A
anvar
Guest
Lol if anyone here is involoved in sports for their career like myself....shit like this is common! People bash and yell, debate and fight, kick and scream...get used to it or buy a chess board!
ENTROPY said:Before I begin, I
cockysprinter said:hes said it millions of times, look through this board or his.
ENTROPY said:* Belt use.
I disagree with belt use entirely. I
Madmick said:I thought the point of the belt was to compensate for the natural strength imbalance between the abdominals and the lower back? I know said imbalance will have to be endured on the field, and I know you won't wear a belt on the field...but then, you won't be put laying 600 pounds across your back on the field, either.
Monger said:I was just curious if you seen any stats on overhead pressing vs. injury. What I'm really trying to get at is that I've had tears in my labrum tendon twice and once in my rotator cuff and both required surgery (same shoulder). I do both MT/Boxing along with strength training. I really have no idea which one is more the cause of my injury and at the moment I'm nervous as hell of going through that crap again. I'm doing all the rotator cuff exercises to try to stay strong there. Any thoughts on overhead pressing with previously injured labrum/rotator cuff? Good or bad? Sorry to get off topic in the thread.
ENTROPY said:The assistance provided by a belt during exercise occurs as a result of increased abdominal pressure, reduced compressive and shear forces on the spine, and restricted torso movement which in turn allows for greater stability. It is for these exact reasons, that the strength qualities developed during belt use, will not have the same functional strength transfer to athletic action as non belt actions.
rickdog said:Sorry for the off subject for a second. Sonny, that is a drastic av switch. You went from Phil Collins to Pete "El Duro" Williams. Why such a drastic switch man.
ENTROPY said:The assistance provided by a belt during exercise occurs as a result of increased abdominal pressure, reduced compressive and shear forces on the spine, and restricted torso movement which in turn allows for greater stability. It is for these exact reasons, that the strength qualities developed during belt use, will not have the same functional strength transfer to athletic action as non belt actions.
To assume that the strength qualities obtained are equal between both variations would require that an increase in the machine squat strength has the same functional carry over to sports as the standard squat which clearly is untrue. Though an extreme example, the exact reasons why one is dominant over the other are virtually identical to belted vs non-belted squats.
Squatting without a belt requires far greater stabilization and contraction of the core musculature, which is not only responsible for maintaining the stability of the spine and pelvis, but in the case of athletic expression, is also responsible for the transfer of energy from large to small body parts. As such, an increase in a non-belted squat will pay bigger dividends in terms of functional strength in the long run by way of greater CNS efficiency, etc.
If belts truly had a benefit in terms of increasing athletic strength expression, one would observe that if a lifter increases his belted squat, that an expected increase should occur in the non belted squat. Interestingly, this has not been observed!
ENTROPY said:Sorry been slammed at work and missed your post as a result.
I have not seen research showing a statistical corellation between overhead pressing vs injury.
101pro said:The valsalva maneuver provides protection for the same reason.
As a side note, I have a lot of respect for Entropy. His replies to posts always show a lot of thought and whether or not you agree with him they are informative and make you think. While thinking can be painful it's how the SC community learns and grows over time.
Sonny said:Really? funny I don't remember him saying it at the time, but I did tend to ignore him towards the end of his stay here at Sherdog.
cockysprinter said:http://powerdevelopmentinc.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=32&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=10
heres one place to start. i looked through his posts here on sherdog but couldnt find anything. ive seen james post on way more places than sherdog, so maybe i got mixed up.
James Smith said:Now, as far as what are the most beneficial lifts for MMA goes; we must first perform a cost:benefit analysis.
1. Although the OL's are great for power development they are also much slower to learn than the powerlifts, with a higher risk of injury, due to high technical demand, and shorter career longevity of competitive lifters.
2. The snatch is the fastest lift around, however, many NON olympic lifters tend to suffer from fraying of the labrum from performing snatches.
3. Cleans pose a risk to injuring the wrists, and the act of racking the weight on the clavicle, following the pull, is of no athletic use.
I am a fan of pull variations, both snatch and clean grip. The execution of pulls allows the athlete to focus on true triple extension without prematurely squatting to either catch the bar during the clean or executing the snatch.
Heavy backward overhead medicine ball throws are also a fantastic tool for developing true hip extension and power development. This type of throw allows the athlete to reap all of the athletic rewards of the snatch without the trauma to the shoulder capsule.
All in all, and in my opinion, there is no reason for anyone to perform the classical Olympic lifts (snatch, clean and jerk) unless you are either required to test in the power clean (which many football players are) or are training to be a competitive Olympic weightlifter.