian kettlebell master Pavel Tsatsouline participated in this study and was able to reach 150% MVC in his erector spinae and 100% MVC in this gluteal muscles with just a 32kg kettlebell.

Muscle, Smoke & Mirrors

One of my American strength coach buddies in Auckland gave me an amazing book to read during my free time titled Muscle, Smoke & Mirrors: Volume I. Randy Roach, the author, spent considerable time researching the history of bodybuilding, from the origins of physical culture through the rise of the iron game. You may recall T Nation contributor Chris Colucci interviewing Randy about the book in 2009here.
I was very interested in learning more about some of the personalities of the characters who helped mould and shape the industry, including the Weiders, Bob Hoffman, and Vince Gironda to name a few. Though geniuses, most of our founders seem like eccentric and overly arrogant egomaniacs.
You’ll certainly find it interesting to learn about the “Weider Research Clinic,” not to mention the origins of various debates such as those pertaining to the squat exercise or training for strength versus size, and finally the infiltration of anabolic steroids.
I definitely recommend this book to anyone interested in the bodybuilding and nutrition industries as it’s important to know and understand their roots and progression.

Strongman Training

A study has finally been conducted examining the training methods of strongman competitors. Until now no such study existed. Winwood et al. (2011) surveyed 167 strongmen from 20 different countries on a variety of training topics.
Here are the highlights:

• 66% of strongmen reported that the back squat was the most frequently performed type of squat. Front squats were often performed as well.
• 88% of strongmen reported that the conventional deadlift was the most frequently performed type of deadlift. Partial deadlifts were often performed as well.
• 80% of strongmen periodize their training and 83% use a training log.
• 74% of strongmen perform hypertrophy training, 97% of strongmen perform maximal strength work, 90% of strongmen perform power training, and 90% of strongmen perform aerobic/anaerobic conditioning.
• 60% of strongmen perform dynamic effort squats and deadlifts (explosive reps with submaximal loads), 56% use elastic bands, and 38% use chains.
• 88% of strongmen incorporate Olympic lifting into their arsenals with 78% performing the clean. The jerk, snatch and high pull were frequently performed as well.
• 54% of strongmen perform lower body plyometrics, 29% upper body plyometrics, and 20% ballistics (i.e., jump squat, bench throw).
• 55% of strongmen perform HIIT and 53% perform low intensity cardio.
• 54% of strongmen competitors train with strongman implements once per week and 24% train with strongman implements twice per week.
• 82% of strongmen perform the tire flip, 95% perform the log clean and press, 94% perform the stones, 96% perform the farmers walk, and 49% perform the truck pull. Other strongman implements and exercises performed included various types of overhead presses (Viking, sleeper press, and dumbbells), carries (Conan’s wheel, shield, hydrant, and frame), pulls (harness, arm over arm, ropes, and chains), walks (duck and yoke), lifts (safe, kettlebells, and car deadlifts), holds (crucifix), and grip exercise (block, hand, and tools).

Low Back Loads

Many trainees fail to grasp spinal loading, in terms of both biomechanics and in common levels reached during functional movement, sports, and exercise. To help address this poorly understood topic, I created a chart below involving over twenty different studies.
Before you delve into this chart and start analyzing the data, there are a few things you should understand:

• First, if you want to convert Newtons to pounds, know that one Newton equals .224808943 pounds of force. Conversely, one pound of force is equal to 4.44822162 Newtons. You can use these numbers to convert back and forth from pounds to Newtons and vice versa. For example, in Cholewicki’s deadlift study, 17,192N of compressive force equates to (17,942N)(.224808943 lbs/N) = 4,034 pounds of force.
• The reason why such incredible compressive forces are placed on the spine during deadlifts has a lot to do with the intense contractions of core muscles needed to support the spine. These muscles clamp down on the spine, causing compressive forces to far exceed the load of the barbell. Granhed’s study used a slightly lower moment-arm measurement for the spinal extensor musculature (5 cm compared to 6 cm) than Cholewicki’s study that helps explain the larger values reported.
• Due to the orientation of the various vertebrae, joint shear force estimates are highly dependent on the vertebral level examined. For example, L5/S1 is inclined forward around 30° more than L4/L5, causing it to receive much higher shear forces. For this reason, comparisons should only be made between studies examining the same vertebral level (and even then methodology differences complicate matters). Moreover, shear forces can be directed anteriorly or posteriorly; this chart doesn’t specify the direction of forces.

Activity	Site	Compressive Loading	Shear Loading (Anterior/Posterior)	First Author
Golf swing	L3/L4	6,100-7,500N	N/A	Hosea
Rowing	L3/L4 L4/L5	6,086N 4.6x bodyweight	N/A 660N	Hosea Morris
Football linemen blocking manoeuvre	L4/L5	8,679N	3,304N (2.6x bodyweight)	Gatt

Functional Tasks	Site	Compressive Loading	Shear Loading (Anterior/Posterior)	First Author
Lifting a 50 pound box from knee to waist height	L5/S1	6,000-7,000N	1,200-1,600N	Marras
Lifting a 33 pound box	L5/S1	6,342N	1,755N	Kingma
Pushing and pulling at waist height with 40% of bodyweight	L2/L3	N/A	1,100-1,200N	Knapik

Squatting	Site	Compressive Loading	Shear Loading (Anterior/Posterior)	First Author
Half squat w/loads of .8-1.6x bodyweight	L3/L4	10x bodyweight*	N/A	Cappozzo
Traditional squat	L5/S1	10,473N	3,843N	Lander
Isometric squat	L3	6,248-11,497N	420-906N	Hansson

* e.g., 7,000N for a 70kg individual

Deadlifting	Site	Compressive Loading	Shear Loading (Anterior/Posterior)	First Author
Women	L4/L5	6,400N	1,107N	Cholewicki
Men		12,641N	1,739N
Conventional		10,738N	1,643N
Sumo		10,405N	1,530N
Maximum value		18,449N	N/A
Combined (sumo and conventional)	L3/L4	18,800-36,400N	N/A	Granhed
Round back	L4/L5	N/A	1,900	McGill
Isometric deadlift	L3	6,785-8,898N	729-1012N	Hansson

Abdominal Exercises	Site	Compressive Loading	Shear Loading (Anterior/Posterior)	First Author
Straight leg sit up	L4/L5	3,230N	260N	McGill
Bent knee sit up		3,410N	300N
Straight leg sit up	L4/L5	3,502N	N/A	Axler
Bent knee sit up		3,350N
Crunch		1,991N
Lying leg raise		2,525N
Twisting crunch		2,964N
Hanging straight leg raise		2,805N
Hanging bent knee leg raise		3,313N
Side plank		2,585N
Standing cable walkout	L4/L5	2,743-4,185N	464-714N	McGill
Overhead cable push		2,327-3,006N	584-760N
Isometric axial twist	L5/S1	3,382-4,158N	1,409-1,688N	Arjmand

Low Back Exercises	Site	Compressive Loading	Shear Loading (Anterior/Posterior)	First Author
Quadruped hip ext	L4/L5	2,000N	150N	Callaghan
Bird dog		3,000N	200N
Superman		4,000N	50N
Back extension		4,000N	250N
Bridge	L4/L5	2,853N	N/A	Kavcic
Standing isometric back extension	L5/S1	1,400-1,600N	950-1,100N	Kingma

Kettlebell Exercises	Site	Compressive Loading	Shear Loading (Anterior/Posterior)	First Author
Swing	L4/L5	3,195N	461N	McGill
Swing to snatch		2,992N	404N

Strongman Exercises	Site	Compressive Loading	Shear Loading (Anterior/Posterior)	First Author
Farmer’s walk	L4/L5	9,876N	2,409N	McGill
Super yoke		12,043N	1,341N
Atlas stone lift		5,659N	635N
Suitcase carry		6,890-9,061N	1,520-2,143N
Keg walk		6,591-8,412N	913-1,249N
Tire flip		7,921N	138N
Log lift		7,270N	1,021N

Rowing Exercises	Site	Compressive Loading	Shear Loading (Anterior/Posterior)	First Author
Bent over row	L4/L5	3,576N	87N	McGill
Inverted row		2,339N	76N
Cable row		2,457N	130N

Push Up Exercises	Site	Compressive Loading	Shear Loading (Anterior/Posterior)	First Author
Standard	L4/L5	2,900N	490N	Beach
Suspended		3,800N	520N
Standard	L4/L5	1,838N	N/A	Freeman
Explosive		3,905N
Clapping		4,699N
One arm		5,848N
Alternating		6,224N

In 1981 the NIOSH set action limits for compression at 3,400N with maximum permissible limits at 6,300N. Some spinal experts have suggested that maximum shear loads should be limited to 1,000N.
As you can see, much of what we do on the field or in the weight room exceeds these limits (sometimes by a large margin). Many coaches vilify certain exercises based on the levels of spinal loading they produce only to prescribe alternative exercises that exceed the levels reached in the exercises they discourage. Hopefully this chart will assist coaches with logical consistency in exercise prescription decision-making.

Neck Training

Coaches have long debated whether specific neck training is necessary for maximum neck strength and size. Some say that neck isolation lifts are needed, while others say that posterior chain exercises such as squats, deadlifts, shrugs, and bent over rows will build all the necessary neck strength and size.
I recently located a study conducted in 1997 by researchers out of The University of Georgia that took a close look at the topic of training for neck strength and size (Conley et al., 1997). One group performed 12 weeks of squats, push presses, rack pulls, shrugs, RDL’s, bent over rows, and crunches.
Another group added in neck harness extensions. Group number one failed to increase their neck extension strength and neck size, whereas group number two saw a 34% increase in neck extension strength and a 13% increase in the cross-sectional area of selected neck muscles (mostly the splenius capitis, semispinalis capitis, semispinalis cervicis and multifidus). Take home message: If maximum neck size and strength is important to you, then make sure you perform some isolation exercises for the neck.

Yin and Yang Planks: The Hardstyle Plank

RKC creator Pavel Tsatsouline likes to talk about yin and yang planks. Yin planks are performed by simply chillaxin’ in the plank position. You might think your 3-minute plank is pretty badass, but George Hood, a 54-year-old former Marine and DEA Agent, recently shattered your best plank performance by a long shot. On December 3, 2011, in Naperville, Illinois, Hood held a plank for 1 hour, 20 minutes, and 5 seconds. You read that correctly – over 80 minutes! While incredibly impressive, this is an extreme example of a Yin plank, since it can be held for a prolonged period of time. Here’s a video highlighting Hood’s performance:

A yang plank, on the other hand, is done with an all-out performance in a shorter period of time. Allow me to introduce the RKC plank.
The RKC plank is a reverse-engineered core exercise that’s evolved into a brutal full body iso-hold. The RKC plank is also called the “Hardstyle Plank,” and when done right, wipes you out completely after only 10 seconds.
Pavel likes to teach his students the “yang” plank and show them how they can completely exhaust their bodies through maximum static exertion. The RKC plank has you manipulating whole body muscle tension to generate maximum internal work from the plank position.
Though you won’t be moving – it’s a static exercise – you’ll be engaging in an all-out 10-second isometric war by applying torque to joints that are locked into the ground by gravity. Pavel has all sorts of nifty cues that he’s come up with and will even teach you how to breathe efficiently for maximum performance, but I’m a straight up biomechanics geek so my instructions will be very cut and dry. Here’s the RKC plank in 10 not-so-easy steps:

1. Get into standard plank position
2. Make sure the neck is in neutral and there’s a straight line from the head to the toes
3. Keep the forearms in neutral and the elbows placed directly underneath the armpits
4. Make tight fists with the hands to allow for irradiation (meaning the tension is so high that it “spills” over into the other muscles)
5. Keep the shoulders back and down and screw them into place through an external rotation torque
6. Contract the quadriceps forcefully to lock out the knees (you’ll be surprised how high they go)
7. Squeeze the thighs together through an adduction torque
8. Pull the elbows down to the toes with the lats
9. Pull the toes up to the elbows via the abs and hip flexors, thereby creating a hip flexion torque at the hips (i.e. a pike)
10. Forcefully contract the gluteus maximus to a) counter the hip flexion moment (pike) and keep the hips extended, b) counternutate the sacrum to allow for proper inner core unit function, and c) posteriorly tilt the pelvis which decreases residual tension on the hip flexors and lumbar spine and increases residual tension on the gluteals and abdominals (when the knees are locked your pelvis won’t rotate much).

It takes some time to get this right – don’t expect to master it the first time you try it. Pick a couple points at a time and eventually you’ll have all of it down pat. When you finally get it right, you’ll never question the level of challenge provided by a plank ever again. I’ve been teaching the hardstyle plank to trainers and it’s an instant hit as within 10-20 seconds they’re shaking and convulsing.

Conclusion

I hope you enjoyed my ramblings and perhaps picked up something useful you can use in your own training.
In summary:

• Stretching doesn’t do jack squat for reducing muscle soreness.
• Perform explosive hex bar deadlifts with 40% of 1RM and you’ll register just as high of power outputs as you would in an Olympic lift.
• Full range movements trump partials for strength and hypertrophy.
• Multiple methods including weights, sprints, sled work, and plyos will improve acceleration performance.
• Kettlebell swings are a great glute activator that builds terminal range hip extension power.
• Read Muscle, Smoke and Mirrors to gain an appreciation of our industry’s roots.
• Strongmen incorporate many types of training into their arsenals, including hypertrophy, strength, power, and conditioning work.
• Many things we do on the field or in the weight room far exceed spinal loading safety limits.<
• If you want a big and strong neck, train it specifically.
• Hardstyle (RKC) planks rock the standard plank’s world.

See you next month!

References

Conley MS, Stone MH, Nimmons M, Dudley GA. Specificity of resistance training responses in neck muscle size and strength. 1997. Eur J Appl Physio. 75: 443-48.

Cormie, P, McCaulley, GO, Triplett, TN, and McBride, JM. Optimal loading for maximal power output during lower-body resistance exercises. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 39: 340–349, 2007.

Garhammer, J. Power production by Olympic weightlifters. 1980. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 12(1):54-60.

Garhammer, J. A review of power output studies of Olympic and powerlifting: methodology, performance prediction, and evaluation tests. J Strength Cond Res. 7: 76–89, 1993.

Henschke N and Lin CC. Stretching before or after exercise does not reduce delayed-onset muscle soreness. 2011. Br J Sports Med. 45: 1249-50.

Kotzamanidis C, Chatzopoulos D, Michailidis C, Papaiakovou G, Patikas D. The effect of combined high-intensity strength and speed training program on the running and jumping ability of soccer players. 2005. J Strength Cond Res. 19(2) 369-75.

Lockie RG, Murphy AJ, Schultz AB, Knight TJ, Janse de Jonge XAK. The effects of different speed training protocols on sprint acceleration kinematics and muscle strength and power in field sport athletes. J Strength Cond Res. Published ahead of print.

Ronei PS, Gomes N, Radaelli R, Botton CE, Brown LE, and Bottaro M. Effect of motion on muscle strength and thickness. J Strength Cond Res. Published ahead of print.

Swinton PA, Stewart AD, Keough JWL, Agouris I, and Lloyd R. Kinematic and kinetic analysis of maximal velocity deadlifts performed with and without the inclusion of chain resistance. 2011a. J Strength Cond Res. 25(11) 3163-74.

Swinton PA, Stewart A, Agouris I, Keough JWL, and Lloyd R. A biomechanical analysis of straight and hexagonal barbell deadlifts using submaximal loads. J Strength Cond Res. 2011b. J Strength Cond Res. 25(7) 2000-9.

Winchester, JB, Erickson, TM, Blaak, JB, and McBride, JM. Changes in bar-path kinematics and kinetics after power-clean training. J Strength Cond Res. 19: 177–183, 2005.

Winwood PL, Keogh JWL, Harris NK. The strength and conditioning practices of strongman competitors. 2011. J Strength Cond Res. 25(11)3118-28.

Wikio

Wikio

The Best Damn Bench Press Article Period

by Bret Contreras and Sam Leahey – 12/15/2011

Like it or not, the bench press is the gold standard of upper body strength lifts. Critics frequently try to knock it down, calling it “over rated,” “injurious,” or the dreaded “not functional,” but the bench press isn’t going anywhere.
And for good reason. There’s no better upper body lift than the bench press. What other upper body lift requires a good amount of leg drive, sufficiently activates the lats, delts, pecs, and tri’s, is stable enough to allow for the hoisting of huge loads, and is specific to many sports due to the horizontal pressing nature of the lift?
The answer is, none!

• Powerlifters perform the bench press as one of the “Big 3″ lifts in their sport and have developed numerous variations to boost their strength.
• Bodybuilders bench to build the pecs and triceps.
• Bench pressing is so revered by everyday gym rats that the first day of the week has been renamed “International Bench Press Monday.”
• The bench press is used to measure upper body strength endurance in the NFL Combine Test, and it’s correlated with many different sports performance markers.

Interestingly enough, despite all this, the bench press wasn’t readily accepted by the weightlifting community.

History of the Bench Press

At the time when pressing from a lying-down position started cropping up around the lifting communities, standing exercises were the only lifts deemed “manly.” Weightlifters scoffed at the pretty-boys who would lie on a bench to “expand their pecs.” However, once women started swooning over the broad-chested bodybuilders, the weightlifters soon jumped on the bench-pressing bandwagon.
Interestingly, the bench press has evolved over the years, from floor, bridge, and belly toss variations to the methods used by bodybuilders and powerlifters today.
At first the strict floor press was the most popular method. In 1899, using a barbell with 19-inch discs (plates), George Hackenshmidt, inventor of the barbell hack squat, rolled a barbell over his face (which was turned to the side) and performed a strict floor press with 361 pounds. This stood as a record for 18 years until Joe Nordquest broke it by 2 pounds in 1916.
Around this time, new methods started gaining ground. Lifters started figuring out that strong glutes could help them get the bar from the ground to overhead. They’d lie on the floor and position the bar over their abdomens, then perform an explosive glute bridging movement, thus catapulting the bar overhead and catching it at lockout.
The heaviest weight lifted by way of this method belonged to heavyweight wrestler-strongman Georg Lurich, who “belly-tossed” 443 pounds in 1902. Critics argued that the “belly toss” method was more of a hip-power exercise rather than an upper-body strength exercise, as the triceps were simply being used to support the weight in a locked position.
In a lighter weight class, Arthur Saxon pressed 386 pounds using the same belly toss method, a record that was later bested by Joe Nordquest, who broke it by 2 pounds in 1917. This technique remained popular through much of the 1920s and 1930s.
Here’s George Lurich, circa 1885:

Soon it became the norm to set up in a bridge position and perform a “press from back” variation, essentially turning the lift into a modified decline press. The other option was to set up normally and use the hips for a boost through a “bridge press” method. This variation differed from the belly toss and press from back methods in that the bridging motion (hip thrusting) was performed under control and held into position while the pecs and tri’s contracted concentrically to finish the lift.
However, when Bill Lilly started setting records by bridging his surprisingly flexible spine and hips all the way to where the bar was locked out, with no separation of the barbell from the abdomen until the lift was completed, people started realizing the absurdity of this method as a demonstration of upper body strength.
Fortunately, Lily’s flexible spine and hips sparked changes in acceptable form, although Lilly’s 484-pound lift remained unchallenged throughout the 1930s.
The AAU outlawed the bridging maneuver by standardizing the pullover and press in 1939. This technique involved keeping the legs straight, the feet together, and the buttocks on the ground. Nevertheless, many wrestlers would still bridge, arching up onto their heads and performing “wrestler’s bridges” while pressing, which required unbelievable neck strength.
Eventually floor pressers realized that small boxes and crates could be used to increase the exercise’s range of motion and pectoralis activity, and before long specialized pieces of equipment were being manufactured. Throughout the 1940s, several types of horizontal presses were popular: the strict floor press, the belly toss, the press from back, the bridge press, and the bench press.

Bodybuilding

By the 1950s bodybuilding was on the rise, and full range of motion was deemed the best method for hypertrophy. At this time the bench press was crowned the king of upper body lifts. As benches grew sturdier, spotters gained competency, form improved, and supportive equipment evolved, bench press numbers have continued to rise.
In the 1950s, Doug Hepburn became the first man to bench 400 and 500 pounds with a pause on the chest. The first 600-pound lift belonged to Pat Casey in the 1960s while the first 700-pound bench is credited to Ted Arcidi in the 1980s. Tim Isaac became the first 800-pound bencher in the late 1990s while Gene Rychlak became the first 900-pound and 1,000-pound bencher in the early 2000s.
The current record belongs to Ryan Kennelly, who benched 1,075 pounds in 2008 with supportive equipment, while Scot Medelson holds the raw record at 715 pounds, which he performed in 2005.
Indeed, the bench press has received its fair share of controversy every step of the way. From day-one, lifters claimed it produced unequal chest to back development and created poor posture. This debate rages on today, with coaches questioning its functional transfer, safety, and optimal technique.
Just as the arched back technique was questioned long ago before actual benches were used, the current arched back technique popular in powerlifting is still frowned upon by many, as is the use of bench shirts.
One thing is certain; lifters will always seek ways to increase their strength on the bench. Before we delve into the various methods used to increase bench press strength, let’s examine what the literature has to say about this exercise.

A Review of the Bench Press Literature

Substantial research has been conducted regarding the bench press and its variants. Probably the most important yet overlooked component to bench press performance is the importance of technique. Less experienced lifters differ from more experienced lifters in setup strategies, execution strategies, and overall technique (Madsen & McLaughlin 1984). We recommend that beginners devote considerable time and attention to proper technique and reinforce good technique with every repetition performed.
Researchers have debated the mechanisms behind the “sticky point,” but we recommend that the sticky point not be thought of as a “point,” but a “region.” This region is characterized by a period of lower external force in relation to gravity resulting in a slowing of bar speed and a decrement in momentum.
A typical 1RM-attempt repetition may last around 1.8 seconds. The sticky region starts at around 2-4 tenths of a second into the concentric portion of the repetition and ends at around 8-9 tenths of a second, comprising around 25% of the duration of the shortening motion (Van den Tillaar & Ettema 2010; Elliot et al. 1989).
Two predominant theories exist which explain the reasons for the sticky region. Elliot et al. (1989) found that muscle activity remained unchanged in the prime movers and suggested that the occurrence happens as a result of the termination of the period of increased elastic strain energy from the reversal portion of the movement.

In other words, passive muscle force due to the active stretch of the muscle fibers involved in the prime movers will help get the bar moving during the bench press (think rubber band here).

But the elastic assistance ends very quickly, thereby creating a burden for the active contractile components of the muscle fibers. This makes a lot of sense, but Van den Tillaar & Ettema (2010) found otherwise.
They showed that muscle activity in the prime movers was diminished during the sticky region, and proposed that a neural delay is created between the point where the muscle’s leverages diminish and where the brain ramps up muscle activation to complete the movement. We recommend using a variety of strategies to increase your ability to overcome the sticky point, which we’ll discuss later in the article.
Any serious lifter understands the importance of mental preparation before a heavy lift. Tod et al. (2005) conducted a very interesting study where they found that “psyching up” led to an 8% increase in force production compared to controls.
They also took a look at force production in a bench press when distracted and found that distracted lifters were unable to produce maximum force. A 12% difference existed between psyched up lifters and distracted lifters. This could amount to a 36-pound difference for a 300-pound bench presser!
We recommend that you save your huge psyche-ups for true max attempts and use them sparingly for optimum performance. Furthermore, we recommend that you concentrate diligently during your lifts and ditch any workout partner who likes to tell jokes or talk during your sets.
Power output during the bench press was shown to increase from 10% to 50% of 1-RM and then decrease from 50% to 90% 1-RM (Stock et al. 2010). This jibes with the findings of Siegal et al. (2002) who found optimal power loads at 40-60% of 1RM. Similarly, Jandacka & Uchytil (2011) found optimal loads at 30-50% of 1RM, while Pearson et al. (2009), found that maximum mean and peak power in the bench press occurred with loads of 53% and 50%, respectively.
Regarding tempo, Pryor et al. (2011) found that fast eccentrics with no rest in the bottom position resulted in the greatest power output gains when compared to slow eccentrics and pauses in the bottom position (something Thibs has been saying for years, which has finally been validated). We recommend using loads of around 50% of 1RM if trying to demonstrate maximum power (remember power equals force x velocity), but when trying to develop maximum power, use a variety of loads ranging from 30-100% of 1RM. For maximum power production, we also recommend incorporating bench throws, which have an optimal power load of 55% of 1RM bench press (Baker et al. 2001) and display higher levels of peak force compared to the bench press (Clark et al. 2008).
Multiple sets have been shown to be superior to single sets for strength gains in the bench press (Rhea et al. 2002).
As far as exercise order is concerned, the bench press is most often performed before exercises such as flies and dumbbell presses due to the increased total body musculature used in the barbell bench press, though all three offer similar levels of pectoral activation (Welsh et al. 2005). Rocha et al. (2007) found similar levels of pec activation between the bench press and pec deck, which lends credence to the findings of Welsh et al.
Placing the bench press first in the workout is a more ideal strategy than placing it at the end of the workout if increased bench press strength is the goal (Simao et al. 2005; Spineti et al. 2010).
As long as volume is matched, it appears that training two times per week versus three times per week or using total body routines versus split routines doesn’t make much of a difference in bench press strength gains (Candow & Burke 2007;Arazi & Asadi 2011).
Following a high-intensity workout, women recover their max bench press strength in only four hours whereas men take 48 hours to recover (Judge & Burke 2010).
For maximum bench press strength, we recommend performing a bench press variation twice per week with an emphasis on lower rep ranges and maximal and dynamic effort methods. Women seeking increased bench press strength train the lift more frequently as they don’t fatigue to the same degree as men on this exercise.
It’s common knowledge amongst lifters that for pec activation, the clavicular head (upper pecs) is recruited more during an incline press, whereas the sternocostal head is recruited better in a flat bench press. Trebs et al. (2010) found the “sweet” spot to be right at 44 degrees for upper pec activity.
Barnett et al. (1995) found that the horizontal bench press activated the most sternocostal pec muscle and triceps fibers, close grip incline press activated the most clavicular pec fibers, and military press activated the most anterior delt fibers.
Lehman (2005) showed that a supinated (reverse) grip led to higher activation in the clavicular (upper) fibers compared to a regular grip and that narrower (close) grips led to higher triceps but lower pec activation than regular grip.
Glass and Armstrong (1997) examined the level of pectoral muscle activation between the decline press and incline press. They found that the decline press activated more lower pec fibers compared to the incline press, while the level of upper pec activation was similar between both lifts.
Clemens and Aaron (1997) found the wide grip bench press worked more prime mover musculature than narrow grip in all the major muscles. For maximum hypertrophy, we recommend performing a variety of grip widths and torso angles to stimulate as many fibers as possible.
Upon analyzing injuries during flat bench press, Green and Comfort (2007) explained how shoulder abduction at 45 degrees with a medium grip offered the safest method of bench press performance for the shoulder joint. For maximum pectoral development, we recommend performing a variety of chest exercises in a variety of rep ranges.

Massey et al. (2004) examined partial range of motion (ROM) training, full ROM training, and a combination of both. They found that none of the three categories resulted in superior strength gains of full ROM bench pressing, yet interestingly the combination group saw the least results.
Regarding machine versus free weight bench pressing, Schick et al. (2010) demonstrated that Smith machine bench pressing activated less shoulder stabilizer and prime mover muscle than free weight bench pressing. Researchers have also identified that a max free-weight bench press is significantly higher than a max Smith-machine bench press (Cotterman et al. 2005).
Research by Ignjatovic (2009) indicates that measures of static strength in the bench press don’t correlate well with measures of dynamic bench pressing strength, so isometric outputs shouldn’t be used to predict a 1RM.
Duffey and Challis (2011) found that there are considerable lateral forces at play when bench pressing. They used a special bar that allowed for the measurement of vertical and lateral forces and found that the “pulling apart” force exerted on the bar equaled roughly 25% of the upward force. It appears that the muscles involved in pressing the bar upward produce considerable outward forces as well.
This helps explain why individuals can’t dumbbell press as much as they can bench press; not only is more stabilization required, but lateral forces aren’t allowable in dumbbell pressing as they’d cause the dumbbells to move away from each other, which would result in a failed lift. The fact that triceps EMG is lower during dumbbell pressing compared to barbell pressing lends support to this theory (Saeterbakken et al. 2011). Elitefts has been preaching about spreading the bar apart during the bench for years.
“Forced reps” are quite popular, especially in commercial gyms. Drinkwater et al. (2007) found no significant difference in both strength and power gains between lifters using forced repetitions and those not using forced repetitions. As for taking the training just to failure, Drinkwater et al. (2005) showed that 4 sets of 6 repetitions was superior to 8 sets of 3 repetitions for strength and power gains.
As a set progresses from first to last rep, bar speed slows down and the bar path shifts more to lifting over the shoulders rather than over the lower/middle chest area (Duffey & Challis 2007).
The bench press has an ascending strength curve, meaning that it becomes easier as the concentric range of motion rises. Elliot et al. (1989) found that bench pressing with an 81% 1RM load resulted in 48% of the lift being performed in an acceleration phase and 52% being performed in a deceleration phase. These periods of deceleration are necessary to prevent the bar from jolting the lifter upward at the termination of the lift. For this reason, amongst others, the use of variable resistance such as bands and chains are commonly used.
Bellar et al. (2011) showed that distributing the load with 15% band tension and 85% free weight tension allows for superior strength gains compared to free weights only. Burnham et al. (2010) demonstrated equal 1RM increases between chains of 5% total load and free weights only, similar to the results of McCurdy et al. (2009), who used greater proportions of chain to bar loads.
Using 15% chain load and 60% free weights for a total of 75% of 1RM, Baker and Newton (2009) found the method to be superior in enhancing concentric lifting velocity compared to using a regular 75% 1RM of free weight only. Studies suggest using 40-50% of 1RM with either chains or bands has the greatest effect on power variables (Ghigiarelli 2009). We support the use of chains and bands as the research is clear, but we feel a decent base of strength should be built before traveling down this path.
Ojasto & Hakinen (2009) found that accentuated eccentric loading as in weight-releasers was more productive for power production when using lighter loads. Specifically, they found that concentric force reduced when supramaximal eccentric loads were used before a maximal concentric rep, yet they also found that when heavier eccentric loads were used for submaximal loading, concentric power was maximized. Doan et al. (2002) showed that accentuated eccentric loads through weight-releasers with 105% loads led to subsequent increases in concentric loads of 5-15 lbs. We recommend using weight-releasers as a strategy to increase upper body pressing power while using around 70% of 1RM loads for the eccentric portion and 50% of 1RM for the concentric portion.
Concerning stable versus unstable surfaces, it’s been shown that bench pressing on unstable surfaces allows for an increase in activation of total body stabilizer muscles during the movement, and the mode of instability has the greatest effect on which areas of the body recruit more stabilizers (Norwood et al. 2007; Saeterbakken 2011).
For example, the triceps are used less but the biceps are used more during dumbbell pressing compared to barbell pressing (Saeterbakken 2011). The pectoralis major (chest) and shoulders showed similar recruitment patterns in both dumbbell versus barbell pressing (Saeterbakken 2011).
Koshida et al. (2008) demonstrated decreased peak power (10%), velocity (10%), and peak force (6%) when benching on a Swiss ball. Conversely, Goodman et al. (2008) reported no differences in 1RM strength and muscle activation during the traditional flat bench barbell press compared to the barbell Swiss ball bench press. Obviously more research is needed in this area as we doubt that elite bench pressers would be able to bench the same amount on a Swiss ball compared to a flat bench.
Santana et al. (2007) looked at the differences between a standing one-arm cable press and a traditional supine bench press and found that the barbell bench press was better for the pecs, shoulders, and erectors, whereas one-arm cable pressing was better for the lats and internal oblique. They confirmed that whole body stability and coordination were greater and thus more of a limiting factor in the standing version compared to the supine.
All types of stretching protocols for the pecs, shoulders, and triceps have been shown to have no effect on maximum bench press strength (Molacek et al. 2010). As for stretching between sets of bench press, Garcia Lopez et al. (2010) found that absolute velocity decreased when performing static stretching between sets whereas it was unaffected by ballistic stretching.
Researchers compared heavy resistance training only and combined heavy resistance training with ballistic training. The results showed greater significant increases in 1RM strength with the combined protocol compared to just heavy resistance training (Mangine et al. 2008). Wilcox et al. (2006) demonstrated that using two plyometric pushups or two light medicine ball chest passes around 30 seconds before bench press performance enhanced maximum strength acutely.

Methods for Improving Bench Press Strength

This section will discuss bench press technique and showcase methods used for strengthening various ranges of motion and variations.

Technique

Your technique will be determined by your anatomy and goals. In comparison to powerlifters, most bodybuilders don’t arch their backs as much, they flare their elbows out more, and they lower the bar higher onto their chest.
Pilot research has shown that a guillotine press with 225 pounds of resistance activates more pec musculature than a 275 pound powerlifting-style bench press. This indicates that bodybuilders know what they’re talking about when it comes to muscle activation, but it’s also very important to consider joint health. While there’s no doubt that the guillotine press is superior for pectoral activation, it’s also more dangerous for the shoulder joint.
Physiological responses to different technique options can vary. For example, some lifters can guillotine press their entire careers and never suffer any consequences. However, other lifters impinge their shoulders by simply glancing at someone performing a guillotine press.
At any rate, for higher pec activation you may choose to flare the elbows outward and lower the bar higher up on the chest, but for maximum shoulder joint safety, using a 45 degree shoulder angle is the safest bet.
Another strategy for increasing pectoral involvement and decreasing triceps’ involvement is to not “pull the bar down to your chest” by “spreading the bar apart.” Doing this will allow the pecs to contribute more to the bar deceleration than if you used your triceps on the way down.
If you simply want to decrease the force contribution from the lower body and force the upper body muscle to do the work, then eliminate the leg drive during the ascent by placing your feet flat on the ground under your knees. Be sure not to drive into the ground during the press and concentrate on using only upper body force.
Varying the grip will also shift muscular contributions during the bench press. A closer grip would use the arms and shoulders more while the wider variation receives a greater contribution of force from the pectorals. If you’d like a bit more contribution from the triceps, simply keep your elbows tucked in throughout the movement.
In the end, these strategies are not absolutes. Some lifters may not get as much of a pronounced change as others by altering their bench press technique. The reason being is that lifters present varying levels of mobility, stability, weak points, and anthropometries. Some might experience a much different pressing feeling by using a different technique while others only feeling a slight change.

If interested in maximum strength, we recommend the following:

• Don’t ignore leg drive, experiment to find the best foot position for you, create a stable base, get the quads tight, and force the knees out to activate the glutes.
• Set up onto the upper back and get a big lower back arch while “screwing” your scapulae down into the bench. Don’t lose this position during the lift off and settle the bar overhead before lowering to your chest.
• Experiment to find the best grip width for you, grip the bar as hard as possible while wrapping the bar tight with your thumb, and maintaining a neutral wrist position, and spread the bar apart throughout the lift.
• Hold a huge breath and pull the bar down with the lats, initiate the press with the lats and focus on pushing your body away from the bench. Experiment with different bar paths to find the best path for you, release your breath only after you’re passed the sticky region.
• Don’t bounce the bar off your chest or raise your butt off the bench during the lift.

Unique Methods for Improving Strength

Raw powerlifters should spend a significantly larger proportion of time focusing on bottom range bench press strength and using full range repetitions, whereas equipped powerlifters should dedicate more time building top-end strength since their bench shirts will provide tremendous elastic assistance at the bottom of the lift.

Most Important – the Standard Bench Press

If all you ever did was a standard bench press, you’d be okay. But the variations below will get you from point A to point B quicker if you train correctly.

Bottom Range Strength

In this video we showcase three different methods to increase your bottom range bench press strength:
Included are:

• Pin press from bottom range
• Bottom range yielding iso-hold
• Bottom range overcoming iso-hold

Mid Range Strength

In this video we showcase four different methods to increase your mid range bench press strength:

• Mid range yielding iso-hold
• Mid range overcoming iso-hold
• Dead-stop floor press
• Pin press from mid range

Top Range Strength

In this video we showcase eight different methods to increase your top range bench press strength:

• Floor press
• Board press (1-4)
• Pin press from top range
• Top range yielding isohold
• Top range overcoming isohold
• Reverse band
• Bench plus chains (Overloaded at top)
• Bench plus bands (Overloaded at top)

Eccentric Strength

In this video we show you two different ways to overload the eccentric/negative/lowering phase:

• Negative accentuated
• Weight releasers

Stability

In this video we provide five methods for improving stability in a bench press:

• Chain stability press
• Kettlebell stability press
• Dumbbell press
• Alternating dumbbell press
• One-arm dumbbell press

Weak Links and Variety

This video details several different variations that can and should be employed during various phases throughout the year:

• Speed bench
• Speed bench with chains
• Speed bench with bands
• Close grip bench press
• Wide grip bench press
• High incline press
• Mid incline press
• Low incline press
• Decline press
• Narrow neutral grip bar
• Wide neutral grip bar
• Thick bar

Conclusion

Many bodybuilders train the bench press once per week during their chest day with large amounts of volume. Many powerlifters train the bench press movement twice per week — once with maximal loads, and once with maximum power outputs.
This is a good place to start, but all bodybuilders and powerlifters should experiment with form, variations, frequency, volume, and intensity to figure out what works best for them.
Generally, most lifters can handle two bench sessions per week. For hypertrophy purposes, perhaps one session per week focusing on the bench press and another focusing on the close-grip incline press is ideal. For maximum strength, perhaps one session per week focusing on the bench press and another focusing on the board press is ideal.
For hypertrophy purposes, we recommend a variety of rep ranges ranging from 3 x 10 to 10 x 3, ascending pyramids to descending pyramids, cluster sets to drop sets.
For max strength, we recommend staying under 5 reps and getting comfortable performing maximum singles. It’s critical that you use good form to stay healthy over the long run, rotate variations to prevent pattern-overload and habituation, and consistently add load to the bar every year.
As far as the myriad of methods and variations shown in this article, don’t be a jackass and try to do everything at once. The guy who ignores all the crazy methods and variations and focuses on straight sets of the standard bench press is usually much stronger than the douchebag who tries to perform every variation and method in existence. Every few weeks pick a new focus, and then rotate to a different focus.
Attention should be dedicated toward strengthening the shoulder external rotators and scapula retractors for structural balance. Exercises such as L-flies, band no-moneys, cable external rotation, face pulls, rear delt raises with scapular retraction, one arm rows, seated rows, one arm cable rows, chest supported rows, and inverted rows are very important to prevent negative postural adaptations and prevent future shoulder injuries.
Furthermore, push ups and overhead pressing and pulling help keep the scapulae working properly, which is vital long-term benching prowess, so don’t ignore them, either.
If you’re trying to maximize the functional transfer of your bench press and improve your athleticism, we recommend supplementing your existing program with JC Band presses, which will strengthen the hips and core to allow for more carryover, along with explosive work such as med-ball chest passes and plyo pushups, which will increase explosive power and reactive strength.
Of course having strong legs and hips through squatting, deadlifting, hip thrusting, and sled work will also go a long way in increasing your horizontal pushing power and will ensure that your upper body pressing transfer isn’t limited by weaknesses and energy leaks down the kinetic chain.
We hope you enjoyed the history lesson, the literature review, and the videos. Now get to it!

Wikio

The Contreras Files: Volume I

Volume I

by Bret Contreras – 12/07/2011

To say I’m a workaholic is like saying Tiger Woods has commitment issues. Through all the lifting, training, reading, and researching that I do, I’m constantly being exposed to and coming up with new ideas.
This column will introduce T Nation readers to just some of what I happen to stumble upon every day, in no particular order of importance. The typical lifter, athlete, personal trainer, strength coach, or physical therapist is bound to find something useful in this article.

1. Low Load Glute Activation is Legit

One thing I love about T Nation is that often the best coaches in the world are years ahead of the research. You might remember Mike Robertson and Eric Cressey writing about glute activation as early as 2004. I can remember thinking, “Why in the hell would I do some silly Jane Fonda exercises?”
When other top coaches including Mark Verstegen, Mike Boyle, and Martin Rooney started recommending glute activation, I could no longer ignore their advice. I got down on the floor and got my bridge, clam, and bird dog on and immediately recognized the potential in these simple movement patterns.
And thus began a love affair unparalleled by any other. Some guys have pictures of their girlfriend on their nightstand. Me? A picture of some glutes with a bouquet of roses stuck in-between the cheeks.
Kidding. But I do keep my eyes and ears open for new glute research. Case in point:
Australian researchers recently put 22 professional Australian Football League (AFL) players through three different warm-up protocols:

• Standing on a whole body vibration platform for 45 seconds at 30 Hz.
• A 5-7 minute, 7-glute exercise routine consisting of glute bridges, side lying clams, quadruped hip extensions, side lying hip abductions, prone single leg hip extensions, fire hydrants, and stability ball wall squats.
• A control group.

The researchers found that during a countermovement jump, the whole body vibration group fared 2.4%worse than the control group, while the glute activation group outperformed the control group in peak power by 4.2%, along with outperforming the whole body vibration group by 6.6% (Buttifant et al. 2011.).

My conclusion is that you’d be wise to include some low load glute activation work in your warm-ups. Remember, the purpose of glute activation isn’t to “rep-out” or “max-out,” but to groove proper motor patterns and focus on getting the glutes working efficiently. Ten high-quality repetitions of each exercise is all you need.

2. Cue the Glutes!

Speaking of glute activation, Cara Lewis and Shirley Sahrmann tested the gluteal activation of a prone hip extension exercise (Lewis and Sahrmann 2009). They showed that compared to no cueing, simply uttering the phrase, “Use your glutes to lift your leg while keeping your hamstrings relaxed,” resulted in over double the gluteus maximus activation and caused the gluteus maximus to fire quicker in hip extension.
Based on my experience as a trainer, most beginners suck at using their glutes. It’s important to remind individuals over and over to use their glutes until it becomes automatic.

3. Lifters vs. Weaklings – Lumbopelvic Rhythm

After a couple of months of training with me, my clients always tell me that their backs feel stronger and better than ever. Is it due to increased hip mobility, or is it core stability? Maybe it’s just increased glute strength? Perhaps it’s due to improved fundamental movement patterns? Or is it a case of all of the above?
In his book Low Back Disorders, Stu McGill discusses the mythical lumbopelvic rhythm pattern explained in textbooks – supposedly the first 60° of bending is accomplished by flexing the lumbar spine while the remaining flexion takes place at the hips (McGill page 74). While most individuals bend with a blend of spinal, pelvic, and hip motion, weightlifters possess unique movement patterns at the hip. Stu states that:

“Olympic Weightlifters attempt to do the opposite – they lock the lumbar spine close to the neutral position and rotate almost entirely about the hips.”

Of course, Olympic weightlifters are better at hip hinging than normal individuals, but the importance of this information is that the movement patterns developed in the weight room transfer over to everyday life.Master the hip hinge first and everything else seems to fall into place.
Here’s my man Tony Gentilcore demonstrating proper hip hinge patterning with a dowel.

4. Powerlifters vs. Olympic Weightlifters – Hip and Knee Moments During Squatting Tasks

Swedish researchers measured the hip and knee moments of six powerlifters and eight Olympic weightlifters during parallel and deep squats (Wretenberg et al. 1996). The results were intriguing: during deep squats powerlifters exhibited 41% higher hip extension moments and 37% less knee extension moments compared to weighlifters, and during parallel squats the powerlifters exhibited 43% higher hip extension moments and 42% less knee extension moments than weightlifters.
This study shows that during squatting tasks, powerlifters use a low-bar position, sit back more, and use their powerful hips to a greater degree than weightlifters, whereas weightlifters use a high-bar position, stay more upright, and use their powerful knee joints to a greater degree than powerlifters.
Maximum sports performance requires strong hips and knees so it’s wise to rotate between different types of squats throughout the year, including low bar parallel, box, front, and high bar full squat variations.

5. Bench Press and Lateral Forces on the Bar

Wonder why the bench press elicits more triceps activity than a dumbbell bench press? A new study out of Penn State showed that the lateral forces exerted on the bar equaled roughly 25% of the vertical forces (Duffey and Challis 2011).
Ten men and eight women were tested in the bench press and the total vertical forces totaled on average 187 pounds of force whereas the lateral forces applied to the bar totaled on average 53 pounds of force. With these proportions, a 600-pound bench presser would be exerting around 150 pounds of outward pressure on the bar throughout the movement.
If you’ve listened to Dave Tate over the years and learned to use your triceps while benching, chances are your lateral forces are even higher than 25% of the vertical forces.
This extra work is simply a byproduct of the prime mover’s maximal contractions against the barbell – which isn’t possible with the dumbbell bench press as the dumbbells would split apart and result in a failed lift.

6. Elite Fitness Glute Ham Raise

I’ve traveled the world and performed glute ham raises with over twenty different glute ham developers. In a nutshell, 99% of glute ham developers suck. Instead of feeling smooth, the lift usually feels awkward and unproductive.
That is, unless you have an Elitefts glute ham raise. If you’ve never performed a glute ham raise off of an Elifefts model, then you can’t possibly imagine the exercise’s effectiveness, as chances are the one you’re using pales in comparison.
Sometimes I wonder if equipment manufacturers even work out or understand biomechanics. Big props to Elitefts for spending the necessary time getting the design right.

7. Crunch Like This

Research out of Stanford University from 1979 showed that a sit-up exhibited 38 degrees of lumbar flexion, but a crunch where only the scapulae are lifted off the ground exhibited only 3 degrees of lumbar flexion (Halpern and Bleck 1979).
Given that the lumbar spine has between 40-73 degrees of ROM in males and 40-68 degrees of ROM in females (Troke et al. 2005), I think it’s safe to say that this type of crunch remains in the neutral zone for the lumbar spine.
If you limit the lumbar ROM and use a controlled tempo, it makes the exercise much more challenging and you’ll no longer be able to bust out hundreds of repetitions.
Start from a slightly hyperextended position by using a rolled up towel, ab mat, or stability ball. Raise the torso to only around 30° of trunk flexion, moving mostly in the thoracic spine. Control the tempo and accentuate the negative portion of the exercise. I discuss this further in the video below:

To prevent hyperkyphotic postural adaptations in the thoracic spine, make sure you perform thoracic mobility drills and include plenty of exercises to strengthen the erectors.
For example, some mobility drills include thoracic extensions off a foam roller and quadruped thoracic extension and rotation, while some strength training exercises include squats, deadlifts, bent over rows, and farmer’s walks.

8. Four to Six Weeks to Harden Up

When I was 18 years old, I was in the gym quarter-squatting 275 pounds with a pad around the bar. A giant behemoth of a man walked up behind me and told me to back down to 135 and squat down deep to the floor like a real man and quit using the pussy pad. Thankfully I took his advice and never looked back.
I can remember using the bar pad because squatting freakin’ hurt my back. The pressure was overwhelming. After ditching the bar pad, it took around four weeks to stop hurting.
When I started front squatting, the same scenario occurred – it hurt. But I stuck with it and a month later I could no longer feel any pain. Zercher squats took a bit longer to quit hurting – around six weeks – as did hook grip deadlifts. Just recently I started hip thrusting without a bar pad and it hurt like hell. I’ve been doing this for a month and it no longer hurts.
The take home message is, the more frequently you perform the lifts, the quicker your nervous system will become densensitized to the stimuli. So man up and fight through the discomfort. Just remember, what seems like torture today in a month will feel like a hot oil massage from a pair of busty Asian masseuses. I kid you not.

9. Resistance Training vs. Stretching for Flexibility Gains

Many long-term lifters have noticed that they don’t have to stretch much to maintain their flexibility. Fact is, many of us have noted superior flexibility gains from weight training compared to stretching.
In the past few years, several studies have emerged showing that resistance training increases flexibility (Monteiro et al. 2008; Santos et al. 2010). This isn’t surprising, but some have shown resistance training protocols to be just as effective or even more effective in terms of flexibility gains when compared to stretching protocols (Aquino et al. 2010, Simao et al. 2010; Morton et al. 2011; Nelson and Bandy 2004).
I’m a fan of doing all sorts of things for improved mobility and soft tissue functioning such as foam rolling and static stretching. But know that full range of motion resistance training is one of the best things you can do to increase and maintain mobility.
Just make sure your programs are well-designed, as structural balance is critical for postural and functional adaptations. To add icing on the cake, make sure you foam roll, stretch, and perform mobility and activation drills.

10. Broz Mentality – The “Shoot Your Family” Scenario

I’m a big John Broz fan. When I met him at his Las Vegas facility he said something that really hit home. He told me to envision someone capturing my family and informing me that they were going to shoot all of them unless I put a hundred pounds on my squat in one month. Then he asked me how often I would squat if this actually happened, and followed up with this gem: “Something tells me you’d squat more than twice per week.”
I like to think of this scenario for a variety of purposes in strength and conditioning. What if you had to put an inch on your arms in one month without gaining any weight? Something tells me you’d perform some curls and triceps extensions. What if you needed your abs to be the strongest they ever were? Something tells me you’d perform dynamic spinal movements and not just core stability exercises.

It’s good to really hone in on one goal per month and give it your all, just don’t try this strategy with multiple goals or you’ll fail at all of them.

Conclusion

I hope you enjoyed my ramblings and perhaps picked up something useful you can use in your own training.
In summary:

• Activate the glutes
• Learn to sit back and hinge properly at the hips
• Learn to use the triceps properly for maximum bench press performance
• Buy an Elitefts glute ham developer if you want a real GHD
• Limit your lumbar ROM when you crunch
• Know that there’s a light at the end of the tunnel for dealing with pain from barbell pressure on new movements as they only take a month or so to get accustomed to
• Perform full ROM resistance training for maximum flexibility
• Pick a new goal each month and attack it with purpose.

See you next month!

References

Aquino CF, Fonseca ST, Goncalves GGP, Silva PLP, Ocarino JM, Mancini MC. Stretching versus strength training in lengthened position in subjects with tight hamstring muscles: A randomized controlled trial. Manual Therapy. 15(1) 26-31, 2010.

Buttifant, D, Crow, J, Kearney, S, and Hrysomallis, C. Whole-body vibration vs. gluteal muscle activation: What are the acute eff ects on explosive power? Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 25: S14–S15, 2011.

Duffey, MJ and Challis, JH. Vertical and lateral forces applied to the bar during the bench press in novice lifters. J Strength Cond Res. 2011. 25(9): 2442–2447.

Halpern, AA and Bleck EE. Sit up exercises: an electromyography study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979. 145:172-8.

Lewis CL, Sahrmann SA. Muscle activation and movement patterns during prone hip extension exercise in women. J Athl Train. 2009. 44(3): 238–248.

McGill, S.M. Low back disorders: Evidence based prevention and rehabilitation, Human Kinetics Publishers, Champaign, IL, U.S.A., 2002.

Monteiro WD, Simão R, Polito MD, Santana CA, Chaves RB, Bezerra E, Fleck SJ. Influence of strength training on adult women’s flexibility. J Strength Cond Res. 2008;22(3):672-7.

Morton SK, Whitehead JR, Brinkert RH, Caine DJ. Resistance Training vs. Static Stretching: Effects on Flexibility and Strength. J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Sep 30. [Epub ahead of print]

Nelson RT, Bandy WD. Eccentric Training and Static Stretching Improve Hamstring Flexibility of High School Males. Journal of Athletic Training. 2004;39:254–258.

Santos E, Rhea MR, Simão R, Dias I, de Salles BF, Novaes J, Leite T, Blair JC, Bunker DJ. Influence of moderately intense strength training on flexibility in sedentary young women. J Strength Cond Res. 2010;24(11):3144-9.

Simão R, Lemos A, Salles B, Leite T, Oliveira É, Rhea M, Reis VM. The influence of strength, flexibility, and simultaneous training on flexibility and strength gains. J Strength Cond Res. 2011;25(5):1333-8.

Troke M, Moore AP, Maillardet FJ, Cheek E. A normative database of lumbar spine range of motion. Manual Therapy. 2005. 10:198-206.

Wretenberg P, Feng Y, Arborelius UP. High and low bar squatting techniques during weight-training. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1996. 28(2)218-24.

Wikio

Wikio

To Crunch or Not to Crunch

by Bret Contreras and Brad Schoenfeld – 8/04/2011

The most heated argument in strength and conditioning today is to crunch or not to crunch. It’s bewildering that this seemingly harmless, short ROM exercise could create such a rift between so many smart strength and conditioning professionals, yet the great crunch debate rages on.
At the center is research showing that repeated spinal flexion using cadaveric porcine spines resulted in herniated discs. This in vitro research seems to indicate that lumbar flexion is a potent herniating mechanism, and anti-crunch proponents have extrapolated from the data that humans possess a limited number of flexion cycles throughout their lifetimes.
Accordingly, they’ve gone out on a limb and recommended that spinal flexion exercises such as the crunch be avoided at all costs. While this may seem logical on the surface, there’s more to this topic than meets the eye.
Someone needs to step up and grow some balls and address the 2000-pound gorilla soiling the carpet. We know dozens of respected strength coaches, physical therapists, personal trainers, researchers, and professors that all have serious doubts about the danger of crunches, yet none wish to discuss it out of fear of being chastised.
The line must be drawn here!

Fitness is Religion

Humans have a basic need to fall into camps, rally behind a leader, believe in supernatural phenomena, and rebel against scientific principles. Throughout history scientists have been punished for questioning current dogma. Sadly, it’s no different in the fitness industry.
Many fitness professionals have been seeking a culprit for low back pain and jumped aboard the anti-crunch bandwagon without question. These folks have adopted absurdly rigid views of the lumbar spine, believing that you should go through life moving this region as little as possible to spare insult to the spine, to the point of altering normal biomechanics in daily living.
Taking it a step further, they then intimidate others into jumping on the bandwagon and get downright emotional when confronted on the topic.
This is the antithesis of scientific thinking. We’re just happy that we won’t be house-imprisoned like Galileo for hypothesizing that the Earth wasn’t the center of the universe.
After delving into the topic, reviewing the literature, and applying our critical thinking skills, we’ve concluded that like every other exercise, a reasonable dose of spinal flexion exercise is potentially good for you and need not be avoided.
We presented our position in a review paper published in the Strength & Conditioning Journal and while we won’t rehash everything in the article, we do continue to question the recent “anti-crunch” movement and suggest a plausible alternative theory.
In our journal article we addressed the following issues, which will only be succinctly summarized below.
For more detailed explanations and citations, we encourage you to pull up the article and read it in its entirety.

Methodological Issues in Research Against Lumbar Flexion Exercise

Removal of muscle. The experiments used in the studies used to refute lumbar flexion exercise used porcine (pig) cervical spines with muscles removed, which alters spinal biomechanics.
No fluid flow in cadavers. Cadaveric spines don’t function the same as living spines as fluid doesn’t flow back into the discs as it does when tissue is alive.
Range of motion in porcine spine. Porcine cervical spines have smaller flexion and extension ranges of motion than human lumbar spines.
Doesn’t mimic crunch exercise regimen. When most people do crunches, they might do a few sets of 10 to 20 reps or so and then wait a couple of days before repeating. This allows the discs to repair and remodel. In the studies used to bash lumbar flexion, thousands of nonstop cycles were performed, which does not replicate a strength and conditioning regimen. It should also be noted that cadaveric spines do not remodel while living spines do.
Genetics. In the world of intervertebral disc degeneration, the role of genetics is huge. It appears that some individuals are quite prone to disc issues while others are not, suggesting that optimal programming would require knowledge of genetic traits.
Range of motion in the crunch exercise. Many years ago, an NSCA journal article described proper performance of the crunch exercise, which involved 30 degrees of total trunk flexion, most of this motion occurring in the thoracic spine, not the lumbar spine. If the lumbar spine doesn’t approach end range flexion in the crunch exercise, then the studies wouldn’t be applicable to the crunch exercise.
IAP controversy. There’s a chance that models used to estimate compressive forces during the crunch have been overestimated due to failure to take into account the role of intra-abdominal pressure (IAP). If this is the case, then the studies could have used too much compression along with range of motion mentioned earlier, which would render the studies inapplicable to crunching. However, there’s conflicting research in this area and it’s likely that the effect isn’t significant.

Potential Benefits of Lumbar Flexion Exercise

Increased fluid flow and nutrition to posterior disc. Lumbar flexion enhances nutrient delivery to discs by increasing nutrient-carrying fluids to the discs.
Increased remodeling of tissue. Proper doses of spinal flexion likely strengthens the disc tissues, which would therefore increase tolerance to lumbar flexion exercise and prevent future injury.
Sagittal plane mobility. Some studies have linked lack of spinal mobility to low back pain, however the literature is somewhat contradictory. At the very least crunches can prevent losses in spinal mobility, which might be important in low back pain prevention.
Rectus abdominis hypertrophy. When taking into account the entire body of knowledge on hypertrophy research, it’s abundantly clear that dynamic exercise is superior to isometric exercise in increasing muscle mass. Much of this has to do with the increased muscular damage incurred from eccentric activity as well as the increased metabolic stress. Bottom line, if you want to optimize your “six-pack” appearance, spinal flexion exercises will certainly help to achieve this goal.
Performance enhancement. Contrary to what some have claimed, lumbar flexion is prevalent in many sport activities. Thus, concentrically/eccentrically strengthening the abdominals may very well lead to increased athletic performance.

Anecdotes and Other Arguments

Now let’s look at some anecdotal evidence to support our claims.

If we’re indeed “limited” in the number of flexion cycles, where does the number lie?

Several fitness professionals have suggested that humans possess a limited number of flexion cycles and believe that we should save these cycles for everyday living such as tying one’s shoe rather than wasting them on crunches. Realizing that anecdotal evidence doesn’t prove squat, it’s still interesting to ponder and can provide a basis for theoretical rationale.

• In 2003, Edmar Freitas, a Brazilian fitness instructor, performed 133,986 crunches in 30 hours, thereby setting a world record. This beat his previous record of 111,000 sit-ups in 24 hours set in the prior year.

Manny Pacquiao, one of the world’s best boxers, performs 4,000 sit-ups per day.

• Finally, Herschel Walker, football legend, Olympic bobsledder, and current MMA hopeful, has been performing 3,500 sit-ups every day since he was in high school. He started doing sit-ups daily when he was 12 years old. Considering that he’s now 49 years of age, this equates to 47,267,500 sit-ups. That’s almost 50 million flexion cycles performed under compressive loading!

Granted, the argument could be made that perhaps all these individuals have screwed up spines and if you were to obtain MRI’s from each you’d see appalling evidence of herniations and degeneration, but we doubt this is the case. Instead we believe that this is clear evidence that the spinal discs can remodel and become stronger over time to resist damage incurred from spinal flexion exercise.
Another argument could be made that these folks are “outliers” and their freakish genetics allow for such incredible flexion cycles. We disagree, and believe there are likely many individuals that have unknowingly met or exceeded this number in their lifetimes. Instead, we believe that this is evidence that muscular balance, abdominal strength, and flexion exercise can protect the spine.

Should We Just Shoot Ourselves?

If we cherry-picked select disc studies to determine which forms of exercise we do, we wouldn’t be allowed to do literally anything.
We found 13 studies to indicate that spinal flexion is a bad idea. (Callaghan and McGill, 2001; Drake et al., 2005; Tampier et al., 2007; Drake and Callaghan, 2009; Marshall and McGill, 2010; Adams and Hutton, 1982; Adams and Hutton, 1983; Adams and Hutton, 1985; Lindblom 1957; Brown et al. 1957; Hardy 1958; Veres et al., 2009; Court et al. 2001). This means no crunches and sit ups.
We found 11 studies that showed that combinations of spinal loading aren’t a good idea. (Gordon et al. 1991 (Flexion and Rotation); McNally et al. 1993 (Flexion and Anterolateral Bending); Shirazi 1989 (Lateral Bending and Rotation); Kelsey et al. 1984 (Flexion and Rotation); Adams et al. 2000 (Complex); Marshall and McGill, 2010 (Flexion/Extension and Rotation); Drake et al. 2005 (Flexion and Rotation); Veres et al., 2010 (Flexion and Rotation); Schmidt et al. 2007 (Lateral Bending and Rotation, Lateral Bending and Flexion, Lateral Bending and Extension); Schmidt et al. 2007 (Lateral Bending and Flexion, Lateral Bending and Rotation, Flexion and Rotation); Schmidt et al. 2009 (Lateral Bending and Flexion, Lateral Bending and Extension). This means no exercises such as twisting sit-ups or Russian twists.
We found a couple studies showing that spinal extension is a big no-no (Adams et al., 2000; Shah et al., 1978). This means no Supermans.
Several studies show that spinal rotation is bad (Krismer et al., 1996; Aultman et al. 2004; Farfan et al. 1970). This means no cable chopping motions. And you better not be performing these on a vibration platform as that would produce a double whammy to the spine. Vibration has been shown to be bad for the discs (Dupuis and Zerlett 1987).
There’s research to suggest that lateral bending is bad for you (Costi et al. 2007; Natarajan et al. 2008). This means no side bending. Similarly, asymmetrical lifting has been shown to lead to negative results as well (Natarajan et al. 2008). This means no unilateral exercises or weighted carries.
Here’s where things get interesting. We found 18 different studies showing that static or dynamic compression is a very bad idea (Virgin 1951; Liu et al. 1983; Lai et al. 2008; Lotz et al. 1998; Tsai et al. 1998; Iatridis et al. 1999; Lotz et al. 1998; Kroeber et al. 2002; MacLean et al. 2003; Hsieh and Lotz 2003; MacLean et al. 2004; Ching et al. 2004; Masouka et al. 2007; Veres et al. 2008; Lai and Chow 2010; Nakamura et al. 2009; Wang et al. 2007; Huang and Gu 2008).
This not only means no squats, deadlifts, and core stability exercises, it means no physical activity involving free weight exercise whatsoever, since muscular contractions create compressive loading on the spine. We should have known that though, as heavy lifting is bad for the back (Lee and Chiou 1994; Kelsey et al. 1984), as is overactivity (Videman and Battie, 1999). So now we know that weightlifting and intense training is out.
It goes on and on. We’ve found studies suggesting all sorts of every day activities are bad for the back, even sitting down and bed-rest. Maybe we should all just shoot ourselves before we become completely debilitated?

Do Crunches Screw up Your Posture?

The theory goes something like this: Crunches shorten the rectus abdominis. Since the rectus abdominis spans from the sternum/rib cage to the pelvis, continually shortening the muscle will pull down your ribcage, ultimately resulting in kyphosis (i.e. a round-back posture). It’s an interesting theory. It’s also completely unfounded.
As with many theories, the essence of this claim is based on a kernel of truth. Specifically, placing a muscle in a shortened position for a prolonged time causes it to assume a shorter resting length. For example, if you immobilize your arm in a cast at a flexed position for several weeks, your arm will tend to remain flexed once the cast is removed.
This is due to an adaptive response whereby the elbow flexors (i.e. biceps, brachialis, etc.) lose sarcomeres in series while sarcomeres are added to the antagonistic extensor muscles (Toigo & Boutellier, 2006). This has been coined “adaptive shortening.”
Perhaps you can see the flaw in hypothesizing that performing a crunch will shorten the rectus abdominis, namely, crunches aren’t solely a shortening exercise! Rather, the crunch also includes eccentric actions where the rectus abdominis is returned to its resting length.
Thus, any potential negative effects of shortening contractions on sarcomere number would be counterbalanced by the lengthening effect of the eccentric actions. The net effect is no change in resting length.
Some anti-crunch proponents also argue that performing spinal flexion exercises (i.e. crunches) overly strengthens the rectus abdominis so that it overpowers its antagonists, thereby pulling down on the ribcage.
This is a straw man argument. Certainly it’s true that an imbalance between muscles can cause postural disturbances – I’m sure you’re familiar with guys who hit chest and arms every workout and end up so internally rotated that they have trouble scratching the back of their head. But this doesn’t mean you shouldn’t perform bench presses and arm curls.
The issue here is one of poor program design, not an indictment of specific exercises.
Regarding crunches, the same principle holds true. Sure, if you perform a gazillion crunches every day and don’t train other muscle groups, you’re setting yourself up for a postural disturbance.
But this is a non-issue if you adhere to a balanced routine. Performance of virtually any standing, non-machine based exercise will heavily involve the core musculature, particularly the posterior muscles that antagonize the rectus abdominis (Schoenfeld, 2010, Lehman, 2005). It also should be noted that the average person tends to have weak abdominals (Morris et al. 2006), so they could very well benefit from performing spinal flexion exercises.
To sum up, there is no convincing evidence that performing crunches as part of a total body resistance training routine will have any negative effects on posture.

Do crunches lead to additional dysfunction, such as breathing dysfunction and glute dysfunction?

If crunches did indeed pull down on the ribcage and induce kyphosis, then one could speculate that breathing and glute functioning could be compromised. However, as just mentioned, this likely isn’t the case.
Anecdotally, hundreds of thousands of athletes in the past few decades have achieved terrific success in spite of doing crunches. If crunches did lead to shortening of the abdominals, given that a majority of people including athletes seem to display an anterior pelvic tilt in their daily posture, one could argue that it would be wise to perform crunches to pull up on the pelvis, which could theoretically decrease anterior pelvic tilt and lead to a more neutral lumbo-pelvic posture.

Are crunches a nonfunctional exercise?

Whenever one questions the implication that crunches are as dangerous as wake boarding in a tsunami, anti-crunchers quickly counter with something like, “Who cares if they’re dangerous or not? Crunches aren’t functional! They’re a short range movement performed while lying on your back. They can’t possibly transfer to anything.”
As our mentor Mel Siff aptly stated:

“Functional training is any form of training that improves any relevant biomotor ability that does not come at the detriment to other biomotor abilities.”

Anti-crunchers will point out that the crunch solely involves bodyweight and therefore isn’t heavy enough to transfer to high-force or high-velocity movement. This is absurd, as it’s very easy to hold a dumbbell at the upper chest to increase the exercise’s intensity. You also can perform a kneeling rope crunch using a cable apparatus to increase training intensity.
What carries over best to functional activity depends on the task. Here’s a chart that should help you determine optimal transfer of training.

Biomotor Ability	Examples	Exercise Category	Examples
Trunk Rotary Stability, Strength and Power	Throwing a football or baseball, throwing a discuss, swinging a bat, throwing a left hook	Rotational exercises and anti-rotation exercises	Woodchops, landmines, Pallof presses, cable or band chops and lifts
Trunk Lateral Bending Stability, Strength and Power	Stiff-arming, posting up, landing a jab	Lateral flexion exercises and anti-lateral flexion exercises	Side bends, side planks, suitcase carries, cable or band side bends
Trunk Flexion Stability, Strength and Power	Sitting up from a bench, bar gymnastics exercises, bracing for a punch to the midsection, resisting being pushed rearward as in sumo wrestling, throwing a soccer ball overhead	Flexion exercises and anti-extension exercises	Crunches, sit ups, hanging leg raises, planks, ab wheel rollouts, bodysaws
Trunk Extension Stability, Strength and Power	Carrying heavy loads, picking up stuff off the ground, staying upright in the clinch	Extension exercises and anti-flexion exercises	Squats, deadlifts, back extensions, reverse hypers, farmer’s walks, Zercher carries

Basically, stability exercises appear to be better for stabilization tasks as well as tasks that require proper inner-core unit functioning, while strengthening exercises appear to be better for dynamic tasks and hypertrophy.
As you can see, an exercise like a weighted crunch could transfer quite well to a myriad of functional tasks, and therefore shouldn’t be maligned for its applicability to functional or sports performance.

Is There a Healthy Balance and Do Discs Heal and Remodel?

It’s been stated by many practitioners that the discs don’t heal. This is misleading. It’s true that they’re poorly vascularized and struggle to receive adequate nutrition, and it’s true that disc tissue doesn’t heal rapidly. Proteoglycan turnover may take 500 days (Urban et al. 1978) and collagen turnover may take longer (Adams and Hutton 1982).
Hence, the discs’ rate of remodeling lags behind that of other skeletal tissues (Maroudas et al. 1975; Skrzypiec et al. 2007).
However, much evidence of disc-healing exists. Common sense would dictate that discs do heal, otherwise anyone that suffered a disc injury would never get better. We’d all just get progressively worse until we could no longer move.
Based on epidemiological studies, it’s clear that there’s an optimal window of spinal loading that is somewhere in between bed-rest and overactivity (Videman et al., 1990).
A healthy balance has been shown to occur with spinal compression (Hutton et al. 1998; Lotz et al. 2002; Walsh and Lotz 2004; Wuertz et al. 2009; MacLean et al. 2005) and spinal rotation (Chan et al. 2011). Positive aspects of spinal bending have been shown to occur in the discs as well (Lotz et al. 2008; Court et al. 2001).
Furthermore, 16 different studies indicate that the spinal discs can repair and remodel themselves. While several papers reviewed the topic (Lotz 2004; Stokes and Iatridis; Adams and Dolan 1997; Porter 1987), others demonstrated that flexion damages can heal (Court et al. 2007), compression damages can heal (Lai et al. 2008; Korecki et al. 2008; MacLean et al. 2008; Hee et al. 2011), prolapses can reverse (Scannell and McGill 2009), herniations can improve (Girard et al. 2004; Wood et al. 1997), the outer annulus can strengthen (Skrzpiec et al. 2007), collagen within the disc can remodel to become stronger (Brickley-Parsons and Glimcher, 1984), and vertebrae, ligaments, and strengthen to resist loading (Porter et al. 1989; Adams and Dolan 1996).
Every time you move your spine you cause micro-damage to the tissues, which triggers both anabolic and catabolic processes. Ideally, you want to limit the amount of damage, as healing from larger scale damage usually leaves the disc biomechanically inferior.
For example, annular damage is repaired by granulation tissue and the scar never regains its normal lamellar architecture (Hampton et al. 1989). End plate injuries heal with cartilaginous tissue (Cinotti et al. 2005; Holm et al. 2004), fibrocartilage replaces nucleus material (Kim et al. 2005), and a healing of harmed tissue is often replaced by a thin-layer of weaker fibrous tissue (Fazzalari et al. 2001).

A Stress – Eustress Solution?

The study of biomechanics is unique because you must not only consider forces and stresses on human tissues, you must also consider adaptive remodeling. The ideal situation in programming doesn’t avoid stress; it keeps the body in eustress while avoiding distress, which ensures that anabolic agents inside of tissues exert more work than catabolic agents inside of tissues to promote full repair, recovery, and strengthening.

Conclusion

We hope that we’ve provided you some food for thought and encouraged you to rely on logic rather than emotion in decision-making involving exercise safety and program design. An effective practitioner weighs all available evidence and makes appropriate conclusions in a dispassionate manner, without adhering to rigidly held beliefs.
We believe that future research will help hone in on the safety of the crunch exercise and determine proper dose responses, but this research needs to be conducted on living humans and involve pre and post-MRI results with a training intervention that ensures proper crunch technique.

Wikio

Wikio

The New Rules of Strength Training

by Bret Contreras – 7/18/2011

I’ve just received word that I’ve been appointed the new President of the Strength Training Industry.
As your leader, my first order of business is to address what I consider to be the greatest challenge facing the industry today: the widespread acceptance and proliferation of biomechanically dangerous exercises.
We’ve allowed strength training to become a “risky” or “dangerous” business, attracting an unsavory mix of foolish, hardcore, Jackass-inspired thrill seekers who preach lifting ridiculously heavy weights in a chalk-dusted frenzy. Their unwanted influence needlessly injures thousands of well-intentioned exercisers that just want to enjoy a refreshing workout and follow a healthy lifestyle.
I can say with confidence that it doesn’t have to be this way. And thanks to my newly acquired authority, with just a stroke of a pen I can render strength training as safe or safer than the stationary bike, lawn bowling, and Chinese checkers, current gold standards of exercise safety.
The following is a list of banned exercises that shall not be performed again, along with a brief explanation.

Upright rows

Abducting your arms over 90 degrees combined with severe internal rotation will shred your shoulders like Grandma’s 4^th of July coleslaw.

Behind the neck press, behind the neck pulldowns, and behind the neck pull-ups

The “high five” position characterized by shoulder abduction and extreme external rotation is an injury waiting to happen. While you grind away at your rotator cuff, inducing tendonitis, you’ll also be stretching out the ligaments and anterior capsule, leading to permanent elongation, hyperlaxity, and instability.
While you’re at it, why not jam the bar into your spine and damage a cervical process? Might as well multi-task, right?

Squats

All squatters have round lumbar spines and posteriorly-tilted pelvises when they go deep, and if their poor discs could talk, they’d be screaming bloody murder. The low bar position wreaks havoc on the shoulder joints, and the ACL, PCL, and patella take a beating during the descent. Too heavy a weight leads to excessive forward lean, exposing the lumbar spine to injury.
Worse, the lift requires dangerous levels of intra-abdominal pressure and can lead to rectal prolapse, a condition where the walls of the rectum protrude through the anus and become visible outside the body. Good luck riding your bike home from the gym after that happens.

Bench press

The barbell puts the wrist in a fixed position that can damage the elbows and shoulders, while the powerlifting style low-back arch will hammer the posterior elements of the spine. Going deep overstretches the delicate shoulder ligaments, and the scapulae can’t move naturally as they’re pinned against the bench. Not to mention, the scapulae will be permanently abducted and the shoulders internally rotated, which over time can lead to a Neanderthal-like posture.

Military press

Ignore that the head is dead smack in the path of the barbell and just focus on the fact that the delicate acromions can’t handle the load. Furthermore, the typical kyphotic posture will massacre the shoulders and cause spinal hyperextension.

Deadlifts

A perfectly named exercise. The deadlift will create numerous disc herniations and permanent elongation of the spinal ligaments due to a slumped posture. Weak glutes encourage lumbar flexion and posterior pelvic tilt to initiate the lift, and lumbar hyperextension and anterior pelvic tilt to finish. Just imagine, a single exercise that can create flexion and extension intolerance in one fell swoop!
Increasing or decreasing the load doesn’t improve the safety profile one iota. Heavy deadlifts over stress the CNS, leading to permanent downregulation of key brain chemicals and eventually mental retardation, while high rep deadlifts can lead to cardiac arrest.

Good mornings

If you bumped into an extra terrestrial at the gym and asked him to put a heavy bar on his back and bend over with it, he’d likely start laughing hysterically in that cute way benevolent aliens do before shooting you in the face with a phaser. It’s sad that even aliens have more common sense than meatheads.

Reverse hypers and back extensions

Most people’s hips don’t work correctly, so they move at the spine and not the hips. Down low, they flex the spine to make up for crappy hamstring flexibility, and up top hyperextend the lumbar spine to make up for weak glutes. Why not just foam roll on the freeway and get it over with?

Glute ham raises

Nobody does this exercise properly. Weak hamstrings require anterior pelvic tilt to try to improve the length tension relationship, which puts the low back into hyperextension and annihilates the posterior elements of the lumbar spine.

Lunges, Bulgarian split squats, step ups, pistols, and single leg RDL’s

All single leg exercises lead to SI joint pain and sciatica. Crappy hip stability causes the knee to move all around in the frontal and transverse planes, obliterating the patellofemoral joint. Any PT who prescribes a single leg movement is a shill for the knee replacement industry.

Hip thrusts, barbell glute bridges, and single leg hip thrusts.

Whoever thought up these abominations is a serious douchebag. Since weak glutes can’t do the job, the pelvis will anteriorly tilt and the low back will hyperextend, thereby taking a jackhammer to the posterior elements of the lumbar spine. Furthermore, the weak glutes will fail to exert a rearward pull on the femur, leading to anterior hip pain as it jams forward in the acetabulum.
If you still choose to perform these hare-brained movements, maybe you should consider the other exercisers using the facility. Unless you have an Airex pad to place under the bar, too much pressure is placed on the abdomen, resulting in volcanic eruptions of explosive diarrhea.

Dips

Extreme shoulder extension combined with external rotation will inevitably lead to anterior capsule dysfunction. Dips are for dipshits.

Push-ups

Push-ups are too hard on the wrists and elbows, and if the feet are elevated to make them more difficult you risk hyperextending the neck. Due to most lifter’s obsession with the bench press, the serratus anterior and trapezius fibers often don’t fire and can’t properly stabilize the scapula so once again the shoulders take a beating.

Leg presses and seated rows

These exercises require too much hamstring flexibility, leading to severe lumbar rounding under heavy loads and eventually herniated discs. Moreover, machines place the body in unnatural fixed positions that can lead to faulty motor recruitment in as little as six workouts, and walking like Frankenstein’s monster in twelve.

Bent over rows

I get it. Since the ribcage can serve as a trampoline in the bench press to max out at 225 lbs., it would be silly to only row 95 lbs. So you pile two plates on each side of the bar, round the back to 30 degrees, and start performing upright rows to the belly.

Chin-ups and pull-ups

Supinated chins over stress the biceps tendons, while wide grip pull-ups over stress the shoulder joints. To make the exercise easier lifters hyperextend the low back and shrug the shoulders to account for weak lower traps.

Sit-ups, side bends, and Russian twists

Sit-ups will induce compressive and sheer loading on the spine, leading to compromised neural function, mindless incoherent babbling, and eventually holding up homophobic signs at Michele Bachmann campaign rallies.
Since the hip flexors are already tight from sitting, you should never, ever try to strengthen them. Twisting sit-ups combine lumbar flexion and rotation, which is akin to a Mike Tyson right uppercut – left hook combo.
The spine was meant to stay in neutral your entire life and should never be moved. For this reason, side bends and Russian twists are out, along with getting out of bed, tying your shoes, sitting, and picking up loose change off the ground.

Shrugs, farmer’s walks, and all loaded carries

Most lifter’s upper traps already dominate their lower traps. You should never, EVER, carry anything heavy or even take a plate or dumbbell out of the rack or your traps will become perpetually imbalanced.

Pullovers, flyes, lateral raises, barbell curls, and prone rear delt raises

Single joint exercises in the stretch position such as flyes and pullovers are hard on the shoulder joint, and lateral raises, unless performed in the scapular plane, will destroy the shoulders.
Barbell curls over stress the biceps tendon and the bones of the lower arm.
Prone rear delt raises require hyperextending the neck while lying prone on an incline bench, which can cause amnesia, aneurisms, or stroke.
Let’s not forget the most important point, that single joint lifts aren’t functional. Even though they may look like movement patterns seen in swimming, tennis, and strongman, don’t let your eyes fool you! There’s zero functional transfer to the real world.

Power cleans and jump squats

People can’t clean worth a piss these days, and the wrists take too much of a pounding over time. Jump squats jar the entire body upon landing.

Pallof presses, cable chops, cable lifts

These exercises require simultaneous contraction from all the core muscles, which clamp down on the spine and create enormous compressive loads. This leads to vertebral issues and severe constipation that cases of Metamucil can’t cure.

Crunches

Since I’m President, I’ve decided to eradicate the terms “lumbar flexion” and “posterior pelvic tilt” from the Kinesiology textbooks, and the rectus abdominus will now be referred to as “The Muscle Whose Name Cannot be Mentioned.” (TMWNCBM for short.)
Before you roll onto your back and start crunching, realize that the lumbar spine only allows for 20,000 flexion cycles. When you hit this number, all five lumbar discs herniate immediately and you begin writhing in uncontrollable spasm.
Even if you’re way shy of the 20,000 limit, with every single rep your athleticism and ability to walk upright while chewing gum decreases by .02%. You do the math.
Crunches destroy the workings of the pelvic floor musculature, resulting in you pissing yourself uncontrollably every time you laugh or sneeze, or whenever the fighter jets do a fly-over on opening weekend.
Furthermore, crunches are linked to glute dysfunction. It doesn’t matter if you’re sprinting or hip thrusting, crunches override those signals and extinguish their effects. The result is now you can’t walk, run, or jump properly.
Worse, this glute dysfunction can lead to erectile dysfunction. Since the glutes no longer function properly, thrusting becomes impossible, and even the most accommodating partner is bound to start laughing hysterically at such anemic displays of ass drive, resulting in the “little general” shriveling like over-cooked linguini. This psychological catastrophe can embed itself deep into the brain, resulting in permanent erectile dysfunction.
Finally, crunches can lead to AIDS and other STD’s. Many lifters who perform crunches become so horribly kyphotic that they can’t attract a mate through conventional means, leading to encounters with prostitutes and other ladies of ill repute. This significantly increases their exposure to AIDS, gonorrhea, syphilis, certain politicians, herpes, and other single-guy buzz kills.

The New Rules to Strength Training

What’s the deal? Has Contreras sold out?
Hell no! I wrote this article to make a point. If you know enough about anatomy, physiology, and strength training, you could make a case for why every exercise in the book should be avoided. Conversely, you could also make a case for why every exercise in the book should be performed.
Without further ado, here are President Contreras’ actual new rules to strength training:

• An exercise is judged by how it is supposed to be performed, not by how the jacktards screw it up.
• If you think lifting weights is dangerous, try being weak. Being weak is dangerous.
• There are no contraindicated exercises, just contraindicated individuals. Learn how your body works and master its mechanics.
• If you can’t perform an exercise properly, don’t do it. If an exercise consistently causes pain, don’t do it. If an exercise consistently injures you, don’t do it.
• Earn the right to perform an exercise. Correct any dysfunction and become qualified with bodyweight before loading up a movement pattern.
• There exists a risk-reward continuum and some exercises are safer than others. It’s up to you to determine where you draw the line. Don’t bitch about your lack of progress or poor joint health as you lie in the bed you made for yourself.
• Exercises performed poorly are dangerous, while exercises performed well are beneficial. If you use shitty form, you’ll hurt yourself. It’s only a matter of time.
• If you display optimal levels of joint mobility, stability, and motor control, you’ll distribute forces much better and be able to tolerate more volume, intensity, and frequency.
• Structural balance is critical. You must strengthen joints in opposing manners to ensure that posture isn’t altered. If your posture erodes due to strength training, it means that you’re a shitty program designer.
• Body tissues adjust to become stronger to resist loading. The body is a living organism that adapts to imposed demands.
• Your training will be based on your needs, your goals, and your liking. Different goals require different training methods. The loftier your goals, the more risk entailed.
• There are two type of stress: eustress and distress. Keep yourself in eustress and you’ll be okay.
• If you believe an exercise will hurt you, it probably will.
• Injuries in the weight room have more to do with poor form and poor programming than the exercise itself. Exercises are tools. You are the carpenter. A good carpenter never blames his tools.
• Rather than drift along with popular trends, it’s more fruitful to learn how the body works, which will allow you to understand the pros and cons of every exercise and make educated decisions in your programming.

At the end of the day, how you train is your call. Whether you play it safe or roll the dice, at least you’re not sitting on the couch. Pain and injuries have a way of teaching you proper form and programming, and having a large arsenal of exercises is important to prevent boredom and habituation and spark further adaptation. In short, keep learnin’ and keep liftin’!
I’m President Contreras and I approve this message.

Wikio

Wikio

>The Best Damn Push-Ups Article, Period!

>

by Bret Contreras and Elsbeth Vaino – 6/22/2011

Push-ups get no respect.
While other bodyweight exercises like chin-ups and dips boast devoted fans from all corners of the industry, the lowly push-up is the veritable red-headed step-child of the strength and conditioning world.
At the risk of going all Freudian, perhaps it has something to do with childhood?
Come across the word “push-up” in an otherwise blasé strength training program and suddenly you’re a pimple-faced 7^th grader again, desperately trying to avoid attention while an overly-caffeinated Mr. Hartmann doles out punishing sets of push-ups for the slightest of offences.

“Class started 17 seconds ago you slimy scumbag! Get on your face and give me 25!”

So rather than re-live that humiliation every time we strap on our Chucks, we label the push-up as “biomechanically inferior,” or a “pussy exercise,” and strike it from our programs, and our psyche.
But we’re here to tell you that’s just not fair, and there’s much ado about the push-up that warrants your attention.
For example, if they’re such a walk in the park, ever wonder why most novices do what they do when first attempting push-ups?
Why do rookies flare their elbows and place their hands high and wide? Why do they tend to sag in the core region, or limit the range of motion and perform “partial reps?”
And why do men just seem to “catch on” much quicker than women?
In this article, we’re going to review the literature pertinent to push-ups, discuss common technique errors, offer some corrective exercises to assist in proper push-up performance, and provide a push-up progression list.

Literature Summary

Despite the notable absence of glutes and ass references, this is still a Bret Contreras co-production, which means one thing: research. Here’s a brief summary of just some of what the literature says about push-ups.
The abdominal muscles are king when it comes to spinal stability during push-ups. The rectus abdominis is the primary stabilizer for preventing hip sagging, while the obliques do most of the work to prevent lateral shifting and twisting. The transversus abdominis, multifidus, and erector spinae are only minimal contributors to spinal stability during the push-up exercise.
Push-ups are also about arms and chest, with 73-109% maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) of the triceps, and 95-105% MVC of the pec major. The back is also involved, with serratus anterior as the top back muscle with 75% MVC compared to 27% for the mid traps and 36% for the lower traps.
Hand position plays an important role. A narrow base push-up position significantly increases stress on the elbow joint, but also involves higher muscle activation in the triceps and pecs. Internally rotated hand positions were also shown to produce greater and potentially injurious forces on the elbow joints.
Depending on your goal, you’ll want to do different push-up progressions. Push-ups with alternating hands on a ball provided the greatest rectus abdominis and oblique challenge; one arm push-ups hit the lats, anterior deltoid, and erector spinae the hardest; and clapping push-ups were the toughest for the pec major, triceps, and biceps.
Cogley et al. (2005) found that narrow base push-ups led to higher EMG values in the triceps brachii and pectoralis major than wide base push-ups. Popular belief indicates that wide base push-ups activate more pec fibers, but this study showed otherwise.
An et al. (1992) found that peak axial forces on the elbow joint during push-ups averaged around 45% of bodyweight. This increases to 75% in the case of narrow base push-ups. This means that narrow base push-ups (with your hands closer together) increases stress on the elbow joint.
Beach et al. (2008) showed that suspended push-ups activated more core musculature than regular push-ups. Based on this finding you can use blast straps or a TRX to increase the efficacy of the push-ups exercise.
Lehman et al. found in 2008 that elevating the feet above the hands had a greater influence on scapulothoracic stabilizing musculature than placing the hands on a Swiss ball. This means that it’s more challenging for the shoulder girdle stabilizers to do push-ups with your feet elevated onto a bench – with your hands on the ground – than to perform push-ups with your hands on a Swiss ball and your feet on the ground.
But don’t dump the unstable equipment just yet. Lehman et al. also found in 2006 that as long as you kept the torso angle constant, it would be more effective to perform exercises such as Swiss ball and Bosu push-ups in comparison to bodyweight push-ups – provided you place the hands on the unstable piece of equipment rather than the feet.
Lou et al. (2001) showed that internal rotation of the hand position or full pronation of the forearm during push-ups led to greater posterior and varus forces on the elbow joints that could produce injurious shear forces. Considering this finding, it’s recommended that internally rotated hand positions should be avoided for optimal elbow health.
Sandhu et al. (2008) found that push-ups with the hands placed on a Swiss ball significantly increased triceps and pectoralis major activity compared to normal push-ups, but only during the eccentric phase.
Youdas et al (2010) found that depending on the hand position, the push up activated between 73-109% MVC of the triceps brachii, 95-105% MVC of the pectoralis major, 67-87% MVC of the serratus anterior, and 11-21% MVC of the posterior deltoid musculature. The researchers also found that the narrow base position was the most effective position for increasing triceps contribution, and that the Perfect Push up™ device did not enhance muscular recruitment.

Common Biomechanical Errors

Think performing a push-up should come as natural as peeing your name in the fresh fallen snow? Think again.

There are three common push-up performance errors.

T-Set Up

First, when performing push-ups, people often set up with their hand position high and wide. If you took a snapshot from above as in an aerial view, their set up would look like the letter T. People do this to make the exercise easier.
Why is this position easier?

• The alignment of the pec fibers is better suited to produce force from this position.
• This position requires less muscle activation (as measured by EMG) in the pecs and the triceps.
• Shoulder horizontal abduction flexibility is limited, so the structures limiting flexibility will contribute much needed passive force in the bottom position.

Caterpillaring

Second is caterpillaring, or allowing the hips to sag resulting in anterior pelvic tilting and lumbar hyperextension. Here’s why this occurs.

• They lack the core strength to stabilize their lumbopelvic region and simply allow their core to gain stability by “hanging” on the structures that limit this motion – namely the hip flexors and lumbar vertebrae. Basically, the hip flexors lengthen and contribute passive tension, and the neural arches of the vertebrae get closer together (aka approximation). This places the posterior elements of the spine at risk.
• People are stuck in anterior pelvic tilt due to tight hip flexors and erector spinae and don’t have the muscular strength in the rectus abdominis and gluteus maximus to override this tightness during the push-up.
• By keeping the hips low and hinging at the lumbar spine, a lower percentage of bodyweight is being lifted since much of the body is hanging toward the floor, thereby making the exercise easier.
• People aren’t strong in deeper ranges so they sag to “pretend” they’re going deeper since their hips will bottom out before their chest, creating the illusion that they’re using full ROM.

Stopping Short

Third, people cut the movement short and perform half-reps. Here’s typically why this occurs.

• People lack end-range shoulder strength and stability.
• The bottom position of the push-ups involves a higher percentage of bodyweight than the top position, which makes the bottom more difficult. This makes the push-up the opposite of “accommodating resistance” since the loading increases as the push-up is lowered to the ground.
• People want to fool themselves into thinking that they’re in better shape than they really are. The ego can handle doing ten half-rep push-ups, but it’s tough for a typical person to admit that he or she isn’t in good enough shape to perform a single legitimate, full-range push-up.

PPT: To Tilt or Not to Tilt

The push-up naturally encourages anterior pelvic tilt (APT) and lumbar extension due to the posteroanterior forces on the body induced by gravity. Contraction of the rectus abdominis is required to prevent pelvic and lumbar deformation and keep the lumbopelvic region in neutral, but further contraction of the glutes and abs will take you into posterior pelvic tilt (PPT). Whether you should enter into PPT, and the optimal amount of PPT, is up for debate.
Most coaches would agree that doing push-ups in APT is unwise. As long as you can keep a neutral posture, then all is well. However, some coaches believe that the push-up should be performed with a maximal glute and lower ab contraction to facilitate a strong PPT.

The PPT push-ups have three distinct advantages over the traditional push-up.

• Since it requires a strong gluteand lower ab contraction to create the tilt, it serves as a static glute activation exercise. This allows you to kill two birds with one stone by improving the neural drive to the glutes while working the upper body. Take it from the Glute Guy, everyone can benefit from some extra glute activation!
• By shifting the pelvis forward with your glutes, you’re no longer “hanging” on your hip flexors and lumbar vertebrae for stability. This will now require a stronger abdominal contraction as now you’re using active muscles to keep you stable rather than passive muscles and ligaments. Theextra muscle force from the rectus abdominis and gluteus maximus makes it a more effective core exercise and makes the push-up a “total body exercise.”
• Third, it”locks you in” so there’s really no chance of losingcore stability. In other words, you maintain a straight line from your shoulders to ankles while you perform push-ups. Now yourhips won’t begin to sag as the set ensues, which spares the posterior elements of the lumbar spine.

However, there’s one drawback of performing the PPT push-ups.

Pelvic positioning is linked to lumbar and thoracic spine positioning. Specifically, a PPT is associated with increased thoracic kyphosis. Performing push-ups with a hyperkyphotic curve will affect scapulohumeral rhythm and could increase the risk of impingement and rotator cuff issues. While this might not cause any problems initially, it might present problems down the road.
Now, it is important to take a step back and note that you don’t need a posterior pelvic tilt in your push-ups; what you need is to avoid anterior pelvic tilt push-ups. If you tend to produce an anterior pelvic tilt when you do push-ups, then encouraging PPT as you work on improving your push-ups is a great approach, but once you’re able to maintain a neutral pelvic alignment, you may wish to eliminate the posterior tilt focus. For this reason, our corrections and progressions will be shown using a PPT.

Sex Differences: Men versus Women

Three different factors could explain why women struggle more with push-ups than men.
First, strength levels are different between men and women. When measured as a percentage of lean body mass, the differences are dramatically reduced, especially in the lower body. But upper body strength in men is greater than in women, and because upper body strength is a big part of a push-up (requiring moving around 66% of body weight), it’s not a simple task for beginners, especially beginner women.
Second, most women possess a higher proportion of lower body muscle mass relative to upper body muscle mass compared to men. If you want to see how this feels, put yourself in a plank position and have someone place some weight above your chest and see how much of an added challenge that is. Then try this again but have the weight placed above your pelvis. Your core will need to work much more to support the weight at your pelvis than at the chest. For this reason women could find the push-ups more challenging for the core.
Third, push-ups are considered the gold standard for strength in young males. Teenage boys likely attempt far more push-ups than teenage females. The “manliness” factor of push-ups provides an incentive for males to try harder and master the push-up.

The Path to Push-ups Proficiency

There are several corrections that can be implemented to assist with push-up performance.

• No matter which type of push-up you’re performing, always set up in the “arrow formation.” Basically, this means that if you took a snapshot from the aerial view the push-ups position would look like an arrow, not the letter T. This position is easier on the shoulder joint and leads to higher EMG activation of the pecs and triceps.
• Only perform variations that allow you to keep your core stable and prevent excessive anterior pelvic tilt and lumbar extension. In other words, regress the exercise to a variation you can do correctly and progress from there.
• If you tend to produce an anterior pelvic tilt (APT) during your planks or push-ups, then focus on a posterior pelvic tilt.
• Only perform variations that allow you to use a full range of motion. In other words, regress the exercise to a variation that you can do correctly and progress from there.
• Perform corrective exercises and move up gradually through the progressions.

Push-ups Progressions

Despite the complex tone of this article, performing a push-up so perfect that it will make even the most anal retentive exercise physiologist’s heart skip a beat is a breeze.
From the list of push-up progressions below, find the one that you can do with proper form and do a set two-three times per day. Once you can complete a set of 10 with good form, move to the next progression.

Once you can do singles, progress to multiple repetitions of full push-ups. Success!

Corrective Exercises to Assist in Proper Push-ups Performance

Progress not happening fast enough? Then do a couple of sets of these exercises two-three times per week and you’ll accelerate your push-ups performance progress.

Advanced Push-up Variations

Once you get the hang of proper push-up form you might find yourself quite smitten with the exercise. You’ll want it more, multiple times a day, different ways, different positions, in airplane lavatories after the captain turns off the seatbelt sign. You get the picture.
Fortunately there are many advanced progression options once quality regular push-ups have been achieved, starting with feet elevated push-ups, and moving to:

• One-foot push-ups
• One-arm push-ups
• Diamond push-ups
• Between bench increased range push-ups
• Hindu push-ups (Judo push-ups)
• Dive-bomber push-ups
• Push-ups with rotation (T-push-ups)
• Spiderman push-ups
• Push-ups with hip extension
• Tick tock push-ups
• Corkscrew push-ups
• Suspended push-ups (using TRX, blast straps, or rings)
• Weighted plate push-ups
• Weighted vest push-ups
• Weighted chain push-ups

• Band resisted push-ups
• Clapping push-ups
• Kneeling clapping push-ups
• Bosu ball or stability ball push-ups
• Stability ball push-ups with two balls
• Alternating stability ball push-ups (walkovers)
• Side-to-side push-ups
• Triangle push-ups
• Side-tap push-ups
• Push-up iso-holds
• One-arm one-leg push-ups
• Alligator push-ups
• Grasshopper push-ups (soccer push-ups)
• Pike push-ups
• Push-backs
• Planche push-ups

Push-up Variations for Ballers

Here are some good video demonstrations for push-up variations:
These two are from Roger Lawson.

These two are from Martin Rooney.

Think You’re Too Strong for Push-ups? Think Again!

Nobody can ever be too strong for push-ups variations. Here’s Ben Bruno doing suspended push-ups with 185 lbs. of extra resistance; more than his own bodyweight!

Here’s Cem Eren doing explosive plyometric push-ups; you’ll see that he can spin 180 degrees while doing them!

And this is just insane. It’s some freak doing clapping planche push-ups, as if regular planche push-ups weren’t hard enough!

Conclusion

There are literally hundreds of exercises you can do in the gym to build a healthier, stronger body, but sometimes the basics are the best. Of course, we don’t expect you to dump your current strength training routine in favor of just performing push-up variations while you watch the dozen hospital shows you TiVo’d, but we do think it’s time to give the much-maligned push-up a second look.
At the very least, you should’ve picked up some cool factoids that will make you look really smart in front of your meathead friends. Just don’t let Mr. Hartmann catch you looking like a caterpillar when you do push-ups!

Wikio

Wikio

Rule Number One: Do What Works

by Bret Contreras – 12/21/2010

These Are the Facts:

1. There is no “best training program” for everyone.
2. What works great for others in the gym may work terribly for you. Likewise, what has worked very well for you may not do jack for someone else.
3. You must develop the confidence to abandon the training programs that don’t pan out. Give different programs a fair shot, yes, but ditch the methods that don’t produce results.
4. The only way to find your optimal program and achieve astonishing results is to stop copying routines and start acting like a scientist in order to discover your own “best” program.
5. Tinker with the variables (split, exercise selection, frequency, volume, intensity, periodization, etc.), and gain insight into how your body responds.

Look to Science! (Or Just Look Around Your Gym)

A new study by Timmons published in the Journal of Applied Physiology suggests that genetics might play a large role when it comes to training response. This is an exciting new area of research that warrants more attention, especially as it pertains to hypertrophy.
But if you’re not the science-type, just stand in the middle of the gym and do a panoramic 360 degrees. You’ll see jacked freaks training right next to guys who look like they’ve never touched a dumbbell in their lives… yet both types are lifting hard. Steroid use aside, some guys respond like crazy just looking at a barbell while others barely grow even though they’re doing “all the right things.”
The fact is, there are numerous differences that exist genetically, biomechanically, and physiologically between individuals. But don’t get discouraged if you don’t find yourself in the freak crowd. Every lifter can get stronger, get bigger, and get leaner with sound training methods, but he must learn to think for himself and figure out what works for his body.
To illustrate, here are five methods I had to abandon because they just didn’t work for me, even though they’ve worked great for others.

Abandoned Method #1: High-Volume Body Part Splits (hitting each muscle group once per week)

Yes, I know. Some people thrive with this method, including most professional bodybuilders. But the majority of lifters do not progress optimally from this methodology!
For me, training a lift or muscle group once per week results in a quick spike in strength that lasts a couple of days (stimulation), followed by a plateau that lasts a couple of days (retainment), followed by linear degradation in strength (detraining). By the time the next week rolls around, I’m weaker than the previous session.
I can’t progress on any lift by only training it once per week. I need to program more frequency into my routines.
My old workout partner? He was the opposite. After years of experimenting with all types of routines, we realized that he grows best using a typical high-volume, body part split where he hammers a muscle group once per week.
After following high-volume, body part split training for far too long, I tried HIT or High Intensity Training. I was blown away by how well it worked for me. It was the “best” program for me… at that time.
Here’s a quick HIT-style plan that worked very well for me in the past. If you find yourself not responding anymore to the high-volume splits, give this one a shot:

Monday

Back squat 1 x 20
Romanian deadlift 3 x 10
Bench press 3 x 5
Bent over row 3 x 6
Military press 3 x 5
Barbell curl 2 x 10

Thursday

Back squat 3 x 5
Rack pull 3 x 10
Walking lunge 1 x 20
Bench press 3 x 3
Chin up 3 x 3
Dip 3 x 5

Every lifter should experiment with low-volume, infrequent training to see just how low they can go in volume and frequency and still keep their strength and size. Most people would be very surprised by the results of a well-planned, two day per week, full-body workout.

Abandoned Method #2: Westside

Don’t get your squat suit in a bunch. When I first learned of the Westside Method I was pumped! This was the answer to all my struggles.
I was slow off the floor and out of the hole, so I needed speed. If I utilized the box squat and good morning I could train these lifts more frequently because they weren’t quite as taxing on the CNS as regular squats and deadlifts.
And if I really focused on arching my back with the lighter loads used in the Dynamic Effort method and the box squat and good morning, it would resolve my tendency to lean forward in the squat and round my back in the deadlift.
Oh, and my bench lockout was lousy, too. Board presses were going to fix that! Right?
Wrong! After twelve weeks of box squatting I went from a 275-pound max to a 405 max on the box squat. I went from 225 to 405 in the sumo stance, arched-back good morning. I was jacked! My speed was up from the dynamic effort method and my board presses were up too.
Boy, was I in for a rude awakening.
When I tested my free squat, deadlift, and bench press, I found that my strength on all three lifts had notimproved. I could box squat more than I could free squat and my deadlift actually decreased in strength. This is when I realized that my programs require specificity.
I know of many individuals whose deadlift goes up from all sorts of things — shrugs, bent over rows, good mornings, Zercher squats, barbell hack squats, etc. My deadlift responds best to actual deadlifts.

Abandoned Method #3: Off-Weeks and Deloading

I used to think taking a week off was good for the joints, plus it allowed my body to supercompensate in strength. But every time I returned to lifting after taking a week off, I was weaker and I’d get absolutely crippled after coming back. Weak and sore is no way to go through life!
When I learned about the concepts of deloading and fluctuating training stress, I thought this was the answer: a happy medium, just enough to stimulate the muscles while allowing the body to heal, ramp up in anabolic hormones, and rejuvenate itself.
Much to my surprise, that never worked for me either! Deloading made me weaker and didn’t allow me to hold onto my strength.
Plenty of lifters thrive off of a rest week or a week of deloading. Most powerlifters peak this way. However, this just doesn’t work for me. If I entered a powerlifting meet I’d probably deadlift heavy three days prior to the meet. That’s just how my body works.
Now, let’s remember the premise here: Some things will work for you while other things will not. This isn’t an anti-deloading manifesto. Try it. Evaluate it. Make your own decision. Don’t cling to the methodology just because your favorite strength coach likes it. You decide.

Abandoned Method #4: Assistance Lifts

Glute-ham raises work the hell out of my hamstrings and they might help me run faster, but they don’t increase my squat or deadlift. Ab wheel rollouts cripple my abs, but they don’t make me stronger at the big lifts. Single-leg work doesn’t transfer well to my powerlifting total, nor does core stability work.
Clearly these lifts aren’t my “weak links.” There are tons of great exercises that don’t seem to help build my big lifts; however, many probably contribute to hypertrophy and athleticism.

Abandoned Method #5: Pre-Determined Periodization

Periodization may be the greatest trick the devil ever pulled.
Show me a lifter who did well with strict pre-planned periodization and I’ll show you a fool who could’ve seen even better results had he known had to autoregulate.
Don’t get me wrong, periodization in general is much better than just going to the gym without a plan, purpose, or system. However, a lifter with a superior knowledge of tweaking the workout based on biofeedback will trump the average lifter in terms of gains.
A lifter who knows how to autoregulate will modify the workout based on his or her intuition and interpretation of “clues” that the body gives off. Since it’s impossible to predict a lifter’s particular physiology on any given day, as physiologic levels are affected by factors such as sleep, stress, diet, and environment, it’s very practical to adjust the workout intuitively. “Cybernetic periodization” was the term Mel Siff used in  Supertraining,
All great lifters have mastered the ability to listen to their body and adjust the workout accordingly.

Do What Works… Until It Doesn’t Work

What works best one year might not work best the following year. Needs morph over time.
By experimenting with different exercises and program variables such as frequency, volume, and intensity, you can ride the wave and experience much greater results than the guy who sticks to their favorite guru’s cookie-cutter recipe of the month.

Wikio

Wikio

The 10 Manliest Exercises

by Bret Contreras

Bret Contreras has no family, no friends—not even a pet goldfish. There’s just no time, because all he wants to do is figure out which exercises give you the most bang for your buck. Okay, we’re exaggerating. He has an imaginary friend named Stuey. But we’re not kidding about the other part. He simply wants to know which exercises build the most muscle. He’s even spent countless hour with electrodes attached to his muscles in an attempt to figure out which movements spur the most electrical activity, so when he lists the 10 Manliest Exercises, you’d best pay attention.

I’ve spent a lot of time in commercial gyms over the years. I can say with absolute certainty that 99% of what I’ve seen was unimpressive. Most people simply don’t train hard and don’t perform the best exercises.
However, there have been rare times where I waltzed into the gym to find some throwback from the caveman era performing a challenging exercise with a ton of weight and intensity. I’ve found myself on several occasions saying to my workout partner, “That dude is a serious badass!”
Just how does one go about getting labeled a badass in the strength training world? Obviously you have to get strong. No matter how cool the exercise looks, nobody gives a shit if you’re snatching 65 lbs.
You also need to have good form. This usually comes from good core stability induced from heavy lifting with good form over the years. Even if you use a ton of weight, nobody cares if you perform a wobbly, energy-leaking squat that doesn’t resemble anything athletic. Finally, you need to be performing badass exercises. Without further ado, here are the ten manliest exercises:

1. Chain Dips

Branch Warren popularized chain dips. He’d drape a couple pairs of heavy chains over his shoulders and start busting out sets of high rep dips. It looks and feels really cool to have chains draped around your body, sort of like Mr. T. This exercise works a ton of neck extensor musculature while also hammering the pecs, front delts, and triceps.

2. Zercher Squats

You don’t hear much about the Zercher squat these days. Most people hate doing them because they hurt like hell. Holding a heavy barbell in the crux of your arms is one of the most painful things you’ll ever do. However, the placement of the barbell increases the load on the core and glute musculature, in addition to hitting the quads, hams, and calves, which makes it an extremely effective exercise. So try to deal with the pain; eventually your body gets used to it.

3. Clean and Press

I don’t care what anyone says, if you can bust out a 225 lb clean and press, then you are pretty badass. That’s just all there is to it. This exercise works the hell out of the traps, delts, and triceps. Get to 315 lbs and you’ve now reached Lattimer status from the 1993 movie, The Program.

4. T-Bar Row Strip Sets

I once saw some beasts in the gym doing these and was enamored. They started off with six 45-lb plates and did five reps. A partner would strip a plate off and the lifter would get five more reps. This would continue until there was only one plate left on the bar, so the lifter would execute a total of 30 reps. This exercise works the lats, scapulae retractors, and biceps, as well as working the entire posterior chain isometrically. Two words: freaking brutal!

5. 20-Rep Breathing Squats

One set of squats can’t be that bad, right? Wrong! If you don’t know about 20-rep breathing squats, then read up on them as these bad-boys have been around forever. They might just be the hardest single exercise known to man. You take your 10RM and get 20 reps by “resting” in the top position and taking deep breaths. A set can last anywhere from three to ten minutes. If your quad growth has been stagnant for a while, focus on these for around six weeks and you won’t be disappointed.  

6. Parking Lot Lunges

Ronnie Coleman popularized these years ago when he’d walk outside Metroflex gym and start lunging up and down the parking lot with 185 lbs on his back in the blazing Texas heat. The parking lot lunge will hammer your quads and glutes. To Ronnie, this “ain’t nuttin’ but a peanut.”

7. Kroc Rows

Matt Kroczaleski popularized these explosive high-rep one-arm rows with the heaviest dumbbells your gym carries. Essentially, they’re heavy, high rep, one-arm rows with a little bit of English. In Kroc’s words, they’re Òwhatever dumbbell you think you can’t do for one rep x 50.Ó
He credits these for packing on slabs of lat mass and increasing his deadlift strength. In addition to working the lats, scapulae retractors, and biceps, Kroc rows work a ton of core as well. If you do them right, one set is all you need!

8. Deadlifts

If you’ve seen video clips of Konstantin Konstantinovs busting out various types of deadlifts, then you understand how badass deadlifts can be once you get strong. Many would argue that the deadlift is the most functional exercise of all, as it annihilates the entire posterior chain in addition to working the quads too. Even the name “deadlift” reeks of manliness.

9. Heavy Yolk or Farmer’s Walks

You don’t see many people doing yolk walks and farmer’s walks these days because most gyms don’t carry the implements. Even if they did, there usually isn’t any room to do them anyway. However, if you have a garage gym or belong to a rare gym that allows you to perform heavy walks, consider yourself lucky.
These exercises are unbelievable total body strengtheners. In fact, spinal researcher Stuart McGill found evidence that the super yolk walk might just be the most challenging exercise for the spine due to the extreme load of the implement and the core muscle contractions required to stabilize the spine and hips. You don’t need a yolk to do a yolk walk; a barbell works just fine, and heavy dumbbells or a hex bar can be used for farmer’s walks.

10. Bench Press

There’s no reason to hate on the bench press. It’s the most popular exercise in the world because every guy wants a nice set of pecs. But powerlifters realized long ago that if you bench press in a certain manner, it’s a total-body exercise. They figured out how to use their lats and legs in addition to their triceps, shoulders, and pecs in order to maximize the weight they could press.
Learn how to bench like a powerlifter and keep a strong low back arch, pull the bar down lower on your chest, and get some good leg drive. Everybody is impressed with a strong ass bench press.

In all honesty, this list could go on and on and on, as there are plenty of manly exercises. Any variation of the lifts you find in Olympic weightlifting, powerlifting, and strongman training is pretty damn manly. There are plenty of badass bodyweight exercises you can do as well…for instance the muscle up and pistol.
Honorable mentions go to the cambered bar good morning and weighted chin up. And it’s always fun swinging sledgehammers and pushing trucks around. When you’re super strong, everything looks manly…a Turkish get up, a one-arm snatch, a barbell curl, and even an explosive landmine.
The point of this article is to illustrate that the manliest exercises are performed with heavy free weights and are usually performed on your feet. If all your training is done on machines, while lying down, or with pink dumbbells, then you probably aren’t getting the most out of your routine. In the words of King Ronnie: “Everybody wanna be a bodybuilder, but nobody wanna lift no heavy ass weight!”

Bret Contreras received his master’s degree from Arizona State University and his Certified Strength and Conditioning Certificate from the National Strength and Conditioning Association. Bret trains himself and others out of his kickass garage gym and has a popular blog here. Check it out!

Take that stupid gold chain off you neck and use something like this.

Konstantin and deadlifts equal manliness.

T-bar rows, old school.

© 1998 — 2010 Testosterone, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Wikio

Wikio

Inside the Muscles: Best Chest and Triceps Exercises

by Bret Contreras

Every guy has his own theory about which exercises are the best and which exercises suck. Whether we’re analyzing the biomechanics of an exercise (not very likely), “feeling the burn” (more likely), or simply doing a ton of sets and seeing how sore we get over the next few days (ding, ding, ding, we have a winner!), we all think we know the best movements to grow our muscles.

But do we really?

Bret Contreras wants to take you inside your muscles—without the freak accident that usually precedes such gross anatomy lessons—using EMG, a tool that measures how much muscle activity is going on with every movement you do.

After testing 20 different chest and triceps exercises, he’s here to reveal the best of the best.

— NG

Editors Note: If you haven’t yet read Inside the Muscles: Best Shoulders and Trap Exercises you may want to give it a quick look as it’ll clear up any questions you may have regarding electromyography (EMG) and the experiments.

First, I apologize if I left out one of your favorite exercises. Don’t take it personally. I performed these experiments in my garage, and while I have one of the baddest garage gyms in Arizona, I don’t have a lot of machines. So you pec-deck folks can drop me some hate mail.
I’m also sorry I couldn’t test more individuals. These experiments are very labor-intensive; in order to measure every exercise on every muscle part using a variety of subjects would be a project of colossal proportions. (And one I’d need a few thousand dollars and a keg of Guinness to perform.) Just remember this: people are different, but  not that different. What’s true for me is probably true for you.
Finally, I’m not going to make any judgments regarding the safety of any exercise. I realize that certain exercises pose greater risks to the joints than others, but every guy has the right to train however the hell he chooses. As lifters, we can choose to assume a lot of risk or little risk since we’re the owners of our bodies.
Oh, one more thing: good form, a natural tempo, and a full range of motion were always used in these experiments.
Now that the pre-flight safety announcement list of warnings is over, let’s get to it. Are you ready to build some huge pecs and horseshoe triceps?

What You’ve Been Waiting For! The Exercises.

Since this is a bodybuilding experiment, I never used a weight that was too heavy to perform at least five repetitions. The mean number is on top and the peak number is on bottom. (If you don’t know what I’m talking about, please read “What Are Mean and Peak Activation?“)

Exercise	Upper Pec	Mid Pec	Lower Pec	Tri Long Head
135 lb Bench Press	53.8 111.0	69.5 157.0	42.0 82.7	14.3 51.2
225 lb Bench Press	125.0 230.0	181.0 408.0	116.0 347.0	47.8 109.0
275 lb Bench Press	109.0 198.0	177.0 288.0	130.0 345.0	73.5 153.0
135 lb Incline Press	87.1 157.0	68.3 197.0	25.3 60.2	18.9 42.7
225 lb Incline Press	135.0 222.0	133.0 374.0	69.4 249.0	48.7 84.0
245 lb Incline Press	130.0 261.0	156.0 422.0	89.4 337.0	55.8 109.0
100 lb DB Bench Press	122.0 192.0	204.0 451.0	88.1 252.0	43.7 128.0
90 lb DB Incline Press	128.0 310.0	124.0 286.0	59.0 172.0	35.5 98.9
BW Dip	73.7 164.0	105.0 234.0	124.0 266.0	73.9 150.0
115 lb Dip	140.0 232.0	192.0 332.0	214.0 418.0	124.0 217.0
225 lb Close Grip Press	106.0 211.0	137.0 229.0	77.5 217.0	52.6 107.0
225 lb Wide Grip Guillotine Press	114.0 302.0	176.0 511.0	169.0 502.0	61.9 142.0
225 lb Floor Press	106.0 197.0	148.0 248.0	121.0 255.0	52.2 112.0
275 lb Floor Press	132.0 265.0	197.0 356.0	154.0 347.0	64.8 170.0
50 lb Fly	116.0 226.0	165.0 354.0	150.0 387.0	13.2 26.1
60 lb Fly	133.0 231.0	195.0 493.0	160.0 450.0	14.9 31.3
50 lb Incline Fly	125.0 249.0	135.0 344.0	77.3 257.0	12.6 20.0
100 lb High Pulley Crossover	107.0 201.0	168.0 311.0	153.0 397.0	9.6 19.1
100 lb Mid Pulley Crossover	154.0 252.0	154.0 271.0	124.0 251.0	11.5 23.1
100 lb Low Pulley Crossover	135.0 233.0	78.6 249.0	36.9 74.8	20.2 77.2
BW Push Up	109.0 204.0	124.0 252.0	101.0 194.0	24.0 38.7
BW CG Push Up	103.0 188.0	118.0 188.0	70.7 119.0	22.9 43.2
BW Elevated Push Up	96.6 156.0	102.0 232.0	52.7 167.0	24.0 46.6
BW Blast Strap Push Up	113.0 206.0	166.0 363.0	177.0 352.0	35.3 107.0
Purple Band Push Up	115.0 168.0	125.0 294.0	113.0 217.0	51.8 78.7
Green Band Push Up	151.0 239.0	162.0 268.0	121.0 238.0	59.3 125.0
100 lb DB Pullover	55.7 119.0	88.6 186.0	53.8 164.0	66.9 153.0
JC Band Press	143.0 272.0	45.7 91.0	53.0 127.0	21.0 52.6
95 lb Skull Crusher	45.6 89.5	21.5 48.6	70.7 118.0	116.0 172.0
120 lb Rope Extension	6.9 14.9	5.4 21.9	36.1 82.5	135.0 276.0
140 lb Cable Extension	9.3 21.3	9.3 18.7	78.2 172.0	132.0 255.0
Purple Band Extension	11.4 27.4	10.7 19.5	69.4 174.0	120.0 221.0
140 lb Cable Overhead Extension	19.4 41.0	19.2 130.0	40.6 126.0	109.0 206.0

The Winners

Based on this experiment, here are the top three exercises in terms of mean and peak activity for each muscle part:

Upper Pec

Mean   Mid Pulley Crossover, Band Push Up, JC Band Press
Peak    DB Incline Press, Guillotine Press, JC Band Press

Mid Pec

Mean   DB Bench Press, Floor Press, Fly
Peak    Guillotine Press, DB Bench Press, Fly

Lower Pec

Mean   Weighted Dip, Blast Strap Push Up, Guillotine Press
Peak    Guillotine Press, Fly, Weighted Dip

Medial Triceps

Mean   Rope Extension, Cable Extension, Weighted Dip
Peak    Rope Extension, Cable Extension, Band Extension

Confirmations

It’s important to know that I used a powerlifting-style bench press: arched low back, good leg drive, arms at a 45-degree angle, slightly narrower grip, bar lowered to the lower chest. The form used for the guillotine press was straight from late Iron Guru Vince Gironda: feet on the bench, no arch, elbows flared out, wider grip, bar lowered to the neck. It’s no surprise the guillotine press works much more pec than the bench press.
Looking at the entire pecs, we find much variety in movements. This jives with the old bodybuilder theory that the best workout should hit muscles from a lot of angles with different forms of resistance. We’ve always known the pecs respond to a good stretch, as shortened ranges of motion rarely build a nice chest.
I’ve long-suspected that pec isolation movements can rival compound movements in terms of pec activity. This study confirms that suspicion. Powerlifting gurus like Louie Simmons and Dave Tate have always discussed the importance of triceps specialization for a strong bench. This experiment lends support to their recommendations.

Surprises

Although I knew that the guillotine press worked much more pec than a bench press, I was surprised to find that a guillotine press with 225 pounds worked more pec than a bench press with 275 pounds! I found it very surprising that the floor press and band push up squeaked their way into the winner’s circle, as they’re the only movements in the entire winner’s group that do not move the pecs into a stretch position.
Although I’ve always felt the JC band press worked a ton of pec (the bands typically place the most stress in the contracted position), I didn’t expect it to work as much pec as it did. I can walk out really far with the JC bands and get a ton of tension in the movement, and the increased stabilization efforts may focus more tension on the pecs and less on the triceps. I was surprised that the barbell incline press and incline fly didn’t make it into the winner’s circle, especially for upper pec activity.
The pullover always gets the long head of my triceps very sore, so I was wondering if it would top the charts in muscle activity. But activation does not always equate to soreness, as stretch position exercises produce more soreness while contracted position exercises produce more of a pump.
I was actually very surprised at how much better triceps isolation exercises seem to work the triceps in comparison to compound movements. However, the body likes to grow proportionately; you rarely see a guy with huge arms and a puny torso, so don’t neglect compound movements for triceps development.

What If?

During experiments like these, one is often left with much curiosity. What if I would have gone heavier on the guillotine press? I could have gone much heavier, as 225 is a relatively light weight for me on that exercise. The same goes for dumbbell bench press—I could have gone heavier.
How would the pec deck have faired? What if I would have placed the electrodes on the inner and outer pecs? Would the activity be the same, or can we isolate those areas as well? (Doubtful.)
What if I would have performed wide-grip weighted dips? What if I would have worn a weighted vest during blast strap push-ups? What if I would have measured the activation in the lateral head of the triceps? Would it have matched the activity in the long head of the triceps, or do they function much differently? What if Miley Cyrus was 18? Would she date a musclehead from Arizona?
Clearly more research is needed, as it’s impossible to anticipate everything prior to an experiment, no matter how prepared and organized you seem.

The Best Damn Pec and Triceps Workout

Based on the results of this experiment, I bet the following would be one kick-ass workout that’d target the upper, mid, and lower pecs as well as the triceps. Enjoy!

Guillotine Press or Dumbbell Bench Press

Dumbbell Incline Press or Mid-Pulley Crossover

Weighted Dip or Fly

Rope Extension or Cable Extension

The dumbbell bench press had more muscle activation than the traditional barbell bench press.
The Guillotine Press
Recommended: Weighted dips. Not Recommended: Short-shorts.

Screw the skull-crusher. Do rope extensions to really hit the triceps.

About Bret Contreras

Bret Contreras received his master’s degree from Arizona State University and his Certified Strength and Conditioning Specialist certification from the National Strength and Conditioning Association. Bret invites you to follow or join him on his blog. You can download his e-book here.

© 1998 — 2010 Testosterone, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Wikio

Wikio