Ankle / leg strenghth - "ski fitness"

PMTS Forum

Postby mkgil » Wed Dec 08, 2004 7:13 pm

BigE wrote:
YIIKES! Hypertrophy/strength training does not require full range of motion; that is a myth. The stress at full range of motion is not what makes your muscles big or strong. It's all about time under tension and load. Why is an eccentric phase to a lift useful? It increases time under tension. Look at the bicep curl as an example. Why increase load? Current theory is microtears of muscle tissue stop occurring, and increased load is required to start the tear/heal process.

I don't think that the same reasoning at all applies to meniscus. Otherwise, my meniscus would be HYOOGE!


Well, let's continue our good-natured disagreement. (And I do intend that it remain respectful.) I don't believe the benefits of full ROM are mythical. If you only did curls and close-grip benchs for half the ROM, do you think your arms would gain the same size and strength as if you did those same exercises at full ROM? There is a place for partials, and that place is to break through sticking points, or because of current injury/compromise.

But we could bypass the issue of hypertrophy and focus on strength. Let's examine the practice of the experts, the folks who compete at an elite level in powerlifting and olympic lifting. They need techniques with the maximum strength-producing results and the minimum risk of competition-ending injuries. If full ROM were a myth--and dangerous--these folks would restrict their training to only enough full range ROM to "keep the goove greased" for their competetive lifts. In their assistance exercises they would have no reason to ever do anything other than partials. No powerlifting or olympic lifting coach of whom I'm aware trains lifters this way.

You mention time under tension (TUT). What better way to increase TUT than by safely increasing the ROM/distance through which the weight travels? More about safety below.

You accurately point out that the miniscus isn't subject to hypertrophy. It will, however, benefit from the increased stability of a knee joint that has powerful muscles and strong, thick tendons protecting it. Tendons certainly thicken from systematic exposure to load, and they are most exposed to beneficial microtrauma at the point of maximum eccentric contaction of the target muscles: full ROM. Yes, at full ROM the connective tissue is also vulnerable to injury from inappropriate warm-up, faulty biomechanics, etc. But that argues for the competent supervision that Piggyslayer called for, not the abstention of training a joint through the full ROM for which it is anatomically designed.

Let me finish with the example of olympic lifters in the bottom of the snatch or the bottom of the clean in the clean and jerk. Any of you who have ever watched those lifts on TV, have seen athletes drop--fast!--into such a deep positon that their butts are almost in contact with the floor. And they're doing that with massive poundages on the bar. As a group, these folks have remarkably sound knees--that are surrounded by some steel tendons.

Now of course they didn't start as olympic lifters to rehab a knee. Presumably they had healthy knees to start with. But they kept them that way through sound training that worked the joints through full ROM. Skiing can subject the knee to unpredictable strain. Think about another skier who careens into you. The strains can force the knee into extreme positions that you didn't intend. If the knee can wind up in those extreme positions, why not carefully train it in the most extreme positons that you safely can. Safety presumes sound technique taught by a knowledgeable source.

Michael
mkgil
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2004 1:57 pm

Postby mkgil » Wed Dec 08, 2004 7:29 pm

BigE wrote:In fact, the most dangerous position in which to change direction is when the knees are at right angles. That's the position that orthopedic surgeons test the knee for instability. Why? It's most unstable there.

So, I'd not recommend even going that far..... There are much safer ways to strengthen the quads and spinal erectors and glutes.


So I wouldn't recommend that one get to right angles and then change direction laterally. :)

But, since the knees are least stable to lateral displacement at right angles, why pause there? Move smoothly past that unstable point to full bottom position where, with a suitably wide stance, the knees are not as vulnerable to unintended lateral displacement.

I've enjoyed the sparring BigE. I often find it useful to be challanged. Sometimes I'm forced to change my opinion, but even when I don't, I'm forced to think clearly through a postion. At the very least, forum members unfamiliar with the squat would now realize that many issues must be addressed.

Michael
mkgil
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2004 1:57 pm

No worries.

Postby BigE » Thu Dec 09, 2004 9:05 am

Sparring is fun!

Everything you say is right -- if your sport is powerlifting/olympic lifting. Individuals that are involved in these sports MUST train using the full ROM, since those sports require full ROM.

I would add that neither olympic or powerlifters train with weights anywhere near their competition standards, and in fact, train quite extensively with weights that are well below 50% of the competition levels. No one calls them wimps.

They are also very often hurt. And it's the knees that suffer the most. precisely because of the ROM and the explosive power they need to harness.

The failing of full ROM squats is that people do them with weights and reps that exceed their needs. eg. 20 rep squats at bodyweight was popular at one time as a mass building exercise.

OK, who does that? Bodybuilders. How does that relate to skiing? Not one bit.

The issues with suggesting such exercises should be done by joe average is enourmous. First off, joe average is not an experienced lifter. Most damage to joe is done early in his lifting career, by going too heavy too early. The damage is increased by full ROM movement.

Remember, we are talking about folks that have little experience: "Hey have you tried squating? No?! Well you should, and you should go ass the the grass. just look at powerlifters." That sounds so wrong it's unbelievable folks say those things....

The way to get around injury and STILL use full ROM exercises is to use sufficiently light weight. Most find this very difficult to do, as they look really wimpy. They are so self conscious that they will try to lift too heavy too early, and cause damage to connective tissue. This is coupled with the mistaken opinion that they are getting stronger week to week so they should lift more week to week. A clear recipe for disaster.

The first "strength gains" are purely neurogical: the body learns to recruit more muscle fibres. As "strength" increases, folks increase poundages. Many times much too fast.

These are folks that have no idea about periodization -- they jump into the gym, do full ROM and stack the weights on as fast as possible, each and every time out, because of some magazine article spouting "Joe Weiders training tips".

The other way to limit the injury rate is to avoid full ROM. The problem with that, is that they have no clue as to what full ROM of an exercise really means.

Injuries from full ROM exercises can be very crippling. eg. Dumbell flyes. Just because the arms move that far back does not mean the exercise demands it. Improper dumbell flyes through excessive ROM is the quickest way to tear a rotator cuff. The weight need not be all that heavy either.

Full ROM is more often than not, the WRONG way to do a particular exercise. And if the lifter's ONLY clue is that full ROM is good, they will hurt themselves. I guarantee it.

Other examples: upright rowing lifting the bar above the shoulders, behind the neck press bar below the ears. The list is endless, shrugs, dips, back hypers, lat raises.... I could go on and on and on listing exercises that MUST not be done with full ROM -- BY ANYONE!

A lifter is considered a novice until they have been lifting for 1 year, 3 times per week, full body. It is then that you can be assured that the connective tissue is strong enough, and correct movements are imprinted in the body. It is then that you can be assured your form won't fall apart when you start to lift a bit heavier.

Which brings me to another "vogue" activity: Lifting to failure. Don't. I doubt that one of 100 lifters actually knows what that means. You could be surprised: It means failure to maintain form.

Imagine failing just when coming up from the squat. It's not a matter of avoiding injury, it's now just a question of what kind and how bad. Light weights will mitigate the problem. OTOH, heavy ass to the grass lifts, inexperience, overtraining, improper workout schedules(no periodization), poor form, poor nutrition (eg, dieting) and bobbling on the way up from a squat on rep 17 of 20. Geez it hurts just thinking about it.

To suggest that we all run to the gym and immediately partake in full ROM exercises is exceedingly dangerous.
BigE
 
Posts: 1519
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 11:42 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: No worries.

Postby mkgil » Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:14 pm

BigE wrote:
Everything you say is right -- if your sport is powerlifting/olympic lifting. Individuals that are involved in these sports MUST train using the full ROM, since those sports require full ROM.


Well, by now, E, we're probably writing only to each other. But, what the heck, let's continue our good-natured disagreement. Actually, we appear to agree on many things. Debate tends to hightlight the differences.

You imply that olympic lifting requires full ROM, but skiing doesn't. That allows me to make a useful distinction here. Recall that several miles of emails ago I recommended that anyone with compromised functioning should follow your advice to not squat below parallel. That applies to lower back and knees (and ankles and hips and . . .) So we're presuming an audience not in need of rehab. (Some of them will eventually benefit from full squats, but let's try to stay focused here.) Now that audience may be divided into those who ski cautiously and don't want to make a chore out of it, and those who are athletic by inclination and are always pressing their personal limits. I suggest that the latter group of folks frequently find themselves by design or accident in deep flexion of the knee. My point is that skiers with an athlete's mentality who push themselves are going to benefit from strength and tendon thickness at pretty complete ROMs. If that's true, it makes sense to learn what we can from folks who use an extreme version of full ROM under load, without trying to duplicate their exact methods.

I would add that neither olympic or powerlifters train with weights anywhere near their competition standards, and in fact, train quite extensively with weights that are well below 50% of the competition levels. No one calls them wimps.


Gonna call you on that one. When they periodize, they certainly have cycles at 50% of 1RM. But at the peak of their intense cycle they're doing heavy doubles and triples. Those weights are much higher than 50% of 1RM.

They are also very often hurt. And it's the knees that suffer the most. precisely because of the ROM and the explosive power they need to harness.


E, you're going to have to give me your source here. That counterdicts my experience and the experience of the strength coaches I've known. If readers follow the results of olympic lifting at state and regional levels as well as national levels, they will have noticed that most of the names appear year after year. (Don't laugh; there may be one or two out there who follow lifting results as avidly as ski forums.) Very rarely will an injury report involve knee surgery rather than the tweaks that are part of any sport. Knee injuries are common among competitive skiers, football running backs, and anyone Tonya Harding doesn't like, but not with olympic lifters. I have an acquaintance who trains olympic lifters and was himself a member of the 1980 US team. I checked to see if my information was outdated; he says not.

The failing of full ROM squats is that people do them with weights and reps that exceed their needs.


But that's a failure of judgement or coaching, not of the lift.

The way to get around injury and STILL use full ROM exercises is to use sufficiently light weight. Most find this very difficult to do, as they look really wimpy. They are so self conscious that they will try to lift too heavy too early, and cause damage to connective tissue. This is coupled with the mistaken opinion that they are getting stronger week to week so they should lift more week to week. A clear recipe for disaster.

These are folks that have no idea about periodization -- they jump into the gym, do full ROM and stack the weights on as fast as possible, each and every time out, because of some magazine article spouting "Joe Weiders training tips".


Yep. We're in agreement here. That's why both Piggyslayer and I recommended knowledgeable supervision.

Injuries from full ROM exercises can be very crippling. eg. Dumbell flyes. Just because the arms move that far back does not mean the exercise demands it. Improper dumbell flyes through excessive ROM is the quickest way to tear a rotator cuff. The weight need not be all that heavy either.


But if a lifter aggressively engaged in activities where the pectoralis and shoulder joint were drawn that far back, they should train that way--safely. While seated or lying down, postion your hands as they would be at the top of a DB flye. Bend your elbows slightly, and keep that angle of bend constant. Now imitate the concentric portion of the flye. Your upper arm is probably about 100 degrees from the starting position, 110 degrees if you're flexible. You can safely use weights to that same degree of movement if proper form is followed and the lowering phase is under complete control.

Other examples: upright rowing lifting the bar above the shoulders, behind the neck press bar below the ears. The list is endless, shrugs, dips, back hypers, lat raises.... I could go on and on and on listing exercises that MUST not be done with full ROM -- BY ANYONE!


There are few absolutes in training, including your list and last sentence. I'll take just one, behind neck presses (BNP). Any one with no laxity in the shoulder joint who takes the time to develop very good flexibility in the shoulder joint can do BNP, if the movement is controlled, the weight is well thought out, and s/he doesn't extend the neck forward for bar clearance.

In college atheletics I shattered my right acromiolclavicular joint so badly that surgical pins wouldn't hold. It was redone with two 4 inch screws, holding bone to bone. Yes, primitive, but this was 1967. I was told I wouldn't be able to use that right arm in anything other than an abreviated walking swing, forget abduction. After a year of careful preparatory flexibility training, I began to train my shoulders again with weights. I have complete range of motion. The mainstays for my shoulder strength: incline bench press and BNP. At my age I no longer use above my bodyweight for the BNP, but I still use around 150 pounds during part of my yearly cycle.

My shoulders also hold just fine for weighted dips. During part of my cycle I'll use 60 to 70 pounds around my waist for complete eccentric contraction of the triceps, i.e., at the bottom, my elbows are significantly higher than my shoulders. This is a safe ROM for me. Would I recommend this for someone in our clinic rehabing shoulder surgery? No. But if the person were an athlete who, after suitable rehab, wanted to take it to the next level so s/he could resume her/his sport, I'd ask our physical therapist to evaluate for unweighted dips to the depth that shoulders were almost even with elbow level. We'd progress, slowly, from there with reevaluation at every step.

I'm not sure if there are any recognized lifts that should never be done by anyone. Too absolute for me.

Which brings me to another "vogue" activity: Lifting to failure. Don't. I doubt that one of 100 lifters actually knows what that means. You could be surprised: It means failure to maintain form.


Oh, oh, we're in agreement again, E. If this keeps up we'll be leaving our wives and buying a cottage by the sea together. Training to failure, just as you defined it, is a useful minicycle within a mesocycle.

Imagine failing just when coming up from the squat. It's not a matter of avoiding injury, it's now just a question of what kind and how bad.


Which is why I only do squats to failure in a power cage with the pins set very carefully.

OTOH, heavy ass to the grass lifts, inexperience, overtraining, improper workout schedules(no periodization), poor form, poor nutrition (eg, dieting) and bobbling on the way up from a squat on rep 17 of 20. Geez it hurts just thinking about it.


Hmm, once again we're in agreement. I'm becoming alarmed.

To suggest that we all run to the gym and immediately partake in full ROM exercises is exceedingly dangerous.


Be fair, BigE. I don't think I ever wrote anything that universal and unqualified.

Michael
mkgil
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2004 1:57 pm

Postby mkgil » Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:25 pm

BigE wrote:Impressive if Darren actually goes below parallel.


Yes it would be. I don't know if he does. Which brings up an interesting question. Who knows how the various strength coachs train WC skiers in the squat. The only one with whom I'm familiar is Charles Polinquin. He was the strength coach for several members of the Canadian national ski team. I don't know if he was the trainer for the whole team or hired personally by some of the skiers. In any case his preference for absolute full squats for all athletes is well-known by anyone who's read any of his publications.

But what about others? It would be especially interesting to know how folks like Picabo Street were trained after rehabing knee surgery. Did they resume full squats? If not, did they do lunges at full ROM? Anyone out there know?

Michael
mkgil
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2004 1:57 pm

Postby BigE » Fri Dec 10, 2004 9:44 am

Probably just us, but a few points:

If you find yourself skiing with your butt so far down it's at the "ass to the grass" squat position, you are in horrible trouble. Going below parallel is unnecessary. I'll continue to advocate no below parallel squats for as long as people ask the question "How low?". I'll also continue to state no below parallel squats to anyone that is not a serious lifter -- eg. skiers.

Re: Well below 50% 1RM training. I said it is done extensively, not exclusively.

This is a rather long, but interesting article. The end of which surprisingly enough agrees with me....

http://www.physsportsmed.com/issues/199 ... laskow.htm

This is a fellows master's thesis. It's even longer. It looks very interesting, especially regarding injury of olympic and power lifters. He does advocate full ROM as a general rule, but OTOH his injury statistics are alarming. Around pgs 36 has interesting stuff.

http://fred.ccsu.edu:8000/archive/00000 ... 002-24.pdf

Much interesting statistics. eg. shot putters did not improve distance after a 12 week bench training program! Enjoy! It was a good read.
BigE
 
Posts: 1519
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 11:42 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Postby mkgil » Fri Dec 10, 2004 2:58 pm

Thanks for the articles, BigE. I'll reply when I get at chance to read them. I'll first need to get past the first page of the first article by overcoming my bias about an author who writes about olympic lifting, and then proceeds to misdescribe the snatch and describe the clean and press while calling it the clean and jerk. :( I hope his thesis committee fried him.

Off to turn 'em in some Cascade clearflake. I believe you Eastcoasters call it rain.

Michael
mkgil
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2004 1:57 pm

Postby mkgil » Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:05 pm

BigE wrote:This is a rather long, but interesting article. The end of which surprisingly enough agrees with me....

http://www.physsportsmed.com/issues/199 ... laskow.htm



Back from the rain. For the first article: I'm not sure why you found his statistics alarming. His risk factors are: "Probable risk factors for injury include errors in technique (described in a sidebar), skeletal immaturity, and anabolic steroid abuse."

No question, except for what he considers errors in technique. The worst stats are for teen powerlifters. He admits that lack of supervision was responsible according to the original study. For nonteen lifters who have appropriate supervision, skeletal maturity, and aren't using steroids, he appears to suggest injury rate is low. Within the low rates of injury he characterizes the most commonly seen injuries. As Robert pointed out. Healthy lifters don't present to a physician.

In his illustrations for flyes and BNP, notice the extemes of what he's calling improper form. In a flye position you have more stability than with a pec-dec machine. Do a flye as I suggested then rotate the forearms upward as they would be for a pec-dec. Notice the extra stress at the end of the eccentric phase. Another argument for free weights not machines whenever possible.

More later,
Michael
mkgil
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2004 1:57 pm

Postby BigE » Wed Dec 15, 2004 12:58 pm

Healthy lifters DO present to a physician: From the first article--

Brown and Kimball (5) found that 39.4% (28 of 71) of adolescent power lifters entered in a teenage power lifting championship (ages 14 to 19) sustained injuries during training. The authors suggest that the high rate of injuries may have been from lack of supervision. Risser et al (6) in a retrospective survey observed that only 7.6% (27 of 354) of adolescent football players in a supervised weight training program sustained injuries, and Zemper (7) found only a 0.3% rate of weight training injuries in a 4-year study of a national sample of college football players who trained under supervision.

One can speculate that the injury rate went down as the supervision went up. I suggest these were all healthy folks. This is what I find alarming:

nearly 40% of adolescent powerlifters entered in a championship sustained injuries during training. I would suspect that the amount of supervision they received was more than your average skier walking into a gym to "get ready" for the coming season. Couple low supervision with the need for good technique and not overloading, and you've got a recipe for disaster. IMO, the skier has better than 50% chances of getting hurt lifting. Increase that when you add squats of any sort. I'd think it would be a near certainty if folks began olympic lifting without supervision.

There is a tremendous lack of respect for the art of weight training. It is MUCH more difficult to manage a safe routine than folks will let on.....

Yes, I've said it before, but many people involved in weight training only give lip service to safe training techniques. If someone says: "I lift safely" they'd better be able to prove they do. Not for my sake, but for their sake. Lifting is NOT a joke. One bad lift can linger for years -- if not more.....

Cheers!
BigE
 
Posts: 1519
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 11:42 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Postby Guest » Wed Dec 15, 2004 5:00 pm

BigE wrote:Healthy lifters DO present to a physician: From the first article--

Brown and Kimball (5) found that 39.4% (28 of 71) of adolescent power lifters entered in a teenage power lifting championship (ages 14 to 19) sustained injuries during training. The authors suggest that the high rate of injuries may have been from lack of supervision. Risser et al (6) in a retrospective survey observed that only 7.6% (27 of 354) of adolescent football players in a supervised weight training program sustained injuries, and Zemper (7) found only a 0.3% rate of weight training injuries in a 4-year study of a national sample of college football players who trained under supervision.


Well first, they didn't "present" to a physician; they answered the questions of researchers. And we have no idea the extent of the injuries.

One can speculate that the injury rate went down as the supervision went up.


As you know, that's exactly what the original authors said.

I suggest these were all healthy folks. This is what I find alarming:
nearly 40% of adolescent powerlifters entered in a championship sustained injuries during training. I would suspect that the amount of supervision they received was more than your average skier walking into a gym to "get ready" for the coming season.


O.K., let's clear some things up for readers who may not have read the articles you linked. A risk factor stated in the first article was skeletal immaturity. We're talking adolescents here. Additionally, and this is very important, the adolescent powerlifters were presumably training for their competitions, which means training near the end of a cycle at limit strength. Neither I nor Robert suggested heavy singles at near personal record levels. BigE, this is a major confounding variable in our discussions.

Let's look at another claim from the second article: "The most interesting statistic was that 43% of those not competing attributed that to injury suffered during weight lifting." Again, we're talking about competitive lifters who train to lift heavy singles under the stress of competition. The very next sentence puts this in perspective: "The authors make the note that this statistic is not so astonishing since 50% of elite soccer players in Sweden had also quit playing due to injury after seven years." Soccer, not Rugby or American football. Take home lesson: at the elite level, competition means pushing the edge of one's capabilities. Look at the number of sprinters who are injured every track season. The author correctly points out that training for another sport by weight lifting isn't as demanding as powerlifting or olympic training.

And my favorite recommendation by the second author: "Perform each exercise throughout the full range of motion. Strength improvements are specific to joint angles. Shortening a repetition will diminish flexibility around a joint and diminish the total amount of work performed."

I rest this part of my case.

Michael
Guest
 

Postby Guest » Wed Dec 15, 2004 7:58 pm

BigE wrote:
If you find yourself skiing with your butt so far down it's at the "ass to the grass" squat position, you are in horrible trouble. Going below parallel is unnecessary.


Below parallel? Check out the photos in the DesLauriers' book Ski the Whole Mountain. Look at the inside leg just before transitioning to a new turn, especially on steeps. I haven't their skill level, but in narrow couloirs or terrain over 40 degrees, I'm frequently in the positions pictured. Grabbed the first ski mag in our waiting room, Skiing, Nov. '04. I eliminated photos of racers or skiers doing ariel manouvers, but still found these photos of at least the inside leg below parallel: pp. 42, 45, 57, 79, 113, 116, and 127,

Aggressive skiers will have occasion to use their knees in a pretty complete ROM. Since skiing is inherently risky to the knees, I advocate working them through full ROM. Learn appropriate form; cycle exercises to avoid overuse injuries; avoid limit singles.

BigE, I respect your knowledge level. I hope our polite disagreement was a usefully provoking stimulus for readers interested in ski conditioning. Hope you're having more snow than we are in Oregon.

Michael (I'll probably appear as "guest." The login needs new coding.)
Guest
 

Postby BigE » Wed Dec 15, 2004 9:05 pm

Respectfully, one bent leg is not the squat position, and there is remarkably little weight on it. My cheesy example is of two legs, bent far below parallel, as a low squat would do it.

As for advocating full ROM squats-- be my guest. Just be warned -- don't lift heavy like that.

Regarding injury statistics, I stand by my interpretation that the statistics mirror the amount of supervision the athlete receives -- college level football players are expensive commodities, and get treated very well. hence, the lowered injury rate.

It will always be my take that full ROM is ok for SOME exercises, but not all, and especially not squats. EG. As an advocate of full ROM exercises, do you suggest lat raises until the dumbells are overhead or do you restrict the range of motion until just parallel with the floor?

BTW: Not much snow at all in Ontario. Really lousy start to the season. OTOH, mont-ste-anne in Quebec has 54 of 63 runs open. Will be there soon!

Cheers!
BigE
 
Posts: 1519
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 11:42 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Postby mkgil » Thu Dec 16, 2004 1:54 pm

BigE wrote:Respectfully, one bent leg is not the squat position, and there is remarkably little weight on it.


More like a conversation than a debate at this point. On steeps, especially with variable snow, I and those I ski with often find that suddenly all our weight is on the inside leg in a bend far below parallel. It could be to avoid the tip of a rock we've just come upon so we lift the outside ski; it could be that the outside ski hit a patch of ice and lost edge grip; it could be in a narrow chute where we're specifically jumping off the inside leg for a hop turn (the only turn available if the chute is narrow enough). At those times I'm very pleased to have available the strength and flexibility I need.

EG. As an advocate of full ROM exercises, do you suggest lat raises until the dumbells are overhead or do you restrict the range of motion until just parallel with the floor?


On db laterals for the medial aspect of the deltoids I stop at a few degrees above parallel because past that point usefull stress is taken off the deltoid. Testing me weren't you, BigE? :D

BTW: Not much snow at all in Ontario. Really lousy start to the season. OTOH, mont-ste-anne in Quebec has 54 of 63 runs open. Will be there soon!

Cheers!


E, we've got to get you on some western mountains, off piste, so you can exercise full ROM in some narrow chutes. :wink:

Michael
mkgil
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2004 1:57 pm

Postby BigE » Fri Dec 17, 2004 11:33 am

You passed. :lol:

Let me make this clear.... I'm not suggesting that full ROM does not happen in skiing. It just does not happen like it does in the squat. I am purely advocating less ROM in the gym when doing a squat.

I used to train using Hindu Squats to improve flexibility, and to incorporate the strength from the "sissy" squats.

The issue is more of a balance and coordination issue than a raw strength issue.

Western hills.... if my knees make it through the season we're off to Banff for our season finale. Then I get 'scoped. I am SO looking forward to it!
BigE
 
Posts: 1519
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 11:42 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Work exercises!

Postby skirmastr » Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:58 pm

Bluey,

How are you doing on the exercises? I stayed in an 18 story tower over the weekend and I did a lot of the exercises that we had talked about, it was fun!

I also have remembered one more balance and strengthening exercise that I started doing a few years ago and have lapsed a little bit on. It is very simple and really works the balancing muscles of the legs. Instead of sitting down to put your socks and shoes on you have to do it all from a standing position. Sounds simple until you try it! It includes the tying of your shoe laces.

Hope you have had a chance to ski!
skirmastr
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 2:47 pm
Location: Reno, NV

PreviousNext

Return to Primary Movements Teaching System

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests