It might well do, but it is also rich in information to the body. In contrst what do smooth and fixed planes of motion tell our body about the environment we operate in?
The guy doing the lifting is huge! It was frightening watching the guys hold onto the bar while the lifter pressed them to the sky. Takes some serious control.
Asclepius, I'm curious, do you personally combine maximal effort and instability in your training (if so some examples would be great) or are you only arguing in the abstract that this is a good thing for people to do?
I have no problem using 'unconventional' objects and employing them in my training. I am also a fan of asymmetric exercises. It is part of my mix. E.g. I shoulder my heavy duty kick bag and walk around with it. Occasionally I throw medicine balls around (one handed). In the first case I could use a sandbag, in the second I could use rocks (and on occasion have done).
Now if you have developed massive strength using the tight planes of a pressing machine then perhaps what the guy above does might lead to an injury if he continued to go full tilt every session with a guy hanging off each end of his barbell. But if you have incorporated such 'awkward' weight in to your training from the outset, your body is obviously better prepared.
Another example. Last year I had to carry several tonnes of rocks around my garden to build a rockery. The rocks were big and heavy and anything but regular in shape. I *suspect* that my weekly training prepared me quite well to lift the rocks from A to B as fast as I did.
The point is that the application of strength in the REAL WORLD was in anything but a controlled and orderly fashion in the way you'd use weights in a gym.
And that is what I train for - to have the capacity to handle life's slings and arrows which I assume will fire upon me in (what is it the paleo-econs call it?)...a none Baysian distribution!
the one doing lifting is certainly strong, but still he has a good deal of abdominal obesity (=not a 'leangains' body type) - doesn't make sense unless he is in a profession which requires that much strength
Asclepius, yes, thanks for answering my question. Your examples are good ones but look to be life not so close to the edge as the guy in the clip. My training approach is actually the same as yours (that's why I asked), I don't use machines and also value unstable, asymmetrical real life strength/skill components in training but never attempt maximal efforts in conjunction with instability. I accent one or the other separately for safety reasons.
We could put this in a paleo context of, say, wrestling to subdue live prey to get a sense of the training skill.
Yes, Chris, exactly. Thanks for stating that explicitly. Many, many people injure themselves needlessly exercising and it would be sad if someone thought this would be a good thing to try "at home".
10 comments:
Weight that wobbles ups the ante, and the risk...just sayin.
It might well do, but it is also rich in information to the body. In contrst what do smooth and fixed planes of motion tell our body about the environment we operate in?
The guy doing the lifting is huge! It was frightening watching the guys hold onto the bar while the lifter pressed them to the sky. Takes some serious control.
Asclepius, I'm curious, do you personally combine maximal effort and instability in your training (if so some examples would be great) or are you only arguing in the abstract that this is a good thing for people to do?
I have no problem using 'unconventional' objects and employing them in my training. I am also a fan of asymmetric exercises. It is part of my mix. E.g. I shoulder my heavy duty kick bag and walk around with it. Occasionally I throw medicine balls around (one handed). In the first case I could use a sandbag, in the second I could use rocks (and on occasion have done).
Now if you have developed massive strength using the tight planes of a pressing machine then perhaps what the guy above does might lead to an injury if he continued to go full tilt every session with a guy hanging off each end of his barbell. But if you have incorporated such 'awkward' weight in to your training from the outset, your body is obviously better prepared.
Another example. Last year I had to carry several tonnes of rocks around my garden to build a rockery. The rocks were big and heavy and anything but regular in shape. I *suspect* that my weekly training prepared me quite well to lift the rocks from A to B as fast as I did.
The point is that the application of strength in the REAL WORLD was in anything but a controlled and orderly fashion in the way you'd use weights in a gym.
And that is what I train for - to have the capacity to handle life's slings and arrows which I assume will fire upon me in (what is it the paleo-econs call it?)...a none Baysian distribution!
Does this answer your question?
If the "weights" had done a few kips I'd be really impressed.
the one doing lifting is certainly strong, but still he has a good deal of abdominal obesity (=not a 'leangains' body type) - doesn't make sense unless he is in a profession which requires that much strength
Asclepius, yes, thanks for answering my question. Your examples are good ones but look to be life not so close to the edge as the guy in the clip. My training approach is actually the same as yours (that's why I asked), I don't use machines and also value unstable, asymmetrical real life strength/skill components in training but never attempt maximal efforts in conjunction with instability. I accent one or the other separately for safety reasons.
We could put this in a paleo context of, say, wrestling to subdue live prey to get a sense of the training skill.
Do you not think we are taking this a bit too seriously? This video is not a prescription for you to copy....just a bit of fun
Yes, Chris, exactly. Thanks for stating that explicitly. Many, many people injure themselves needlessly exercising and it would be sad if someone thought this would be a good thing to try "at home".
Post a Comment