It's a ratio of strength, particularly considering the triceps are the "size muscles" of the upper arm. I don't know how you'd measure the size of the individual muscles, anyway.
The ratio is actually in regards to the ligament tightness, hence pull strength. You see, as you strengthen a muscle, the associated tendons get stronger and the ligaments tighter. Ligaments hold joints together in the proper fashion, so if you imbalance the ligaments you imbalance the joint. More specifically, if you imbalance the muscles, you imbalance the ligaments, and you imbalance the joint. Then all you have to do is screw up and [bam] the joint is good and funked.
As a side note, the use of steroids only increases muscle strength. As such, if the user puts on muscle too quickly, the tendons don't have time to catch up, and can snap. Another good reason to do it au naturale. I digress.
If you want to know the details, though, the ratio is meant for work done at similar speeds for both muscles. The speed is measured in degrees per second, not just how fast you finish out the rep. Also, the speed must be consistent throughout the movement. Really, it's meant for a special kind of equipment that measures rotation speed, but you can rig it by moving through a similar range of motion with as consistent of speed as possible.
The big problem, though, is that it's difficult to find positions / exercises that have the exact same forces generated on the muscles. For instance, with a normal bicep curl, the upper arm hangs in a neutral position, with little to no interaction from the shoulder joint position. However, in a preacher curl, the muscle is shortened, hence weakened; the bicep not only flexes the elbow but the shoulder to a small extent. If the shoulder is extended, the muscle is stretched and again weakened. The triceps have similar issues. It makes it worse that a little adduction or abduction of the shoulder joint also throws off the focus of the varying heads of the muscles.
So, you can't compare a bicep curl's weight capacity to a dumbbell kickback's. I have no idea exactly how much a muscle is weakened with the amount of shoulder flexion or extension; I suppose I could find out with some vulgar experimentation, but it's really not my area of interest at the moment.
I've thought of trying to do this kind of experiment with a cable, doing a cable curl and a cable pressdown and comparing the two, and it doesn't seem bad. I don't know the exact dynamics of the cable-pulley system, but I bet if you stood in the exact same place, with the exact same posture, with the pulley an equal distance from the elbow in either direction, you could get a decent reading. Of course, you still have to move the same speed and distance.
There are other ratios to take into account also, though I dug these up mostly from internet sites a while back. They seem reasonable, but...well, logic only gets you so far without testing.
[3:1] rotator cuff rotation, internal:external
[3:2] shoulder, extension:flexion (rear:front deltoid raise)
[1:1] wrist, extensors:flexors (wrist extension:curl)
[1:1] spine, extension:flexion (back:ab crunch)
[1:1] hip, abduction:adduction
[3:2] quadriceps:hamstrings (knee extension:flexion)
[3:1] ankle, extension:flexion (don't know for sure, considering the gastroc and soleus both extend the ankle)
I found nothing but conflicting answers about a possible bench press vs. lat pulldown ratio, whereas the ratios above were all consistent.
Madmick, do they show ratios for lots of different joints in your book, or just the quad:ham one? That's the only one I found in my ACE manual, though I actually researched the hip ab:ad one in an article through InfoTrac concerning tennis players.
The ratio is actually in regards to the ligament tightness, hence pull strength. You see, as you strengthen a muscle, the associated tendons get stronger and the ligaments tighter. Ligaments hold joints together in the proper fashion, so if you imbalance the ligaments you imbalance the joint. More specifically, if you imbalance the muscles, you imbalance the ligaments, and you imbalance the joint. Then all you have to do is screw up and [bam] the joint is good and funked.
As a side note, the use of steroids only increases muscle strength. As such, if the user puts on muscle too quickly, the tendons don't have time to catch up, and can snap. Another good reason to do it au naturale. I digress.
If you want to know the details, though, the ratio is meant for work done at similar speeds for both muscles. The speed is measured in degrees per second, not just how fast you finish out the rep. Also, the speed must be consistent throughout the movement. Really, it's meant for a special kind of equipment that measures rotation speed, but you can rig it by moving through a similar range of motion with as consistent of speed as possible.
The big problem, though, is that it's difficult to find positions / exercises that have the exact same forces generated on the muscles. For instance, with a normal bicep curl, the upper arm hangs in a neutral position, with little to no interaction from the shoulder joint position. However, in a preacher curl, the muscle is shortened, hence weakened; the bicep not only flexes the elbow but the shoulder to a small extent. If the shoulder is extended, the muscle is stretched and again weakened. The triceps have similar issues. It makes it worse that a little adduction or abduction of the shoulder joint also throws off the focus of the varying heads of the muscles.
So, you can't compare a bicep curl's weight capacity to a dumbbell kickback's. I have no idea exactly how much a muscle is weakened with the amount of shoulder flexion or extension; I suppose I could find out with some vulgar experimentation, but it's really not my area of interest at the moment.
I've thought of trying to do this kind of experiment with a cable, doing a cable curl and a cable pressdown and comparing the two, and it doesn't seem bad. I don't know the exact dynamics of the cable-pulley system, but I bet if you stood in the exact same place, with the exact same posture, with the pulley an equal distance from the elbow in either direction, you could get a decent reading. Of course, you still have to move the same speed and distance.
There are other ratios to take into account also, though I dug these up mostly from internet sites a while back. They seem reasonable, but...well, logic only gets you so far without testing.
[3:1] rotator cuff rotation, internal:external
[3:2] shoulder, extension:flexion (rear:front deltoid raise)
[1:1] wrist, extensors:flexors (wrist extension:curl)
[1:1] spine, extension:flexion (back:ab crunch)
[1:1] hip, abduction:adduction
[3:2] quadriceps:hamstrings (knee extension:flexion)
[3:1] ankle, extension:flexion (don't know for sure, considering the gastroc and soleus both extend the ankle)
I found nothing but conflicting answers about a possible bench press vs. lat pulldown ratio, whereas the ratios above were all consistent.
Madmick, do they show ratios for lots of different joints in your book, or just the quad:ham one? That's the only one I found in my ACE manual, though I actually researched the hip ab:ad one in an article through InfoTrac concerning tennis players.
