Core Training Mythology Resources

[Guest guest]

In response to the comments made regarding core stability. I would just like

to say one thing. In order to obtain a response in training you must use the

modality that is best suited for the job. I have found the stability ball to

be an excellent tool to develop postural awareness, core strength, and

balance. However, it is not the only tool out there. Professionals often

overuse a new modality when they find a new one. You must integrate tools.

But it seems to me that if you are trying so hard to prove that the ball

does not work then you are probably not using it right. You cannot expect

every training modality to directly improve performance right away. There

are indirect benefits such as joint stabilizing strength to name one. Don't

you think that this may help an athlete? It may not directly improve their

numbers, or goals scored etc. but it will keep your athletes healthy and

less prone to injury.

Weight-training utilizing big loads helps improve the strength of the big

muscles but little to strengthen the small segmental

stabilizing muscles. This is where stability ball and board drills come in

to play. Why not integrate? Another example of the necessity of integrating

modalities is, if you were a football player and for a year you just

trained with weights exclusively utilizing olympic lifts, barbell exercises

etc., how well do you think your performance would improve? Probably not that

much since there was no conversion to power via plyometric training (another

modality). There are organizations out there that say plyometrics should not

be used (I liked to see them play volleyball without utilizing a " plyometric

move " . Let me tell you there would not be too much going on!). Integrate!

Getting back to core stability training, this training is initally performed

isolated to be sure you can actually fire the muscles that support your

spine at the segmental level. Once that is learned it is then integrated

with the rest of the core musculature then integrated with the whole body.

The core is the link between the upper body and lower body. To say that core

stablity training is a waste of time and that ball and board drills are

unimaginative and non-specific in nature then once again you are probably

using it wrong. Board drills are excellent for developing stablity in the

ankle, knees, hips , and spine and when used for upper body exercises

shoulder stabilizers to. And some drills can be so challenging that the

person's sport seems easier.

In regards to scientific evidence, if you look for scientific evidence on

everything you will probably find out that

science doesn't prove a lot of things that you have probably found works.

Just because there is no " documented " evidence that the ball is beneficial

to athletic training doesn't mean there aren't any. Ask beyond your circle

of coaches to other conditioning specialists who have successfully used

boards and balls to improve performance and the health of their athletes. An

analogy would be that we have always known that fruits and vegetable were

good for us before we had the science to find out there were vitamins and

phytochemicals in there etc. Don't stop yourself using a mode of training

that has a lot of successful clinical experience only to find out later on

that science proves it is beneficial and you could have been using it all

this time.

Core stability is a crucial link to human performance. It is the link

between the upper body and lower body. It is not a waste of time to

strengthen and should be an important part to a conditioning program. Read

the book " Therapeutic Exercise for Segmental Spinal Stabilization by

Hodges,Jull and or Integrated Training for the New Millenium by

Mike " for further details.

J. B.H.K., CSCS

ICTraining Fitness Services Inc.

-----Original Message-----

From: Mcsiff@... [mailto:Mcsiff@...]

Some very active coach sent me this letter and requested to remain anonymous

for the mean time because he does not wish the discussion to be tainted by

focus on who he is and who he trains, rather than what the problem is.

<Dr Siff - the " isolationist " principles involved set some alarm bells

ringing among those of us who have witnessed how unproductive and

time-wasting " core stability " training usually is, along with the

unimaginative and non-specific nature of the stability challenges involved

in

the ball and board drills. As something of a closet biomechanist, I

couldn't

agree more with your views on " core " versus " peripheral " stability,

because

one simply cannot train the " core " without training the periphery.

Basically, it is extremely frustrating to see healthy athletes doing

super-safe, non-challenging exercises that often involve less demand on

balancing skills than geriatric jogging, let alone running over hurdles,

negotiating swerving skills in many sports, taking part in wrestling or

doing

gymnastics. Our coaches have even had the misfortune to hear various

'authorities' telling us about the so-called proper progressions from body

weight exercises, to Olympic lifts, to core stability ball work (yes, in

that

order! I thought I'd misheard this 'expert', and made him repeat

himself).

Lately I have been attempting to convince some of our coaches and

physiologist colleagues that " ball " training is not all it seems, nor does

it

endow one with skills that may extrapolate directly to any top level

sport.

I have attempted to find studies that have looked at and supported ball

training within athletic populations, to no avail. Some of the coaches I

have been in contact with are now looking for documentary evidence that

highlights the inadequacies of ball training, which, to anyone who have

worked seriously in sport for long enough, are very obvious - but we would

now like some more documented evidence.

Believe it or not, this is needed politically to reduce the emphasis on

this

very- overmarketed training mode. This presents a bit of a paradox...find

research evidence to dispute a training mode for which there is no

scientific

evidence in the first place. Can you or anyone else help? Even some web

based articles by yourself and others would help.>

***For a start, please search our archives for articles that some of us

have

written in the past on this topic, then let me know what else you need.

The

world of motor control offers a great deal of research on the biomechanics

and neurophysiology of balance, agility and movement. Much of this work

shows that the non-stepping balance drills on balls and wobble boards, and

the specificity and complexity of different static and dynamic balancing

tasks, do not automatically endow one with the specific and highly

volatile

motor skills required in most sports. Far too much of the ball and wobble

board training philosophy is based upon physio drills used for pathology

and

for the early management of musculoskeletal injuries. Remember, too, that

this philosophy also sells products for some of the more visible

marketeers

in this field.

Dr Mel C Siff

Denver, USA

Supertraining/

[Guest guest]

RE: Core Training Mythology Resources

wrote:

In response to the comments made regarding core stability. I would just like

to say one thing. In order to obtain a response in training you must use the

modality that is best suited for the job. I have found the stability ball to

be an excellent tool to develop postural awareness, core strength, and

balance.

Casler writes:

Please explain how you, " have found the stability ball to be an excellent

tool to develop <snip>, core strength " ?

What methods, exercises and loads do you use to stimulate " core strength " ?

You state, " In order to obtain a response in training you must use the

modality that is **best suited** for the job " . I would state that in the

development of long chain core stability, the ball as I know it, is closer

to an amusing gym toy than a serious training tool. I would challenge you

to describe and explain one single exercise on the ball that would provide a

greater core result than the clean or snatch?

wrote:

But it seems to me that if you are trying so hard to prove that the ball

does not work then you are probably not using it right. You cannot expect

every training modality to directly improve performance right away. There

are indirect benefits such as joint stabilizing strength to name one.

Casler writes:

On what do you base the belief that the ball produces " joint stabilizing

strength " beyond or superior to other equipment?

wrote:

Weight-training utilizing big loads helps improve the strength of the big

muscles but little to strengthen the small segmental

stabilizing muscles.

Casler writes:

Let me suggest that you may not totally understand the way the body

stabilizes itself in closed chain activity for your statement is incorrect.

If force is transmitted through the chain, it cannot be transmitted but to

the degree of stabilization produced by the combination of

stabilizer/movers.

wrote:

Why not integrate? Another example of the necessity of integrating

modalities is, if you were a football player and for a year you just

trained with weights exclusively utilizing olympic lifts, barbell exercises

etc., how well do you think your performance would improve?

Casler writes:

Improvement for that example would depend on the initial condition of the

subject and the appropriateness of the training protocol. A youthful

beginner should make dramatic improvement, an older seasoned veteran may

make no progress at all.

wrote:

Probably not that much since there was no conversion to power via plyometric

training (another

modality).

Casler writes:

What does that mean? What proof do you have that strength developed through

weight training requires plyometric training to be converted to power?

wrote:

Getting back to core stability training, this training is initally performed

isolated to be sure you can actually fire the muscles that support your

spine at the segmental level.

Casler writes:

I would humbly suggest that " isolation " would NOT in any way be needed to

" be sure you can actually fire the muscles that support your spine at the

segmental level " . And just how do YOU determine when they " can actually

fire the muscles " ? Isolation is only something to consider for specific

kinds of therapy or bodybuilding. It has very little use in long chain

activities and sports.

wrote:

Once that is learned it is then integrated with the rest of the core

musculature then integrated with the whole body.

Casler writes:

Unless the subject is injured there is no need to isolate then integrate.

It seems like a serious waste of valuable training time.

wrote:

The core is the link between the upper body and lower body.

Casler writes:

Finally we agree on something.

wrote:

To say that core stablity training is a waste of time and that ball and

board drills are

unimaginative and non-specific in nature then once again you are probably

using it wrong. Board drills are excellent for developing stablity in the

ankle, knees, hips , and spine and when used for upper body exercises

shoulder stabilizers to. And some drills can be so challenging that the

person's sport seems easier.

Casler writes:

I would guess this is personal opinion (entitled) and there is absolutely no

evidence or even general consensus to support this supposition.

wrote:

In regards to scientific evidence, if you look for scientific evidence on

everything you will probably find out that

science doesn't prove a lot of things that you have probably found works.

Casler writes:

Aside from a few exercises, I would suggest that much of the " ball hype " is

promoted by those who realize profit from " imaginative " utilization of

alternative training modes. I personally am not against them, but I find

their use very limited and that those who generally support their use are

seriously uninformed and uneducated, " or " they profit to the point that they

support the mode for the income production.

wrote:

Core stability is a crucial link to human performance. It is the link

between the upper body and lower body. It is not a waste of time to

strengthen and should be an important part to a conditioning program. Read

the book " Therapeutic Exercise for Segmental Spinal Stabilization by

Hodges,Jull and or Integrated Training for the New Millenium by

Mike " for further details.

Casler writes:

Again no argument about the importance of " core stability " , but your method

to develop such, is (IMO) lacking basis for athletic utilization.

" Therapeutic Exercise " is not always translatable to the playing field

unless the athlete is injured. In therapy we are taking an " injured " area

and assimilating its function back into the functioning organism. In a

healthy athlete, this practice only serves to provide " extra " integrative

and translative steps.

I also agree there is nothing wrong with " integrating " training modalities

as long as they are the most effective methods we know.

Regards,

A. Casler

-||||--------||||-

TRI-VECTOR 3-D Force Systems

Century City, CA

http://summitfitness.websitegalaxy.com/index.html

[Guest guest]

From: " " <bjustin@...>

<Weight-training utilizing big loads helps improve the strength of the big

muscles but little to strengthen the small segmental stabilizing muscles.>

, this statement perplexes me. Could you explain it a bit further

please?

Krista -Dixon

Toronto, ON

[Guest guest]

wrote:

<<Weight-training utilizing big loads helps improve the strength of the big

muscles but little to strengthen the small segmental

stabilizing muscles.>>

Casler wrote:

<Let me suggest that you may not totally understand the way the body

stabilizes itself in closed chain activity for your statement is incorrect.

If force is transmitted through the chain, it cannot be transmitted but to

the degree of stabilization produced by the combination of stabilizer/movers.>

:

I agree with what you are saying in the sense that the force of

movement is transmitted to the degree of stabilization allowed by the

stabilizers.

However, studies by Grabiner show that strength or force alone does not

correlate with normal function. Individuals with low back pain consistently

show a lack of symmetry in their paraspinal contraction during trunk

extension. This lack of neuromuscular symmetry has been able to predict low

back pain in people who tested normal on dynamometry. Ball exercises require

symmetrical contractions of these muscles otherwise you will fall off the

ball (granted some exercises do use assymmetrical contraction but they have

to be controlled to maintain balance).

The unstable environment also provides perturbation stimulus which has been

shown to help recruit the deep

abdominal musculature. Fitness professionals often use deadlifts, good

mornings, and squats to strengthen the spine. These exercises are excellent

and effective for strengthening the hips and spinal erectors.

Now don't get me wrong I am not saying anything bad about these exercise I love

them and

think they are important exercises. But the lordotic posture used during

these lifts does not provide the stimuli for full spinal development. The

ball allows for gentle resisted flexion and extension of the spine which

allows the multi-segmental musculature to be fully active.

This allows for better postural control and greater efficiency of movement. Ask

any physical

therapist about this. Have a read of the book by Hodges I mentioned. It

delves deeper into this topic than I can in an email.

[i haven't seen this text cite any studies done with the ball - do you have any

that you could

suggest? Mel Siff]

I don't think you need to be an injured athlete to utilize these exercises. A

lot of trainers who

were in good physical condition and could lift a lot of weight had a hard

time with some of the core stabilization exercises during a core

stabilization course I attended. Norris PT has an excellent book

on this called " Back Stability " . Gentle core stabilization exercises can be

used as prehabilitation exercises in any training situation. The key is

properly integrating it into the training plan.

Casler writes:

<Please explain how you, " have found the stability ball to be an excellent

tool to develop ........., core strength " ?

What methods, exercises and loads do you use to stimulate " core strength " ?

You state, " In order to obtain a response in training you must use the

modality that is **best suited** for the job " . I would state that in the

development of long chain core stability, the ball as I know it, is closer

to an amusing gym toy than a serious training tool. I would challenge you

to describe and explain one single exercise on the ball that would provide a

greater core result than the clean or snatch? >

:

Definately the clean and snatch are excellent exercises and

they are excellent for developing core and total body power. But how about

trying kneeling on the ball and performing a dumbell clean to provide a

different stimulus to the core. Or squatting on an Extreme Balance Board. It

provides a different stimulus and you will feel the increased demand for

balance and stabilization by your core. Whether it gives you a better " core

result " you tell me how you would measure that. I measure it by how it feels

and improvement of spinal control in an unstable environment. Not

necessarily by big poundage numbers.

[if " big poundage numbers " or significant quantitative improvements in

performance

are not be considered as indicators of ball effectiveness, what other functional

indicators would you suggest? Try selling improved " feel " to a top level pro

athlete or Olympian! Mel Siff]

My main argument is give the ball a full try. I,too, was skeptical of its

use till I tried out all kinds of movements. It is not the only useful tool

just one of many. From personal experience and the experiences of other

trainers it has been shown to help people recapture balance skills, improve

back conditions, and provide fun and challenge to clients from non-fit to

athlete. I can understand your skepticism because there is so much garbage

out there but give it another try. I am going to leave some references you

can look up if you want to to answer the above questions further. As these

references are more detailed than I have time to type for.

[Mel Siff: Not one of the following references cites any research validation of

ball balancing

regimes, so how do they support the case for ball validity in conditioning

non-pathological

competitive athletes? Several of us have clearly and repeatedly stated that

balancing tools

such as the ball or woblle board may play a useful role in treating injured

subjects, but that

no evidence as yet has shown that the same methods categorically enhance any

aspect of

sport specific motor performance.

Grabiner M. et al. Decoupling of bilateral paraspinal excitation in subjects

with low back pain. Spine. 17(10):1219-1223. 1992.

Hodges, P.W. , , C.A. Inefficient Muscular Stabilization of the

Lumbar Spine Associated with Low Back Pain. Spine, 21(22):2640-2650, 1996.

Hodges, P.W., , C.A., Jull, G. Contraction of the Abdominal

Muscles Associated with Movement of the Lower Limb. Phys Ther, 77:132-14,

1997.

Posner-Mayer, J. Swiss Ball Applications for Orthopedic and Sports

Medicine. Denver: Ball Dynamics International, Inc. 1995.

DJ: Comparison of electromyographic activity in the lumbar

paraspinal muscles of subjects with and without chronic low back pain. Phys

Ther 65:1347-1354, 1985.

Cresswell, A.G., Oddsson, L., Thorstensson, A. The influence of sudden

perturbations on trunk muscle activity and intra-abdominal pressure while

standing. Exp Brain Res, 98:336-341. 1994.

, Beate, P.T. " Swiss Ball Exercises. " PT Magazine. September;

92-100. 1993.

Chek P. Strong 'N' Stable Swiss Ball Weight Training Series, Vol. 1-3.

Chek Seminars. Encenitas, CA 1997.

[The last two articles offer no scientific or sporting validation of performance

enhancement by use of the ball. Mel Siff]

---------------

wrote:

In response to the comments made regarding core stability. I would just like

to say one thing. In order to obtain a response in training you must use the

modality that is best suited for the job. I have found the stability ball to

be an excellent tool to develop postural awareness, core strength, and

balance.

Casler writes:

Please explain how you, " have found the stability ball to be an excellent

tool to develop <snip>, core strength " ?

What methods, exercises and loads do you use to stimulate " core strength " ?

You state, " In order to obtain a response in training you must use the

modality that is **best suited** for the job " . I would state that in the

development of long chain core stability, the ball as I know it, is closer

to an amusing gym toy than a serious training tool. I would challenge you

to describe and explain one single exercise on the ball that would provide a

greater core result than the clean or snatch?

wrote:

But it seems to me that if you are trying so hard to prove that the ball

does not work then you are probably not using it right. You cannot expect

every training modality to directly improve performance right away. There

are indirect benefits such as joint stabilizing strength to name one.

Casler writes:

On what do you base the belief that the ball produces " joint stabilizing

strength " beyond or superior to other equipment?

wrote:

Weight-training utilizing big loads helps improve the strength of the big

muscles but little to strengthen the small segmental

stabilizing muscles.

Casler writes:

Let me suggest that you may not totally understand the way the body

stabilizes itself in closed chain activity for your statement is incorrect.

If force is transmitted through the chain, it cannot be transmitted but to

the degree of stabilization produced by the combination of

stabilizer/movers.

wrote:

Why not integrate? Another example of the necessity of integrating

modalities is, if you were a football player and for a year you just

trained with weights exclusively utilizing olympic lifts, barbell exercises

etc., how well do you think your performance would improve?

Casler writes:

Improvement for that example would depend on the initial condition of the

subject and the appropriateness of the training protocol. A youthful

beginner should make dramatic improvement, an older seasoned veteran may

make no progress at all.

wrote:

Probably not that much since there was no conversion to power via plyometric

training (another modality).

Casler writes:

What does that mean? What proof do you have that strength developed through

weight training requires plyometric training to be converted to power?

wrote:

Getting back to core stability training, this training is initally performed

isolated to be sure you can actually fire the muscles that support your

spine at the segmental level.

Casler writes:

I would humbly suggest that " isolation " would NOT in any way be needed to

" be sure you can actually fire the muscles that support your spine at the

segmental level " . And just how do YOU determine when they " can actually

fire the muscles " ? Isolation is only something to consider for specific

kinds of therapy or bodybuilding. It has very little use in long chain

activities and sports.

wrote:

Once that is learned it is then integrated with the rest of the core

musculature then integrated with the whole body.

Casler writes:

Unless the subject is injured there is no need to isolate then integrate.

It seems like a serious waste of valuable training time.

wrote:

The core is the link between the upper body and lower body.

Casler writes:

Finally we agree on something.

wrote:

To say that core stablity training is a waste of time and that ball and

board drills are

unimaginative and non-specific in nature then once again you are probably

using it wrong. Board drills are excellent for developing stablity in the

ankle, knees, hips , and spine and when used for upper body exercises

shoulder stabilizers to. And some drills can be so challenging that the

person's sport seems easier.

Casler writes:

I would guess this is personal opinion (entitled) and there is absolutely no

evidence or even general consensus to support this supposition.

wrote:

In regards to scientific evidence, if you look for scientific evidence on

everything you will probably find out that

science doesn't prove a lot of things that you have probably found works.

Casler writes:

Aside from a few exercises, I would suggest that much of the " ball hype " is

promoted by those who realize profit from " imaginative " utilization of

alternative training modes. I personally am not against them, but I find

their use very limited and that those who generally support their use are

seriously uninformed and uneducated, " or " they profit to the point that they

support the mode for the income production.

wrote:

Core stability is a crucial link to human performance. It is the link

between the upper body and lower body. It is not a waste of time to

strengthen and should be an important part to a conditioning program. Read

the book " Therapeutic Exercise for Segmental Spinal Stabilization by

Hodges,Jull and or Integrated Training for the New Millenium by

Mike " for further details.

Casler writes:

Again no argument about the importance of " core stability " , but your method

to develop such, is (IMO) lacking basis for athletic utilization.

" Therapeutic Exercise " is not always translatable to the playing field

unless the athlete is injured. In therapy we are taking an " injured " area

and assimilating its function back into the functioning organism. In a

healthy athlete, this practice only serves to provide " extra " integrative

and translative steps.

I also agree there is nothing wrong with " integrating " training modalities

as long as they are the most effective methods we know.

Regards,

A. Casler

[Guest guest]

Unfortunately, Dr. Siff you got me there. Most of the reasoning behind

ball training has been implied by studies cited. but you are right - there are

no specific research studies validating its use in athletic

conditioning. We (people who do use the ball) only have anecdotal

evidence from improvements we have seen in clients and ourselves.

I have seen balance improvements from exercising in an unstable 3D environment

the ball provides (unfortunately non-quantitative), improve control of

spinal movement (unfortunately non-quantitative), and improved posture

(unfortunately also non-quantitative). I do however hold the idea that

non-pathological athletes can still benefit from the ball and maybe one

day there will be a study to quantify the results we do just see from

it. Thats the end of my debating.

.....USA

-----Original Message-----

wrote:

<<Weight-training utilizing big loads helps improve the strength

of the big

muscles but little to strengthen the small segmental

stabilizing muscles.>>

Casler wrote:

<Let me suggest that you may not totally understand the way the

body

stabilizes itself in closed chain activity for your statement is

incorrect.

If force is transmitted through the chain, it cannot be

transmitted but to

the degree of stabilization produced by the combination of

stabilizer/movers.>

:

I agree with what you are saying in the sense that the force of

movement is transmitted to the degree of stabilization allowed

by the stabilizers.

However, studies by Grabiner show that strength or force alone

does not

correlate with normal function. Individuals with low back pain

consistently

show a lack of symmetry in their paraspinal contraction during

trunk

extension. This lack of neuromuscular symmetry has been able to

predict low

back pain in people who tested normal on dynamometry. Ball

exercises require

symmetrical contractions of these muscles otherwise you will

fall off the

ball (granted some exercises do use assymmetrical contraction

but they have

to be controlled to maintain balance).

The unstable environment also provides perturbation stimulus

which has been shown to help recruit the deep

abdominal musculature. Fitness professionals often use

deadlifts, good

mornings, and squats to strengthen the spine. These exercises

are excellent

and effective for strengthening the hips and spinal erectors.

Now don't get me wrong I am not saying anything bad about these

exercise I love them and

think they are important exercises. But the lordotic posture

used during

these lifts does not provide the stimuli for full spinal

development. The

ball allows for gentle resisted flexion and extension of the

spine which

allows the multi-segmental musculature to be fully active.

This allows for better postural control and greater efficiency

of movement. Ask any physical

therapist about this. Have a read of the book by Hodges I

mentioned. It

delves deeper into this topic than I can in an email.

[i haven't seen this text cite any studies done with the ball -

do you have any that you could

suggest? Mel Siff]

I don't think you need to be an injured athlete to utilize these

exercises. A lot of trainers who

were in good physical condition and could lift a lot of weight

had a hard

time with some of the core stabilization exercises during a core

stabilization course I attended. Norris PT has an

excellent book

on this called " Back Stability " . Gentle core stabilization

exercises can be

used as prehabilitation exercises in any training situation. The

key is

properly integrating it into the training plan.

Casler writes:

<Please explain how you, " have found the stability ball to be an

excellent

tool to develop ........., core strength " ?

What methods, exercises and loads do you use to stimulate " core

strength " ?

You state, " In order to obtain a response in training you must

use the

modality that is **best suited** for the job " . I would state

that in the

development of long chain core stability, the ball as I know it,

is closer

to an amusing gym toy than a serious training tool. I would

challenge you

to describe and explain one single exercise on the ball that

would provide a

greater core result than the clean or snatch? >

:

Definately the clean and snatch are excellent exercises and

they are excellent for developing core and total body power. But

how about

trying kneeling on the ball and performing a dumbell clean to

provide a

different stimulus to the core. Or squatting on an Extreme

Balance Board. It

provides a different stimulus and you will feel the increased

demand for

balance and stabilization by your core. Whether it gives you a

better " core

result " you tell me how you would measure that. I measure it by

how it feels

and improvement of spinal control in an unstable environment.

Not

necessarily by big poundage numbers.

[if " big poundage numbers " or significant quantitative

improvements in performance

are not be considered as indicators of ball effectiveness, what

other functional

indicators would you suggest? Try selling improved " feel " to a

top level pro

athlete or Olympian! Mel Siff]

My main argument is give the ball a full try. I,too, was

skeptical of its

use till I tried out all kinds of movements. It is not the only

useful tool

just one of many. From personal experience and the experiences

of other

trainers it has been shown to help people recapture balance

skills, improve

back conditions, and provide fun and challenge to clients from

non-fit to

athlete. I can understand your skepticism because there is so

much garbage

out there but give it another try. I am going to leave some

references you

can look up if you want to to answer the above questions

further. As these

references are more detailed than I have time to type for.

[Mel Siff: Not one of the following references cites any

research validation of ball balancing

regimes, so how do they support the case for ball validity in

conditioning non-pathological

competitive athletes? Several of us have clearly and repeatedly

stated that balancing tools

such as the ball or woblle board may play a useful role in

treating injured subjects, but that

no evidence as yet has shown that the same methods categorically

enhance any aspect of

sport specific motor performance.

Grabiner M. et al. Decoupling of bilateral paraspinal excitation

in subjects

with low back pain. Spine. 17(10):1219-1223. 1992.

Hodges, P.W. , , C.A. Inefficient Muscular

Stabilization of the

Lumbar Spine Associated with Low Back Pain. Spine,

21(22):2640-2650, 1996.

Hodges, P.W., , C.A., Jull, G. Contraction of the

Abdominal

Muscles Associated with Movement of the Lower Limb. Phys Ther,

77:132-14,

1997.

Posner-Mayer, J. Swiss Ball Applications for Orthopedic and

Sports

Medicine. Denver: Ball Dynamics International, Inc. 1995.

DJ: Comparison of electromyographic activity in the

lumbar

paraspinal muscles of subjects with and without chronic low back

pain. Phys

Ther 65:1347-1354, 1985.

Cresswell, A.G., Oddsson, L., Thorstensson, A. The influence of

sudden

perturbations on trunk muscle activity and intra-abdominal

pressure while

standing. Exp Brain Res, 98:336-341. 1994.

, Beate, P.T. " Swiss Ball Exercises. " PT Magazine.

September;

92-100. 1993.

Chek P. Strong 'N' Stable Swiss Ball Weight Training Series,

Vol. 1-3.

Chek Seminars. Encenitas, CA 1997.

[The last two articles offer no scientific or sporting

validation of performance

enhancement by use of the ball. Mel Siff]

---------------

wrote:

In response to the comments made regarding core stability. I

would just like

to say one thing. In order to obtain a response in training

you must use the

modality that is best suited for the job. I have found the

stability ball to

be an excellent tool to develop postural awareness, core

strength, and

balance.

Casler writes:

Please explain how you, " have found the stability ball to be

an excellent

tool to develop <snip>, core strength " ?

What methods, exercises and loads do you use to stimulate

" core strength " ?

You state, " In order to obtain a response in training you must

use the

modality that is **best suited** for the job " . I would

state that in the

development of long chain core stability, the ball as I know

it, is closer

to an amusing gym toy than a serious training tool. I would

challenge you

to describe and explain one single exercise on the ball that

would provide a

greater core result than the clean or snatch?

wrote:

But it seems to me that if you are trying so hard to prove

that the ball

does not work then you are probably not using it right. You

cannot expect

every training modality to directly improve performance right

away. There

are indirect benefits such as joint stabilizing strength to

name one.

Casler writes:

On what do you base the belief that the ball produces " joint

stabilizing

strength " beyond or superior to other equipment?

wrote:

Weight-training utilizing big loads helps improve the strength

of the big

muscles but little to strengthen the small segmental

stabilizing muscles.

Casler writes:

Let me suggest that you may not totally understand the way the

body

stabilizes itself in closed chain activity for your statement

is incorrect.

If force is transmitted through the chain, it cannot be

transmitted but to

the degree of stabilization produced by the combination of

stabilizer/movers.

wrote:

Why not integrate? Another example of the necessity of

integrating

modalities is, if you were a football player and for a year

you just

trained with weights exclusively utilizing olympic lifts,

barbell exercises

etc., how well do you think your performance would improve?

Casler writes:

Improvement for that example would depend on the initial

condition of the

subject and the appropriateness of the training protocol. A

youthful

beginner should make dramatic improvement, an older seasoned

veteran may

make no progress at all.

wrote:

Probably not that much since there was no conversion to power

via plyometric

training (another modality).

Casler writes:

What does that mean? What proof do you have that strength

developed through

weight training requires plyometric training to be converted

to power?

wrote:

Getting back to core stability training, this training is

initally performed

isolated to be sure you can actually fire the muscles that

support your

spine at the segmental level.

Casler writes:

I would humbly suggest that " isolation " would NOT in any way

be needed to

" be sure you can actually fire the muscles that support your

spine at the

segmental level " . And just how do YOU determine when they

" can actually

fire the muscles " ? Isolation is only something to consider

for specific

kinds of therapy or bodybuilding. It has very little use in

long chain

activities and sports.

wrote:

Once that is learned it is then integrated with the rest of

the core

musculature then integrated with the whole body.

Casler writes:

Unless the subject is injured there is no need to isolate then

integrate.

It seems like a serious waste of valuable training time.

wrote:

The core is the link between the upper body and lower body.

Casler writes:

Finally we agree on something.

wrote:

To say that core stablity training is a waste of time and that

ball and

board drills are

unimaginative and non-specific in nature then once again you

are probably

using it wrong. Board drills are excellent for developing

stablity in the

ankle, knees, hips , and spine and when used for upper body

exercises

shoulder stabilizers to. And some drills can be so challenging

that the

person's sport seems easier.

Casler writes:

I would guess this is personal opinion (entitled) and there is

absolutely no

evidence or even general consensus to support this

supposition.

wrote:

In regards to scientific evidence, if you look for scientific

evidence on

everything you will probably find out that

science doesn't prove a lot of things that you have probably

found works.

Casler writes:

Aside from a few exercises, I would suggest that much of the

" ball hype " is

promoted by those who realize profit from " imaginative "

utilization of

alternative training modes. I personally am not against them,

but I find

their use very limited and that those who generally support

their use are

seriously uninformed and uneducated, " or " they profit to the

point that they

support the mode for the income production.

wrote:

Core stability is a crucial link to human performance. It is

the link

between the upper body and lower body. It is not a waste of

time to

strengthen and should be an important part to a conditioning

program. Read

the book " Therapeutic Exercise for Segmental Spinal

Stabilization by

Hodges,Jull and or Integrated Training for the New

Millenium by

Mike " for further details.

Casler writes:

Again no argument about the importance of " core stability " ,

but your method

to develop such, is (IMO) lacking basis for athletic

utilization.

" Therapeutic Exercise " is not always translatable to the

playing field

unless the athlete is injured. In therapy we are taking an

" injured " area

and assimilating its function back into the functioning

organism. In a

healthy athlete, this practice only serves to provide " extra "

integrative

and translative steps.

I also agree there is nothing wrong with " integrating "

training modalities

as long as they are the most effective methods we know.

Regards,

A. Casler

[Guest guest]

In the rehab literature it has been stated that people who have

experienced low back pain (80-90% of the population athletic or

non-athletic) may have inhibited transversus abdominis and multifidus

function. Pain inhibits these muscles and they need to be re-trained.

[Please supply some references to substantiate these statements. Mel Siff]

And exercises using big loads do not train these muscles, as the bigger

more superficial muscles will take over most of the stabilizing and

moving and the placement of these muscles is not set-up for stabilizing

(not close enough to the joint). It has been found that gentle more fine

control exercises re-establish function of these deep muscles using

floor exercises and ball exercises.

[Who proclaims that bigger muscles are necessarily superficial muscles?

In addition, please offer some references which definitely show that " big loads "

do not train " these " muscles, because EMG studies on competitive lifters do

not corroborate what you are claiming. How is it possible for the mulitifidus

not to be activated by heavy deadlifts or cleans, for example? Mel Siff]

This is why I feel initially in athletic conditioning, it is a good idea to

establish the function of

these muscles in the off-season or anatomical adaptation phase to be

sure an athlete has a stable spine for the rest of the season. If they

are good at this, then they move into more integrative exercises, then to

sport-specific exercises as the training plan moves on.

............City?

--------------------

From: " " <bjustin@...>

<Weight-training utilizing big loads helps improve the strength

of the big muscles but little to strengthen the small segmental stabilizing

muscles.>

Krista -Dixon

, this statement perplexes me. Could you explain it a bit

further please?

[Guest guest]

The completed December issue of Dolfzine was uploaded yesterday evening.

There are articles by Mel Siff, Rosemary Wedderburn, Dave Draper, Vince

McConnell, Hugo and many others. Chip Conrad has an article

contrasting HIT, Westside and Super Slow. If you missed Dr. Siff's article

on Pilates, now is the time to catch up. It is not only about Pilates but

about the whole history of the fitness movement.

I wrote this email about two days ago and it is forwarded by a friend of

mine due to a death in the family.

Ron Dobrin

New York City

www.dolfzine.com

Fax: (212) 644-5690

[Guest guest]

Casler wrote:

Individuals without LBP also exhibit asymmetrical tensioning and

contraction. This is not a predictor at all. If a person with low back

pain exhibits a lack of, or asymmetrical contractile profile, it is a result

of sensorimotor retardation.

**** I would like to add that my own research on LBP suggests that the

interdigitated symptomatised trajectory of the asymmetrical tensioning will

also in some cases affect the anterosuperior thoracotendinous pattern of the

spine.

You can read more of my research here:

http://swisslunatic.tripod.com/rainbows/rainbows.htm

[PS To understand the precise academic jargon, consult the " Guru Terminology

Kit " by

Dr Siff in : " Facts & Fallacies of Fitness " or in the Supertraining archives. ]

Jan Baggerud Larsen

Oslo, Norway

[Guest guest]

RE: Core Training Mythology Resources

Jan Baggerud Larsen wrote:

**** I would like to add that my own research on LBP suggests that the

interdigitated symptomatised trajectory of the asymmetrical tensioning will

also in some cases affect the anterosuperior thoracotendinous pattern of the

spine.

You can read more of my research here:

http://swisslunatic.tripod.com/rainbows/rainbows.htm

Casler writes:

Even though you may not support my terminal linguistic exaggerations, your

site (which I just visited) certainly supports my sentiments regarding the

swiss ball and " CORE " training.

Your experiment, and most unfortunate outcome, display a serious " CORE "

displacement that I did not know was possible.

Would you attribute that result/response to ass-symmetrical contractile load

stimulus?

(none will know what I am talking about until you visit Jan's zany " swiss

ball " site - If you have a weak stomach, pass on the visit)

ROTFLOL

Regards,

A. Casler

-||||--------||||-

TRI-VECTOR 3-D Force Systems

Century City, CA

http://summitfitness.websitegalaxy.com/index.html

[Guest guest]

>Some very active coach sent me this letter and requested to remain anonymous

>for the mean time because he does not wish the discussion to be tainted by

>focus on who he is and who he trains, rather than what the problem is......

Dr Mel C Siff:

>***For a start, please search our archives for articles that some of us have

>written in the past on this topic, then let me know what else you need. The

>world of motor control offers a great deal of research on the biomechanics

>and neurophysiology of balance, agility and movement. Much of this work

>shows that the non-stepping balance drills on balls and wobble boards, and

>the specificity and complexity of different static and dynamic balancing

>tasks, do not automatically endow one with the specific and highly volatile

>motor skills required in most sports. Far too much of the ball and wobble

>board training philosophy is based upon physio drills used for pathology and

>for the early management of musculoskeletal injuries. Remember, too, that

>this philosophy also sells products for some of the more visible marketeers

>in this field.

I have just come back from the Olympic Training Center in Colorado

Springs. I find it distressing that core stability is now being

pushed onto all athletes including our resident Judoka ('Judo players') who are

of national and international caliber.

[if anyone else is visiting the Olympic Training Center, don't forget that our

well-equipped

facility is only about an hour's drive from Colorado Springs and you are welcome

to

visit us and discuss training matters - just contact me a few days in advance.

Mel Siff]

Gerald Lafon

* Judo America San Diego

* Email: glafon@...

* Web: http://www.judoamerica.com

* Phone: (619) 232-JUDO

***************************