I read this excellent Mike Robertson article on lunges and my conclusions are:
1)My ROM is complete. This illusion that i don’t go all the way up happens because i use a VERY long stride. Try it and u’ll know what i mean.
I tried static lunges with a shorter stride the other day and my leg was upright at the top of the movement, so it’s all good.
2)Especially useful were the article’s points about the heel’s role. For example, the other day i used a shorter stride, i noticed instinctively pushing through the middle of the foot.
3)For some reason i still don’t think i’ll ever switch to non static lunges, and the reason is
a)It mostly seems like a balance rather than strength/size excercise. Not that balance isn’t important, but i feel it’s overemphasized with non-static lunges at the expense of strength and size gains.
b) I really don’t like them, it feels awkward and the rythym of the second half of the concentric part, i.e. when i come back to the standing position, feels a bit weird.
[quote]guaglione wrote:
I read this excellent Mike Robertson article on lunges and my conclusions are:
1)My ROM is complete. This illusion that i don’t go all the way up happens because i use a VERY long stride. Try it and u’ll know what i mean.
I tried static lunges with a shorter stride the other day and my leg was upright at the top of the movement, so it’s all good.
2)Especially useful were the article’s points about the heel’s role. For example, the other day i used a shorter stride, i noticed instinctively pushing through the middle of the foot.
3)For some reason i still don’t think i’ll ever switch to non static lunges, and the reason is
a)It mostly seems like a balance rather than strength/size excercise. Not that balance isn’t important, but i feel it’s overemphasized with non-static lunges at the expense of strength and size gains.
b) I really don’t like them, it feels awkward and the rythym of the second half of the concentric part, i.e. when i come back to the standing position, feels a bit weird.
[/quote]
I’m going to have to disagree with you there. Someone else mentioned Split Squats earlier in this thread and he was quite right, those are what you are doing. The “static” in Static Lunges means that you aren’t doing Walking Lunges, you are staying in the same place. Every example of Lunges I could find all ended in standing up completely regardless of stride length.
[quote]IQ wrote:
guaglione wrote:
I read this excellent Mike Robertson article on lunges and my conclusions are:
1)My ROM is complete. This illusion that i don’t go all the way up happens because i use a VERY long stride. Try it and u’ll know what i mean.
I tried static lunges with a shorter stride the other day and my leg was upright at the top of the movement, so it’s all good.
2)Especially useful were the article’s points about the heel’s role. For example, the other day i used a shorter stride, i noticed instinctively pushing through the middle of the foot.
3)For some reason i still don’t think i’ll ever switch to non static lunges, and the reason is
a)It mostly seems like a balance rather than strength/size excercise. Not that balance isn’t important, but i feel it’s overemphasized with non-static lunges at the expense of strength and size gains.
b) I really don’t like them, it feels awkward and the rythym of the second half of the concentric part, i.e. when i come back to the standing position, feels a bit weird.
I’m going to have to disagree with you there. Someone else mentioned Split Squats earlier in this thread and he was quite right, those are what you are doing. The “static” in Static Lunges means that you aren’t doing Walking Lunges, you are staying in the same place. Every example of Lunges I could find all ended in standing up completely regardless of stride length.[/quote]
If you look at the article of Mike Robertson, a link of which is posted on the first reply of this topic, you’ll see that what you refer to as static lunges is named “dynamic lunges”.
To fully convince you, take a look at this link: http://www.T-Nation.com/readTopic.do?id=459755
Go at the bottom of the page where static lunges are the topic of discussion and u’ll see pics of the starting and ending point.
[quote]guaglione wrote:
If you look at the article of Mike Robertson, a link of which is posted on the first reply of this topic, you’ll see that what you refer to as static lunges is named “dynamic lunges”.
To fully convince you, take a look at this link: http://www.T-Nation.com/readTopic.do?id=459755
Go at the bottom of the page where static lunges are the topic of discussion and u’ll see pics of the starting and ending point.
[/quote]
You’re right. The disagreement is that it turns out that Static Lunges and Split Squats are actually different names for the same exercise, some resources don’t recognise Static Lunges and some call the Dynamic Lunges Static Lunges instead.
That said they say the Static Lunges (as we would now both see them) are a good exercise so I hope you enjoy them.
[quote]IQ wrote:
guaglione wrote:
If you look at the article of Mike Robertson, a link of which is posted on the first reply of this topic, you’ll see that what you refer to as static lunges is named “dynamic lunges”.
To fully convince you, take a look at this link: http://www.T-Nation.com/readTopic.do?id=459755
Go at the bottom of the page where static lunges are the topic of discussion and u’ll see pics of the starting and ending point.
You’re right. The disagreement is that it turns out that Static Lunges and Split Squats are actually different names for the same exercise, some resources don’t recognise Static Lunges and some call the Dynamic Lunges Static Lunges instead.
That said they say the Static Lunges (as we would now both see them) are a good exercise so I hope you enjoy them.[/quote]
Yeah, maybe their only difference being that with (Bulgarian) SplitSquats you place on foot on a bench.
(OUT OF TOPIC)Btw why do they call them Bulgarian?
Trivial fact:Bulgaria is bordering Romania, it’s not a coincidence that two very important exercises are named after these otherwise poorly developed countries/(Bulgaria has a great Olympic weightlifting team, haven’t heard much about Romania’s).
Million dolar question: Why do Eastern Europeans perform so well at hese sports while at the same time they suck at football(soccer)??