Other/Mixed Long muscle length training

[Antti]

The question is whether the long head typically lags the other two when the arm is not overhead. Stated another way, the two other heads are stretched simply by bending the elbow with the upper arm in any posture, the long head is not. I didn't read the study since I've long preferred overhead tricep exercises anyway "I knew that".




Some of this is seen in research with use of eccentric overloading and not so much concentric or standard iso. After that, most studies aren't looking for it specifically. Important to note that even with eccentric it isn't a notable response - seems to be quite difficult to train for.

The remaining research I've found is spotty, so from a "prove it" standpoint (results not consistent or statistically sig), that's all I've got. It may be research design, IDK. I have seen it claimed in other articles re iso, but no specific references. And then we know that without sport specific training, this response doesn't of itself increase movement speed. A surprising amount of research is not sport related but rather for people with muscular conditions.

My own use of iso at long length reliably produces sensation of stretch or pump at the insertion end of the muscle upon termination of an effort. Example biceps I feel it in the pit of my elbow, bench I feel it near my armpits.



Not clear to me, I suspect a lot of it comes down to specifics. We do know that concentric only induces far less fatigue and markers of muscle protein breakdown. Full ROM overload eccentrics a ala Arthur Jones presumably require a lot of recovery. Partial ROM reps probably a lot less - likely comparable to full ROM, but that's just a guess.


Elite althletes not only turn on high threshold motor units faster than mortals, they turn them off faster too (Kenny mentioning this got me to looking a little more into how I could incorporate it). This allows them to move and react faster in dynamic environments.

Cal Dietz interview, he observed that athletes adapted to this training show some remarkable abilities. Example dumbell bench press with rapid fire partial ROM, an assistant is needed to place hands on the athlete to keep them pinned to the bench. He had other examples but that one stuck with me.

I know my own pulse work has improved movement speed, but I never benchmarked it at the start (not sure how I would have done that anyway) so is all anecdotal.

When it comes to the triceps' study and the question of the position of the humerus, the advantage of the overhead due to the stretch can't stand for the lateral and medial head if they're already stretched when not overhead. That is precisely my point. Yet, they showed better development when overhead. Though, can we assume that the equally better development of the long head was due to the stretch? I'd say no.

Ao turning off motor units means faster relaxation and tension cycling? I was in the mode of only considering lifting or sports like powerlifting, so it didn't come to mind.

 

[bluejeff]

When it comes to the triceps' study and the question of the position of the humerus, the advantage of the overhead due to the stretch can't stand for the lateral and medial head if they're already stretched when not overhead. That is precisely my point. Yet, they showed better development when overhead. Though, can we assume that the equally better development of the long head was due to the stretch? I'd say no

I have no idea if this is the case, but off the cuff, I wonder if it has to do with the leverage/lack of leverage in that position creating more tension than in other positions. That is, if you load up an EZ bar and do overhead triceps extensions, and you load up a cable machine and do tricep push-downs with the same loaded weight, does the overhead version stress the triceps more because of the changes in the lever arms? How would that be different from doing overhead extensions with the cable machine?

My thought is that perhaps even though the lateral and medial heads aren't stretched any further, the disadvantaged lever in the overhead position might make a similar weight "heavier" and thus stress them more.

I would have to set up a physics problem to get a better idea haha.

 

[GreenSoup]

In the "golden days" of Gymnastic Bodies,...

The gymnastic holds I had learned from being a casual reader of their message board seemed pretty cool, although goals shifted and I might make them a part of training in the future. What happened to GB that they are not in the Golden Days now?

Dan John mentioned isometrics are very effective but only for 6 weeks and then adaptation kicks in. Can't recall which podcast episode but he's probably got a YouTube short that covers it.

This probably goes back to the Hettinger strength studies (of the 1940s or 50s?) that found 6-8 weeks of the same overcoming isometrics led to strength stagnation. I have since read about gains from much more recent 12 week isometric strength studies. Which is right? The principle is that constantly pushing to the max meant your nervous system got tired of doing the same joint angle the same way and accommodated to it. The answer I've read was to switch the angle of the overcoming iso by about 15 degrees or so.

Being in the absolute longest joint angle and even 20 degrees away from that seem like a decent trade off every few weeks if someone wanted to keep pushing with overcoming isos. So it could be the longest length and then just a different but still long length alternated to follow the rules, presuming Hettinger was correct.

I haven't read anything about accommodation to the load of yeilding isos, like planche and front lever progressions. Has anyone else?

On the day that he bar reported a max force of 106 lbs. I grabbed a 53 lb. kettlebell to see if I could press it. I found being able to press 106lbs isometrically with 2 arms meant I could press a 53 lb. weight with one arm for a tiny bit - it was enough force to put the weight in motion, but not very far.

As I understand it, that is the problem of training specificity. One example could be bilateral deficit, which is when one hand can do a heavy weight, but two hands together are lower than just double the one handed weight. Is it possible two hands together, when trained, can be higher than double the untrained one handed weight? Maybe.

Can you rig the IsoMax to do a one handed lift and see what force it says you're lifting?

 

[North Coast Miller]

When it comes to the triceps' study and the question of the position of the humerus, the advantage of the overhead due to the stretch can't stand for the lateral and medial head if they're already stretched when not overhead. That is precisely my point. Yet, they showed better development when overhead. Though, can we assume that the equally better development of the long head was due to the stretch? I'd say no.

Ao turning off motor units means faster relaxation and tension cycling? I was in the mode of only considering lifting or sports like powerlifting, so it didn't come to mind.

A lot of the application seems to be sporting related. Although the links to Nippard et al for bodybuilding are very interesting. That was some of my interest in posting this, the applications are many, and fairly easy to impliment.

For the overhead triceps, it may come down to the resistance curve, really not sure as I haven't read the study. Looks like I'd better get educated.

 

[GovernorSilver]

As I understand it, that is the problem of training specificity. One example could be bilateral deficit, which is when one hand can do a heavy weight, but two hands together are lower than just double the one handed weight. Is it possible two hands together, when trained, can be higher than double the untrained one handed weight? Maybe.

Can you rig the IsoMax to do a one handed lift and see what force it says you're lifting?

That was in response to:

On the day that he bar reported a max force of 106 lbs. I grabbed a 53 lb. kettlebell to see if I could press it. I found being able to press 106lbs isometrically with 2 arms meant I could press a 53 lb. weight with one arm for a tiny bit - it was enough force to put the weight in motion, but not very far.

Bilateral deficit is a reasonable guess as to why I couldn't press the 53lb (24kg) KB more than a centimeter upward with one arm. Although on that day, there was not much difference in performance between left or right arm.

But past experience and data gathering has shown that whatever force I can apply the bottom of the overhead press, I can apply only a fraction of it at higher points in the press, with the worst performance at the close to lockout position (highest). As noted that day, my force at the midpoint of the press was only 68 lbs. which is quite a drop from 106 lbs. at the bottom. Conventional thinking in relation to overcoming isometric training would have been to just train at the midpoint until I can apply 106 lbs. of force - at midpoint - then try again. Perhaps Kenny's advice to train at just below midpoint would be better.

However, I do want to test the findings for myself, regarding the research that found greatest carryover to dynamic movement from isometric training at longest possible muscle length. Approximately 2 weeks after the 106 lb. day, I logged a max force of 115 lbs. Retest with the 53 lb. KB found I could press it to 1/3 of the full movement, which is a dramatic improvement over moving it 1 cm. It does not mean I'll be able to press the KB all the way in 2 weeks, because progress in overcoming isometrics is no more linear than progress in dynamic weight training. The previous 2 sessions before I hit 115 lbs., my force was only 102-103 for 2 consecutive sessions. I've been at this style of training long enough though to just keep showing up, don't do anything to get hurt, and results will eventually come.

Yes I could rig the IsoMax for one-arm pressing, by attaching motorcycle straps. But given how the current experiment is progressing for me, I don't have the motivation to test the one-arm press.

 

[North Coast Miller]

As I understand it, that is the problem of training specificity. One example could be bilateral deficit, which is when one hand can do a heavy weight, but two hands together are lower than just double the one handed weight. Is it possible two hands together, when trained, can be higher than double the untrained one handed weight? Maybe.

Whem I tested vs a crane scale. My one arm isometric press was just over 100lb. I don't think I could press that with one hand, or 200 with 2.

My first attempt was about 85 IIRC, and though I felt that was a max effort, determined to do better. Full body bracing and max effort gained 15lbs of force.

Edit to add: isometric exertion at max effort is a skill as much as strength expression. It feels very alien at first and then it doesn't. If you stick with it exclusively past the 6-8 week mark, regular lifts begin to feel a little awkward.

 

[North Coast Miller]

Reading the triceps research, it would seem that regardless of muscle origin, the greatest tension on the muscle would have been at long length.

Compared to something like a downward cable press, where at full flexion the tricep can almost relax so long as the grip is firm, overhead work places a stretch on the muscle that is in effect even if you attempt to relax and just let the load hang.

My take anyway. One study does not a trend make. My fav tricep press is laying on a bench, arms overhead, press the bar to a full horizontal extension, maybe a few degrees elevated but nothing like a vertical tricep press. Aim for a lockout against max resistance at full extension. Note, this approach does not put the same level of stretch on the tricep as a full overhead press.

 

[puddleduck]

As he tends to with most hypertrophy related topics; Chris Beardsley has written extensively on this subject. Worth the effort…

One line summary;
Lengthened partials generate some quick gains. These generally aren’t a long term strategy. They also yield a lot more fatigue so need to be programmed properly

 

[Kenny Croxdale]

Long muscle length training​

Good post.

Here is some additional information that was provide last year on it...

Long-Length Partial Reps For Hypertrophy Long-Length Partial Reps For Hypertrophy

 

[bluejeff]

What happened to GB that they are not in the Golden Days now?

Their current online presence/influence is almost zero from my point of view. As someone who trained and taught at their former master affiliate gym, I can say they had some fallings-out with some of their affiliate gyms (the details of which I'm not sure I should disclose). In short, it seems like they wanted to push a business model in a world where most of their information was starting to spread for free. They were also pretty bad about posting videos of gymnasts and handbalancers who did not use the GB method to get to where they are to promote their services.

I used the words "golden days" because when I was involved, they were at the peak of their "popularity" and influence.

I will say that it does seem to be true that a lot of what you see as "gymnastic strength training" came from Coach Sommer and GB. For example, he didn't invent the Jefferson curl (it goes back pretty far under other names) but had he not promoted it, I have little doubt it would still remain in obscurity. I also think GB had a lot to do with the rise in popularity of the "gymnastic flavor" of calisthenics, that is, involving static holds, etc. Another example is that Ido Portal studied under Sommer and spread lots of his techniques without really much attribution to the source.

Let me make an important note that I am not bashing GB. I got into bodyweight training through them, learned valuable training lessons that transfered to other areas of my life and more. They just weren't "perfect" and I think they could've made a better business model than they ended up with.

 

[Kenny Croxdale]

isometrics are very effective but only for 6 weeks and then adaptation kicks in.

The General Adaptation Syndrome

This is the underlying principle behind Periodization Training.

There are three phases to it. Google it for the break down.

Hyperbolic Definition

You either adapt or die. That in essence what Dr. Han Selye, M.D, PhD concluded when came up with this term regarding disease. This applies across the board with everything.

In training you don't figuratively die from training, your training protocol metaphorically speaking dies.

At some point in a training program, OverReaching occurs (mild OverTraining). Continuing to push in an OverReached State lead to OverTraining which leads to going backwards and being more susceptible to injuries.

This occurs performing the same Isometric Training Program or Traditional Weight Training Program. It also applies to gaining or losing weight. Information on this has been posted multiple times based on The MATADOR Diet Research, etc.

Isometric and Traditional Weight Training

Continuing to progress with an Isometric Training Program to ensure continued progress is the same as other Traditional Weight Training Program.

Periodization Training

Base on the posts on this forum, this appear to be something that is not understood or implemented.

Periodization Training is Planned Progressive Training with a beginning and end over a certain number of weeks.

Once that Periodization Training cycle is completed, a new one is begun with Lower Loads that are progressively increased each week combined with New Training Exercises.

Varying Exercises

information on his has been repeatedly posted. I understand that the learning process is reliant on repetition of information. However, for some reason this information is not sinking in for many individuals.

Here it is again in Post 8.

Other/Mixed - Why not vary exercises day to day?

Active Recovery

Starting over with a New Periodization Training Plan with Lower Loads promotes Active Recovery. Training with Lower Loads increases blood flow to the muscles, which promotes recovery.

This approach work as well for...

Isometric And Functional Isometric Training

1) Isometric Training

The same concepts apply as a means of continuing to make progress with an Isometric Training Program.

One you stop Isometric Training, it stop working; which applies to everything.

As the research data in "Changing Exercises" and the anecdotal training data from over 40 years of The Westside Powerlifting Protocol demonstrate, Varying/Changing Exercise is one of the key to ensuring progress.

That applies to Isometric Training, as well, with a well written program.

Varying Isometric Exercises

This can be accomplished as easily as going from an Isometric Flat Bench Press to an Incline Bench Press or going from an Isometric Narrow Stance Stance to a Wide Stance.

It can be as simple as going from an Isometric Flat Wide Grip Bench Press to a Narrow Grip Flat Bench Press.

2) Functional Isometrics

This involves Weighted Isometrics.

Power Rack Bench Press Example

a) Placing Pins that are right off the chest.

b) Placing another Set of Pins a few inches up.

c) Driving the weight from the Bottom Pins into the Upper Pins and performing an Isometric.

Understanding Training Concepts

Being able to Understanding Training Concept ensures you are able to write an effective program.

individual who don't progress to the point of Understanding Training Concepts are relegated to following Training Programs the are proven to produce results.

A great example is the difference between a Cook and a Chef.

A Cook needs to follow the Recipe. A Chef's understanding of the culinary art of cooking allow them to be creative.

Everyone start off Training as a "Cook". Some progress to being a "Training Chef" , many don't.

Essentially, a "Training Chef" has learned the Rules of Training and knows when to break them and revise them for success.

 

[GreenSoup]

I used the words "golden days" because when I was involved, they were at the peak of their "popularity" and influence.

I went to their web site and...wow. When I was there last it was like the StrongFirst forum but for isometrics and other gymnastic advice. Now...not even a forum and they minimize their original name so you need to press Ctrl and + to read it.

Change is inevitable except from a vending machine.

 

[GreenSoup]

Active Recovery

Starting over with a New Periodization Training Plan with Lower Loads promotes Active Recovery. Training with Lower Loads increases blood flow to the muscles, which promotes recovery.

This approach work as well for...

Isometric And Functional Isometric Training

It doesn't seem like there can any periodization of lower loads with overcoming isometrics. Push to the max at one angle for one block and then blunt accommodation with a slightly different angle's max effort in the next block. The first angle has a lower load of zero in the second block but the muscles are still giving 100% in both blocks. Or does the separate angle just count as active recovery for the first angle and therefore count as effective block periodization?

 

[Antti]

How would one compare training the overcoming isometrics to simply lifting to failure?

Let's take an athlete who competes in the deadlift and has a sticking point at the knees, a typical issue. He gets the bar off the ground very easily but stalls at the knee.

Now, he could load the bar a little over his 1RM, and do deadlift singles so that the bar stalls at the knees and he stays there for 3-6 seconds each time, trying maximally to pass the sticking point.

Is this overcoming isometrics training or not? What would the differences be between the two if not?

In general, training like this seems to be extremely frowned upon due to recovery issues and some also see a greater injury risk. Is this general notion untrue and how would the overcoming isometrics be different?

 

[North Coast Miller]

It doesn't seem like there can any periodization of lower loads with overcoming isometrics. Push to the max at one angle for one block and then blunt accommodation with a slightly different angle's max effort in the next block. The first angle has a lower load of zero in the second block but the muscles are still giving 100% in both blocks. Or does the separate angle just count as active recovery for the first angle and therefore count as effective block periodization?

Changing angle or point in the ROM, also the timing duration of each exertion, the ramp up, is it possible to use leverage to force a given muscle to a longer length under tension, what additional training variables are at work with the isometrics? If using a strain gauge or crane scale it is now possible to accurately train sub max efforts.

 

[Spirit198]

BP done at long lengths bottom chest position for 10 seconds done it, why? because atp pc lasts that much or around that, dont know when my peak force ocures and to train effort. Is it better to hold for 5 sec. and how mamy sets in one spot?

What about Ballistic iso how to program ddoes it goes in waves like 2 sec On 2 sec OFF how many time to repete and why is better for RFD amd explosive strength?

 

[North Coast Miller]

How would one compare training the overcoming isometrics to simply lifting to failure?

Let's take an athlete who competes in the deadlift and has a sticking point at the knees, a typical issue. He gets the bar off the ground very easily but stalls at the knee.

Now, he could load the bar a little over his 1RM, and do deadlift singles so that the bar stalls at the knees and he stays there for 3-6 seconds each time, trying maximally to pass the sticking point.

Is this overcoming isometrics training or not? What would the differences be between the two if not?

In general, training like this seems to be extremely frowned upon due to recovery issues and some also see a greater injury risk. Is this general notion untrue and how would the overcoming isometrics be different?

If you were to pin the bar at the sticking point, or use a much lighter load with upper limit travel pinned at your sticking point might be a better example.

Tech your example is a form of isometrics since the muscle isn't changing length. But is not training against an absolute resistance since there is initial travel of the bar and nothing physically stopping it from going higher. The safest way to train vs absolute resistance is to start with a resistance that is stationary.

This is where different uses of iso come in - not all coaches use it at long length, not all coaches use it with an external load. There's no concensus, similar to different training strategies with traditional loading. "Coach uses a lot of barbell" or "Coach uses a lot of isotonics" doesn't really tell you very much.

To me, a large part of how I use overcoming iso, the trainee supplies the tension against the resistance. The lack of muscle length changing much, changes the energy use dynamics to something very different to a traditional training to a stall, far fewer metabolites are created, less oxidative stress. For a given stimulation of high threshold MUs, you have reduced recovery needs, not more.

Also "long length" iso implies a situation where maybe you put 2000lbs on the bar and one attempts to crack it loose from the floor. Or better yet, pin the bar a few inches lower than if it had 45s on it and use a max pull.

 

[North Coast Miller]

BP done at long lengths bottom chest position for 10 seconds done it, why? because atp pc lasts that much or around that, dont know when my peak force ocures and to train effort. Is it better to hold for 5 sec. and how mamy sets in one spot?

What about Ballistic iso how to program ddoes it goes in waves like 2 sec On 2 sec OFF how many time to repete and why is better for RFD amd explosive strength?

You're taking the fastest posdible shortcut to Hennemen's size principle = increased power output. As for how long to hold the effort, depends on training goals. 3-4 seconds is my recommendation but have used it with 1/2 second pulses and everything between.

 

[Antti]

If you were to pin the bar at the sticking point, or use a much lighter load with upper limit travel pinned at your sticking point might be a better example.

Tech your example is a form of isometrics since the muscle isn't changing length. But is not training against an absolute resistance since there is initial travel of the bar and nothing physically stopping it from going higher. The safest way to train vs absolute resistance is to start with a resistance that is stationary.

This is where different uses of iso come in - not all coaches use it at long length, not all coaches use it with an external load. There's no concensus, similar to different training strategies with traditional loading. "Coach uses a lot of barbell" or "Coach uses a lot of isotonics" doesn't really tell you very much.

To me, a large part of how I use overcoming iso, the trainee supplies the tension against the resistance. The lack of muscle length changing much, changes the energy use dynamics to something very different to a traditional training to a stall, far fewer metabolites are created, less oxidative stress. For a given stimulation of high threshold MUs, you have reduced recovery needs, not more.

Also "long length" iso implies a situation where maybe you put 2000lbs on the bar and one attempts to crack it loose from the floor. Or better yet, pin the bar a few inches lower than if it had 45s on it and use a max pull.

I would argue that my example would still be an isometric, but I suppose it may be hard to maintain the force output at a specific angle for longer. On the other hand, with a specific load you can be certain that your force output is high enough. Pulling against a pin you never know, but with a load you know. Maybe it would be good for programming and managing fatigue, having external input so you really know when you can't put out the force anymore.

From what I've read I've come to understand that it is better to move the implement a bit with a some kind of load and not just start at the point. But I'm sure there are different opinions on it. Still, my example is alike to the idea.

I understand that my example is not a long length isometric. However, it is specific for the athlete with a specific goal.

 

[North Coast Miller]

I would argue that my example would still be an isometric, but I suppose it may be hard to maintain the force output at a specific angle for longer. On the other hand, with a specific load you can be certain that your force output is high enough. Pulling against a pin you never know, but with a load you know. Maybe it would be good for programming and managing fatigue, having external input so you really know when you can't put out the force anymore.

From what I've read I've come to understand that it is better to move the implement a bit with a some kind of load and not just start at the point. But I'm sure there are different opinions on it. Still, my example is alike to the idea.

I understand that my example is not a long length isometric. However, it is specific for the athlete with a specific goal.

I'd say if you manage to calculate the load to a stall, you're doing a yielding isometric. Still an isometric in part, but also if you fatigue and it pulls you down, it was ultimately an overload eccentric.

Yes, with iso is better to pre-load, but that could be as simple as mentally estimating a 30% output prior to full exertion, or leaning back a little to pre-load the muscle.

Addition of a crane scale can provide loading data without need for external load. This also demonstrates real time force output with each exertion or rep, and changes in output based on contraction speed etc that won't be obvious with just a load.

To me, best intended use of iso is full-bore overcoming "as hard as you can" with intent to recruit high threshold MUs. Speed of contraction being a prime variable. The ability to access this without use of heavy loading is a huge plus, esp for older trainees but potentially useful for anybody. At that point I'd say having feedback data is only needed for benchmarking effort and occasionally for progress. Yes, you'll tend to push harder if you can see the numbers moving, but in real-life application there will be no gauge.

The primary reasons to use iso would be to improve joint and tendon morphology and high threshold MU