You may have a point because I have spoken to many people on this site and most of there times are 11.5+, so what does that tell you - yet so many people try and act like experts.
since times are all that matters, what are you guys?
SQUATS:
Escamilla RF Knee biomechanics of the dynamic squat exercise Med Sci
Sports Exerc 2001 Jan; 33(1):127-41
Palmitier RA, An KN, Scott SG, Chao EY. Related Articles, Links
Kinetic chain exercise in knee rehabilitation.Sports Med. 1991 Jun;11(6):402-13. Review.
PMID: 1925185 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
BANDS:
Effects of Elastic Bands on Force and Power Characteristics During the Back Squat Exercise
Brian J. Wallace
Musculoskeletal Research Center, Department of Exercise and Sport Science, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, La Crosse, Wisconsin 54601;
Jason B. Winchester
Department of Kinesiology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70803;
Michael R. McGuigan
School of Exercise, Biomedical and Health Sciences, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, Western Australia, Australia
ABSTRACT
Wallace, B.J., J.B. Winchester, and M.R. McGuigan. Effects of elastic bands on force and power characteristics during the back squat exercise. J. Strength Cond. Res. 20(2):268–272. 2006.—Athletes commonly use elastic bands as a training method to increase strength and performance. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of elastic bands on peak force (PF), peak power (PP), and peak rate of force development (RFD) during the back-squat exercise (BSE). Ten recreationally resistance-trained subjects (4 women, 6 men, mean age 21.3 ± 1.5 years) were tested for their 1 repetition maximum (1RM) in the BSE (mean 117.6 ± 48.2 kg) on a Smith machine. Testing was performed on 2 separate days, with 2 sets of 3 repetitions being performed for each condition. Testing was conducted at 60% and 85% of 1RM with and without using elastic bands. In addition, 2 elastic band loading conditions were tested (B1 and B2) at each of the 2 resistances. No bands (NB) represents where all of the resistance was acquired from free-weights. B1 represents where approximately 80% of the resistance was provided by free-weights, and approximately 20% was provided by bands. B2 represents where approximately 65% of the resistance was provided by free-weights, and approximately 35% was provided from bands. The subjects completed the BSE under each condition, whereas PF, PP, and RFD was recorded using a force platform. There was a significant (p < 0.05) increase in PF between NB-85 and B2-85 of 16%. Between B1-85 and B2-85, PF was increased significantly by 5% (p < 0.05). There was a significant (p < 0.05) increase in PP between NB-85 and B2-85 of 24%. No significant differences were observed in RFD during the 85% conditions or for any of the measured variables during the 60% conditions (p < 0.05). The results suggest that the use of elastic bands in conjunction with free weights can significantly increase PF and PP during the BSE over free-weight resistance alone under certain loading conditions. The greatest differences are observed during the higher loading conditions, with the B1-85 condition appearing to be optimal for athletic performance of the ones we tested. The strength training professional could use variable resistance training (VRT) to increase PF and PP more than the traditional BSE can. VRT could also be used to train these 2 performance characteristics together, which might be especially useful in season, when weight-room training volume can sometimes be limited
Im a NObody from a small division three school in Wisconsin - so please don’t pay me any attention.
im trying to debate what has been read and exp. but apparently that is all invalid because ive never been timed in 100m
lol. Amen my friend, amen!
the point of that exercise was 2 prove that it’s the weight which put pressure on the knees and not so much the angle of squat. with the same max weight 4 all three angles, atg will apply the most pressure, so much that the atempt will fail. i agree if the weights r low enough u will remain injury free bt ur aim in the squat is 2 increase maximum force production and this can and will b achieved better with the higher heavier lifts.
As for ben, you are misinformed, 11.5 with no training and before the start of physical maturity. 10.79 (i believe the next year?), all the way up to 10.25 at 19, making all of the grand prix finals he entered. Thats not talent?
back to the oly’s, theres no reactive factor (big thing in sprinting), no time factor (again big thing in sprinting), so again, i will continue to disagree with you that ANY movement in the weight room is specific to sprinting either by movement, speed of movement, etc… ALTHOUGH i will only concede that the oly’s are “more specific” to sprinting in that they use ~90% of the body MU’s when performing the movement, making it not far off from sprinting. So, as a general overal stimulus for organism strength, I WOULD agree that it is “more specific”, but not because “there is triple extension and you have to move the weight fast”.
it all depends how u look at it cos everything a sprinter does in training he does 2 get a certain event relavent adaption from. if spicifity did’nt matter then the sprinter might as well do a strength endurance programe or just stick 2 a hypertrophy programe and would still get the same results cause they r still conditioning the athlete.
im saying that there is no specific movement, i made no mention of breadth or intensity
how many of the test subjects were sprinters?
i’m not disputing that the bands make u stronger, what i am saying is that that kind of strength adaption is not relevant 2 sprinting!!!
again it depends how u look at it cos there is spicifity 2 a point. reactivity and time constraints r catered 4 with plyos, every quality of a sprinter is trained and improved with the appropiate specific training stimulus
arnie why don’t you post a sample week for us of your training and the level of your athletes? I want to see how you implement these ideas.
Where’s your research? As I stated previously, to me your argument is null and void until you provide it. If you want to talk about research, cite it please. If you want to talk coaches, list their names. Enough with the half-truths and exagerrated claims. You’ve clogged enough space on this forum with all of that nonsense. Establish your argument. I’ll even accept a sample phase of your training plans as Davan recommended you do. But no more nonsense.
You may have a point because I have spoken to many people on this site and most of there times are 11.5+, so what does that tell you - yet so many people try and act like experts.
So true, most of the time what does it turn into? Two or more people running to google to type in pubmed to see what kind of article best supports their side of the story. Or better yet find me a study, well hell a lot of this stuff has not been properly studied at all. The best is well this worked for me, well everyone is different, and just cause something works for one person doesnt mean it works for everyone. Over and over every thread, damnit everyone just try to help everyone else dont bicker or i know more than you or no you cant be right this worked for me, HELP this isnt an i can go to google so i am right website, just help each other out for the love of god.
Damn, did you eat too many chicken noodles or what?
I want to address this because my most recent posts are not the person that I am (as anyone who has read my posts here should be able to attest; for the most part at least). It just urks me tremendously when certain individuals go from thread to thread posting opinions that cannot be verified (through research, education, or experience) and seem to be based on empty theories. I am more likely to quote coaches than research, but when individuals (arnie365) post about research this, elite coach that, I feel obligated to ask for the truth to separate fact from fiction. Anyone who has read this thread or the other thread (on white/black sprinters I believe) realizes that there are a lot of bogus claims being thrown around and I have yet to see any backing scientifically. I’m not a research guy, or an elite coach lover, but again, when someone starts throwing out claims, I think it’s irresponsible to let such behavior continue. I was told by one hell of a strength coach once, that those that have the ability to help have a responsibility to. I thought I was, but for my part in taking this thread in a negative direction, I’ll stop with this post. But I am not going to apologize for standing up to bogus claims, especially when the person making those claims has been very disrespectful to knowledgeable and valuable contributors to the site (martn76, nikoluski, etc.).
buddy, if my opinions can not b verified y then r they printed in the IAAF journals and in other track related litrature, y do top coaches from around the world from countries like belgium, italy, south africa, usa, cuba and the uk agree with me. if u know anything more that just about the strength department of track u will know who highly respected ppl like c.bosco and c.vittori r.
b4 u take it upon urself like martn76, nikoluski etc 2 weed out all the ppl that have a different piont of veiw and challenge ur narrow minded approach which yelds no worth while results, learn 2 do it in a mature non attacking and educative manner. like that ppl can c that there r 2 sides 2 the coin, the right side and wrong side and can make up thier own minds what the truth is.
as u said in ur other post ur aim is 2 get me of this forum so i can post everything from the research 2 training programes and national record setting results and u still will try and find a reason 2 disagree thus leaving me at the same point i am now so i just leave my word, u can use(my advise) it or lose(the race) it, the choice is urse.
i think that says it well, i think everyone can learn better if we discuss the subjects like mature adults and allow different points of veiws 2 help us understand how training works.
OK lets get back on track here …
3 Pages later and I still have seen no proof, research papers or otherwise, that full squats are bad for the knee joint.
You never will my friend…
Non-reason oriented people (no names) just cannot avoid destroying a thread before it can reach an acceptable conclusion.
These forums are 5 years and thousands of posts from qualifiied professionals who cannot decide if the sky is blue.
The reason is refusal to use their own minds…“where’s your research, who said so, what records have you got and of course only CF can be so sure of himself”!
They will be here asking the same dumb questions all through their careers until what I (and others) are succeeding with is published in the Journals.
I’ve been away for 6 months and i’m now light years ahead of where I was it’s sad so many haven’t budged.
SeanJos