"Functional Trainer" strength training??

"Functional Trainer" strength training??

Postby dewdman42 » Tue Oct 17, 2006 4:06 pm

Hey all. I am thinking about getting some weight training equipment for my home. not only for ski training, but just because in general my arms have gotten wimpier and wimpier as I get older and I want to start getting into weight training in general.

But of course, how to train for skiing is always in the fore-front of my mind at all times.

One of the pieces of equipment I'm looking at is a Precor "Functional Trainer', the 3.23.

http://www.precor.com/cons/strs/323/

I am wondering if anyone here has any experience using this type of equipment for strength training related to skiing??
dewdman42
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 11:52 pm

Postby Mac » Tue Oct 17, 2006 6:29 pm

Can't say that I'm familiar with the piece of equipment that you mentioned, but I've been a gym rat most of my life, I belonged to a health club for over twenty years until I decided to set up a gym in my basement. I've used a lot of strength training as well as aerobic exercise equipment over the years, and I've found that the Totalgym is the best single piece of home exercise equipment that I've run across. It uses your own body weight for resistence, and combines an element of versatility including stretching, flexibility, and aerobic exercise as well as strength training that I haven't found in any other single piece of equipment. I never paid much attention to the TV commercials that showed them using the apartment size model that folds up and stores under the bed. But I had a few friends who are very fitness minded and can afford any exercise equipment that they want, and they told me that they swear by the Totalgym. In fact, one of my buddies has one in his house in the city, and another one at his house in the mountains. I found out that they manufacture a wide array of machines, from the basic model all the way up to heavy duty commercial grade units found in health clubs and gyms. I tried one of their machines and I was sold. Not only do you get all the benefits I mentioned, but you don't get the negative side effects of freeweights and other weight machines, such as strained or damaged joints and ligaments, which is a particular concern at my age (54), plus it is much safer to use. Check it out at Totalgym.com. I wouldn't be without one.
Mac
 
Posts: 633
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:47 pm

Postby dewdman42 » Tue Oct 17, 2006 6:43 pm

Interesting piece of equipment. The fact that you can do Pilates type exercises with that thing is interesting, though I think it would take me a while to learn how to do them all (PROPERLY). Its not inexpensive though by the time you get all the extra attachments or a higher model.

I can see why your gym rat friends would really like that thing. I will keep it in mind though. Thanks.

I'm really curiuos what people think and know about so called "functional training" as opposed to traditional weight training.
dewdman42
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 11:52 pm

Postby NoCleverName » Tue Oct 17, 2006 9:38 pm

The Precor does seem to concentrate on upper body, so if you mean by skiing, "crosscountry" :) then I guess it's good for skiing. The sample exercise chart for it only showed one lower body workout.

This "functional training" sounds more like it's good for enabling you to take the garbage out in one load rather than two or three. That machine's certainly got a lot of weight. If you build up your arms to its full capacity, think of the extra cost in new shirts you're going to have to lay out :lol: .

For no real good reason but my own prejudice, I lean towards us 50+'ers using moderate weight for lots'o reps. Less chance of injury, well maybe less chance of injury that takes a long time to recover from. You always hurt when you're old. Reasonable tone is going to give you the ability to go 130% for a couple of pulls when you really need it in the field, so I don't think you have to train for it at that level daily.

I see "range of motion" as something for oldies to work on. Having good wind is important, too, since there's no use having all that Charles Atlas if you can't get enough O2 to them to make 'em work. The ol' lungs aren't as efficient as the younger ones.

I think you could build up pretty good arms (not NFL arms, but really good yard-work arms) with nothing more than 40lb weights tops.
User avatar
NoCleverName
 
Posts: 452
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 am
Location: Massachusetts

Postby Mac » Wed Oct 18, 2006 7:51 am

On the contrary, my two friends that own and use the Total Gym are hardly gym rats. Both of them are successful middle aged businessmen that happen to be avid skiers and know the importance of staying in shape. I've found through my experience that the Total Gym is the most effective strength training and conditioning device that I have found to supplement the cycling program that Harald advocates. I don't get a commision for selling these things, I'm just telling you what works.
Mac
 
Posts: 633
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:47 pm

Postby dewdman42 » Wed Oct 18, 2006 9:51 am

ok, thanks.

Anyone here with any actual experience with functional training?
dewdman42
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 11:52 pm

Postby Mac » Wed Oct 18, 2006 5:52 pm

That's why I mentioned the Total Gym in the first place. It is supposed to be one of the best functional training devices on the market. If you go to Totalgym.com, click on Total Gym Re-invented, then scroll down on the left side to Home Products, and under that you'll see the functional training icon, click on that, and it will give you a description of how the machine relates to functional training. Granted, this is the manufacturer's description, and all these exercise company's machines come with a slick sales pitch. Like I said, I don't own stock in their company, so it makes no difference to me what you buy. There's a lot of crappy exercise equipment on the market, and none of them are cheap. And it's all too easy to get stuck with something that isn't right for you. I just thought that this was right in line with what you were asking about, and I can vouch that the thing delivers what it promises. Take a minute to read the article and decide for yourself.
Mac
 
Posts: 633
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:47 pm

Postby dewdman42 » Wed Oct 18, 2006 7:51 pm

thanks for the feedback
dewdman42
 
Posts: 513
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 11:52 pm

Postby Icanski » Thu Oct 19, 2006 1:22 pm

I've been doing some rehab/preseason training with a trainer who sent me to a fitness shop for some rubber bands (I'm really low tech :wink: ) and there was the GTS, the high class version of the Total Gym you mentioned. It's an interesting combination of Pilates, and other systems which mainly use your own weight and gravity to work you out. They said it was a great system once you knew how to use it. Up here, it costs $3500.00 though the GTS is the top line and can be used in a pro gym. Needless to say, I didn't get one. I was tempted to get a Skiers Edge, after trying one at the ski show, but they are around 1500. up here, and not as versatile, plus I can jump around for a lot less...
there are lots of helpful machines out there, but the trick is regular use.
Icanski
Icanski
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:58 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Postby NoCleverName » Thu Oct 19, 2006 3:42 pm

I've got it; instead of spending money to work out, since you live in the northwest, how about a part time job in the logging industry? :lol: That'll be "functional exercise".
User avatar
NoCleverName
 
Posts: 452
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 am
Location: Massachusetts

Postby Mac » Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:43 am

Actually, through functional exercise, we are not trying to turn work into exercise, we are trying to find exercises that help us work (or play) better. Almost all exercise devices have some kind of drawbacks. The most beneficial free weight exercises are generally multiple joint exercises, that is movements that involve rotation around two or more joints, such as most presses, squats, pulldowns, etc. Single joint exercises, such as a bicep curl, are not real efficient. There is no resistence at the beginning of the movement, the dumbell is just hanging from your hand, the resistence is greatest when your forearm is at a 90 degree angle to the rest of your body, that is parallel to the floor, you are trying to lift straight up while gravity is pushing straight down. At the end of the movement when the dumbell is at shoulder level, there is once again no resistence, you are just supporting the dumbell at that point, there is no resistence to the bicep, so in reality only a small part of the bicep is being fully worked. I have trained with individuals that had used free weights exclusively that were very strong in exercises like the bench press, but were surprisingly weak in some movements when they tried working out on Nautilus equipment. The reason being that Nautilus and other similar machines can apply constant resistence through a full range of motion, the muscle is taxed equally throughout the movement, unlike freeweights. With dumbells and barbells you are always limited to what you can handle in your weakest position. The drawback with most weight machines is that they mostly work in a linear fashion, that is they travel along a predetermined plane, they force your body to go in the direction that the machine dictates. Most don't require you to support or balance the weight, you are limited to the movement that the machine wants you to travel in, so a lot of the surrounding muscle groups are not involved in the exercise. That's one of the major drawbacks of machines, they sometimes don't relate well to real world activities and sports, because people just don't function along a predeterminded path. But getting back to Dewdman42's original questions on funtional exercises, there are definatley some exercises that are better than others depending on what you're looking to accomplish. If you're willing to put the time and effort into an exercise program, you might as well put in the time to figure out what is going to be the most beneficial to what your goals are.
Mac
 
Posts: 633
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:47 pm

Postby NoCleverName » Sun Oct 22, 2006 5:34 am

Very informative, Mac.
User avatar
NoCleverName
 
Posts: 452
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:56 am
Location: Massachusetts

functional fitness/strength training

Postby difchip » Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:17 pm

go to http://www.crossfit.com. simply the best fitness method out there. requires very little in the way of equipment, and is all functionally based. Eva Twardokens is a trainer, and has been doing crossfit for the past 11 years. I just attended their level 1 certification seminar recently, and am more than a little passionate about the whole thing.

just realized how old the previous post is. little embarrassed at this point.
difchip
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 12:23 pm
Location: Grants Pass

Re: "Functional Trainer" strength training??

Postby krazzy legs » Sat Nov 15, 2014 3:56 am

(according to Mike Mentzer)Muscles work by contracting. Each muscle fiber contracts in the same order before the next muscle fiber contracts the prior muscle fiber must have fully contracted before the next muscle fiber starts to contract. The problem with a lot of free weights exercises such as bench press, squats, curls @ the end of the movement where the most amount of muscle fiber is in the fully contracted position there is little to no resistance which is a major problem with free weights. Nautilas,, Hammer Strength & Med X machines increases the resistance along the natural strength path of the body. The golden spiral shape can be seen in the cam of the nautilas machine which is most logical since the body is a tapestry of fibonacci relationships. One of the major reasons trying to ski rotary does not work is because it is based on a circle & not on the golden spiral which is based on a spiral, In nature death & decay is based on the golden spiral, In skiing to grow & decay a turn it makes no sense to use rotary & base growth & decay of turns on a circle. Maybe Harold is related to Newton because if Newton were to ski I think he would have eliminated the rotary which then allows the tapestry of fib to take over.
krazzy legs
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 6:58 pm


Return to Fitness

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests