all posts post new thread

5/3/1 - Back from the Dead(lift)

The big load is a different beast. In theory I agree with @pet' about improving the pieces improving the whole, but it can be hard to find the correct pieces. Like with the axial loading, for example, how exactly do you go about strengthening the torso with that without the load? How big is the carryover?

I think it may somehow be akin to glute bridges vs deadlifts. I readily confess I do not know how well they carry over to each other.

With the core work there is a great quote from Ulf Timmermann, a renowned shot putter, that I often like to paraphrase:

"Abdominal work in the DDR was taken VERY, VERY SERIOUSLY. This is one of the most special very important things. Without a strong and conditioned torso, you cannot connect power from the legs to the shoulders to the implement. This is why we threw so many throws with heavy shots, performed squats without belts, and did jump exercises under weight as told before.

But actual sit-ups? No. This is less specific to throwing than cheesecake."
 
Hello,

You are perfectly right @Antti ! :)

This is just impossible to "mimic" a load without it. What I do as far as core training is concerned (using only calisthenics) is:
- Hanging Leg Raises (a)
- Hanging Leg Raises with a "wipe" motion (b)
- Dragon Flags (c)
- OAOL Push ups (d)

With these moves, I get:
- Flexion with neutral spine (a & b)
- Anti extension (c & d)
- Anti lateral flexion (d)
- Anti rotation (b & d)

This gives some sort of "raw strength", some sort of base to build upon. It mostly makes the transition to weightlifting easier (but can not replace it, obviously). Plus, strength is also highly dépendent of the neural signal. You just do not have this "feeling" of having something on your back. We can not mimic it with pure calisthenics. We can not work the technique neither.

Sit ups are not favorites of mine as they work the core only on a portion of their ROM (first 30°. Beyond that, this is mostly hip flexors). I prefer curls / crunches. These also have their place on the training table, but can be specific. In boxing, one has to "curl" for instance. Obviously you can load them.

My personal carryover is very modest. Indeed, it gives me enough strength to carry someone, doing heavy rucking (up to 50kg). This is "enough" for me but sure, if I want to go beyond that, I'd have to lift !

Kind regards,

Pet'
 
Antti said:
The big load is a different beast. In theory I agree with @pet' about improving the pieces improving the whole, but it can be hard to find the correct pieces. Like with the axial loading, for example, how exactly do you go about strengthening the torso with that without the load? How big is the carryover?

I think it may somehow be akin to glute bridges vs deadlifts. I readily confess I do not know how well they carry over to each other.

With the core work there is a great quote from Ulf Timmermann, a renowned shot putter, that I often like to paraphrase:

"Abdominal work in the DDR was taken VERY, VERY SERIOUSLY. This is one of the most special very important things. Without a strong and conditioned torso, you cannot connect power from the legs to the shoulders to the implement. This is why we threw so many throws with heavy shots, performed squats without belts, and did jump exercises under weight as told before.

But actual sit-ups? No. This is less specific to throwing than cheesecake."
Click to expand...
Absolutely. It is not just the “core” that needs to be strong here, it needs to be strong during the specific function of a squat with a barbell. Now barbell squats are unique from unloaded squats in that the load on the spine allows very little leeway for the torso’s rigidity to deviate. Pistols, go ahead and round your back even with a load and you’ll be fine. Same with airborn squats, BSS and lunges (provides the load is held other then on the traps) etc.

This is also why I feel my deadlift suffers less. The deadlift doesn’t require as much strict adherence to torso position as the squat, namely with the upper backs concern and the fact the range of motion at the hips is far shorter, is another advantage because not only must the torso stay extremely rigid during the BS, it must do so in collusion with a longer ROM at the hips. Also, I found front levers do a fine job of similarly mimicking the loading pattern of a deadlift. Train your legs with pistols and you’re in pretty good shape...if you’re built to deadlift.

The functions of the core during the squat are linked to many moving parts. Firstly, the upper back also has a greater task during low bar squats, as the hips travel further back and the torso more inclined. The range of motion at the hips will dictate how well the core holds up as if that range is limited, there’s only a few places the lifter can compensate to reach depth, none of which are desirable.

Not only is the core meant to resist flexion, but if tension is lost, power leaks from the legs to the bar will occur. As Hulkster said, the squat is often forgotten to include the many other necessary components of function that occur from the feet all the way to the bar on the back. Lats, obliques, grip, the head/neck, are all important.

I believe that the core is certainly an important aspect of the limit squat. I also believe to emulate its function in a back squat without back squatting (or other barbell lifts/loaded lifts like sandbags etc) is damn near impossible.
 
pet' said:
Hello,

You are perfectly right @Antti ! :)

This is just impossible to "mimic" a load without it. What I do as far as core training is concerned (using only calisthenics) is:
- Hanging Leg Raises (a)
- Hanging Leg Raises with a "wipe" motion (b)
- Dragon Flags (c)
- OAOL Push ups (d)

With these moves, I get:
- Flexion with neutral spine (a & b)
- Anti extension (c & d)
- Anti lateral flexion (d)
- Anti rotation (b & d)

This gives some sort of "raw strength", some sort of base to build upon. It mostly makes the transition to weightlifting easier (but can not replace it, obviously). Plus, strength is also highly dépendent of the neural signal. You just do not have this "feeling" of having something on your back. We can not mimic it with pure calisthenics. We can not work the technique neither.

Sit ups are not favorites of mine as they work the core only on a portion of their ROM (first 30°. Beyond that, this is mostly hip flexors). I prefer curls / crunches. These also have their place on the training table, but can be specific. In boxing, one has to "curl" for instance. Obviously you can load them.

My personal carryover is very modest. Indeed, it gives me enough strength to carry someone, doing heavy rucking (up to 50kg). This is "enough" for me but sure, if I want to go beyond that, I'd have to lift !

Kind regards,

Pet'
Click to expand...
Certainly a routine that covers most bases but yes, the core’s demand in a back squat are mostly anti-flexion/extension against the load, which bodyweight exercises seem to miss. I suppose a back raise or good morning could have some use if it’s loaded...but this is quality difficult to do without a machine/setup. I think heavy swings have use here however if one has that option.
 
Antti said:
I think it may somehow be akin to glute bridges vs deadlifts. I readily confess I do not know how well they carry over to each other.
Click to expand...
As somebody who does both... I personally haven't seen much carryover in either direction there. To me, bridges are a great bulletproofing movement to develop some strength at funny angles, but I just don't get the same kind of tension. Of course, it may also be that I'm just not capable of the harder variations (e.g. some variety of planche) that might change that. It always seems to me like bodyweight stuff is kind of a "doughnut"; there's the lower-end stuff that anyone can attain (and everyone probably should), and then there's the incredible high-end stuff that most people never come close to. I can totally believe that high-end gymnasts can step up to a barbell and do amazing things without much training. But, for all the talk about progressions, to me there just doesn't seem to be a good middle ground between the high and low ends of bodyweight stuff.
 
WhatWouldHulkDo said:
As somebody who does both... I personally haven't seen much carryover in either direction there. To me, bridges are a great bulletproofing movement to develop some strength at funny angles, but I just don't get the same kind of tension. Of course, it may also be that I'm just not capable of the harder variations (e.g. some variety of planche) that might change that. It always seems to me like bodyweight stuff is kind of a "doughnut"; there's the lower-end stuff that anyone can attain (and everyone probably should), and then there's the incredible high-end stuff that most people never come close to. I can totally believe that high-end gymnasts can step up to a barbell and do amazing things without much training. But, for all the talk about progressions, to me there just doesn't seem to be a good middle ground between the high and low ends of bodyweight stuff.
Click to expand...
Most certainly. Gymnasts, acrobats, break dancers display very unique and high level strength. I think nowadays, there real is a vast difference between the low end stuff and high level. For some a single chin-up is great progress while others bang out multiple reps on a single arm. For most, a single arm chin is a lifetime achievement.

I think, however, nowadays that the middle ground between high level gymnastics and beginner calisthenics is a terrain more easily traverses. Bands are a great equalizer and can help one practice various calisthenics moves with support. Bands come in all sizes and can help with nearly all exercises be it planches, OAP, levers, pistols, OAC, etc.

I think gymnastics are actually a very productive way for iron enthusiasts to train strength without the spine baring load. When you’re really undertrained in some area, it’s almost like being a beginner trainee again.
 
pet' said:
Hello @WhatWouldHulkDo & @Philippe Geoffrion

I completely agree with both of you guys. But I think we still can find some comfort in "reverse engineering" the squat: leg strength + core strength + hip mobility. In a FB post, A. Salkins stated that most of the time, what prevent folks doing heavy squats is not leg strength, it's core strength.

Eventually, it all comes down to personal goals, but I guess that once one is able to do 6-8 pistols in a row, day in day out, one gets "acceptable" level of leg strength. On the top of it, a well rounded core routine (which can also be done with bodyweight) can secure the raw strength for a good back squat (assuming we previously drill the technique).

I am far from an experienced lifter and I do not have 'fitness guru', but in this case, I think Salkins is right. I do not have barbells but as far as calisthenics are concerned, do both leg and core strength training. It gives me enough strength to at least carry someone on my back and then squat).

Kind regards,

Pet'
Click to expand...
Maybe I'm late for this discussion, but I will give my 2 cent:
Core strength/leg strength are very large terms.

The back squat requires lots of upperback strength, without a proper upper back position is harder to brace properly. Without the proper bracing your leg is better super strong compared to the load, or else the upper body will cruch down before you can finish the lift.

But with the good bracing, maybe your legs do not need to be super super strong - just strong enough for you to grind the lift for 2-3 s.

I can do one arm-one legged push up and planche in the past (not now, lol) => my abbie is good enough for many things (I have kids who under 10 jumping on my stomach...) => still, I have problem with proper bracing in squat (in the past, when I first get back to the barbell) and deadlift (now).

I think is very hard without the load to train the core strength for squat. Sure, dragon flag is great exercise - you can train your abs (for both muscle thickness and bracing) - but you will need some kind of squat with enough load to transfer the effect of other lift to the main lift.

Maybe some of you are familiar with Westside approach. People at Westside do all kind of thing. And they still have heavy lifting with big 3 versions (maximum effort). And the important thing that Mr. Simmons had mentioned is doing the with those lift with similar techniques to the main lifts (it's better to increase your deadlift by doing good morning rather increase your goodmorning by doing good-morning). This makes me thing: even with very similar lifts you still need to do it precisely to have a great carry over - so how useful the other lifts (with different ways of perform)?
 
q.Hung said:
Maybe I'm late for this discussion, but I will give my 2 cent:
Core strength/leg strength are very large terms.

The back squat requires lots of upperback strength, without a proper upper back position is harder to brace properly. Without the proper bracing your leg is better super strong compared to the load, or else the upper body will cruch down before you can finish the lift.

But with the good bracing, maybe your legs do not need to be super super strong - just strong enough for you to grind the lift for 2-3 s.

I can do one arm-one legged push up and planche in the past (not now, lol) => my abbie is good enough for many things (I have kids who under 10 jumping on my stomach...) => still, I have problem with proper bracing in squat (in the past, when I first get back to the barbell) and deadlift (now).

I think is very hard without the load to train the core strength for squat. Sure, dragon flag is great exercise - you can train your abs (for both muscle thickness and bracing) - but you will need some kind of squat with enough load to transfer the effect of other lift to the main lift.

Maybe some of you are familiar with Westside approach. People at Westside do all kind of thing. And they still have heavy lifting with big 3 versions (maximum effort). And the important thing that Mr. Simmons had mentioned is doing the with those lift with similar techniques to the main lifts (it's better to increase your deadlift by doing good morning rather increase your goodmorning by doing good-morning). This makes me thing: even with very similar lifts you still need to do it precisely to have a great carry over - so how useful the other lifts (with different ways of perform)?
Click to expand...
I agree with pretty much all. I think the main core situation that is unique in a squat is to brace with a neutral spine.

when you think of flexing your “abdominals”, what motion is this often associated with? For me, I think of flexing the spine; curling your torso forward like a boxer bracing to absorb a body jab. This is complete opposite of what you want in the back squat.

Going back to Louie, one of his quips regarding the torso in a squat is “you want to keep a long torso in the squat, and a short torso in the deadlift.” I already have a short torso...Another key point is that the core is not just the abs, as we often think, but includes the obliques, , TA, lats, Spinal-erectors, QL, upper back and even the musculature surrounding the hips (glute medius, hip flexors). The idea is to create 360 pressure like blowing up a balloon.

Tgis is where I sometimes believe the good morning is underrated, as a core exercise. The lower back works sure, but the abdominal pressure is what keeps it safe. Pavel’s idea in BB of training the squat with front squats and good mornings is pretty complete and it is forgotten sometimes that squats that force an upright posture with anterior loading make very effective and specific core exercises for the squat. However, they miss the direct spinal loading component that a good morning would fill while also teaching the harmonious action of proper core bracing with the hinge. In essence, your hitting the both extreme ends of the squat spectrum.
 
Day 1 Redux
A1) Plyo pushups x 3 x 5 sets
A2) OAOLP (band assisted) 2 x 3 sets
Then...OAPU x 10R/L
B) OAR - 26 kgs x 10,10, 25
C) Heels up squat - 26 kgs x 25

Had to give my training a makeover after feeling pounded. Volume is really my nemesis, the top set approach has always done me well, focusing on one pattern a day while giving the other two a light day. Today was pressing and pulling and lower get a top set pump.

Started OAP’s with dead stop reps and no band.
youtube.com

May 22, 2021

youtube.com youtube.com

Then band assisted OAOLP. You can see I’ve allowed my right shoulder to do as it pleases. There’s no pain and this method seems far more natural on the right side.
youtube.com

May 22, 2021

youtube.com youtube.com

Then one AMRAP of ‘cheater OAP’.


I already feel better today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom