He makes some interesting points which relate to the issue I mentioned yesterday - skills vs strength. Skill based movements are inappropriate for developing strength. For strength you need effort not technique. However, there is still value in developing appropriate skills....which gets me back to MovNat.....and developing useful survival skills - running, climbing, fighting etc Doug explains that fighting, self defence is a skill set.....best trained fresh to best train the skills. Which interestingly is the opposite of the Krav classes where we get beasted first and then train the skills!
The talks from Mark Sisson and Drew Baye are also worth watching.....
3 comments:
Regarding Krav thats the problem I have always had with it. Skill development is best done fresh learning to express skill under fatigue is something that should be built on top of quality movement thats already ingrained.
The rest of of the philosophy of Krav maga has always seemed right on to me but that part makes is illogical to me and prohibitive for someone who trains as much in other areas.
I disagree that skill practice is inappropriate for developing strength.
If you look at disciplines like gymnastics, capoeira, break dance, aerilism, equilibre, you will find extremely strong athletes who have developed that strength primarily through skill practice. You might argue that this practice is less safe then HIT but it is clearly they gain both tremendous strength and extraordinary skill.
I agree with the idea of separating skill work and strength work. This works both ways - there are advantages to training for strength while elminating skill demanda (i.e. HIT) and there are advantages to training for skill by eliminating strength and speed demands (i.e. Z-health, feldenkrais, slow mo movement.)
My biggest problem with movnat is that the skills necessarily require strength, speed and power, and are therefore risky.
I believe that strength is in itself a skill and should be approached as such.
http://weighttrainingforever.com/
Post a Comment