RebornXmetalhead said:
What happened to the good ol pushups? Are they not good anymore?
I was always told that pushups build many parts at once (arms, back, shoulders, abs, chest..)
I was also told that working out on machines is bad for muscle developement because you grow out of proportion.. whereas free weights is better.
Pushups do. Main focus is on triceps (back of upper arm), and the pectorals (chest)/anterior deltoid (front shoulder). They are the prime movers. With a wide grip, the chest works more, with a narrow grip, the anterior deltoid works more. I think... Anyway the abs and hip flexors work to brace the torso and maintain a straight line. It's an isometric hold for them, they do not go through any range of motion with proper form. I have heard of it strengthening the back, but I don't really understand how that works.
Machines are not bad for muscle development, they work well at developing muscles. 'Proportion' is relative. Different free weight movements will create different proportions of muscles as well. Someone who does only chinups will look quite different from someone doing only squats. Machines tend to be very stable, so that people do not hurt themself. The problem, and why free weight and bodyweight movements are irreplacable, is that instability is good because you develope the ability to use other muscles as stabilizers. The ability to stabilize yourself is important in the real world, so the strength is more useable. If you build great strength on a machine, you may hurt yourself attempting to use all of it in real situation if you cannot control it with stabilization.
Freight said:
Doing too many situps can cause the overdevelopment of the hip flexor and can cause back problems.
Is overdevelopment a relative thing? If people who build strong/large hip flexor muscles also do a lot of work for the opposite muscles (hip extensors) like the glutes and hamstrings, could this help to balance out the risks and lessen the risk of back problems? So if one were to say, do squats and deadlifting, perhaps it would lessen the risk of back problems associated with excessive situps in some? Hip flexors are very good muscles for people who like to do front kicks, for example, so it can be hard to limit their strength.
Nat. Cap. Girl said:
is it not also true though that if you don't have strong enough abs that you can get back problems from that as well?
Situps focus more on the hip flexors, the abs only work statically (isometrics) to stabilize the core. Crunches work the abs as a prime mover, the hip flexors only contract isometrically and to a lesser degree. The lower back does not leave the ground. They are not associated with as many problems as situps get blamed with.
midgetcop said:
Squats are a great overall exercise that will not only work all your leg muscles at once, but will also build strength in your back, abs, and hip flexors.
Do you mean hip extensors? I know that for going deeper in the squat people often consciously engage their hip flexors to 'pull them in' but that's more of a nerve trick to make some of the short hip extensor fibres relax so that other fibres which are long enough to engage in the stretch can take the load. I don't think they're actually stressed much, not any more than the triceps would be in a biceps curl anyway. Abs are used very much when the torso is upright to avoid letting the weight hyperextend the back ,as well as contracting isometrically with the back muscles to stabilize the spine. It is especially the deeper muscles rather than the superficial ones that work to do this. For people who bend forward on squats and it's more like a good morning or deadlift, I don't think the abs work as hard though, since the lower back muscles take so much more of the load.
Combat_Engineer_Clarke said:
Hopefully this will help with your Strength Conditioning. Well it helped with mine. I found a book called Combat Conditioning my Matt Furey. Pretty much for the first month you have three exercises. Hindu Squats, Hindu Push Ups and Back Bridging.
They're interesting movements, I've tried the system. Pushups are still better training for pushups than hindu pushups though. You need to be able to maintain the plank (yoga term) position to keep your core stiff during pushups, which requires strong abs and hip flexors. Hindu pushups have the hips moving throughout it, and even the back extends (hyperextends?) at the bottom. It also only works the chest and triceps eccentrically. To push off the ground, you need concentric strength. He keeps those as a cardio/endurance exercise, which I guess is okay, but swimming's probably easier on the shoulders. Backbridging is fun but doesn't really transfer to any of these military prep exercises discussed. I really admire Matt's focus on hill/wind sprints, those are a great exercise. Hindu squats help develope ankle and foot strength, and do load the quads more, but normal squats (heel on ground) are better because they are safer for when you weight lift, you use more posterior chain, and you get to learn how to dorsiflex the ankle better. Variety's probably the key, he introduces stuff people forget about so that's valuable, though maybe not a quarter grand valuable as it gets marketed for.
Combat_Engineer_Clarke said:
Here is a training program that I have been doing for the last couple of weeks, I think this will help anyone get in shape for basic. All you need is a Pull up bar , weights or resistance tubing and about an hour a day some days an hour and a half of time out of your day. First of all you should download the following programs P90X Chest and Back- This has enough push up and pull up variations to help you gain some strength, P90X Ab Ripper X- this will blast your abs and the basic sit up will be as easy as walking, P90X Plyometrics- this will help you run faster jump higher and you will kick the pants off of anyone else who is not using it.
The P90X system is marketed by the 'Beach Body' corporation which also produces 'Hip Hop Abs' and 'Turbo Jam'. It's not exactly in the best company, but it is certainly the best I've seen from them of the three. Varying exercises does work and is a smart idea, but not for the reasons of 'muscle confusion' theory that are marketed. That is oversimplifying it. But understanding it isn't necessary for it to work I guess, so long as people are actually measurably progressing and not getting stuck in a rut trying to confuse themselves. The inclusion of the chinning bar is solid. Haven't heard of the 'ab ribber' thing, must be new. I don't really like the name, sounds like it might have some spot reduction stuff in it. Furey used to say stuff like that too, it's not a nice myth to propogate. If it focuses on building the ab muscles as half the battle that's fine though.
ushup:
