Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: hardgainerj on September 13, 2012, 08:52:11 AM
-
wouldnt that just consist of snatches and kettle work
-
It mostly consists of a lot of obnoxious "Look At Me" exercises tbqh.
-
kipping pull-ups
-
kipping pull-ups
-
It mostly consists of a lot of obnoxious "Look At Me" exercises tbqh.
Hahahaha that sums it up pretty well. I've also notice that a lot of these 'functional strength workouts' involve groups of people hanging around the equipment to watch the person 'training for functional strength' oh brother
-
Hahahaha that sums it up pretty well. I've also notice that a lot of these 'functional strength workouts' involve groups of people hanging around the equipment to watch the person 'training for functional strength' oh brother
Yes seems to involve a lot of standing around the gym wearing Under Armour as your top layer of clothing and watching another man work out.
-
Yes seems to involve a lot of standing around the gym wearing Under Armour as your top layer of clothing and watching another man work out.
Hahaha underarmour as your top layer classic
-
no wonder he started losing to everybody - doing real pull-ups is important.
-
Misinformation Engineering©
Andrew Charniga, Jr.
www.sportivnypress.com
2009
Commentary on news, texts, articles and other forms of media.
“Integrated Functional Strength Training”
As Presented at the 2008 Ohio State University Strength and Conditioning Clinic.
It can be viewed on:
part 1: &feature=channel
part 2: &feature=channel
part 3: &feature=channel
The quotations presented below are taken directly from the seminar; other ideas presented are paraphrased.
“Myths for Sale”
Where to begin? Unfortunately, this seminar was so full of non sequiturs and oxymorons it is worth neither the time nor the space to address each and every one.
The presenter’s credentials include: Kung Fu champion, 2x North America’s Strongest Man, Coach of World’s Strongest Man 2006, and “numerous certifications.”
This seminar began with the presenter pointing out the negative aspects of employing powerlifting, weightlifting, and bodybuilding movements in the strength training of athletes.
Since it would be extremely hard, if not impossible, to design a strength program without incorporating a barbell, dumbbells, a bench and other weight training equipment that the exercises could not be classified as belonging to one of the aforementioned three activities. These so called “negatives” must always be present in any program.
Here are the negatives that were presented:
“Powerlifting teaches athletes to be un stabile.”
Not true
The squat requires considerable balance and stability (especially with a heavy weight) because the athlete/barbell as a unit has a high general center of mass. The area of stability in the fore and aft direction (limited to the length of the feet) shrinks with the rise in the amount of weight lifted. So, at the very least, it takes great balance to keep from falling on your face.
“Olympic lifting involves highly technical lifts. It can take 10 to 15 years to perfect technique.”
False
This is a myth for sale because there was no credible information offered in support of it.
Olympic lifts are technical, but it can take a relatively short time, even a matter of a few weeks, for most athletes from dynamic sports to learn technique, especially someone coming from a sport like gymnastics or track and field.
Difficulties associated with learning weightlifting technique most often are due to the athlete having a lack of muscle and tendon elasticity and a specific lack of flexibility in the hip, knee, ankle, wrist, elbow, and shoulder joints. If the athlete who is attempting to learn weightlifting technique has been doing strength training involving much powerlifting and/or bodybuilding movements, or comes from an activity where the upper extremities have been developed preferentially and/or unilaterally, the difficulty of assimilating weightlifting technique increases.
“There are only two lifts… and that’s all they have.”
False
This is another myth. In his textbook A System of Multi – Year Training, A.S. Medvedyev PhD, two time world champion and two time USSR Olympic coach, lists 100 exercises with a barbell for Olympic lifting. This book was published in the two lift era; also, there were many more weightlifting exercises with a barbell when the press was one of the competition exercises.
If anything, there are too many barbell exercises for Olympic lifting training.
“(Olympic lifting) is not good for teaching stability.”
This myth is not just false; it is plain ignorant
The problem of stability with the snatch and the clean and jerk is connected with a rising general center of mass (the athlete/ barbell as a unit) from the instant of separation of the barbell from the platform. This in turn shrinks the area (corridor) of balance continuously as the barbell rises higher. Consequently, the difficulty of balance increases the higher the barbell is raised. And, that is just the vertical lifting of the barbell.
Unlike any other sport, weightlifters shift from straightening the lower extremities and trunk with maximum explosive effort to descending under the barbell with maximum speed.
During the descent under the barbell to receive it in the squat position for the snatch or the clean, the weightlifter generally lifts his feet from the floor, moves them to the side and to the rear before placing them back on the floor. The feet shift in three planes (vertical, horizontal, sagittal) in a fraction of a second.
Once the feet have been placed on the platform, a weightlifter has to balance his body while, at one and the same instant, secure the barbell overhead in the snatch or at the chest for the clean, balance the barbell, and, of course, the body and barbell as a unit. This requires much athletic ability to achieve balance.
“Bodybuilding does not require the body to stabilize any joint.”
Non Sequitur
This statement means nothing. How would bodybuilding exercises, performed with barbells, dumbbells, and pulleys, cause the joints to be unstable?
“Bodybuilding is mostly done with machines.”
Simply not true
Silly pictures were shown of a weightlifter, hockey player, soccer player and others with the comment “that it is not good to do Olympic lifting for training for one leg, one arm dominant sports.”
This is false.
A rather undersized, for shot putting, athlete by the name of Al Feuerbach (who threw over 70 feet) spent so much time practicing Olympic lifting for his one arm, one leg dominant sport, that he placed second at the 1973 (superheavyweight) and first (110 kg class) at the 1974 National Weightlifting Championships. The Olympic lifts are the primary movements for strength training in power sports in most every country in the world, misinformation for sale in the USA notwithstanding.
Pictures of sprinting and bodybuilding machines were displayed with the comments, “Does your lifting mimic your sport?”
Non Sequitur
Use of weight machines are not the way to train for sprinting, but dynamic exercises offer carry over even though they may not “look” the same.
The hurdle event in track and field looks nothing like football. Football players are rarely able to run more than 10 yards in a straight line, consequently they never really have a chance to reach maximum running speed. Furthermore, they do not run down the field in three step increments followed by a leap over a hurdle.
But the power and skill of this dynamic event has obvious carry over value to a sport like football. High school state champion in the hurdles Eddie George went on to win the Heisman trophy.
“Functional strength training develops usable strength.”
This is an oxymoron.
What is “un-usable” strength? Was the explosive strength Al Feuerbach and many other athletes developed by training the Olympic lifts “unusable strength?” Obviously not.
“Most of the time we do stuff with bars we develop strength that can never be used.”
Non Sequitor
See comments about shot put and hurdles.
“An 80 pound one arm press is equal to or better than a 300 pound over head press.”
This is another profoundly ignorant remark.
Anyone who has any reasonable, first hand experience with the press, especially with 300 pounds, knows there is virtually no connection whatsoever between pressing dumbbells and pressing a barbell overhead. Remember, according to this mythologist, there is no balance involved in lifting barbells.
As a “former North American Strongest Man” why is he talking about a 300 pound press. With all of that “functional, usable strength” he talked about, certainly he has pressed much more than this.
This “former North American Strongest Man” should at the very least be able to do more than the 197 kg (435 pounds) Rigert (USSR) pressed in 1972 at a bodyweight of 198 lbs (see Tough Competition in Misinformation Engineering©).
Show us what you can press Mr. Strongest Man.
“All power is derived from the core.”
A Pathetic Non Sequitur
“Studies show strength doesn’t develop in the legs first.”
Non Sequitur
This must mean an infant begins by slithering around on the floor with paralyzed limbs before learning to stand and walk.
“Core muscles fire 4 to 8 microseconds before leg muscles.”
Non Sequitur
“Do we tie the shoulders and hips together through the core?”
Non Sequitur
What does that mean? Since when are they disconnected? Answer, we do not tie our hips and shoulders together; we tie our shoes.
“Sit ups do not affect the core.”
Another profoundly ignorant remark
Is this man talking about an apple core? This is one of the most flagrant myths, no lies which the “functional salesmen” perpetrate. The idea that there are flaccid, or otherwise unaffected abdominal muscles during the performance of standard abdominal and or trunk exercises, is utterly baseless. This is another brazen myth for sale.
“Most conventional exercises will make your athlete less mobile.”
This is nonsensically false.
Which conventional exercises, for instance? Barbell or dumbbell exercises performed through a large amplitude of motion can only increase joint mobility, or at the least maintain an already large range of motion present. This “functional training” myth for sale is today’s version of the old wives tale that weight training will make you muscle bound.
“The heavier you squat the less mobile you become.”
This is false.
If you do only partial squats, you will not necessarily lose anything. You just will not strengthen your lower extremities throughout a full range of movement. When you perform squats all the way down on the other hand, you develop the lower extremities throughout the entire amplitude of motion and develop joint mobility at the same time.
“Squats overload the Back… Squats decrease your range of motion… Athletes cannot get low.”
Non Sequitur
The technique of squatting most commonly advocated in the strength and conditioning community, especially in the textbooks of the “experts,” resembles a power squat. In this version the trunk is tilted excessively forward, away from the vertical, which, of course, places more stress on the lumbar spine. Full squats (front, back, or overhead) performed with sufficient mobility in the lower extremities permits a more vertical position of the trunk and, of course, places considerably less stress on the lumbar area.
The only factor that really can decrease your range of motion is never exercising or otherwise bending throughout a large range of motion. Restricting your movements, especially as recommended in therapy/athletic training rooms and/or strength and conditioning programs which advocate squats to a bench, squats with a restricted range of motion in a power rack, squats to parallel depth only, wall squats, squats, artificially or otherwise, restricting the movement of the ankle joint and shin, most definitely can lead to a decreased range of motion.
“We press and squat … then pair it with a functional exercise to ‘de – learn’ what their body did improperly.”
Non Sequitur
Did people actually pay to hear this presentation? Hopefully not! If so, they must demand a refund.
This statement contradicts so profoundly what preceded it; it is so ignorant, so stupid that mere words cannot possibly suffice.
There was a brief reference to “strengthening the ‘Q’” angle for women and men to prevent anterior cruciate tears.
Non Sequitur
It is common knowledge that girls are built differently than boys. And, most boys like it that way. The so called “Q angle” most often referred to women is due to their wider pelvis. The femur forms a larger angle from hip to knee. This is going to be strengthened? That should be interesting. Maybe a saw or a sander is used to narrow the female pelvis and help prevent those darned cruciate ligament tears.
All too often, many of these pusillanimous purveyors of misinformation for profit hide behind a litany of abbreviations achieved from certifications for sale organizations. Some even have doctoral degrees. One has to believe they were awarded their doctorates from the Wizard of Oz. And, that their area of expertise must be a “doctor of thinkology.”
However, to the best of our knowledge none of these pusillanimous purveyors have this certification abbreviation after their names:
LSMFT.
To this presenter, the Ohio State University, the school which sponsored this seminar, and the other like minded myths for sale purveyors of misinformation, you are encouraged to add the initials LSMFT after your names; it makes as much sense as you do.
-
who the fuck could be bothered to read all that above.....
ive yet to see a 'functional' strength type trainer look any good or change from year to year, yet they sneer at us bodybuilders and claim weve got it all wrong , all the while perving on our over developed muscles and inwardly self loathe
i work in a shipyard as an engineer, i get my additional functional training right there
-
i work in a shipyard as an engineer, i get my additional functional training right there
well said. All these idiots train for functional strength that they will probably never use in their life.
Hard work is the best builder of functional strength known to man.
-
who the fuck could be bothered to read all that above.....
ive yet to see a 'functional' strength type trainer look any good or change from year to year, yet they sneer at us bodybuilders and claim weve got it all wrong , all the while perving on our over developed muscles and inwardly self loathe
i work in a shipyard as an engineer, i get my additional functional training right there
i read it all
this fella's website is so funny and painfully accurate about all that is wrong with american "strength specialists" it makes me laugh
http://www.sportivnypress.com/
-
Misinformation Engineering©
Andrew Charniga, Jr.
www.sportivnypress.com
2008©
Commentary on news, texts, articles and other forms of media.
Training and Conditioning, December 2008
Garratt, K., “Tough Competition”, XVIII:9:29 – 33
Ostensibly this article is designed to enlighten the reader of the benefits of “strongman training” as “a way to break the monotony of the weight room.” This silly idea is unfortunately a sad reflection of the current state of some strength and conditioning programs.
Many of us old timers still remember having to fend off the proliferation of old wives tales about lifting barbells not being good for athletes to develop strength because it will make you “muscle bound.” Those myths persisted for many years and in some cases still do. They were a real impediment to getting athletes into the weight room to develop strength for their respective sports.
If we understand correctly, part of the rational to employ strongman events is to get out of the weight room because it is boring. So, help us understand.
Why is it better to go out, pick up stones, roll tires, throw beer kegs and such than to use traditional implements like barbells and dumbbells to develop applicable skills for dynamic sports strength and power training?
First, we should enlighten the reader as to what exactly constitutes strongman events. Strongman events involve a variety of implements such as large stones, truck tires, makeshift barbells for overhead pressing or bars connected to cars for dead lift, squat types of exercises, beer kegs, trucks or other large machinery for the athletes to pull from one point to another for time, and so forth.
The popularity of these events has culminated in “World’s Strongest Man” competitions on television that has, no doubt, increased public awareness of this form of entertainment and, subsequently, its popularity, much like professional wrestling.
How these activities would factor into strength training for dynamic sports such as football is unclear, especially when their adherents (as cited in the article) write all of these impressive initials after their names: SCCC, CSCS, MS, MA, MSCC, and so forth.
These are educated people with tons of certifications; remember all those initials. Supposedly they have the knowledge and experience to decide that practicing these events, among other things, are “the best way to train for football” and provides “some unique football specific benefits that are hard to achieve in the weight room.”
What exactly do they do for athletes in dynamic sports, especially those athletes who have to move quickly and at the same time perform specific skills which require explosive strength, flexibility, agility, and dexterity?
For that matter, what do these “enlightened professionals” have in their weight rooms for their football players that cause the boredom, and the consequent need to run outside to pick up tires and stones?
These titans of strength and conditioning should be careful with their answer to these simple questions because their respective athletic directors are going to want to know why the schools have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on weight equipment that is boring and not “functional” like strongman stuff.
According to one of the experts, “The physical benefits are beyond reason…it’s the best way to train for football.”
This man’s athletic director is going to want to know why the school spends big bucks on all sorts of fancy new stuff, every few years or so, when they could have saved a bundle by going to the junk yard and picked up the “best stuff,” the “functional equipment” such as tires, beer kegs, and so forth for a song? After all, training with that stuff “is the best way to train for football,” isn’t it?
And,what about the school’s football boosters? Could it be their donations are used to buy fancy stuff, ostensibly, which is not only not “functional” but boring to boot, when, after all, used tires, empty beer kegs, stones, and logs will not only do just fine, but are more fun to boot??
Let’s take a closer look for a moment at the so called “World Strongest Man.”
Please note that despite the registered trademark that is written after this, to be found on the organization’s web site, the title “The world’s strongest man” is in fact the property of The International Olympic Committee. The reason is that many years of prior use by many publications, TV, etc., is in reference to the winner of the super heavyweight division of the Olympic weightlifting competition.
Currently the real “world’s strongest man” is Matthias Steiner of Germany, the super heavyweight champion of the Beijing Olympics. He lifted 203 kg in the snatch and 258 kg in the clean and jerk. His total weight lifted was the gold medal result of 461 kg. He is the world’s strongest man.
The strongman event is in reality a form of athletic entertainment much like professional wrestling with make up events, make up equipment, and make up titles. It is a crude effort to distinguish itself from established power sports which, among other things, have long established rules and regulations, equipment specifications, and, in the modern age, testing for performance enhancing substances.
The made up strongman events such as the truck pull, tires, kegs, and stones are essentially tests of brute strength with little carry over to any sport but strongman. For instance, none of these “world’s strongest men” competitors listed on the organization’s web site were at the Beijing Olympics. Certainly the functionality of their strongmen events (which, remember, are so functional to football) would easily carry over to two such simple, ordinary, barbell exercises as the snatch and the clean and jerk?
Unlike the strongman, make up barbells with tires, logs, or bars attached to a car and such, the international barbell is perfectly balanced with dimensions, specific weight tolerances, uniform markings for hand placement etc. This apparatus ensures that any international weightlifting competition, anywhere in the world, the playing field is uniform.
So, you would think the weightlifting barbell would be much easier to negotiate for any of these “world’s strongest men.” Unlike “awkward and hard to handle implements,” there is no need to worry about balancing an international barbell. Just pick up the most weight to arms length overhead and you get to be Olympic champion, the real “World’s Strongest Man.”
If these men were really the strongest men in the world and not entertainers, why go through all these weird shenanigans with make up implements which increase the risk of injury because they are “awkward and hard to handle?”
For instance, let the strongmen dispense with the “over head lift” or the giant log lift and substitute a standard barbell. Both of the strongman implements involve some form of overhead press, so instead of an awkward make up object, a regular barbell ought to be easy to press.
The Olympic press was abolished from weightlifting competitions after 1972. The world records at the end of that year were 90 kg class 197.5 kg (435 lbs), 110 kg class 213.5kg (470 lbs), superheavyweight class 236.5kg (520 lbs).
Any of these “world’s strongest men” can certainly be able to beat the record of David Rigert of 197.5 kg set in 1972. If anyone can beat that mark try to overcome Kozin’s (110 kg class) 213.5 kg. Should Kozin’s press not present a problem, by all means the “world’s strongest strong men” should attack the record of a real world’s strongest man. Someone who actually earned this traditionally bestowed title, Vassily Alexeyev who pressed 236.5 kg.
However, it is highly unlikely any of the strongmen could even challenge Rigert, let alone Alexeyev.
Why?
1. They would lack the power and coordination to lift a regular barbell to the chest (the first part of the press exercise);
2. They have too much muscle mass or lack sufficient joint mobility in the arms to let the barbell rest on their clavicles to begin the exercise properly;
3. They would simply lack the strength and coordination to actually press that much weight to arms length overhead.
For instance, Jang Mi-ran (KOR) became the strongest woman in the world by winning the gold medal at the 2008 Beijing Olympics in the 75+ class with a result of snatch 140 kg and clean and jerk 186 kg at a bodyweight of 116.75. The most weight in the clean and jerk former “world’s strongest man” Bill Kazmaier could ever muster was about 170 kg at a bodyweight of over 130 kg.
The fact of the matter is these strongmen are refugees from the real world of dynamic sports; they could not make it in dynamic sports and were also rans.
So, what is the attraction for these make up strong man events to strength and conditioning for dynamic sports?
If you can’t teach your athletes to lift a specially designed, actual sport implement in the weight room and to train diligently fully accepting the “boredom” of hard work, then you copy what the guys who can’t do it either; so you employ make up stuff to ease the boredom of the weight room.
There is a special section of this article concerning “Strongman safety.” Astonishingly, the safety information presented is not intended to be a joke, but anyone with experience in sports training would look at this and conclude that “Strongman safety” is an oxymoron.
Quote:
“Building mental toughness competitive desire …. Are top priorities.”
With tires and beer kegs?
This is such a crock. There is no known connection to throwing beer kegs, picking up stones, and pretend competitions with building mental toughness. The truth be known, hard work, a lot of exceptionally boring hard work builds mental toughness and character.
Michael Phelps trained seven days a week for swimming. He reasoned that this gave him a 52 day per year advantage over his competitors. Try jumping in a swimming pool seven days a week, week after week after week. The result of all of this boredom was eight gold medals. A colossal amount of boring work in the pursuit of athletic perfection. That is mental toughness.
Nadia Comeneci performed each of her routines ten times per day. That’s four events times ten. How boring is that? It is so incredibly boring she earned the first ever tens in gymnastic competitions.
Quote:
“It’s a great way to incorporate functional exercise, and that’s a big buzz term these days.”
Never were truer words spoken. “Functional exercise” is just that a big buzz term. And, that is all it is buzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
-
Yes "training for functional strength" oh brother
-
i read it all
this fella's website is so funny and painfully accurate about all that is wrong with american "strength specialists" it makes me laugh
http://www.sportivnypress.com/
Charniga is an awesome writer. He was one of the big importers of real Olympic equipment in the States through Dynamic Fitness / Dynamic Eleiko. He was also famous for being one of the first translating Russian sports manuals in the US.
-
wouldnt that just consist of snatches and kettle work
No, because we don't just move in a sagittal plane. We move in multiple planes.
-
Charniga is an awesome writer. He was one of the big importers of real Olympic equipment in the States through Dynamic Fitness / Dynamic Eleiko. He was also famous for being one of the first translating Russian sports manuals in the US.
yeah i love his style
shits on all the broscience about squats with knees in front of toes etc
-
(http://www.sportivnypress.com/documents/images/clip_image002.png)
" A Demasulinization of Strength" is a new book from Sportivny Press. A product of more than three years of research; this scholarly text chronicles the how and why the modern female weightlifter has evolved to lift weights which were unimaginable at the time of the first world championships for women. The "great leap forward" began in 1987 with the first world championships for woment weightlifters. By the end of 1987 the female world records were apporximately 53% of the respective male records. Today this strength gap is about 80% and is still closing.
Many common physiological differences between the sexes which are believed to inflict the female athlete with a predisposition to injury, are shown in this book to be unsubstantiated, myths. Many are in fact advantages in power sports.
The text is laid out in landscape with 50 full page color picutres and more than 100 references; many of which are translations of Soviet era or Russian research.
:-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X
-
No, because we don't just move in a sagittal plane. We move in multiple planes.
Don't bother. If its not someone decked out in a torn up BSN shirt, sun glasses, and looking like they are screaming bloody murder wll the while moving fake plates for their photo shoot....its not "real" lifting.
-
Don't bother. If its not someone decked out in a torn up BSN shirt, sun glasses, and looking like they are screaming bloody murder wll the while moving fake plates for their photo shoot....its not "real" lifting.
olympic weightlifting is the only "real" lifting
but they look like shit so there for i prefer to watch MIT
-
This retard used to come into my gym and bring these weighted bags. Then spend 30 minutes swinging them overhead as he moaned and groaned. I found out he was a wannabe MMA fighter. It all made sense
-
This retard used to come into my gym and bring these weighted bags. Then spend 30 minutes swinging them overhead as he moaned and groaned. I found out he was a wannabe MMA fighter. It all made sense
he should have read sportivnypress
damn fool ::)
my old coach was right all along, he would also say every gimmicky form of training is shit and olympic weightlifting is the beginning and the end of everything
but women love big arms so i bodybuild
-
Posts more than 2 paragraphs should be fucking outlawed.
Ron?
-
Posts more than 2 paragraphs should be fucking outlawed.
Ron?
yeah buddyyyyy
-
bodyweight training
and picking stuff up, carrying it and throwing it
-
for me functional strength is less about the muscle being able to perform a 'functional movement' optimally or with the most power or even the exercise itself, but more about any muscle group being able to recouperate in a very limited amount of time and being able to repeat the workload regardless of the outside stimulus applied.
thats functional strength. the 'exercises' have nothing to do with it. its how the muscle adapts to stress and its ability to preform the task again and again to the same level of performance as previous demands. thats functional.