Isometric only

[MC Paul Barman]

It's been awhile since I've lifted weight regularly.
But when I did, after lifting, my muscles never seemed to have too much density to them.
They had noticeable firmness/density to them while I was lifting or if I would flex, but in a relaxed state they felt soft.
I know that's to be expected but they felt softer and looked less defined than my friends who also lifted with me.

But that was back in high school and college.


It's been quite some time since I've lifted regularly.

All of my workouts with strength development and muscle building were with lifting weights (isotonic).

Just a few weeks back I decided I wanted to get into better shape again.
I started to mess around a bit with various isometric workouts.

I was kind of shocked that in about a week and a half I'm noticing a type of density (while relaxed) to my muscles that I never would get when I did only isotonic workouts.

Also, I had heard that isometrics will not build mass. I don't know the truth to that or not, but it seems from my experience with it that it has been building mass.

With any given muscle I'll do an isometric workout and then later in the week do the same workout with that muscle, but at a different angle (not sure if I'm using the right word for that).

Has anyone ever done only isometric strength workouts?
Is there a reason why they should not be done independently of doing isotonic workouts as well?

Thanks

 

[MC Paul Barman]

To clear the air a bit....
my isometrics are not like planking.

One example of what I'll do:

I'll pull up with my bicep on one arm and push down with the tricep of my other arm while holding the position for about 15 seconds and putting a lot of strain into it. Like I'm pulling up as hard as I can while pushing down as hard as I can.

Then during the week I'll mess with the angle that I do that 'hold' with.

 

[flanellograf]

Isometrics will build mass. Probably not as much.
But in my experience they are best suited for "potentiating" strength, i.e. if you hit a plateau or sticking point in regular training, isometrics are extremely effective to get past it. My hypothesis is that they make muscle fire more effectively.
They are also very time efficient and convenient/exact when it comes to tracking strength progress. Recovery is also easier, at least for me. They don't tend to fry me as much and I can train more frequently. At least when I do them by holding a weight suspended. Concentric isometrics, i.e. pushing/pulling, is a lot more taxing and not as effective imo for increasing strength.

 

[MC Paul Barman]

Thanks for the reply and info.

So you would use isometrics to top off regular weight training; but still have weight lifting as the base?

 

[flanellograf]

Pretty much, but it was also because I got bored with one mode of training.
I also did a combination of both in workouts. Started with isometrics, and then topped it off with a regular set or two.
For instance, in bench I would do it in a rack, and keep the weight suspended at my sticking point (5-10 cm above the chest) for 5-20 seconds (if I could hold it for more than 20 I upped the weight next time). I like training low volume, so I usually only did one workset after warmup, and then one or two regular sets to top it off.

 

[Genghiz]

I've never been into the isometrics myself, but Ross Enamait incorporates them in his training books either infinite intensity or never gymless, can't remember which one.

 

[lpaulgib]

Seems like a good way to not get strong.

 

[apizur**]

The body building threads are rampant in here lately.

 

[flanellograf]

Seems like a good way to not get strong.

Yeah, because gymnasts are weak as fuck.

 

[yookfarb]

Yeah, because gymnasts are weak as fuck.

They may be strong, but they certainly aren't the strongest people in the world, nor do they have amazing overall body strength(legs).

And many of them don't limit their training just to what they do on the rings/mats.

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/livingthings/10dec_muscles.html

No one knows why this is so, but one thing seems clear: Isometric exercise might not be the best way to maintain astronaut muscles

 

[flanellograf]

They may be strong, but they certainly aren't the strongest people in the world, nor do they have amazing overall body strength(legs).

And many of them don't limit their training just to what they do on the rings/mats.

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/livingthings/10dec_muscles.html

Concentric isometrics isn't what I'm talking about. And testing rats with electrical stimulation is likely not equivalent to a human holding a weight suspended.

Gymnast may cross-train, and there are a lot of dynamic movements in gymnastics, but they mostly do isometrics for strength, to learn planche etc. Look in any gymnastics trainings manual.

Oh, they very likely are some of the strongest people relative to body weight. And the question was never if isometrics by themselves are the most optimal way to build strength. You can however get very, very strong using just isometrics (even though I. Personally think they are best suited as a supplement to regular training). I personally had some of the fastest gains in my bench when I started doing them, for instance.

 

[CarbonFistprint]

Sounds like you've discovered the secret of Dynamic Tension. Soon you'll be uppercutting any beach bullies who kick sand in your face. Like this guy:

 

[DrBdan]

Anything I've read about isometrics usually says they should work well in theory but no one uses them in practice which I think says something.

 

[ripskater]

Anything I've read about isometrics usually says they should work well in theory but no one uses them in practice which I think says something.

It would require a training partner and various objects to isometrically train at different joint angles. That makes it inconvenient and hard to do. I think it could work and it would be interesting to find out. I would guess you would get less mass compared to traditional weightlifting.

 

[lpaulgib]

Yeah, because gymnasts are weak as fuck.

Having the muscle endurance to hold yourself in awkward positions on a gym bar doesn't mean you are strong enough to say... Deadlift 2.5x your bodyweight. Its not the same

 

[StevenCrowder]

There is a TREMENDOUS value in proper isometric training.

Like many methods however, it's important to separate fact from fiction.

Of you're looking to make serious strength gains the only isometrics worthwhile, are "Overcoming isometrics (like pushing against a wall, fixed pins in a squat rack etc.)"

Static isometrics where you hold a squat, or hold a curl mid-movement are largely a waste of time. You'd be better off just doing the movement.

The beauty of overcoming isometrics is that it's similar to a 1RM, in that you are pressing/pulling as HARD as you humanly possibly can, which in turn recruits as many muscle fibers as possible. Since you're not moving the resistance through motion however (where maximal tension varies through a range), it tends to lead to less injuries. It's also much easier from which to recover due to the overall low volume. So a couple things to know.

1) If you are truly doing a maximal, overcoming isometric, you cannot hold it for 20 seconds as you're saying. 7seconds is the longest one can possibly activate all muscle fibers at that intensity (some even argue 3).

2.) Range of motion can be a problem. Though there is always an overall transfer of some strength, typically an osometric will only transfer strength gains to that specific movement 20degrees on either direction of the angle performed. To solve this, I'd reccomend performing 3 sets of Iso's at three different points of the movement. Then ideally, competing one volume set to increase bloowflow mobility. Or if you're using Iso's for a sticking point, just train that.

I've made some of my greatest strength gains using Isometrics, as have many strength athletes. Just 2 weeks ago I used Iso's to break a 2 year pull-up plateau. My program was simple.

3 sets 7second maximal pull-up iso (against immovable resistance at THREE different ranges of the movement.)
1 volume set to failure.

Was stuck at 18pull-ups at 220bbw.
Competed 24reps at the end of a 4 week program. Overhand, strict. Not kip-ups.

Did the same with push-ups. Have done the same with deadlifts in the past by simply pulling the bar 100% against the pins at different set points.

Iso's like these are the BEST CNS potentiators that I've ever used, and many strength athletes use them all the time. It's just a matter of proper incorporation, understanding their value and avoiding the misinformation out there coming from false fads.

Considering how little I care about having bulky arms, and how boring they are to train, I only train them once a week through Isos just to avoid injury and make sure they aren't a weak link. My pulling and pressing have benefited quite a bit, I'm guessing due to sheer strength gains.

Just take my gi belt out. 3 supersets of 7 second iso curl and extension (again, bottom, middle, and top ranges).
Finish up with one volume set to failure-ish. Done within 6 mins.

 

[pliftkl]

I've made some of my greatest strength gains using Isometrics, as have many strength athletes. Just 2 weeks ago I used Iso's to break a 2 year pull-up plateau. My program was simple.

3 sets 7second maximal pull-up iso (against immovable resistance at THREE different ranges of the movement.)
1 volume set to failure.

Was stuck at 18pull-ups at 220bbw.
Competed 24reps at the end of a 4 week program. Overhand, strict. Not kip-ups.

What sort of setup did you use to do pullups against an immovable object? Did you lock your feet/legs to something and pull on a fixed bar?

 

[flanellograf]

Having the muscle endurance to hold yourself in awkward positions on a gym bar doesn't mean you are strong enough to say... Deadlift 2.5x your bodyweight. Its not the same

It's not muscle endurance, it's absolute strength.
And water is wet. Any more obvious points you wanna share?

 

[flanellograf]

There is a TREMENDOUS value in proper isometric training.

Like many methods however, it's important to separate fact from fiction.

Of you're looking to make serious strength gains the only isometrics worthwhile, are "Overcoming isometrics (like pushing against a wall, fixed pins in a squat rack etc.)"

Static isometrics where you hold a squat, or hold a curl mid-movement are largely a waste of time. You'd be better off just doing the movement.

The beauty of overcoming isometrics is that it's similar to a 1RM, in that you are pressing/pulling as HARD as you humanly possibly can, which in turn recruits as many muscle fibers as possible. Since you're not moving the resistance through motion however (where maximal tension varies through a range), it tends to lead to less injuries. It's also much easier from which to recover due to the overall low volume. So a couple things to know.

1) If you are truly doing a maximal, overcoming isometric, you cannot hold it for 20 seconds as you're saying. 7seconds is the longest one can possibly activate all muscle fibers at that intensity (some even argue 3).

2.) Range of motion can be a problem. Though there is always an overall transfer of some strength, typically an osometric will only transfer strength gains to that specific movement 20degrees on either direction of the angle performed. To solve this, I'd reccomend performing 3 sets of Iso's at three different points of the movement. Then ideally, competing one volume set to increase bloowflow mobility. Or if you're using Iso's for a sticking point, just train that.

I've made some of my greatest strength gains using Isometrics, as have many strength athletes. Just 2 weeks ago I used Iso's to break a 2 year pull-up plateau. My program was simple.

3 sets 7second maximal pull-up iso (against immovable resistance at THREE different ranges of the movement.)
1 volume set to failure.

Was stuck at 18pull-ups at 220bbw.
Competed 24reps at the end of a 4 week program. Overhand, strict. Not kip-ups.

Did the same with push-ups. Have done the same with deadlifts in the past by simply pulling the bar 100% against the pins at different set points.

Iso's like these are the BEST CNS potentiators that I've ever used, and many strength athletes use them all the time. It's just a matter of proper incorporation, understanding their value and avoiding the misinformation out there coming from false fads.

Considering how little I care about having bulky arms, and how boring they are to train, I only train them once a week through Isos just to avoid injury and make sure they aren't a weak link. My pulling and pressing have benefited quite a bit, I'm guessing due to sheer strength gains.

Just take my gi belt out. 3 supersets of 7 second iso curl and extension (again, bottom, middle, and top ranges).
Finish up with one volume set to failure-ish. Done within 6 mins.

It's interesting that you found concentric iso:s to be effective, because I have found the exact opposite; that they fry your CNS and don't give much in strength gains. At least not when done as a sole mode of training. I've also injured my shoulder doing them, and I never got injured otherwise. "Eccentric" isometrics, however, i.e. holding a weight suspended at a certain position, are very effective only used by themselves, and don't tax your CNS as much. At any rate, that they are "generally worthless" is blatantly false. Just ask thousands upon thousands of gymnasts or other people who have done them (a lot of old school lifters used to).

 

[flanellograf]

Anything I've read about isometrics usually says they should work well in theory but no one uses them in practice which I think says something.

A lot of people use them in practice. To not keep harping about gymnasts, I can also mention grip training; keeping the gripper shut, working statically against resistance (even overcrushing), is a common way of training and it works extremely well.