lou schuler article on men's journal

[quaribc]

MJ PEAK PERFORMANCE: The Only Six Exercises You'll Ever Need

a little glimpse of what's to come [img]smile.gif[/img]

[I. Kay]

Great stuff. I can't wait to see more!

One question, though, if Lou happens to see this thread:

Why (under the "Twist" category) do you seem to prioritize the twist over the crunch, yet have the main exercise be a crunch, while the "option" is a twist? I certainly understand the value of the weighted crunch to build strength against unwanted twists, but shouldn't it be the "option", or supplemental exercise? Maybe I missed the point.

Thanks!

[OldGuy]

Why supersets?

[quaribc]

Originally posted by OldGuy:
Why supersets?

probably to get things done faster. especially with the rep scheme at 12, it seems to be more for beginners than intermediate and advance lifters.

[Chris Correia]

Although the workouts suggested do balance the movements, the description doesn't differentiate between vertical and horizontal push and pull. Hopefully, a neophyte reading that won't only do rows or only chins, or only bench presses or only overhead presses.

[I. Kay]

Originally posted by Chris Correia:
Although the workouts suggested do balance the movements, the description doesn't differentiate between vertical and horizontal push and pull. Hopefully, a neophyte reading that won't only do rows or only chins, or only bench presses or only overhead presses.

Yeah... maybe the word "option" isn't the best. Gives the impression that it doesn't need to be done. Maybe something more like "Week 1 (or Workout A) Alternate" and "Week 2 (Workout B) Alternate"?

Originally posted by quaribc:probably to get things done faster. especially with the rep scheme at 12, it seems to be more for beginners than intermediate and advance lifters.

I agree. I'm thinking the book will explain how to best adapt the routine to your needs.

[Chris Correia]

The book will surely be more in depth than a brief men's rag article.

BTW, I went to the root directory for the fitness articles http://www.mensjournal.com/healthFit...out_power.html and read the Westside oriented article Lou (I believe) had in there; I hadn't see it. Nice easy piece to deal with, that one is. http://www.mensjournal.com/healthFit...out_power.html

[Lou Schuler]

Thanks for the heads-up, guys. I didn't realize they had it up on their site yet.

The thing to remember about a magazine article is that there is a fixed, pre-designed space to work with. The folks at MJ -- editors and art directors -- were fantastic to work with on this. But there were only three magazine pages to work with to try to give the flavor of a book that's a little over 300 pages.

So, obviously, what's in the book will be much more complete. I mean, we're talking about Alwyn Cosgrove workouts here. And not just workouts: These are periodized training programs, by one of the most knowledgeable, creative, and non-dogmatic guys in the business. The only thing better would be Alwyn coming to your gym to work with you one-on-one. And, since there's one of him and lots of everyone else, that's just not possible.

Now, getting to the question of vertical vs. horizontal pulls and pushes, my take is that there's very little functional distinction. Most real-life pushes and pulls are at some kind of angle that's in between vertical and horizontal, and the muscles involved are essentially the same.

That said, for bodybuilding purposes there's a very big difference between a vertical and horizontal push. You aren't going to use your pectorals at all on a shoulder press (vertical push), and you aren't going to use your middle deltoids on a bench press (horizontal push). Then there's a functional difference in scapular action, although I'm not sure if it affects muscle development in any major way.

But if your car's stuck in a snowbank and you need to push it out, your body needs general, functional pushing strength a lot more than it needs specific horizontal or vertical pushing ability. I know none of us goes into the gym thinking, "Today I'm going to work on my car-pushing strength." My big point is that the muscles themselves respond best when they're challenged in a way that relates to what they're actually designed to do.

On pulls, the differences are a bit less pronounced, in terms of muscular development. The lats are simply designed to pull your arms to your sides when they're extended. Your traps have distinct functions related to the position of your arms, and your rear delts should be more directly involved the higher your arms are extended -- when you pull your arms back to a position that's horizontal to your torso, in other words.

But the really interesting thing about pulls, from any angle, is how many muscles your body devotes to the task. Depending on the angle, you have virtually all your upper-body muscles involved. Your lower pectorals and triceps assist in vertical pulls, along with all the other muscles that work with the complex of shoulder joints, along with gripping muscles in your hands and forearms.

Stuart McGill (author of Low Back Disorders and Ultimate Back Fitness and Performance) says that pullups and chinups also involve the lower back. If the lower back is involved, that means the abdominal muscles are also contracting for spinal stability. And then you have the hip muscles contracting, too, to stabilize the pelvis.

You'd have a lot of the same muscles involved if you were standing to do a horizontal row -- something that's tragically hard to do with serious weights on conventional equipment.

I've rambled here, but you get the major point: Our bodies make fewer diffentiations between the specific angles of pushes and pulls than our minds do.

[Chris Correia]

Lou:

Thank you for the additional explanation. I've wondered about the push/pull matter (the specificity of those movements). I've recently been thinking I need to spend a lot more time on chin/pullups than rowing. That's bassed on how much weaker I seem in those movements, and on the development of gymnasts and the conditioning level of some of the Crossfit folks, with the heavy use of the rings. I've figured that pullup movements must hit an awful lot of muscles, including chest even. You've validated that.

[I. Kay]

Lou: I've often wondered about the standing horizontal press. I definitely see the practical purpose of it. Now, would rigging up a cable station for this push be worth it?

Thanks again Lou.

[Marykaa]

Loved reading this.. very interesting.. thanks Lou

[OldGuy]

Rock, I did those last week in the gym. I used a single handle and positioned the cable shoulder height. I took a staggered stance (right leg forward when using the left hand and vice versa). You'll definitely need to use your legs and midsection to help with the press. Also you'll need to control the handle as the cable brings some instability to the exercise (especially on the eccentric portion - control it or you'll find yourself pulled back to the stack). I also did some standing rows this way. Anyway, had some nice DOMS in my abs for a few days after this.

[Lou Schuler]

Standing horizontal press? I don't know if it would be worth the trouble. It seems analagous to the Swiss ball chest press. Yeah, you involve more stabilizing muscles, but you give up a lot in terms of strength and muscle development.

Standing pulls, though, strike me as different. Your body just isn't designed to pull things from a sitting position. Most real-life pulls (aside from rowing a boat, a task I assume wasn't crucial to our evolutionary success) are done with your feet on the ground.

I'm kind of going in rhetorical circles here, and risk missing the big point, which is that basic, multijoint movements are always going to produce bigger functional and muscular benefits than single-joint, restricted-range-of-movement exercises.

The rest is just details ... although I do cringe every time I see someone doing shoulder presses or curls sitting down, with their backs pressed against a bench. It doesn't get much less functional than that.