i agree because a stimulus to great will always result in a maladaption but that really has nothing to do with my argument and there are different stimuli the stimuli produced by lifting with a belt is different from that of one without. safety is always an issue but like as i said before weight doesnt hurt people people hurt people. kinda like guns to kill people. a person should be able to handle loads that are within their ability without fear of injury if program organization is sound and they are taught properly. dont get me wrong there are alot of factors to consider but that in no way insinuates that lifting heavy weights will become a detremental practice.
i agree with damn near everything in that quote but again your not considering the neuological implications. it is plausible that a belt can actually strengthen the abs but does it strengthen all the involved muscle groups to the same degree the answer to that is no. if you focus soely on muscles the transfer to athletics will be minimal. focus on the entire picture the movement and your transfer will be great. im not debating that you can squat more with a belt or that a belt helps support the lower back during heavy lifts only i am suggesting that perhaps our concern should be simply squating more but squatting properly and should we be supporting the lower back instead of allowing it to be trained/stressed in its natural state.
Haha, James I actually I agree with you on this one, I was just trying to make a middle ground for both sides, but I definately I agree with what your saying.
But I am a little confused on the intermuscular coordination, probably just because I have no background in this type of stuff. But why cant the intermuscular coordination be developed on the track to get the benefit out of the squat?
Also I read a study I forget exactly where it was, but it was talking more about cyclists and how the speed gains they were making in the weightroom were from hypertrophy not strength gains, because the strength gains had little carry over to the speed they were cycling at. I dobt believe this would be true in track, so basically I’m just looking for someone to explain to me why it isnt true because once again I dont have a background in this.
So basically I am asking could you just train hypertrophy in the weightroom and attempt to transfer the extra muscle to faster movements when you get on the track, without worrying about strength gains? And if not why not?
There seemsto be some misunderstanding about the squat story of the squat. The athlete with the higher squat was Stan Floyd. He spoke to me at length about his training background but was never part of my group. He had a background in powerlifting and squatted higher than Ben for singles but hurt hisback doing it.
charlie
…the following quotes from F & F, “Proprioceptive feedback offered by contact of the belt with the trunk” and “a loose belt can teach one how to use the back more competently, especially among novices” speak towards the neurological implications do they not? Neurologically, the use of a belt in this fashion would seemingly help novices to “grease the proper groove” so to speak in terms of proper movement pattern. Just a thought.
…As with popequique, I agree with much of your supposition James but with your point above, not sure what you mean by the belt not strengthening all the involved muscle groups to the same degree. No movement strengthens all “the involved muscle groups” to the same degree. Am I missing something here?
basically intermuscular coordination is how your CNS controls the contraction of different muscles and muscle groups to produce fluid movement. for example you would not want your quads active while your hams are active as this would reduce the net torque produced by the hams and increase the chance on injury. this is especially important in an event such as the sprint because at its most basic a sprint is only a series of powerful muscular contractions. to get the most power out of a persons given motor ability intermuscular coordination must be in place. intermuscular coordination is developed on the track, the important thing is that all work towards the goal (spriting faster) take into account intermuscular coordination. consider also that work done in the weight room plyometrics and EMS are all tools along with sprint training to raise an athletes motor ability. how you use said tools dictates the developmental outcome (if your a sprinter, football player ect.). any instance in which the motor ability of an individual is taxed maximally develops this system ( you have to sprint fast to get fast, you have to lift heavy to lift heavier) but also delibrate effort should be made to inssure proper motor recruitment.
you should be careful of studies. never simply take them at their face value as often studies are organized in such a way to not take into account all the variables. what may apply in a lab may not apply in real life. that being said, i am not against studies just careful of what i consider dogmatic truth. the reason for the increased speed could come from many places. the goal really should be to maxamize output of the system (force generated by muscle) while minimizine inertial drag. basically as strong as possilbe and as light as possilble. so yes there may be benefits from increase muscle mass hell there are we all know of them but how do those benefits relate to performance and do they offset the value of the increases mass. increases in speed are really a neurological factor, but that is another discussion all together.
i believe you would be very very misguided to simply train hypertrophy in the weightroom. most likly you will end up big and pretty with a control system (the CNS) that isnt worth a damn. remember the body works in together. all parts balanced and acting in coordination with others. train the movement and appropriate hypertrophy will follow.
Thanx for that james, just one more quick thing, as i dont want to hijack the thread.
I am not talking about, hypertrophy for the sake of hypertrophy, so I wouldnt be talking about doing hypertrophy work all the time with no other work.
I would be talking about using it only as a tool to increase size when necessary, then using velocity training drills on the track so that velocity of movements will not be comprimised.
So instead of doing strength work in the weightroom, just use hypertrophy work when needed and limited to no strength work in the weightroom.
All work being done on the track be it sprints, bounds, jumps, etc.
I am just asking if it is necessarily added lifting ability that is giving the benefits on the track or whether it is instead properly placed hypertrophy while maintaining speed of movement on the track.
im not going to discount the validity of what you propose only my personal training philosophy would say there are better ways to train and achieve the desired goal. the problem is your body and your brain is like a computer that records and stores everything you do. if you tell it to work slow over and over it will work slow if you tell it to work fast over and over it will work fast. that is why you not only want to train maximally you want to train maximally repeatedly. the more you do something at that high level the more it gets reinforced enhancing inter muscular coordination and causing the desired adaptation. yes hypertrophy may have a positive effect on performance but is the most effecient way to train?
Thanx again James, hopefully others have opinions on this as well, again critique away at it, its just something I was thinking about without having any background in this I really cant talk about its validity so hopefully other more members will comment on this also.
“for example you would not want your quads active while your hams are active as this would reduce the net torque produced by the hams and increase the chance on injury.”
I know we are going a bit off track here James, but have you not heard of Lombard’s paradox? Standing up from a half squat and voila, both quads and hams contract! Hmmm, how crazy is this thing called the body!
