what is more important exercise for fighter

[rizky]

If i'm a stand up fighter which one is more important

1) working on my abs (do a lot of sit up like old school style), working on light neck crunches like high reps,

Or

2) do heavy squat , deads (lift a lot of weight)

Because i've seen muay thai training in thailand do like number 1

 

[Noodles03]

Between the the two, I would lean towards number 1.

 

[NurseKnuckles]

If i'm a stand up fighter which one is more important

1) working on my abs (do a lot of sit up like old school style), working on light neck crunches like high reps,

Or

2) do heavy squat , deads (lift a lot of weight)

Because i've seen muay thai training in thailand do like number 1

I'm really interested in becoming a hockey player which one is more important?

1. doing this exercise?

2. or doing this exercise?

You see what I did there?

 

[NurseKnuckles]

I'm interested in becoming a football player which is more important?

1. doing this exercise?

2. or doing this exercise?

You getting the point?

 

[ripskater]

That depends on the person.

A person with hyperlordosis is much better off doing the abdominal strengthening.

 

[j123]

#2 is better in the long run. Not just for strength, but injury prevention from muscle imbalances.
Results won't be significant within the first few months, but near a year or 2 down the road, it'll really show.

If you're training old school, eg. unreal amount of circuits with BW exercises, and running mini marathons everyday (6-10k), you will have problems. esp. if you eat at a deficit.

Low calories + lack of strength + muscle imbalance = problems.

I'd even argue that you'd run into knee and chronic joint pain if you do that type of "conditioning" year round for a few years.

I never got the whole giant set of 100+ crunches. I think it's more mental conditioning than actual physical conditioning. Because regardless, getting hit downstairs, doing high reps isn't going to save you. Even building up a strong core with weights won't resist the force of a full torque strike.
If anything, it should be strengthened for balance, stability, not tearing when doing explosive movements. The purpose to training the core shouldn't be to "withstand strikes".

 

[ROcknrollracing]

If you squat 4-500 pounds your core is plenty strong...i just had this discussion with somebody.....a 135 pounder with a 250 pound squat has a weaker "core" than a 405 squatter that weighs 185ish 10 times out of 10 and you will be a better fighter because of it...everybody tries to make martial arts this super complicated secret knowledge crapola when just like other sports it is simple

 

[j123]

If you squat 4-500 pounds your core is plenty strong...i just had this discussion with somebody.....a 135 pounder with a 250 pound squat has a weaker "core" than a 405 squatter that weighs 185ish 10 times out of 10 and you will be a better fighter because of it...everybody tries to make martial arts this super complicated secret knowledge crapola when just like other sports it is simple

Do you think it might be due to the weight class limit in the sport? Other sports, athletes just get as big and strong as possible, given of course their performance doesn't suffer. Some sprinters are over 200lbs.
With martial arts/combat sports, everyone's restricting themselves thinking lifting weights make you bulky, etc.

One teammate of mine is a pretty decent fighter, but said he gained 10lbs in 4 months from lifting and it threw him over his weight class, so he stopped. Of course, anyone who knows how to bulk properly knows thats bs, and its fat and/or water.

 

[ROcknrollracing]

My opinion on that is that unless you are competing at a "high" level and by that i mean for money(in an artificial weight class)it is best to just train and get bigger for basically all sports. When you are getting paid or competing in international type competitions then weight class considerations come into play obviously and even then it is simple you just get stronger on the basic lifts. Im not saying specific "core" work is useless in some cases but I dont think its necessary to perform well or be strong.

I will give you an example from another sport. Lebron James. Remember he lost a bunch of weight to try to save his knees two years ago but then realized he performed better being heavier and stronger and thus he won the title. Now im not saying everybody should be a 275 pound powerlifter for all sports either but you have to try really hard to do that obviously and at that point all the strength and "core" work is just going to tap into your recovery ability to play at what your optimal ability is. Being too big really isnt a problem for most anybody in sports.

At any rate no I dont think specific core work other than just doing the basic lifts is necessary for athletes. It is pretty funny when i see men at the gym doing situps and having somebody punch them in the abs with a pad thinking thats going to help them perform better instead of EVER doing a squat go figure.

 

[rizky]

My opinion on that is that unless you are competing at a "high" level and by that i mean for money(in an artificial weight class)it is best to just train and get bigger for basically all sports. When you are getting paid or competing in international type competitions then weight class considerations come into play obviously and even then it is simple you just get stronger on the basic lifts. Im not saying specific "core" work is useless in some cases but I dont think its necessary to perform well or be strong.

I will give you an example from another sport. Lebron James. Remember he lost a bunch of weight to try to save his knees two years ago but then realized he performed better being heavier and stronger and thus he won the title. Now im not saying everybody should be a 275 pound powerlifter for all sports either but you have to try really hard to do that obviously and at that point all the strength and "core" work is just going to tap into your recovery ability to play at what your optimal ability is. Being too big really isnt a problem for most anybody in sports.

At any rate no I dont think specific core work other than just doing the basic lifts is necessary for athletes. It is pretty funny when i see men at the gym doing situps and having somebody punch them in the abs with a pad thinking thats going to help them perform better instead of EVER doing a squat go figure.

But why if you look at the Thai muay thai fighter. They rarely done heavy squat but they perform best with the training like a men who do sit up and somebody punch him in the stomach. Also if you look at Japanese kyokushin fighter. They're really tough with type 1 of training

 

[Kiwi Tricker]

Thai fighters also train 6 hours a day, 6 days a week from the age of 8.

I fight. I lift heavy. It benefits me.

 

[NurseKnuckles]

Thai fighters also train 6 hours a day, 6 days a week from the age of 8.

I fight. I lift heavy. It benefits me.

Right, like you know anything about what Thai fighters do... Go back to your mom's basement, keyboard dragon master!

 

[ASUThermo]

Stick with the light neck crunches and a lot of like old school style sit-ups, your stand-up game will come along without much else.

 

[selfcritical]

It is both the case that the heavy compound movements are better GPP developers than abdominal work AND that the squat is vastly overrated as development for the core other than the erectors (which is just intuitive. Muscles in general see development best by moving them through a large range of motion with some force directly opposing them. Squatting for abs/obliques won't be optimal for that)

That said, boxing is an unloaded sport so your strength development is pretty low priority compared to your technical/tactical skills, aerobic conditioning, and muscular endurance.

 

[ROcknrollracing]

Wrong^

 

[rizky]

It is both the case that the heavy compound movements are better GPP developers than abdominal work AND that the squat is vastly overrated as development for the core other than the erectors (which is just intuitive. Muscles in general see development best by moving them through a large range of motion with some force directly opposing them. Squatting for abs/obliques won't be optimal for that)

That said, boxing is an unloaded sport so your strength development is pretty low priority compared to your technical/tactical skills, aerobic conditioning, and muscular endurance.

What is GPP

 

[Badger67]

General physical preparedness

 

[Sano]

Wrong^

You don't know what you are talking about dude. He's right on the money. Where you want to prioritize depends on the sport, and the athlete. Squats done right are good for a lot of things, but there are also a lot of things they don't cover.

It is both the case that the heavy compound movements are better GPP developers than abdominal work AND that the squat is vastly overrated as development for the core other than the erectors (which is just intuitive. Muscles in general see development best by moving them through a large range of motion with some force directly opposing them. Squatting for abs/obliques won't be optimal for that)

That said, boxing is an unloaded sport so your strength development is pretty low priority compared to your technical/tactical skills, aerobic conditioning, and muscular endurance.

"Core" is such a broad term in reality and the movements and muscles of the trunc work in many different ways. Try getting someone who powerlifts to do a full arch body hold for 60 seconds and most can't do it.

 

[ROcknrollracing]

I know exactly what im talking about dude. A pro athlete doesnt have to do core work OR squat period(and in some sports some athletes notoriously dont even do strength work at all) because by definition they are strong enough to play the sport in the core and everywhere else(genetics). That said a 500 pound squatter or even 400 pound has a (much)stronger "core" than a 135 pound boxer that doesnt squat and only does ab work vs the 500 pound squatter that does no specific core work. If think that is wrong then you are the one who does not know what they are talking about.....if you have a rebuttal im more than willing to engage further but my guess is you do not.

 

[selfcritical]

How important they are for a given sports performance will of course vary, but EMG numbers for Squat simply do not bear out that they are maximally developing the abdominals. Remember, the abdominals and errector spinae are antagonistic, and the errector spinae are directly opposing the force of gravity as applied by the barbell as you deviate from a perfectly straight position. You'd bend the fuck over if you maximally contracted your abs. Also, you can't successfully push out your stomach against the belt with a true maximal contraction, because that would result in a hollowed position, and your stomach wouldn't be anywhere near the GD belt. It plays a role in IAP, but not greater than the obliques, diaprahm and spinal errectors.