# Training the core



## bdave (2 Jan 2011)

Some of you probably know about Dr. Stuart McGill, at Waterloo University, a prominent figure in the biomechanics and 'health' of the spine.
Through out his career, he has advocated the evil that is flexion, in relation to the spine; the exercises known as crunch and sit up.
Instead, he has shown that the optimum way to train the core (Rectus, transverse and oblique) is through stability.
A large number of coaches, researchers and the like have moved away from flexion and have incorporated stability in their programs.
Things like plank, pilaf presses and other anti flexion/anti rotation/anti extension/whatever, exercises.

I know that one of the components of the physical test given by the Canadian Forces is 'crunches'.
I realize that a number of people train for it by doing crunches and/or sit ups.
Oh well.

Here is an interview with Dr. Stuart McGill, conducted by Marc Demers, at t-nation.com.

http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/sports_body_training_performance_interviews/mister_spine

http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/sports_body_training_performance_interviews/mister_spine_part_2

Conference call with Coach Boyle, Nick Tumminello and Charlie Weingroff on whether flexion is bad or not. This is a direct link to the podcast, and it begins about 7 minutes in and goes on for about an hour or so. Sorry for the long link.

http://69.16.184.143:80/g9z6c6z5/cds/p/4/3/b/43b2fc016dbf9154/Episode_41-_Strength_Coach_Podcast.mp3?sid=629b50ef3e9a218e0ab825a3d69ffe50&l_sid=18153&l_eid=&l_mid=1469777&dopvhost=hw.libsyn.com&doppl=d377661b9e688d989e388d98db283526&dopsig=f3262333822e8fdf7e65a86009f242b1

Just thought some people would benefit from this information.
Good day.


----------



## Chilme (2 Jan 2011)

This is an interesting topic for the CF.  For those concerned CF members, PSP fitness staff are working on this very topic under the direction of Physiotherapist Eric Robataille (located LFCA TC Meaford).  Currently all PSP Fitness Intructors and Basic Fitness Training Assistance (BFTA's) have a module in their training courses that covers this topic.  It is slowly becoming more excepted.


----------



## bdave (3 Jan 2011)

You mean they are phasing out sit ups/crunch?


----------



## blacktriangle (3 Jan 2011)

Well I'm about to hit the gym to rock my holiday sideburns and scruff...and I sure won't be doing any sit ups! I find doing some squats, running/swimming and legs 6 inches from the ground/plank is good enough for my core. Plus I have had this weird popping in my hip for a few years, and it's annoying!


----------



## Chilme (3 Jan 2011)

I can't say they're phasing them out.  Many physical tests are designed to mimic conditions and tasks of a particular job, and although sit-ups have the potential to cause injury down the road, they are still necessary fr some jobs.  I will tell you that the PSP Research and Development section is aware of some of these issues and are re-evaluating the EXPRES and some other specialty tests.   You keep in mind that it will take some time to implement new tests because they need to be scientifically validated so they can be considered a Bona Fide Occupational Requirement (BFOR).  That is basically a legal term that suggests that an individual in a position who doesn't meet BFOR has the potential to cause serious harm or death.


----------



## bdave (3 Jan 2011)

Please enlighten me; I can't think of any job where a soldier needs to ever do a sit up or crunch.


----------



## George Wallace (3 Jan 2011)

bdave said:
			
		

> Please enlighten me; I can't think of any job where a soldier needs to ever do a sit up or crunch.



Have you thought of the muscle groups one uses in crossing obstacles?  Next time you navigate the Obstacle Crse give it some thought.


----------



## owa (3 Jan 2011)

bdave said:
			
		

> Please enlighten me; I can't think of any job where a soldier needs to ever do a sit up or crunch.



I can't really either.  I mean, I definitely use my core on the obstacle course, but not in a situp/crunch sort of way.  More for balance.


----------



## PMedMoe (3 Jan 2011)

bdave said:
			
		

> Please enlighten me; I can't think of any job where a soldier needs to ever do a sit up or crunch.



I can't think of a job where I need to do a push up.    :

It's all part of training the whole body.


----------



## bdave (3 Jan 2011)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Have you thought of the muscle groups one uses in crossing obstacles?  Next time you navigate the Obstacle Crse give it some thought.



We are talking about validating the crunch/sit up.
So from a suppinated position, bring the torso up to vertical.
Keeping your body/torso braced and stable, while crossing an obstacle, would be something that could be achieved through stabilization brought on by the core muscles.
A plank would do nicely in training the abdominals in doing just that. A crunch/sit up, not so much.

PMedMoe, that was a terrible strawman.


----------



## MJP (3 Jan 2011)

Chilme said:
			
		

> You keep in mind that it will take some time to implement new tests because they need to be scientifically validated so they can be considered a Bona Fide Occupational Requirement (BFOR).  That is basically a legal term that suggests that an individual in a position who doesn't meet BFOR has the potential to cause serious harm or death.



BFOR is much more than just a potential to cause serious harm/death.  BFOR in the simplest form means that it is a rule that establishes a requirement that is necessary for proper or efficient performance of a job.  Not all BFORs involve the potential for injury although they are the most common in rigorous physical jobs.  However, if a rule is a legitimate qualification for doing a job - a BFOR - then it will be upheld. For a rule to qualify as a BFOR, it must be:

    * made honestly, in good faith, and in the sincere belief that it is made in the interests of effectiveness, safety, and productivity
    * objectively reasonable. In other words, it must have a sensible connection to the ability of an employee to do the job.

There is a lot more to BFORs and they have to reliable and valid for the job.  Someone somewhere sat down, did the testing and found empirical evidence that the x number of sit-ups was sufficient for the criteria laid out by the CF.  I agree with others that a feet held sit-up is a horrible test of someones core strength and doesn't have a whole lot of functional cross over to the real world, but it is what we have till a newer test is developed.


----------



## owa (3 Jan 2011)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> I can't think of a job where I need to do a push up.    :
> 
> It's all part of training the whole body.



Well to be fair the act of pushing ones body up seems pretty valuable when on the obstacle course and the muscle endurance built through that comes in handy.

Planks and similar exercises, as bdave suggested, have a much more functional use in day-to-day life.

With that said, I'm not really concerned about whether or not we do situps or not.  On Basic we mostly do planks and russian twists to build core strength.  Those slay me pretty well, and in turn my situp max has gone up quite a bit -- so that'll see improvements on the CF Express.  I still don't see the crunch or situp as being super important to build overall body strength; personally I see more useful exercises.

As a bit of an aside, the plank has also helped me with my pushups quite a bit.


----------



## armychick2009 (3 Jan 2011)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> I can't think of a job where I need to do a push up.    :
> 
> It's all part of training the whole body.



AMEN!!!  I recently saw a woman with 25 years of nursing experience have to leave basic because she couldn't do push-ups. She could however, lift a 350 pound man off the floor who has fallen out of a bed....


----------



## MikeL (3 Jan 2011)

armychick2009 said:
			
		

> AMEN!!!  I recently saw a woman with 25 years of nursing experience have to leave basic because she couldn't do push-ups. She could however, lift a 350 pound man off the floor who has fallen out of a bed....



She could lift a 350 pound man up off the floor? All on her own? Are you sure about that? 350 pounds is a lot of weight to be picking up for anyone(Man or Woman)


----------



## MJP (3 Jan 2011)

armychick2009 said:
			
		

> AMEN!!!  I recently saw a woman with 25 years of nursing experience have to leave basic because she couldn't do push-ups. She could however, lift a 350 pound man off the floor who has fallen out of a bed....



So she could basically deadlift 350# but not do 9 push-ups?  That is either some serious muscle imbalance, or a load of crap.  Assisting someone back in bed yes, physically lifting someone that heavy off the floor not a chance.  Anyone who has done any sort of casualty carry would know it is extremely hard to pick up someone from the ground, especially if they are unable to assist in any way. I can empathize with someone not reaching their goals (ie: finishing basic), but the fact they couldn't meet the bare minimun standard won't garner too much sympathy from allot of folks.  

The push up is a good indicator of both core strength (the subject at hand) and overall upper body strength.  The ability to hold the body in a rigid plane (plank) while conducting push-ups indicates core strength  The sit-up especially when your feet are held is not, as it changes the focus from abs/core to the hip flexors.


----------



## bdave (3 Jan 2011)

The average male needs months of training to be able to deadlift 350 pounds. That is using a barbell with weights; an ideal scenario which makes lifting weights 'easy'.
I can't imagine how difficult it is to lift an asymetrical 350 pound man, let alone having a woman do it, several feet, onto a bed.


----------



## SupersonicMax (3 Jan 2011)

bdave said:
			
		

> Please enlighten me; I can't think of any job where a soldier needs to ever do a sit up or crunch.



Try pulling 7+Gs.  You need to tighten those abs.  Hard.


----------



## armychick2009 (4 Jan 2011)

She had no problem lifting a 250 pound person in front of my very own eyes... _by herself_ and with ease.  I'll take her word she can do a 350 pound dude!

She had no problem doing reverse push-ups on a pull-up bar... but, could not to save her life, do a push-up.


----------



## bdave (4 Jan 2011)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> Try pulling 7+Gs.  You need to tighten those abs.  Hard.



The pilot is strapped into his chair, so he can't bend forward. So, again, this is like the plank, and not an actual sit up/crunch.


----------



## Nostix (4 Jan 2011)

armychick2009 said:
			
		

> She had no problem lifting a 250 pound person in front of my very own eyes... _by herself_ and with ease.  I'll take her word she can do a 350 pound dude!
> 
> She had no problem doing reverse push-ups on a pull-up bar... but, could not to save her life, do a push-up.



Then I guess this really speaks to the need for everyone to train for overall fitness, and not just one or two moves that they commonly have to do on a regular basis.

It's the same reason I'd never train to get better at pushups by doing pushups. If you're not training all four of your horizontal push + pull and your vertical push + pull, you're eventually going to find yourself in a situation where one or more of them is causing you to fail at a task.


----------



## Sapplicant (4 Jan 2011)

bdave said:
			
		

> Please enlighten me; I can't think of any job where a soldier needs to ever do a sit up or crunch.



A lot of times, soldiers are expected to do as they're told without questioning it. Perhaps looking beyond JUST the physical aspect of it, and thinking of the mental conditioning might help alleviate some of your concerns?

Also, consider the fact that you, much like me, have very little knowledge and experience. You've gotten 3 replies from people who have LOTS of knowledge, and more experience than a lot of people will ever get during their time in uniform. 

As quickly as they gave you an answer, you dismissed them. Did you start this thread with the expectation that everyone will agree with you, and sit ups/crunches will henceforth be banished from the Canadian Forces?

One last thought. Sometimes, in the heat of battle, a soldier may get knocked down, and is now laying on his/her back. I'm fairly confident that if a soldier got knocked down, but isn't really hurt, he'd be expected to get back up again, and do so with a sense of urgency. 

Lay down on your back, and try to get up as quickly as possible, without ANY simulation of a sit up/crunch motion. Now, get up as fast as you can, using a sit up/crunch motion, carrying that momentum forward, and bringing your body over your feet. Voila! We did this EXACT motion during football practices, along with up-downs. 

I could be wrong, I could be right. I guess only time, and someone who's qualified, will tell.


----------



## Nostix (4 Jan 2011)

I guess that ties back into my main point.

Yes, at some point in time, someone will almost undoubtedly have to perform a sit-up type motion. And yes, the sit-up is a commonly tested indicator of core fitness. 

But that does not mean that you have to (or even should) try to train your core solely by doing sit-ups. As we've covered in the topic, there are a number of different situations that require a number of different types of core strength.

In the same sense that I'd put my money on someone who trains with their overhead, bench, chin-up, and row, over someone who only does pushups, I'd put my money on someone who trains their core with heavy squats, deadlifts, and stability and balance exercises over someone who only does sit-ups.

The sit-up itself is hardly such a wide-spread and prevalent motion that it deserves to be isolated for training all on it's own, in my opinion.


----------



## bdave (4 Jan 2011)

Nostix said:
			
		

> It's the same reason I'd never train to get better at pushups by doing pushups.


This flies in the face of conventional training knowledge. I was able to hit 120 pushups (all the up, all the way down - good form basically) by doing them on a constant basis. Other than that, Nostix basically understands what my point was; there are better ways to train your abdominal muscles than relying on sit ups/crunches.



			
				Sapplicant said:
			
		

> As quickly as they gave you an answer, you dismissed them. Did you start this thread with the expectation that everyone will agree with you, and sit ups/crunches will henceforth be banished from the Canadian Forces?



I 'refuted' their answers. This is is a forum, so I expect some discussion. I was basically trying to bring about a point on sit ups/crunches, and their use as a physical fitness test. As for someone with knowledge and experience, Dr. Stuart Mcgill has been studying the spine for pretty much his entire 'career'. He is considered by many, to be THE man, when it comes to the spine. The man says spinal flexion (brought on by crunches/sit ups) is very bad, and that there are better ways to train your abdominal muscles.


----------



## Sapplicant (4 Jan 2011)

Nostix said:
			
		

> But that does not mean that you have to (or even should) try to train your core solely by doing sit-ups. As we've covered in the topic, there are a number of different situations that require a number of different types of core strength.
> 
> In the same sense that I'd put my money on someone who trains with their overhead, bench, chin-up, and row, over someone who only does pushups, I'd put my money on someone who trains their core with heavy squats, deadlifts, and stability and balance exercises over someone who only does sit-ups.
> 
> The sit-up itself is hardly such a wide-spread and prevalent motion that it deserves to be isolated for training all on it's own, in my opinion.




http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/lf/Downloads/Fitness%20Manual%20ENG.pdf
On page 68, the core strengthening circuits begin. Sit ups aren't the ONLY exercise, but they are definitely a major component. Also notice how many variations there are of the exercise. 

Also, one must consider the difference between muscle stability, and muscle strength. Stabilizing is not necessarily strengthening, and strengthening is not necessary stabilizing.


----------



## Nostix (4 Jan 2011)

While I'm glad to see that there are a number of different exercises, I'm still a little surprised that they all seem to be variations on the basic theme of isolating the abs in a curl. My objection to the idea of training the sit-up or the curl is less of a condemnation of them in general, and more a reaction to how much emphasis they seem to receive when other areas of fitness are neglected.

I'll be the first one to admit that anyone training for comprehensive fitness (such as someone following the manual provided), will certainly be sufficiently well-rounded to absorb some extra isolation work on the abdominals. 

My biggest personal worry is when there is someone out there who isn't doing everything else, and simply training specifically for an indicator test like the sit-ups, a situation which unfortunately comes up from time to time.


----------



## Nostix (4 Jan 2011)

Or, if I had to succinctly summarize my opinion on the sit-up:

Nobody should use an isolation move such as the sit-up as the foundation for their core training. Core training should come primarily from actively engaging the core muscles in your abdominals and back to aid in the performance of other complex movements. If (and only if) that foundation is properly established and balanced, isolation exercises are perfectly acceptable to increase the intensity of the training.


----------



## Chilme (4 Jan 2011)

Just to clarify a few things:

1) A sit-up is not primarily a core/ab exercise.  It primarily targets the hip flexors with the abs as a secondary mover. (You may recall the feeling in your legs during the EXPRES test sit-ups)

2) Yes it is true that there are very few jobs where someone does the sit-up motion with feet locked down.  However, think of the movement with the upper body being anchored.  Examples of movements:
-Anything where you are hanging and trying to bring lower body up. (Parachuting, rock climbing, rope climbing, obstacle course, )
-Consider the leg movement in running and rucking.
-Kicking motion in swimming
-Getting up from the supine (lying on back) position.

3) The reality is that one uses the muscles involved in the sit up so much that it is recommended by PSP that soldiers refrain from training with sit-ups in a effort to avoid overuse injury to the hip flexor muscles.  A good way to train your core is with static movements like front, back, side planks.  One could do butterfly crunches/sit-ups to minimize hip flexor use and direct more work to the abs.  (Butterfly crunches/sit-ups have the bottoms of feet placed together with knees flaring out to the side.)  The list goes on...

I would recommend speaking with local PSP or your unit BFTA to expand your exercise library.


----------



## Frank G (4 Jan 2011)

I bought McGill's book this summer following a lower back injury and definitely recommend it to anyone looking to improve their health and athletic prowess, I wholeheartedly agree with the no crunch/sit ups/Russian twists principle, the book is legit, but like it's been mentioned before, it's going to take a while for it to leave the CF physical training manuals. 

My understanding is that any variation of sit ups do their job in training the core muscles (some at least) but also do their job inflicting wear and tear on the spine tissues. Especially for those with lower tolerance to injuries. Replacing these exercises with some that removes or at the very least reduces that chance of injury while providing a better result is only logical. Here's what another renowned coach said "If it weren’t for dead guys, we’d probably never have started doing crunches. That’s because for years, much of our knowledge of the way muscles work was  based on the study of human cadavers. By looking at the anatomy of corpses, modern scientists figured that the function of our abdominal muscles must be to flex the spine. " http://alwyncosgrove.com/2010/12/new-rules-of-lifting-for-abs/

I'm glad too hear they're reviewing the issue in Meaford though.

For those interested here are some exercises: 

*Anti-rotation *

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tqlxDpQSKU (By Coach Dos) 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPrsV40UcoY (By Coach Dos) 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JEj7t6Cy9s 

*Curl up (variation of a sit up by McGill) *

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCSc6tvlWPs&feature=more_related


----------



## Hambo (9 Jan 2011)

Overhead pressing, belt-less squats, deadlifts will also greatly strengthen the entire trunk.

Weighted decline sit ups are also great.

-Ham.


----------



## aesop081 (9 Jan 2011)

bdave said:
			
		

> Please enlighten me; I can't think of any job where a soldier needs to ever do a sit up or crunch.



I have to lean forward at the waist to remove 60lbs+ sonobouys from their storage racks, then back to straight up, then back to leaning forward to place them in the launch tubes on the aircraft at +2G.

Close enough to situps for you ?


----------



## Chilme (9 Jan 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> I have to lean forward at the waist to remove 60lbs+ sonobouys from their storage racks, then back to straight up, then back to leaning forward to place them in the launch tubes on the aircraft at +2G.
> 
> Close enough to situps for you ?



Sounds like a perfect example!


----------



## Hambo (9 Jan 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> I have to lean forward at the waist to remove 60lbs+ sonobouys from their storage racks, then back to straight up, then back to leaning forward to place them in the launch tubes on the aircraft at +2G.
> 
> Close enough to situps for you ?



So do you do heavy, weighted sit ups? Or do you do higher rep, body weight sit ups?

I fail to see how body weight sit ups would help you there.


----------



## aesop081 (9 Jan 2011)

Hambo said:
			
		

> So do you do heavy, weighted sit ups?



Nope.


----------



## Hambo (9 Jan 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Nope.



Alright, then. :


----------



## Chilme (9 Jan 2011)

Hambo said:
			
		

> So do you do heavy, weighted sit ups? Or do you do higher rep, body weight sit ups?
> 
> I fail to see how body weight sit ups would help you there.



Look at it this way: If one can't even get their own upper body weight up 19 time, there is a good chance they wouldn't last long in CDN Aviators job.


----------



## aesop081 (9 Jan 2011)

Hambo said:
			
		

> :



I dont understand why you are rolling your eyes.


----------



## bdave (9 Jan 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> I dont understand why you are rolling your eyes.



He means to say that you don't 'train' for this, so the fact that it is part of the CF physical test is useless/irrelevant.


----------



## aesop081 (9 Jan 2011)

bdave said:
			
		

> He means to say that you don't 'train' for this,



I do situps multiple time each visit to the gym. This helps with the performance of my duties on board the aircraft. It is the only part of the CF expres test that remotely relates to my work.

How am i not training for it and how is it irrelevant ?


----------



## Hambo (10 Jan 2011)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> I do situps multiple time each visit to the gym. This helps with the performance of my duties on board the aircraft. It is the only part of the CF expres test that remotely relates to my work.
> 
> How am i not training for it and how is it irrelevant ?



Because after a certain point, training the movement with only your BW will become irrelevant/pointless if, for your job, you need to do the same movement with a bunch of weight. 60 lbs isn't too much though, so for that much weight, it may not even matter.

As another example, would only training BW push ups, and being able to do 60 of them in a row, help you for the part of your job that required you to press 300 lbs off your chest occasionally? No.

Hence me asking if you trained weighted sit ups.


----------



## aesop081 (10 Jan 2011)

Hambo said:
			
		

> 60 lbs isn't too much though, so for that much weight, it may not even matter.



60lbs at 2G is 120lbs.......

Edit : Have to correct myself, an SSQ-62E is roughly 36lbs


----------

