all posts post new thread

Bodyweight Bodyweight lessons learnt overseas

I don’t know how relevant this is, but I did come across some warnings against using overcoming Iso at shorter muscle length/top of the ROM depending on the lift. Stuff like squats, DL, Benching will tend to put very little strain on the muscle compared to forces on the joint. This is where it becomes possible to hurt yourself using Iso.

I’d imagine it would be most helpful on stuff like rows, chins etc

That's really interesting. Is that just because in the final few inches you can generate a LOT of force isometrically, possibly more than the joints are ready for? Or is it a mechanical issue?
 
That's really interesting. Is that just because in the final few inches you can generate a LOT of force isometrically, possibly more than the joints are ready for? Or is it a mechanical issue?
That’s exactly the reason. Pretty sure one could look case by case, but most exercises at the final bit of ROM there is so much mech advantage it only serves to stress the joints. Not many will carry a risk of injury.

Am not sure how much risk there really is with this, but just from a standpoint that the muscle being shortened (or close to its resting length) you’re really only dialing in a mechanical groove and not “training” the muscle anymore.

If it were part of occupational or sport-specific work it might make a lot of sense, at least one could dial the effort back or keep the hold short duration.

There is evidence the joint cartilage will spread and thin to form a more load-specific bearing surface over time, so if you perform a lot of work in a given posture, isometrically loading it could do some good things for ya.
 
Also, I was recently reading some Logan Christopher and Bud Jeffries work where they talk about adapting old-school isometrics and partial ROM work to build phenomenal strength really quickly. The idea is that if you train your longest ROM to be as strong as possible and your shortest ROM to be as strong as possible, your body will fill in the gap. There's a famous calisthenics guy on youtube (I forget his name, sorry) who has built up to some pretty phenomenal strength feats using this method. I once saw a video of him training one-arm push-up partials at both ends of the ROM with an absurdly heavy dumbell in his free hand. His form was grotesque, but when he ditched the dumbell, his unweighted one-arm push-up was basically effortless -- and he's not a small guy. I wish I could remember his name because I'd like to learn more about this method.
Paul Anderson as well as Bob Hoffman and Bob Peoples used the above method in Barbell lifts.
Pavel also seems to be a fan (Beyond Bodybuilding)
 
Its funny how partiels suddenly could be a good thing. I remember back in my early training days when i read about Power Factor Training and i believe 109% that it was bullshit.
i remember thinking the same about kettlebellsROFL
 
Its funny how partiels suddenly could be a good thing. I remember back in my early training days when i read about Power Factor Training and i believe 109% that it was bullshit.
The fitness industry really is just a big wheel of recycled material huh? There's nothing new under the sun....
 
…the idea is that if you train final few inches of your ROM to be as strong as possible and the beginning few inches of your ROM to be as strong as possible, your body will fill in the gap.

I don’t know how relevant this is, but I did come across some warnings against using overcoming Iso at shorter muscle length/top of the ROM depending on the lift. Stuff like squats, DL, Benching will tend to put very little strain on the muscle compared to forces on the joint. This is where it becomes possible to hurt yourself using Iso.

I’d imagine it would be most helpful on stuff like rows, chins etc
Ben Patrick (”Kneesovertoesguy”) and their collective is compiling a lot of useful information on training at long vs. short muscle length.

Hypertrophy and strength gains aside, the basic idea is that at short muscle length you are mostly training the muscle, while at longer lengths you are also training the connective tissue. This leads to the importance of structural balance: if you train too much at shorter lengths, you could be able to overpower your connective tissue using your muscle, and cause something to snap. Also vice versa if training too much, or too soon (progression wise), at long muscle length, you could be putting repetitive strain on the connective tissue which could cause something like tendonitis. The idea then is to start your training progression with short muscle length movements to teach mind-muscle connection, and then progress towards longer muscle length movements to cause positive adaptation in the connective tissue. This all fits in quite well with what @North Coast Miller points out in the quote above about using overcoming iso at short muscle length.

Here’s a good video on the topic:
 
Very interested in this conversation...Does all this stuff I read on isometrics mean that, for example, bullworkers actually work then?
Biggest drawback to the Bullworker, its inly capable of doing accessory level work on the squat and hinge. Pretty sure if you had two of them or if they made a jumbo sized unit, it would work as well as anything else.
 
Ben Patrick (”Kneesovertoesguy”) and their collective is compiling a lot of useful information on training at long vs. short muscle length.

Hypertrophy and strength gains aside, the basic idea is that at short muscle length you are mostly training the muscle, while at longer lengths you are also training the connective tissue. This leads to the importance of structural balance: if you train too much at shorter lengths, you could be able to overpower your connective tissue using your muscle, and cause something to snap. Also vice versa if training too much, or too soon (progression wise), at long muscle length, you could be putting repetitive strain on the connective tissue which could cause something like tendonitis. The idea then is to start your training progression with short muscle length movements to teach mind-muscle connection, and then progress towards longer muscle length movements to cause positive adaptation in the connective tissue. This all fits in quite well with what @North Coast Miller points out in the quote above about using overcoming iso at short muscle length.

Here’s a good video on the topic:


Now THAT is really interesting! Thanks for posting it!
 
Does anyone have any experience with using bodyweight in this way?
Also I'm having a hard time seeing a way to make it progressively harder because at a certain point I feel like there are diminishing returns for longer or slower holds?
Does anybody know a way to train with this long term
Before my shoulder injury I had a few kettlebells and bodyweight only and did isometric pauses for progressions. It worked to help turn an 8rm into 5, 6 or 7rm depending on the time taken. It's the iso-dynamic method written about in Siff's "Supertraining." In fact, Supertraining was older than the next studies I'll mention, but mentioned the concepts and that they were apparently successful in the foreign research that seems ignored by American scientists.

But American/English language guys are catching up:

I ran into an article (Counts 2016 if we want to search for it) that had two groups:
Both had 1.5 seconds up and 1.5 down and four sets of biceps curls.
High Load did 8-12 rep max sets to failure.
No Load just tensed muscles like Charles Atlas and the dynamic tension method for 20 rep sets.
Both groups had the same hypertrophy.

There was a similar article (the search term would be "co-contraction") where they tried 4 seconds on, 4 seconds off of self generated tension on a 90 degrees elbow flex and it also produced significant muscle increases.

I'm doing the Dry Fighting Weight program to build my shoulders back (or test that they are back, ha ha). I use adjustable dumbbells since it requires exact 5rms. I only have one set of these though. Since my legs are so much stronger than arms I tested putting an iso hold (iso-dynamic) just above parallel with the press weight and was able make the same weight as a former 13rm squat from standard reps into a 5rm for my squat as well and "failure" came from not being able to do a 6th rep instead of dropping DBs from the rack position.

I have to suspect you'll want to move up in progressions after a while but low loads, no loads and isometrics can do a lot.
 
Back
Top Bottom