all posts post new thread

Other/Mixed Strength, mobility, and power: the missing link or why everyone should do martial arts movement

Other strength modalities (e.g., Clubs), mixed strength modalities (e.g., combined kettlebell and barbell), other goals (flexibility)
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)

guardian7

Level 6 Valued Member
EDITED:

I was working through a program by Aleks Salkin SFG2 the other day, unbreakable or opening up shoulders and hips when I realized that there might be a missing link after strength and mobility training and that is unloaded power in the same plane of movement.

Of course, there are KB ballistics, but this does not train all planes of movement and we may not always want to load disfunction as Grey Cook says.

Let me explain. StrongFirst argues that Strong comes first and I am on board with that. Many are also rightly concerned about mobility especially as we age, and we do warmups and programs like Flexible Steel. In the textbook, strength, mobility, and power are distinguished, but in practice they are often linked. If you have a restricted ROM through tight muscles, you will not be able to fully express power. Lack of thoratic or hip mobility will prevent you from doing a low bar squat. If you have limited strength, you may not be able to lift limbs to kick (some confuse flexibility with strength deficient in martial arts).

So, I think now that ideally we would start with mobility then strength but then express power in the same ROM.

For example, I am currently working on opening thoratic mobility. However, in doing a windmill I noticed similarities to the Muay Thai reverse elbow. It would seem that I should start with scapular stability and thoratic mobility. Then build power and then express it in unloaded power movements like reverse elbows.

Other examples. Bench press to pec stretch (tonic vs phastic muscles) to speed pushups to tai chi push. Hip flexor stretch to Lunge to flexor stretch to walking lunge to Muay Thai spear knee. Prying goblet squat squat to roundhouse kick.

In other words, I think that we would benefit more from a mobility, strength, to power progression. Exercise science textbooks usually recommend this path. Of course, most people would work on mobility and strength at the same time.

The connection between strength, mobility, and power is clear in Olympic lifting is clear. Many have mentioned the benefits of kettlebell movements for martial arts. However, it seems to me that we could do a better job of connecting grinding strength with mobility AND dynamic power without always separating grinds from ballistics or separating KB and bodyweight. Martial arts movements would seem to fill this gap.

The original hardstyle was very influenced by Karate. Many prominent members of StrongFirst have martial arts background like Mark Cheng and Jon Engum. Jon Engum's Extreme Training

Maybe it is time to look at martial arts type movements for the non-martial artists to consolidate strength and mobility and direct it to power. It seems to me that it should be more like a continuum.

Just a thought.
 
Last edited:
You have some good ideas.
"all models are wrong; some are useful". There is definitely some overlap between all these categories (power exercise can increase strength; a squat can simultaneously improve strength, ROM, coordination, etc.) but I would differ with you based on some FMS principles

1. mobility/midline stabilization should generally come first.
2. demonstrate static stability, then dynamic stability (dynamic stability would be equivalent to motor control, coordination etc)
3. THEN strength - because you need to be able to not only get into both start and mid end range positions, but move through the required ROM cleanly- to maximize strength development. Otherwise, as you correctly noted, you are "strengthening dysfunction", which by the way is a term I generally dislike. Professional to professional dialogue, I am still wary and would rather use another term, and I would never use that term with a client.
4. Then power

Indeed, FMS has many techniques such as mini-circuits with varied exercise ordering as per motor learning principles that somewhat alter this standard progression. However, I would not alter the above outline until I know someone can reach adequate mobility, at which that time I would mix up the practice for the sake of motor learning.

hope this makes sense!
 
You have some good ideas.
"all models are wrong; some are useful". There is definitely some overlap between all these categories (power exercise can increase strength; a squat can simultaneously improve strength, ROM, coordination, etc.) but I would differ with you based on some FMS principles

1. mobility/midline stabilization should generally come first.
2. demonstrate static stability, then dynamic stability (dynamic stability would be equivalent to motor control, coordination etc)
3. THEN strength - because you need to be able to not only get into both start and mid end range positions, but move through the required ROM cleanly- to maximize strength development. Otherwise, as you correctly noted, you are "strengthening dysfunction", which by the way is a term I generally dislike. Professional to professional dialogue, I am still wary and would rather use another term, and I would never use that term with a client.
4. Then power

Indeed, FMS has many techniques such as mini-circuits with varied exercise ordering as per motor learning principles that somewhat alter this standard progression. However, I would not alter the above outline until I know someone can reach adequate mobility, at which that time I would mix up the practice for the sake of motor learning.

hope this makes sense!

Good point. I edited it to prioritize mobility/stability even though in reality we would probably work on both at the same time as is the case with many physical therapy methods. The basic idea stands I think.
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom