Re: Training Quads while minimising Glutes NO ISOLATION?

[Guest guest]

,

That is a very interesting approach. First of all, you don't have

to be a bodybuilder to want to do " isolation " . I myself competed in

powerlifting, and even then, performed " isolation " exercises. The

thing about it is there really isn't such thing as " isolation "

exercise. So, any movement that we do takes multiple muscles to

perform.

About your " study " , if you want to get better at a specific movement

(i.e. squat) you should probably perform it, that's common sense. I

question the validity if it said that those who performed

the " other " exercises actually got weaker, because it is also well

researched that if you perform single joint exercise you WILL

increase the strength of the " chain " . Hence, doing a leg extension WILL improve

your squat. And you will improve even more if you train leg extension with the

squat. Pretty much that's what everyone has been doing for decades until the

" functional movement " . Not that there is anything wrong with " functional "

exercise, but it's not a replacement, it should be used along with other stuff.

I don't know who Michol Dalcourt is, but anyone who

discards " isolation " exercise must not fully understand load

application, chain mechanics or true function, because without joint

isolation, there is no integrated function! I'd be more than happy

to discuss it with him further if there is any question to the

validity of " non-functional " exercise!

Joe DeAntonis

Pittsburgh, PA

<deepsquatdavid@s...> wrote:

> I have a biased approach, I am a competitive powerlifter. If your

client is interested in bodybuilding, then hit those isolations for

all you're worth, but for other athletes, you are teaching faulty

recruitment patterns.

>

> I once read (sorry, I can't reference) a simple study that

examined the effects of leg pressing, leg extensions and leg curls

on one's squatting ability, compared to a group that actually did

squats. The squatting group improved, and the press/extensions/curls

group lost strength in the squat.

>

> I am further biased after taking a course on funtional training

and assessment given by Michol Dalcourt, which promoted compound,

functional exercises using the various sling systems of the body,

core strengthening progressions etc, I can now say that I am

completely against isolation exercises.

>

> It sounds like you are training for bodybuilding, perhaps you

could try a technique like pre-exhaustion and judge the

effectiveness for yourself. I am not saying that it won't work, but

for most clients/athletes I wouldn't try it. Bodybuilding training

is quite different from that of most other athletes, so it could be

beneficial.

>

> , NAIT-PFT and CFC

> Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

> DeepSquat@s...

[Guest guest]

" Joe D " <trainercheck@y...> wrote:

> About your " study " , if you want to get better at a specific

> movement i.e. squat) you should probably perform it, that's common sense.

> I question the validity if it said that those who performed

> the " other " exercises actually got weaker, because it is also well

> researched that if you perform single joint exercise you WILL

> increase the strength of the " chain " . Hence, doing a leg

> extension WILL improve your squat. And you will improve even more

> if you train leg extension with the squat.

*****

Can you provide some references? The single joint exercises

improved strength of the complex movement compared to what?

Nothing?

The principle you are proposing here seems to be ignoring all the

complexities and contingencies that real people encounter when

training. It would only be sound if athletes had unlimited time

available, and limitless work and recovery capacities. Whether

adding leg extensions would improve upon a squat workout depends

upon whether there is room in the program for the extra work

overall, and whether the relevant muscles can productively handle

and recover from any more stress than is already being applied with

the more important compound and movement-specific exercises. If

they can, one could always add more compound or specific movements,

so your squat + leg ext. group would have to be measured against

this.

> I don't know who Michol Dalcourt is, but anyone who

> discards " isolation " exercise must not fully understand load

> application, chain mechanics or true function, because without

> joint isolation, there is no integrated function!

*****

What exactly is " true function " ?

With that last phrase it looks like you are making a very

fundamental conceptual error, by confusing analysis with reality.

Take a movement like the squat. While it is true that you cannot

describe or analyze the movement in anatomical or mechanical detail

without referring to isolated joint movements, the movement itself

contains no " isolation " . It is an intergrated, complex,

coordinated, multi-joint movement - one event, or perhaps even an

arbitrarily chosen portion of an even larger and more complex

event. The only joint isolation involved is as a part of an

anatomical or biomechanical conceptual model. In other words, it's

something we made up.

> I'd be more than happy

> to discuss it with him further if there is any question to the

> validity of " non-functional " exercise!

*****

Mr. Bennet already conceded their possible utility for bodybuilding

purposes. There are definitely plausible arguments for

incorporating single-joint isolation exercises into strength

routines for practical and sport applications, but so far you have

not provided them.

Wilbanks

ville, FL

[Guest guest]

,

The first thing we need to bring up is the fact that we aren't on

the same page. There is a big SEMANTICS issue that we are

confronted with here. I think our definitions of " isolation "

and " functional " are drastically different.

First off, I am going to take your statement, " the movement itself

contains no isolation " . Every movement (compound, integrated,

whatever you want to call it) contains " isolated " movement, each

joint moves independently AND in conjunction with the other joints

in the " chain " to create gross movement. So in REALITY, there

is " isolated movement with respect to each joint. Now, this is

where the semantics thing comes in, because some will say that if

several joints are moving together, there is no isolation, when in

reality, there IS isolated joint movement. The real question is how

do you define isolation!!!

So, when you break down a movement, " analyze " it, you must look at

the individual joint components. So now I will comment on your

other statement that I am " confusing analysis with reality " . Are

you saying the studies done to promote " functional " exercise didn't

analyze the movements, they just used reality to come up with the

results? To analyze a movement you need to know what each joint

(and muscles that create movement at that joint) are doing at each

position throughout the RANGE THAT WE CHOOSE for our client. Lets

use the squat thing again. After I choose a range, I need to look

at how much range I am asking from each joint involved in the

movement. Then I need to look at what the muscles I chose are

doing, their function. I need to look at length-tension

relationship at each point throughout the range, and I need to look

at the mechanical ability at each point throughout the range, and I

need to look at the neuroproprioceptive capabilities throughout the

range. Since we talked earlier about " quads " , I need to look at

their function at the hip, knee, ankle, foot, spine and so on.

And just because they have a function at all of those joints, you

seem to be saying that I have to " mimic " or do something " similar to

my end goal " each time to get better? So now I am going to comment

on another statement you made:

" arbitrarily chosen portion of an even larger and more complex event "

What a true statement!!! You seem to think that I am " ignoring

complexities " by saying " isolation " isn't such a bad thing. In

reality, you are the one making the assumptions that compound

exercises are " more important " ! You seem to be saying that a squat

will make you better at a sport movement, while a leg extension will

not? So, you said yourself that you ARBITRARILY

choose a range? THAT IS IN ESSENCE ISOLATION!!! You are isolating

a PORTION of a movement to try to get better at a larger movement.

THAT IS ISOLATION!!! Again, semantics, some will say that isn't so,

but how do you define it??? If I am only doing " part " of a

movement, the neural stuff, physiological and mechanical stuff is

all different, so according to your theory, that movement would be

USELESS!!!

Where you mistake is: Assuming a " compound " or " functional "

movement is better or more natural and NOT " MADE UP " ?!? And

that " isolated " movement is BAD because we " MADE IT UP " ?!? Isn't

all exercise something we MADE UP?!? Just because one may look more

like a sport movement, doesn't mean it will produce the same result!

Why would an athlete need " unlimited time " to train with some

isolation movements? If you strategically rotate the movements into

what they are currently doing, you wouldn't need any more time!

I have a feeling this is a fruitless conversation for the pure fact

that you aren't willing to see that there may be some benefit

to " isolation " exercise outside of the realm of bodybuilding? But I

will provide some info from a study by Wayne Wescott, PhD, stating

that 2 groups of golfers were tested on club head speed of their

swing. One with exercise, one without. The exercise group did

predominantly single joint single plane movements all on Nautilis

machines (restricted movement). Thae result, the group that did

exercise increased club head speed considerably! Conclusion, single

joint exercise improved " function " ! That's just one study. There's

more. I never said you should only do isolation

exercise, I just implied that it is STUPID to say it is bad or

useless. Use all of the tools in your toolbox when they're

applicable.

Also, I'm giong to respond to on the same topic, different

points.

Joe DeAntonis

Pittsburgh, PA

[Guest guest]

[Casler],

I had a similar problem with , semantics. You seen to be

blinded by the same fallacies he was. " Isolation " doesn't have to

be defined as nothing else moving. Any movement that you do

contains both " isolation " and " integrated " (or whatever you want to

call it) movement.

You say:

" there is no evidence or logic that causes us to conclude that knee

extensions will improve our squat… "

The funny part is, unless you are a powerlifter, WHO CARES!!! A

squat done in a gym is a SIMULATED movement that WE MADE UP!!! Just

like all of the " Isolated exercises " . The REAL question should be

does it IMPROVE FUNCTION??? The other funny part is, there IS

evidence to show knee extensions improve squatting ability.

[Joe, it would help your argument here if you could provide a reference to that

effect. JRG]

You seem to have fallen into the trap that most do, in the respect

that you seem to believe that a knee extension only

strengthens " quads " !!! There are many " co-contraction " things going

on during a knee extension. " Hamstrings " contracting to resist

anterior shear of the tibia, spinal flexors contracting to prevent

anterior pelvic tilt…

Obviously, if you practice a movement, you will get better at it. I

never said REPLACE squats with knee extensions, I was simply

disputing the FACT that isolation exercise IS NOT useless!!! It has

it's place, and not just in bodybuilding.

This statement:

" Even then the position, the action and the motor signals are very

dissimilar. It causes a " reciprocally innervated " hamstring and

gluteal signal, as well as a host of other " confusing signals " such

as a coordinated anterior tibialis activation and

so on. "

You say this about " isolation " , but the same is true

about " functional " movement unless you exactly copy the movement to

be performed. Take your own advice! You need to look at some of

the exercises you choose, and see if they isolate a portion of a

whole movement, if they do, they are in essence " isolation "

movements!

" I'd like to know just what load applications, chain mechanics and

true functions require `joint isolation' "

Um…, all of them. Just because many joints are moving together,

doesn't mean we can discard the fact that each joint is moving on

its own, separately.

Another problem is that you are separating performance enhancement

from rehab. Even though most therapists would like to think they

are separate, they are on the same continuum. And, no matter where

we are on the continuum, we must follow the same rules.

" " And further, performing " isolative " (I agree you cannot easily

isolate) type of actions such as Knee Extensions, Knee Flexions and

such could very well lead to a reduced capacity in someone who was

quite strong in the squat and replaced that exercise totally

with " segmental " actions. Even though some of the individual

segments might actually be of greater capacity, the sum of the chain

may not have the same capacity. " "

It seems to be that you think that the " whole chain " will

automatically strengthen if you only train the chain as a whole.

And that if you separately train each part of the chain the whole

chain will get weaker? That is an odd concept to me. Check out

this example:

If you are the teacher of a class and two students are falling

behind, do you increase the workload for the whole class (or even

keep going the same pace) to ensure the 2 falling behind catch up?

Of course not, you need to give special attention to the two falling

behind so that they do not fall further behind. Also, the only way

to know if they are falling behind is to test, or evaluate them at

some point. If you taught the material all year, and only gave a

final exam, it would be too late, the students who fell behind would

fail (INJURY). If you periodically test or evaluate them throughout

the year, you will know who needs extra work, and will be able to

bring up the average of the ENTIRE class.

I hope that makes sense and helps. I also responded to on the

same topic, you may want to read that one too.

Joe DeAntonis

Pittsburgh, PA