all posts post new thread

Bodyweight Turkish Get Up Versus Warrior Pushup

Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Kozushi

Kozushi

Level 7 Valued Member
By "Warrior Pushup" I mean the one leg one arm pushup in the "Naked Warrior" book.

Which exercise is "better" - it or the Turkish getup?

I am not in a position to be able to judge as I'm fairly new to weightlifting.

I would like some advice as I want to design my programme to be the best possible for me.

My instinct on this is that since the warrior pushup loads more weight on my arm while also loading lots of weight on all the anti-twist muscles all around my body, I'd think it would be the better exercise. It being safer isn't a bad point in its favour either. On the other hand, a kettlebell could be procured that would load as much or more weight onto my arm and body.

I wonder if anyone has had any thoughts on this.
 
Given that your top priority is appearance, I'd say they're almost equal, but if I had to pick a winner, I'd say the OAPU. Reasons being more bi/triceps action, thus more muscle tone in the upper arms, whilst also working the shoulders. I found that when I stopped doing OAPUs and just did TGUs, my upper arms got significantly thinner. I didn't care, as I wasn't after aesthetics, but it's something to consider.

Also, while the OAPU, being a bodyweight exercise, will not likely burn fat in and of itself, it will reward you with progress if you maintain a lean body composition. What I mean by this is that if you're fat but strong, you have a lot of dead weight, so you might be good at TGUs, while struggling with OAPUs.
 
Harry Westgate said:
Given that your top priority is appearance, I'd say they're almost equal, but if I had to pick a winner, I'd say the OAPU. Reasons being more bi/triceps action, thus more muscle tone in the upper arms, whilst also working the shoulders. I found that when I stopped doing OAPUs and just did TGUs, my upper arms got significantly thinner. I didn't care, as I wasn't after aesthetics, but it's something to consider.

Also, while the OAPU, being a bodyweight exercise, will not likely burn fat in and of itself, it will reward you with progress if you maintain a lean body composition. What I mean by this is that if you're fat but strong, you have a lot of dead weight, so you might be good at TGUs, while struggling with OAPUs.
Click to expand...

Aha! Always awesome insight from you! Thanks!

One of my slight concerns with the Turkish Get Ups was that they didn't seem to have much of a "press" involved - although I realized later on that the initial movement is a press, so okay, but evidently not nearly as much of a press as with the warrior pushup, until the amount of weight being lifted is the same, which would happen in my case with the 40 kg kettle bell.

I was amused shopping a few days ago at a big chain store that sells books among other things, while flipping through their muscle building books, that none of them had the warrior pushup - it's like they hadn't ever heard of nor seen such a thing! I had never heard of even a one armed pushup growing up. It shows how ignorant a whole culture can be about important things.

Experimenting between the two, what I seem to see is exactly what you wrote - that the warrior pushup grants excellent appearance. The Turkish Get Up has its own charms though, of course, as you are manipulating an actual weight in your hand - which is useful for real world, real life strength, and also it keeps you under stress for longer than you can stand with the warrior pushup, so it's great for cardio also.

Without thinking it through very hard I've noticed myself more or less alternating S&S with NW days of training, and I have to say I quite like the effects! Today was a NW plus a hike day! :)

Strong First has changed my life!
 
Kozushi said:
I was amused shopping a few days ago at a big chain store that sells books among other things, while flipping through their muscle building books, that none of them had the warrior pushup - it's like they hadn't ever heard of nor seen such a thing!
Click to expand...

The OAPU is not particularly good at building muscle. It's more of a "wiry strength" sort of move, like the pistol. This is why Pavel says in TNW that "what you look like has no bearing on what you're capable of". Pistols and OAPUs, especially done in GTG, won't put on much muscle.

Books that are focused on muscle building would most likely center around weighted exercises, so it would make sense that you wouldn't see a mention of the OAPU. Heck I don't think Pavel even mentions it in Beyond Bodybuilding.

I agree with Harry btw. OAPUs do seem to build up the triceps fairly well if done for slightly higher reps, and with a tucked elbow. However, I wouldn't discount the TGU and it's ability to build up a good looking set of shoulders (more so than the OAPU). Best thing for my shoulder development (not that I train for hypertrophy but still) has been straight arm overhead work (handstands and planches). Overhead pressing is good too of course, but even just static overhead work can be good.

Cheers!
 
305pelusa said:
The OAPU is not particularly good at building muscle. It's more of a "wiry strength" sort of move, like the pistol.
Click to expand...

I wish I understood what you mean here. It took me a month do be able to do even one OAPU and I think I can clearly see the muscular development in my core and arms. Maybe I'm confusing gains made with S&S with NW training??? Why I think I can see the development from the NW programme is that I had already been doing S&S for 3 months before I started adding NW onto it.
 
Kozushi said:
I wish I understood what you mean here. It took me a month do be able to do even one OAPU and I think I can clearly see the muscular development in my core and arms. Maybe I'm confusing gains made with S&S with NW training??? Why I think I can see the development from the NW programme is that I had already been doing S&S for 3 months before I started adding NW onto it.
Click to expand...
Think of the muscular development of a martial artist or maybe a college level gymnast. That's probably what you'll get from OAPU work. If that's what you like that's fine. But if you go to a store looking for a muscle building book, it'll probably focus on other exercises that build up more muscle and bigger physiques.

Think of football or wrestling athletes that might want to go a hit heavier, or a new weight class. They most likely would stick with heavy benching and pressing (plus squatting and DLing) over OAPUs.

Just an observation. Most people who are into KBs and calisthenics typically want the smaller, dense look where you're much stronger than you look. In that case, (and it looks like you're satisfied with how the OAPUs and changing your physique), then it might be enough for you. I'm just saying why it is not a good choice for muscle building literature essentially.
 
305pelusa said:
Think of the muscular development of a martial artist or maybe a college level gymnast. That's probably what you'll get from OAPU work. If that's what you like that's fine. But if you go to a store looking for a muscle building book, it'll probably focus on other exercises that build up more muscle and bigger physiques.

Think of football or wrestling athletes that might want to go a hit heavier, or a new weight class. They most likely would stick with heavy benching and pressing (plus squatting and DLing) over OAPUs.

Just an observation. Most people who are into KBs and calisthenics typically want the smaller, dense look where you're much stronger than you look. In that case, (and it looks like you're satisfied with how the OAPUs and changing your physique), then it might be enough for you. I'm just saying why it is not a good choice for muscle building literature essentially.
Click to expand...

I'll think out loud here then...

I suppose you're limited with bodyweight exercises by your own bodyweight. If someone weighs, say 200lbs, the warrior pushup will be able to load let's say about 95lbs onto their one arm. If you bench 200lbs (your own weight - which is kind of sissy for a bench press) that's already more than what you'd get out of the warrior pushup (multiplying the 95lbs of the warrior pushup by two for your two arms) - although there are all those "anti-twist" benefits to the warrior pushup like there are to the one arm kettle bell swing.

I suppose same goes for the pistol - it's your 200lbs (minus your foot and ankle weight) that are getting loaded onto your one leg. That would be sort of like doing a squat with two legs adding a 200lbs barbell to your already 200lbs. Again, you're limited by your own body weight. A "real" weightlifter would hold maybe a 250lbs barbell or more while doing a squat??? Thus, you can go farther with barbells or kettle bells than with your own bodyweight alone.

Is this what you mean?

What Pavel wrote in the Naked Warrior is that the NW plan does indeed do a great job of strengthening and keeping very strong almost all the muscles of your body. The lack is in the pulling muscles of the lower back, which he says should be addressed by doing deadlifts or kettle bell swings at least twice a week. At the end of the book he compares bodyweight only with traditional weights with kettle bells. He says they all achieve similar goals if you do them right.

I think Pavel does believe that the warrior pushup and pistol build muscle and strength.

So, do you mean the same thing but you can go further with weights added?

I'm doing both NW and S&S anyways, but I'm fascinated about learning exactly what I'm getting out of both programmes, as they've become an important part of my life and the maintenance and improvement of my physical and mental health.
 
Kozushi said:
Is this what you mean?
Click to expand...
I don't think it's just about the weight. You could make OAPUs and Pistols as hard (only can squeeze a couple of reps) as barbell movements. My understanding is that these unilateral calisthenics movements typically don't have the whole-body systematic stress that the big BB compound movements do. I'm not super knowledgeable about the physiology behind that. I think @Steve Freides might be able to explain it a bit better. I think Pistols and OAPUs, while they can lead to some increase in mass for those starting out and maybe doing for higher volume/compressed rest, are typically good for "lean strength" and hence a good choice for those looking to get stronger, at their current weight class.

As a rule of thumb, the more skill intensive a movement is, the worse it is for raw muscle building. So Bent Presses wouldn't be the first pick for shoulder development, but the standing press certainly is. Back Squats are phenomenal, but Pistols not so much. OAPUs are good, but not as good as the Bench. Weighted pull-ups > One-arm pull-up progressions. So on.

Again, ^this is solely in the context of muscle building. When it comes to building strength, this might not apply anymore (it also depends on what you define as strength). So the Bent Press, OAPU, weighted Pistol, etc can be quite good for brutal strength development.
 
305pelusa said:
I don't think it's just about the weight. You could make OAPUs and Pistols as hard (only can squeeze a couple of reps) as barbell movements. My understanding is that these unilateral calisthenics movements typically don't have the whole-body systematic stress that the big BB compound movements do. I'm not super knowledgeable about the physiology behind that. I think @Steve Freides might be able to explain it a bit better. I think Pistols and OAPUs, while they can lead to some increase in mass for those starting out and maybe doing for higher volume/compressed rest, are typically good for "lean strength" and hence a good choice for those looking to get stronger, at their current weight class.

As a rule of thumb, the more skill intensive a movement is, the worse it is for raw muscle building. So Bent Presses wouldn't be the first pick for shoulder development, but the standing press certainly is. Back Squats are phenomenal, but Pistols not so much. OAPUs are good, but not as good as the Bench. Weighted pull-ups > One-arm pull-up progressions. So on.

Again, ^this is solely in the context of muscle building. When it comes to building strength, this might not apply anymore (it also depends on what you define as strength). So the Bent Press, OAPU, weighted Pistol, etc can be quite good for brutal strength development.
Click to expand...

So here are two of us who have both read the books and do the movements, yet still don't really understand what we are doing! Uh, oh!

Having done less S&S and more NW over the past few weeks, what I think I see is clearly better appearance, as the Warrior pushups tone the torso/belly very nicely and very trimly and build pecs and the triceps muscles. This makes for the right "look". The pistols make hiking easier - I can say this as I hike a lot. As for practical strength I'm not sure the pistols are better than the kettle bell swings - I'd think the swings are a bit more practical as they involve a launching, springing movement. The pistols are harder though and the balance element adds a certain advantage. Anyhow, my current programme involves all four exercises - swings, getups, warrior pushups and squats. They all complement each other - they develop different things. I guess either programme does the trick for staying is great physical shape and having great strength, but exactly what kind of strength and shape are a bit different depending on the programme. Given that Pavel, I'm pretty sure, considers S&S the pinnacle of his research, I'll make the assumption that this is the go to programme, and I could surmise fairly succinctly why I think so, if I were asked to.
 
Anything where there is a large balance component will necessarily not be first choice for hypertrophy. That doesn't mean it can't be done, just that it's not first choice for most people, most of the time.

If you are able to do significant volume with pistols without frying your CNS - I am not - then it might be fine choice for getting bigger.

-S-
 
Steve Freides said:
Anything where there is a large balance component will necessarily not be first choice for hypertrophy. That doesn't mean it can't be done, just that it's not first choice for most people, most of the time.

If you are able to do significant volume with pistols without frying your CNS - I am not - then it might be fine choice for getting bigger.

-S-
Click to expand...
Would it be alright to ask what programme you yourself follow? S&S? I think you mentioned somewhere doing windmills because they help with a particular injury. S&S plus windmills?

Pistols fry the central nervous system? Hehehe! Funny! I have not been able to do even one yet, but I do half pistols and they're useful. I've gotten to be able to do 3 single handed (two legged) pushups in a row, so I'm hopeful for full pistols and full warrior pushups too.

You guys really have an amazing set of systems! There just really is so much baloney out there and Strong First is unique in not being baloney. I'm in AMAZING shape now, thanks to Pavel!
 
Kozushi said:
So here are two of us who have both read the books and do the movements, yet still don't really understand what we are doing! Uh, oh!

Having done less S&S and more NW over the past few weeks, what I think I see is clearly better appearance, as the Warrior pushups tone the torso/belly very nicely and very trimly and build pecs and the triceps muscles. This makes for the right "look". The pistols make hiking easier - I can say this as I hike a lot. As for practical strength I'm not sure the pistols are better than the kettle bell swings - I'd think the swings are a bit more practical as they involve a launching, springing movement. The pistols are harder though and the balance element adds a certain advantage. Anyhow, my current programme involves all four exercises - swings, getups, warrior pushups and squats. They all complement each other - they develop different things. I guess either programme does the trick for staying is great physical shape and having great strength, but exactly what kind of strength and shape are a bit different depending on the programme. Given that Pavel, I'm pretty sure, considers S&S the pinnacle of his research, I'll make the assumption that this is the go to programme, and I could surmise fairly succinctly why I think so, if I were asked to.
Click to expand...

I don't have S&S, nor do I use KBs. My passion is calisthenics. And yeah I feel you, I'm glad you're getting the results you're looking for ^_^ I was just trying to give some context as to why the OAPU, and most bodyweight exercises, don't get much coverage when the goal is bulking up.
 
32kg Get ups gave me enough of an "apperance". But I would rather work towards HSPU's if I wanted to build bigger muscle without upgrading to heavier kettlebells or buying a barbell.

I am not an expert so this is just my own concern with "warrior pushups";
For hypertrophy (bigger, etc) you need to add volume, (a pump with a "heavy resistance exercise") therefore, I have concluded that you will fry your core (or something else) with these before you start adding "serious" beef.

I would just use handstand pushups or decline pushups with both hands and add weight if necessary.

If anyone here knows better please correct me. Again, keep in mind I am no expert. It's just my personal experience that single-limb exercises weren't as good as a volume-driven pump-set of a relatively easier exercise like the dec. pushups.
 
305pelusa said:
I don't have S&S, nor do I use KBs. My passion is calisthenics. And yeah I feel you, I'm glad you're getting the results you're looking for ^_^ I was just trying to give some context as to why the OAPU, and most bodyweight exercises, don't get much coverage when the goal is bulking up.
Click to expand...
Hahaha! I suppose my goal is more to bulk DOWN - trim down while adding strength not build bulk (except it does build it in the arms and pecs!), and the one armed pushups are doing that for me. I can certainly see how they are limited in their use if you want to bulk up because your lifting weight is capped at about half of your body weight. But that's enough for me for now. Pressing about 100 lbs for several reps in one hand - that's okay!
 
apa said:
32kg Get ups gave me enough of an "apperance". But I would rather work towards HSPU's if I wanted to build bigger muscle without upgrading to heavier kettlebells or buying a barbell.

I am not an expert so this is just my own concern with "warrior pushups";
For hypertrophy (bigger, etc) you need to add volume, (a pump with a "heavy resistance exercise") therefore, I have concluded that you will fry your core (or something else) with these before you start adding "serious" beef.

I would just use handstand pushups or decline pushups with both hands and add weight if necessary.

If anyone here knows better please correct me. Again, keep in mind I am no expert. It's just my personal experience that single-limb exercises weren't as good as a volume-driven pump-set of a relatively easier exercise like the dec. pushups.
Click to expand...
I'm no expert either, but what I WANT to do is "Fry my core" as I want to trim it up and get rid of the belly - which I did with these one handed pushups. Just like in the last post, my goal is not to get bigger but smaller, stronger and trimmer actually. If you want to be a big huge wrestler or Olympic type weightlifter you can lift more with two hands than one so it makes sense to use barbells and the like. Of course. But, as I wrote above, pressing about 100lbs in one arm, isn't too bad, which is what I'm doing with these one armed pushups!
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom