Big Bench = Bad Shoulders

Training Bodybuilding
81

[quote]tveddy wrote:

the fact that you bench press with your scapulae retracted and you dont have any movement from them can be remedied by simply adding overhead pressing movements.

I disagree. There’s a difference in the type and use of muscles that are used on the scapulae between the two exercises.

In addition to that various pulling movements balance out the imbalance caused by these great looking pecs that the knuckleheads are after.

The imbalance you are referring to is not the one we’re talking about.

As far as typing, you use your forearms and not the tri pecs or ant delts, so maybe some swiss ball grip work is in order. If you were actually trying to question the carryover to everyday activites, then I believe you missed the fact that most people can do these tasks easily without working out.

Again, it should have been pretty obvious that these were exaggerated and sarcastic examples. I’ll keep it simple for you from now on.

I personally feel that I have had very good carry over from the bench press to pushing things in real life applications as well as sports.
[/quote]
Good for you. What sport do you play?

82

I think you missed the banner at the top – it says Bodybuilding’s Think-Tank, not Functional Strength’s Think-Tank. I have a hard time believing that your intentions here are anything but inflammatory.

Maybe you should check out the other thread showing Ronnie Coleman lifting stones – still think he’s an unfunctional bodybuilder? I personally wouldn’t mind having the guy over to help me move.

It’s pretty obvious that this ‘functional’ label is just there for smaller guys to belittle the achievements of bigger guys. The next time you’re too weak to open a jar of pickles, ask yourself: how functional are you?

Aside:
Where do old trolls go to die? Do they get banned, or do they just leave on their own accord? If they do get banned, it sure seems to take the mods a while to finally put an end to some of them.

83

Matgic wrote:

I think you are missing a key factor here. Functional implies a specific purpose. A specific FUNCTION, to be quite obvious.

Of course if you add the word “specific” in front of it, it takes on a slightly different meaning.

For a person to “function”, a whole host of different actions are required.

So NO one exercise can always be functional all by itself. Not deadlifts, barbell squats, or powercleans. If they suit what the athlete or trainee is trying to achieve, THAT will make it functional. Jerking off while riding on a skateboard with one foot can be functional if your sport is jerking off while riding on a skateboard with one foot. There is no absolute, all factors must be considered.

I’ll take your capitalised “NO” and raise you an “ALL”. See my previous posts.

Considering this, what makes benching on a swiss ball fundamentally more functional?

There are many articles written on this, but the basic answer is that you require a lot more fine muscle control, especially through the trunk. That should have a bigger carry-over to your every day life. That is, unless you walk around with a bench strapped to your back.

Because unless the activity you train for has you balancing on a ball, why do it in the gym as opposed to developing these technique and balance specific qualities through training the sport itself?

If you want to talk sports-specific, there certainly is nothing better than practicing the sport to develop the skills required. The reason why going to the gym is beneficial is that you are able to practice a lot of the movement patterns under more load - so when you hit the field/court, the motions come a lot easier. Stay with me here, this is basic stuff.

benching on a swiss ball will automatically reduce the weight a person can use (because of the balance factor)thus making it “safer.”

Only if you haven’t progressed properly.
Take this as a hypothetical example:

You grow up in a world where bench pressing using a swiss ball is the norm as opposed to using a bench. Do you think that if you got onto a bench for the first time, you’d be able to press more than your max while on the ball? I think not.

I feel very strongly on this subject because the first few years of my training were spent using a swiss ball much of the time. And since I hopped off of them and did mainly free weight bodybuilding training for a number of years, I’ve put on around 30lbs and would easily kick my own ass in most sports if I traveled back in time.

I doubt that the ball was the only variable.

84

[quote]SWR-1240 wrote:
Why don’t you go into some of the author’s locker rooms and share your opinion with some of them?

Afraid that they’re in a much better position to prove you wrong as opposed to the average T-Nation poster?

Please post a link to where you ask the questions, or state you opinions.

I’m looking forward to reading your conversations and learning from them.[/quote]

Here you go, pick any one you please, but preferably one who specialises more in exercise physiology:

I’ll suggest Eric Cressey, Mike Robertson, Chad Waterbury, and/or Christian Thibaudeau off the top of my head.

85

[quote]AgentOrange wrote:
I think you missed the banner at the top – it says Bodybuilding’s Think-Tank, not Functional Strength’s Think-Tank. I have a hard time believing that your intentions here are anything but inflammatory.

Aside:
Where do old trolls go to die? Do they get banned, or do they just leave on their own accord? If they do get banned, it sure seems to take the mods a while to finally put an end to some of them.[/quote]

Hmmm. Some of these Forums seem not to only be about bodybuilding. IE Strength Sports. Had he put it in there would it be okay with you?

What’s your definition of a troll? Anyone that thinks differently than you.

You are the troll here. What a boring site this would be if we all though alike and kissed each others asses for making the some dickhead comments.

This thread has actually been an interesting read. Guys like you turn this to shit.

Great work Troll.

86

[quote]SWR-1240 wrote:
Why don’t you go into some of the author’s locker rooms and share your opinion with some of them?

Afraid that they’re in a much better position to prove you wrong as opposed to the average T-Nation poster?

Please post a link to where you ask the questions, or state you opinions.

I’m looking forward to reading your conversations and learning from them.[/quote]

The ever inciteful SWR-1240. Afraid of thinking outside the square.

87

[quote]AgentOrange wrote:
I think you missed the banner at the top – it says Bodybuilding’s Think-Tank, not Functional Strength’s Think-Tank. I have a hard time believing that your intentions here are anything but inflammatory.
[/quote]
You don’t think this open discussion is thought provoking and worth it’s place on the site? Simple answer - don’t read it.

You’d like to think that, wouldn’t you? That’d make you feel a whole lot better, I’m sure.

88

[quote]SWR-1240 wrote:Afraid that they’re in a much better position to prove you wrong as opposed to the average T-Nation poster?
[/quote]

Unlike you, I don’t mind being proven wrong. It’s called growth.

Maybe if I stuck my fingers in my ears, I’d be as blissfully ignorant as you.

89

If you want to train for a sport, then train for that sport.

If you want to get strong, lift to get strong.

If you want to improve your balance, train your balance.

Mixing and matching is only going to lead to subpar results.

90

[quote]CHEKonIT wrote:

Good for you. What sport do you play?

[/quote]

I played football, offensive line to be specific. I don’t know what you know about football so its a postition where your job is to push people around.

91

[quote]CHEKonIT wrote:
SWR-1240 wrote:Afraid that they’re in a much better position to prove you wrong as opposed to the average T-Nation poster?

Unlike you, I don’t mind being proven wrong. It’s called growth.

Maybe if I stuck my fingers in my ears, I’d be as blissfully ignorant as you.

[/quote]

He gets on and bags anyone who says anything outside the bodybuilding square.

92

[quote]ExNole wrote:
If you want to train for a sport, then train for that sport.

If you want to get strong, lift to get strong.

If you want to improve your balance, train your balance.

Mixing and matching is only going to lead to subpar results. [/quote]

If only it were that simple. Most sports require a mix of strength, endurance and balance.

93

[quote]tveddy wrote:
I played football, offensive line to be specific. I don’t know what you know about football so its a postition where your job is to push people around.[/quote]

Hats off to you. It just goes to show that different approaches work for different people.

Thanks for the description, by the way, I wouldn’t have known what an offensive linesman was.

94

[quote]CHEKonIT wrote:
Matgic wrote:

I think you are missing a key factor here. Functional implies a specific purpose. A specific FUNCTION, to be quite obvious.

Of course if you add the word “specific” in front of it, it takes on a slightly different meaning.

For a person to “function”, a whole host of different actions are required.

So NO one exercise can always be functional all by itself. Not deadlifts, barbell squats, or powercleans. If they suit what the athlete or trainee is trying to achieve, THAT will make it functional. Jerking off while riding on a skateboard with one foot can be functional if your sport is jerking off while riding on a skateboard with one foot. There is no absolute, all factors must be considered.

I’ll take your capitalised “NO” and raise you an “ALL”. See my previous posts.

Considering this, what makes benching on a swiss ball fundamentally more functional?

There are many articles written on this, but the basic answer is that you require a lot more fine muscle control, especially through the trunk. That should have a bigger carry-over to your every day life. That is, unless you walk around with a bench strapped to your back.

Because unless the activity you train for has you balancing on a ball, why do it in the gym as opposed to developing these technique and balance specific qualities through training the sport itself?

If you want to talk sports-specific, there certainly is nothing better than practicing the sport to develop the skills required. The reason why going to the gym is beneficial is that you are able to practice a lot of the movement patterns under more load - so when you hit the field/court, the motions come a lot easier. Stay with me here, this is basic stuff.

benching on a swiss ball will automatically reduce the weight a person can use (because of the balance factor)thus making it “safer.”

Only if you haven’t progressed properly.
Take this as a hypothetical example:

You grow up in a world where bench pressing using a swiss ball is the norm as opposed to using a bench. Do you think that if you got onto a bench for the first time, you’d be able to press more than your max while on the ball? I think not.

I feel very strongly on this subject because the first few years of my training were spent using a swiss ball much of the time. And since I hopped off of them and did mainly free weight bodybuilding training for a number of years, I’ve put on around 30lbs and would easily kick my own ass in most sports if I traveled back in time.

I doubt that the ball was the only variable.
[/quote]

Firstly, this is way too confusing with my text and yours in the same font. Could you possibly make it so that they differ or just post your responses seperately below?

In any case. Functionality indicates the need for specifying. A definition I pulled off dictionary.com for function is

“The action for which a person or thing is particularly fitted or employed.”

Saying that this is not specific to the task at hand is just plain wrong in my opinion.

I do not know what you mean by replacing it with an “all.” Is this saying that all exercises can be functional? I agree with this. But just because it’s done on a ball, that does not mean it suits the individual more for their sport.

On to the next point about walking around with a bench strapped to my back. I do not plan on doing that, nor do I plan on rolling around on balls in my daily life. Why not perform leg lowering or reverse crunches while doing barbell benching? This would no doubt cause greater coordination to be used. Will it make me better at my sport? Questionable.

You said “The reason why going to the gym is beneficial is that you are able to practice a lot of the movement patterns under more load - so when you hit the field/court, the motions come a lot easier. Stay with me here, this is basic stuff.”

Again, this opens a whole nother issue. You are assuming that I believe practicing similar movement patterns on the field and in the gym will provide optimal results. Let’s keep this discussion out of it. I’m sure you know that swinging a heavier baseball bat can be detrimental to a swinger’s technique. So not all techniques must be replecated exactally. That being said, you say that the point of the weight room is to use load. Why not use more load on a bench than a swiss ball?

I recognize your statement about my increased ability being due to other factors as well.

In my opinion, the weight room’s primary function is to get the athlete stronger. Not to practice non specific acts of balance.

-MAtt

95

[quote]CHEKonIT wrote:

There are many articles written on this, but the basic answer is that you require a lot more fine muscle control, especially through the trunk. That should have a bigger carry-over to your every day life. That is, unless you walk around with a bench strapped to your back.[/quote]
The problem with the swiss ball is that when you press, not only do you push the bar away from you, you also move into the ball. This give will hinder the explosiveness that could be attained from being in a fixed position. Think of it like this, when you fire a bullet all the compression goes into a fixed position in the firing chamber. This causes the bullet to achieve a greater velocity (or explosiveness). Conversely when you fire a rpg the gas is expelled out the back. While the rpg is rocket propelled and achieves its maximum velocity after it leaves the gun, the back of the rpg is open to relieve the “kick” from the holder who would be acting as the fixed point were the rpg built as a rifle. Back to the swiss ball, while the stabilizer muscles in the core are also getting a workout, benching on a rigid bench will allow a greater explosiveness to be developed because the user is not moving away from the weight.

96

[quote]tveddy wrote:
The problem with the swiss ball is that when you press, not only do you push the bar away from you, you also move into the ball. This give will hinder the explosiveness that could be attained from being in a fixed position. Think of it like this, when you fire a bullet all the compression goes into a fixed position in the firing chamber. This causes the bullet to achieve a greater velocity (or explosiveness). Conversely when you fire a rpg the gas is expelled out the back. While the rpg is rocket propelled and achieves its maximum velocity after it leaves the gun, the back of the rpg is open to relieve the “kick” from the holder who would be acting as the fixed point were the rpg built as a rifle. Back to the swiss ball, while the stabilizer muscles in the core are also getting a workout, benching on a rigid bench will allow a greater explosiveness to be developed because the user is not moving away from the weight.
[/quote]

Good call. If it’s explosive movements you’re after, stick to your plyometric push-ups and heavy medicine ball tosses.

97

watch out guys! the trolls are unifying.

if we don’t watch out, jjay is going to join these two, and then they’ll be unstoppable!

you have been warned. . .

98

[quote]Matgic wrote:

In any case. Functionality indicates the need for specifying. A definition I pulled off dictionary.com for function is

“The action for which a person or thing is particularly fitted or employed.”

Saying that this is not specific to the task at hand is just plain wrong in my opinion.

I’m saying that it can be, but it doesn’t have to be. I’ve got no problems disagreeing about this one.

I do not know what you mean by replacing it with an “all.” Is this saying that all exercises can be functional?

Yes

I agree with this. But just because it’s done on a ball, that does not mean it suits the individual more for their sport.

I agree also, I didn’t say this was necessarily true. And besides, the topic is more about shoulder joint injuries, not it’s application to sports.

Why not perform leg lowering or reverse crunches while doing barbell benching? This would no doubt cause greater coordination to be used. Will it make me better at my sport? Questionable.

Again, depends on what you’re doing. Even this would have a carryover to SOMETHING. Sounds like fun, though.

That being said, you say that the point of the weight room is to use load. Why not use more load on a bench than a swiss ball?

I didn’t say the only point of the weight room is to use load, I was just giving it as one example. Why not use a bench? Refer to my previous posts on intelligently progressing the exercise.

In my opinion, the weight room’s primary function is to get the athlete stronger. Not to practice non specific acts of balance.

And I’m sure that it suits your goals perfectly.

[/quote]

99

[quote]CHEKonIT wrote:
SWR-1240 wrote:Afraid that they’re in a much better position to prove you wrong as opposed to the average T-Nation poster?

Unlike you, I don’t mind being proven wrong. It’s called growth.

Maybe if I stuck my fingers in my ears, I’d be as blissfully ignorant as you.

[/quote]

Great! I’m seriously looking forward to the conversation(s) then.

Does it not make sence to have this conversation with much more qualified people instead of us (the general public of T-Nation).

The authors aren’t close minded and encourage people to ask/talk about differnt ideas.

Where did I say I mind being proven wrong?

Where did I state an oppinion on the subject in this thread?

100

Matgic, your posts in this thread are well thought out and I agree with all of it. I find it hilarious that “functional” now supposedly has some all encompassing meaning or that balancing on a ball now makes you more “functional”. I have yet to run into the situation in life where I was suddenly reduced to the strength of a school girl in spite of benching as much as I do simply because I haven’t been “ball balancing”. I want to see the physiques of those who claim my training isn’t good enough or “nonfunctional”. I want to see what it is I am missing.