Functional / Specificity

Bigger Stronger Leaner Competitive Bodybuilding
61

[quote]Cam Birtwell wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
Can there really be people who can use a computer well enough to post here and EVEN have an avatar who DO NOT get this? I rarely get to this point, but if you really aren’t capable of grasping what he or I are saying then you have the intellect of a jockstrap. This isn’t advanced biophysics here and is not even arguable. My 11 year old daughter could explain the concept of strength gained anywhere is strength usable anywhere.

Great! Bring her in… maybe she’ll come up with better points than you and Prof that even remotely support your claims :wink:

Maybe you can have her research the literally hundreds of analyses that indicate movement pattern specificity of training (loading pattern, joint actions, speed of movement). This info is of course accessible to yourself and the “Prof” but may be above your reading comprehension level.

I would post evidence proving my point, but I’ll give you two the opportunity to bow out gracefully, or better yet come up with evidence (aside from what you “think” is happening) that supports your view.

thanks for your time

cb.

[/quote]

You need evidence that supports the view that gaining strength on my biceps by doing curls actually helps my strength in activities that utilize my biceps…but aren’t curls? You need “evidence” for this? If I do curls, this does NOT translate over to “carrying groceries”? I’m confused at how anyone on planet Earth would need “evidence” to understand this.

62

[quote]dreads989 wrote:

Yes, as a matter of fact, I am undergoing school right now to become A physical Therapist. As far as learning to “barely scratch the surface”, I can’t tell you how wrong that is.
[/quote]
By PT I mean Personal Trainer. As most people on this site would automatically refer PT to.

We are talking about something totally different. Once again, by PT I meant personal trainers not college educated Physical Therapists.

63

[quote]dreads989 wrote:
of course, I am talking about Physical Therapy, and you are probably talking about Personal Trainers (?). If that’s so, sorry. And yes, you are right lol.[/quote]

Yep. PT means personal trainer to me.

64

[quote]Cam Birtwell wrote:
<<< I would post evidence proving my point, but I’ll give you two the opportunity to bow out gracefully, or better yet come up with evidence (aside from what you “think” is happening) that supports your view.

thanks for your time

cb.

[/quote]

You are the ultimate mental masturbator man. I have evidence for what I’m saying connected to every bone in my body and yours and Professor X’s. You’re one of these guys who reads a lot to give the illusion of erudition, but will never weigh 200 lbs without swallowing a bunch of lead which it appears may have already happened and accounts for you even reaching 180.

You can post volumes of whatever you want and it will never prove that all my iron earned strength disappears as soon I’m more than 5 feet away from any weight training equipment.

65

Leg curls help strengthen and build the hamstrings. Can anyone deny that?

The hamstrings are essential in running, jumping, kicking… correct?

Running, jumping, kicking… all required of a soccer player last time I checked.

Do the math…

leg curls = functional

66

Leg curls non-functional?

You do a ballistic, eccentric leg-curl every time you kick.

A soccer player will use this movement tens to hundreds of thousands of times in his or her career. So will a martial artist.

Does this mean that hamstring curls are the ONLY thing a soccer player or martial artist should do to work their hamstrings?

No.

Does it have its place in a complete conditioning program for these athletes?

Yes.

– ElbowStrike

67

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
You are the ultimate mental masturbator man. I have evidence for what I’m saying connected to every bone in my body and yours and Professor X’s. You’re one of these guys who reads a lot to give the illusion of erudition, but will never weigh 200 lbs without swallowing a bunch of lead which it appears may have already happened and accounts for you even reaching 180.[/quote]

If bodyweight = fitness or health or performance, you might have something coming close to a point here. I’m confident that your recent training pales in comparison to the accomplishments that I have attained through the conscientious application of training principles.

The original topic included a request for the discussion of specificity. In physical training of any kind, there is movement specificity, which is comprised of several factors: movement load, muscle action, and movement velocity to name the major ones.

I would never suggest that a bicep curl cannot contribute to a strength move requiring the biceps to be active and I apologize if that is what you think I was saying. What I am saying is that for optimum specificity, or transfer, to a “real life” situation, isolation exercises just plain suck ass.

I think the analogy was made earlier that bicep curls and pullovers would not be as effective for climbing training as pullups. This is a prime example of movement specificity.

Do you think strongman competitors focus on isolation exercises to develop their massive strength and power?

Do the Westside barbell lifters utilize the pec deck and kickbacks to blast up 500lb+ bench presses? Ever heard of dynamic correspondence?

Each and every repetitive skill that we use has its own motor program. Motor programs involving more than one muscle group working together develop specific patterns of intermuscular coordination. Training at higher versus slower velocities develops specific intramuscular coordination.

PS. If knowing what I’m talking about on a physiological and scientific level is “mental masturbation”… I’ll gladly take my hairy palms over your ignorance anyday :slight_smile:

PPS. erudition = “profound scholarly knowledge”. I just learned something today. Thank you for that!

68

[quote]Professor X wrote:

You need evidence that supports the view that gaining strength on my biceps by doing curls actually helps my strength in activities that utilize my biceps…but aren’t curls? You need “evidence” for this? If I do curls, this does NOT translate over to “carrying groceries”? I’m confused at how anyone on planet Earth would need “evidence” to understand this.[/quote]

I would like some evidence that training the seated leg curl is more effective for soccer performance than a squat, plyometric drills, or GHR. You can start there.

Read my posted response to “Tiribulus” (sic) when you get the chance.

69

[quote]Cam Birtwell wrote:

I would like some evidence that training the seated leg curl is more effective for soccer performance than a squat, plyometric drills, or GHR. You can start there.

Read my posted response to “Tiribulus” (sic) when you get the chance.
[/quote]

I don’t think that anyone said the leg curl was more effective. It was simply stated that the leg curl fit the so-called definition of functional.

70

[quote]LA wrote:

I don’t think that anyone said the leg curl was more effective. It was simply stated that the leg curl fit the so-called definition of functional.

[/quote]

You’re right, I stand corrected on that one. I will assert though that the leg curl exercise is not a “functional” movement for anything (except for obscure exercises?) other than BB and rehab.

“Train movements, not muscles” was that Mike Boyle?

71

Cam, does a leg curl make the hamstrings bigger/stronger or not?

72

[quote]Cam Birtwell wrote:
A long post >>>>>>>>[/quote]

OK, either you switched gears on me or we misapprehended each other right from the start or both. I said before that differing forms of training will bring specific results depending on the goal. I would never assert that powerlifters, BBers, soccer players etc. shouldn’t train differently and can confidently say having read plenty of his posts that Professor X wouldn’t either.

However you didn’t do much to disabuse me of the notion that you were basically saying that movements you didn’t find particularly useful were incapable of producing any benefit at all outside of the performance of that exercise which manifestly illogical.

If not then I misunderstood and regret having been so harsh.

Also my handle “Tiribulus” has nothing to do with the supplement and is spelled how I intended. You may also be surprised what I’ve accomplished and will continue to accomplish with what I had to work with.

73

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Cam Birtwell wrote:
A long post >>>>>>>>

OK, either you switched gears on me or we misapprehended each other right from the start or both. I said before that differing forms of training will bring specific results depending on the goal. I would never assert that powerlifters, BBers, soccer players etc. shouldn’t train differently and can confidently say having read plenty of his posts that Professor X wouldn’t either.

However you didn’t do much to disabuse me of the notion that you were basically saying that movements you didn’t find particularly useful were incapable of producing any benefit at all outside of the performance of that exercise which manifestly illogical.

If not then I misunderstood and regret having been so harsh.

Also my handle “Tiribulus” has nothing to do with the supplement and is spelled how I intended. You may also be surprised what I’ve accomplished and will continue to accomplish with what I had to work with.
[/quote]

Cam is a douche. Stop apologizing.

74

[quote]Cam Birtwell wrote:
“Train movements, not muscles” was that Mike Boyle?[/quote]

Peter Twist told me that too.

75

[quote]Cam Birtwell wrote:
I would like some evidence that training the seated leg curl is more effective for soccer performance than a squat, plyometric drills, or GHR. You can start there.[/quote]

Evidence? Considering the piss-poor quality of the majority of “sport science research” out there…

Of course GHR’s, squats, and plyometric drills will be better for overall soccer performance.

These are all mostly hip-dominant movements. Soccer is composed of mostly hip extension movements (sprinting), but it DOES have an explosive, eccentric, knee extension component (kicking) that should be addressed in the weight room (with SOME incorporation of leg curls, be they machine, cable, or otherwise).

A program incorporating squats/deads, plyos, and GHRs PLUS seated, one-leg, high-speed, eccentric leg curls will be better than without the leg curls – at least from an injury-prevention perspective.

A program where the only hamstring exercise is leg curls, though, will suck ass. I’m sure that no one contends this.

– ElbowStrike

76

[quote]LA wrote:
Cam, does a leg curl make the hamstrings bigger/stronger or not?[/quote]

Just like any other exercise - depends on how you train with it!

77

[quote]ElbowStrike wrote:

Evidence? Considering the piss-poor quality of the majority of “sport science research” out there… [/quote]

I am guessing you are of a suitable stature to be critiquing such studies? Have you run one (or several) yourself?

[quote]
These are all mostly hip-dominant movements. Soccer is composed of mostly hip extension movements (sprinting), but it DOES have an explosive, eccentric, knee extension component (kicking) that should be addressed in the weight room (with SOME incorporation of leg curls, be they machine, cable, or otherwise).

A program incorporating squats/deads, plyos, and GHRs PLUS seated, one-leg, high-speed, eccentric leg curls will be better than without the leg curls – at least from an injury-prevention perspective.

– ElbowStrike[/quote]

Agreed… there does have to be a level of movement and loading SPECIFICITY to make the leg curl a FUNCTIONAL exercise for soccer. Good post.

cb.

78

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Cam Birtwell wrote:
A long post >>>>>>>>

OK, either you switched gears on me or we misapprehended each other right from the start or both. I said before that differing forms of training will bring specific results depending on the goal. I would never assert that powerlifters, BBers, soccer players etc. shouldn’t train differently and can confidently say having read plenty of his posts that Professor X wouldn’t either.
[/quote]

Yeah no worries, but I think X is sometimes off in a world of his own…

Agreed. I had no intention to belittle your accomplishments as a lifter/bodybuilder - I simply responded to the assertion that my bodyweight is somehow related to my training knowledge/intensity/efficacy - which of course is not the case.

Even though things get testy sometimes on internet boards, I really don’t mind - I think it forces me to work on my communication skills and blend the physiology with the practical. If everyone agreed all the time, what a boring place this would be!!

cb.

79

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Cam is a douche. Stop apologizing. [/quote]

I actually prefer doucheBAG (for future reference).

PS. You really should calm down. Considering your BMI is over 36, rises in your blood pressure may not be healthy :wink:

Peace

cb.

80

Dudes,

You all seem to be agreeing on the same thing and not realising it.

Hamstring Curls - Some carryover strenght to work/sport

Deadlifts - Better carryover to strength to work/sport.

So why would you ever do hamstring curls? They are less functional in all cases I can think of.

Tribulus, you seem to contradict yourself saying that strenght transfers 100%, but then agreeing with my chinup/lat pulldown post.

I would think that hamstrings play a greater roll in a soccer players ability to accelerate rather than eccentrically kicking a ball, which the power comes from hip flexin not knee flexion, which raises another point about the hamsting curl machine.

It works the hammy only across the knee, not the hip, so you would need to do back extensions as well to get a complete workout. Again we have deadlifts, snatches, etc.