|
2008/04/13, 08:31 PM
1. I've heard arguments against compound strength training exercises, claiming that resistance is "filtered" through stabilizing muscles and extra working muscles, reducing the overload applied to the target muscle(s), and yet others say that an effective overload can only be applied through the involvement of these muscles; which is true?
2. Do stabilizing muscles and extra working muscles receive an overload such that strength would increase, or are gains to them simply lifting coordination.
3. Reading through "Bullet Proof Abs", it mentions to avoid the involvement of the hip flexors in ab-specific exercises; is this because they're involvement would not only put stress on the lower back, but could wind up essentially doing the work for the abs, thus the stomach not receiving an overload?
|
|
|
|
2008/04/13, 10:03 PM
You should clarify question 1. I think you mean to ask whether the stabilizers can be the limiting factor in strength, in which case this is true. The advantage of machines is that they allow one to bypass this, but many times the carryover is limited if you don't train the stabilizers as well. It all comes down to the individuals weakness. If your trying to increase your overhead press and your external rotators are weak, do more work for your external rotators. If the ext rotators are more than strong enough, then machines might work well for supplemental work.
All skeletal muscles can increase in strength, down to the tongue. You can isolate (to a degree) stabilizing muscles just like any other muscle and gain strength and hypertrophy, but a good part of ANY strength increase is in coordination. The answer here is gray, not black and white.
And yes, to both. In many cases, the psoas and other hip flexors take over for the rectus. This is a big issue in physical therapy, as in many cases people have short hip flexors, and can worsen the problem doing sit ups and other abdominal exercises, even though the abdominals are weak. The therapist then has to find a way to strengthen the abdominals while loosening the hip flexors. I found it interesting to learn that a lot of times people can have tight hip flexors and a weak psoas. There are actually 5 hip flexors, and many times the others overcompensate for the psoas, but there are tests to determine this.
--------------
SQUAT MORE ~Jesse Marunde
Blood Guts Sweat Chalk
|
|
2008/04/13, 10:34 PM
1. I just wonder if the stabilizers in any multijoint movement, much like the hip flexors in an abdominal exercise, "absorb" some of the load, limiting the overload to the target muscle(s) as oppose to increasing it.
2. I mean do stabilizers increase in strength through multijoint exercises; since they're not being targetted specifically, would they receive an overload as such?
|
|
2008/04/14, 01:30 PM
2. A strength promoting overload that is.
|
|
2008/04/15, 07:41 AM
Now I know you are overthinking things. You just asked me whether a compound movement that involves stabilizers will make you stronger than an isolation exercise targeting the prime mover, and then asked whether your stabilizers get stronger in multijoint exercises. This seems like it would be common sense to anyone spending time under a bar.
I think you are trying to do something like compare a chest fly to a bench press for pectoral strength. If you think you'll get stronger doing flyes, then by all means, but I think this should be common sense.
Lift weights, get stronger. Lift using compound movements, make many muscles (including stabilizers) stronger.
--------------
SQUAT MORE ~Jesse Marunde
Blood Guts Sweat Chalk
|
|
2008/04/15, 01:21 PM
Between isolation and compound exercises, I am and almost always have been positive that the latter are more effective at building functional strength; this really has nothing to do with training.
|
|
2008/04/15, 03:11 PM
You're asking training questions, in a forum dedicated to powerlifting. It has everything to do with training. You answered your own question.
--------------
SQUAT MORE ~Jesse Marunde
Blood Guts Sweat Chalk
|
|
2008/04/15, 07:32 PM
Whether or not compound exercises were superior than isolation was never in question for me; I was merely wondering about certain specific aspects about them.
I meant it has nothing to do with MY training, just related things.
|
|
2008/04/16, 08:12 AM
Regardless, it should be obvious. If you go from a 135lb bench to a 225lb bench, both your stabilizers and prime movers got stronger. Compare this to going from 30lbs to 60lbs in a chest fly, which would probably be tougher to do, and would result in less strength gains in the pectorals than the bench press increase. And if your stabilizers end up being the weak point, then you can train them, that is what accessory work is for.
--------------
SQUAT MORE ~Jesse Marunde
Blood Guts Sweat Chalk
|
