Archive for April, 2010

There have been several “ah-ha!” moments in my career – moments of clarity as it were – when I learned something new, or something I believed was verified, brought into question or flat out disproved.

Basically these were times when my thought processes as regards training took a significant step forward from where it was and I felt I had reached a new level.

While talking to  Mike Boyle at a recent seminar we were together at, I shared this idea of the “Ah-ha!” moment with him and he suggested that it would make a good article to share. I guess that was another “ah-ha!” for me.

Anyway – here are a few things that I became aware of at some point over the past couple of decades that made a significant change in how I do things.

1. Is lack of range of motion actually a mobility or stability issue?

This was from a Gray Cook presentation. Look at the two guys pictured left performing an overhead squat. The guy on the right can’t get the depth. He’s well above parallel with angles of above 90 degrees at the hip and knee.

So it’s obvious that he has a mobility issue right?

Is it tight lats, tight hip flexors, or maybe a restriction at the ankle?

Maybe none of these.

Because when we put these guys on their backs (and essentially take out the load) –

The mobility issue seems to resolve itself – not completely – but very considerably. The person who couldn’t get below 90 degrees has achieved a range well beyond 90 degrees.

So the difference in squat form and depth was not a mobility issue – it was a stability issue. Essentially the body is shutting down the range of motion – not because of tightness or a restriction – but because it perceives a threat due to the lack of stability.

Up until this point – I’d used a Vladimir Janda approach to movement dysfunction i.e. – if hip flexors are tight, we stretch them and strengthen the antagonist. Gray opened my eyes with this.

Conclusion – a range of motion deficit or asymmetry may not be related to tissue length or tension at all. It could be related to core stability.

–
Alwyn

A recent study came out of Truman State University and looked at the metabolic effect of kettlebell training (thanks to Adam Bornstein for forwarding)

The subjects were asked to swing a kettlebell as many times as they could in a 12 minute period (sets, reps and rest period it seems were freestyled – the subjects rested whenever they wanted)

The researchers found that the subjects completed between 198 and 333 swings in the time frame (265 swings average ) and worked at an average heart rate of 86% of max and at 65% of their previously measured oxygen consumption [VO2max]. They concluded that

“Continuous kettlebell swings can impart a metabolic challenge of sufficient intensity to increase Vo2max. Heart rate was substantially higher than Vo2 during kettlebell swings. Kettlebells provide a useful tool with which coaches may improve the cardiorespiratory fitness of their athletes.”

This validates what several of you training yourself, training clients or who just hate doing traditional cardio have probably known for a while… We don’t have to do traditional cardiovascular training (running, cycling etc) to get a cardiovascular training effect. 12 mins of kettlebell swings can be used as a great cardio tool, as can bodyweight circuits, sleds, sandbags etc.

Taking that a step further, we can see that it may actually be a better choice of cardio training for some clients.

12 mins of running  as a comparison obviously involves a lot more repetitions through the joints than an average of 265 reps of kettlebell swings.  So for some clients/trainees, we can get a similar metabolic effect, heart rate, oxygen consumption (and therefore calories burned) while reducing the total reps and joint stress in deconditioned clients.

The bottom line is that we can use non-traditional metabolic training such as this, to provide cardiovascular training benefits.

Try the following at the end of your next workout:

Start the stopwatch.
Do 10-12 swings at the top of each minute, and rest for the remainder of the minute.
Repeat for 10-12 mins.

–
AC

Guest Blog from Eric Cressey:

Three Key Things Every Personal Trainer Should Know About the Shoulder

1. You should NEVER be intimidated when you hear/see the words “rotator cuff tear” or “labral tear.” Why?  Because if you are training clients, you are absolutely, positively already training people who have these issues but are 100% asymptomatic.  Some interesting research:

Miniaci et al. (2003) found that 79% of professional baseball pitchers – the people who put the most stress on their shoulders on the planet – actually had “abnormal labrum” features.  They concluded that “magnetic resonance imaging of the shoulder in asymptomatic high performance throwing athletes reveals abnormalities that may encompass a spectrum of ‘nonclinical’ findings.”

Meanwhile, rotator cuff tears often go completely unnoticed. Sher et al. (1995) took MRIs on the shoulders of 96 asymptomatic subjects, and found cuff tears in 34% of cases, and 54% of those older than 60.  Meanwhile, another Miniaci study (1995) found ZERO completely normal rotator cuffs in those under the age of 50 out of a sample size of 30 shoulders.

What’s my point?  Both the people who are in pain AND those who have absolutely no pain can have disastrous looking shoulder MRIs.  So, in many cases, it is something other than just the structural deficit that causes certain people to experience pain.  To me, that difference is how they move.

A torn labrum may become symptomatic in a thrower with poor shoulder internal rotation.  Or, a partial thickness cuff tear my reach the pain threshold in a lifter who doesn’t have adequate scapular stability.

In short, a MRI report doesn’t tell you everything there is to know about a shoulder – and you need to assume that a lot of your clients are already jacked up.

2. When assessing a shoulder, everything starts with total motion. In healthy shoulders, total motion – which comes from adding internal rotation and external rotation – should be the same on the right and left side.  This “arc” may occur in a different place on each shoulder, but as long as it’s symmetrical from side-to-side, you’re off to a good start – and that’s when you work further down the chain to see what’s going on with scapula stability, thoracic spine mobility, etc.

3. 100% of all shoulder problems involve scapular dysfunction. The interaction of the glenoid fossa of the scapula (socket) and humeral head (ball) is what allows the glenohumeral joint (shoulder) to do what it needs to do.  However, most individuals have some form of shortness (e.g., pec minor, levator scapulae) or weakness (e.g., serratus anterior, lower trapezius) of muscles working on the scapula.  These inefficiencies alter glenohumeral alignment and increases stress on the rotator cuff, biceps tendon, labrum, and glenohumeral ligaments.  Identifying and addressing scapular issues is a key step in preventing shoulder pain.

===

More from Eric’s most recent seminar:

Check out Eric’s newest product with Mike Reinold (Boston Red Sox head athletic trainer and rehabilitation coordinator)

=>Optimal Shoulder Performance

This is the first product I’ve seen  that really bridges the gap between rehabilitation and high performance better than any shoulder product on the market today.

–
AC

PS -  if you add up all the signing bonuses and career salaries of Mike and Eric’s guys combined, you are talking about more than $1 billion in shoulders that they manage.  That’s a very cool real world perspective on what works.

Check it out here => Optimal Shoulder Performance

A couple of new studies just released (thanks to Adam Campbell for forwarding):

Kelleher et al
The Metabolic Costs of Reciprocal Supersets vs. Traditional Resistance Exercise in Young Recreationally Active Adults.
JSCR 2010 Mar 17. [Epub ahead of print]

This compared traditional weight training (perform a set, rest for a period of time and then repeat) to a reciprocal superset workout (where you perform for example one set of presses, rest a period of time and then perform one set of rows before repeating). The researchers concluded that

“Reciprocal supersets produced greater exercise kJ.min, blood lactate, and EPOC than did [traditional weight training]. Incorporating this method of resistance exercise may benefit exercisers attempting to increase energy expenditure and have a fixed exercise volume with limited exercise time available.”

Basically the superset group burned more calories per minute than the traditional weight training group. So if workout time is limited (which it is for most of us), and the goal is to drop some excess fat, a superset based workout may be superior.

Taking that one step further:

Paoli et al.
Effects of three distinct protocols of fitness training on body composition, strength and blood lactate.
JSMPF. 2010 Mar;50(1):43-51

This looked at three group – a low intensity circuit training group, and endurance (cardio) only training group and a high intensity circuit training group.

This study concluded that among the three groups, the high intensity circuit training showed the greatest reductions in body weight, percentage of fat mass , waistline, blood lactate (produced at 100 Watt during submaximal test) and greater improvement in 6RM in horizontal leg press and underhand cable pulldowns.

“The results obtained favored the conclusion that high-intensity exercise combined with endurance training in the circuit training technique is more effective than endurance training alone or low intensity circuit training in improving body composition, blood lactate, moreover high intensity circuit training results in significantly greater strength increase compared to traditional circuit training”

Really this is just an expansion of the above finding – that pairing or setting up a circuit of exercises with high intensity exercise, will be more effective for fat loss and weight reduction than doing pure endurance training.

When we combine the two – we can extrapolate that reciprocal supersetting, within a circuit format will be the most effective fat loss strategy within the weight room.

Take home advice: If your goal is weight loss or fat loss, set up all your resistance training in superset, triset or circuit (a term we use to describe 4 or more exercises) fashion to really maximize your results. If you add in some interval training (which is metabolically similar to the above type of training – high intensity work followed by a rest period) and clean up your diet, you’ll make great progress.

–
AC