Guest guest Posted December 27, 2006 Report Share Posted December 27, 2006 All bodyweight exercises can build strength. The question always is, what type of strength is required and how much. And yes, BW exercises can build endurance also. Again, the training should fit the outcome you want. If you want the strength to be a competitive weightlifter, you had better lift weights. Gymnast? Learn how to move your body around. Etc. > > hi all, i was wondering if pushups build alot of strength? along with > situps and squats or is that just muscular endurance? > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 27, 2006 Report Share Posted December 27, 2006 The body responds to training inputs. You get better at what you do most. Simple principle but very powerful indeed. > > > > hi all, i was wondering if pushups build > > alot of strength? along with situps and squats > > or is that just muscular endurance? > > At some point, any exercise builds strength. For > continued progress, though, one needs progressive > resistance. For the exercises you mentioned, this > usually means adding repetitions. > > There are those who say that beyond 10 repetitions, > endurance is developed, more than strength. So they > recommend adding resistance (like weights) if one > can do 10 to 15 reps of an exercise. Still, if one > does not add weight/resistance, increasing the number > of reps -- doing them to (near) falilure -- will > still be a form of progressive resistance and there > will be an increase in strength as well as endurance. > > Then again, why only go for one and not the other? > What use is strength if one cannot last? This is a > point pushed by Furey, who advocates body weight > exercises like the Hindu push up, Hindu squat, > and bridge, the reps for the first two reaching the > hundreds. And he enjoys pointing out how even bulky > and muscular body builders could hardly go beyond > 25 Hindu push ups or 50 Hindu squats. (In a way, I > see this reminiscent of courses like Atlas' Dynamic > Tension.) > > Gerry > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 27, 2006 Report Share Posted December 27, 2006 Strength of course, is specific. If we are talking about moving four hundred lbs in the bench press, well, pushups will not do that. Benching pressing weights will do that. Is that the type of strength one wants and needs? That is up to you. Now, if you want the type of strength that allows you to do hundreds of push ups (ie endurance/strength, then do that. One is not better than another in the absolute. It depends on what you want and how much time and money you have to invest. > > > > hi all, i was wondering if pushups build > > alot of strength? along with situps and squats > > or is that just muscular endurance? > > At some point, any exercise builds strength. For > continued progress, though, one needs progressive > resistance. For the exercises you mentioned, this > usually means adding repetitions. > > There are those who say that beyond 10 repetitions, > endurance is developed, more than strength. So they > recommend adding resistance (like weights) if one > can do 10 to 15 reps of an exercise. Still, if one > does not add weight/resistance, increasing the number > of reps -- doing them to (near) falilure -- will > still be a form of progressive resistance and there > will be an increase in strength as well as endurance. > > Then again, why only go for one and not the other? > What use is strength if one cannot last? This is a > point pushed by Furey, who advocates body weight > exercises like the Hindu push up, Hindu squat, > and bridge, the reps for the first two reaching the > hundreds. And he enjoys pointing out how even bulky > and muscular body builders could hardly go beyond > 25 Hindu push ups or 50 Hindu squats. (In a way, I > see this reminiscent of courses like Atlas' Dynamic > Tension.) > > Gerry > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 27, 2006 Report Share Posted December 27, 2006 Well, not really. Experience and science shows us that lifting huge weight for very few reps (1-5 reps) results in fairly dense but not large muscle mass and great strenght. Think Olympic weight lifters here, who are not generally massive but lift very very heavy weights for their weight classes. On the other side of the spectrum, are BBs, who lift moderate weights for a LONGER duration, say 45-90 second sets. It is this sub-maximal tension for a longer duration that seems to generate larger gains in muscle mass. > > > > > > hi all, i was wondering if pushups build > > > alot of strength? along with situps and squats > > > or is that just muscular endurance? > > > > At some point, any exercise builds strength. For > > continued progress, though, one needs progressive > > resistance. For the exercises you mentioned, this > > usually means adding repetitions. > > > > There are those who say that beyond 10 repetitions, > > endurance is developed, more than strength. So they > > recommend adding resistance (like weights) if one > > can do 10 to 15 reps of an exercise. Still, if one > > does not add weight/resistance, increasing the > > number > > of reps -- doing them to (near) falilure -- will > > still be a form of progressive resistance and there > > will be an increase in strength as well as > > endurance. > > > > Then again, why only go for one and not the other? > > What use is strength if one cannot last? This is a > > point pushed by Furey, who advocates body weight > > exercises like the Hindu push up, Hindu squat, > > and bridge, the reps for the first two reaching the > > hundreds. And he enjoys pointing out how even bulky > > and muscular body builders could hardly go beyond > > 25 Hindu push ups or 50 Hindu squats. (In a way, I > > see this reminiscent of courses like Atlas' Dynamic > > Tension.) > > > > Gerry > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 28, 2006 Report Share Posted December 28, 2006 In general, one will find that lb for lb, Olympic Lifters are MUCH stronger than BBs. Overall, it is the training that produces this disparity. If I train for maximum strength, the best methodology is to limit the time under tension and maximize the weight. Oly lifters practice nearly everyday and they do many sets of very few reps. Hence, as compared to BBs, they develop much more strength per lb of mass. BBs of course are strong compared to the average Joe. Yes, some BBs use heavy weights but NOT so heavy relative to their bodyweight mass. If I weigh 250 and bench 350, that is not bad at all. However, you will see 150 lb Power lifters who can bench WAY more than 350. Hence, they are RELATIVELY much stonger than the BBs. No offence, but consider putting in some paragraphs in your posts. > > > > > > > > > > hi all, i was wondering if pushups build > > > > > alot of strength? along with situps and squats > > > > > or is that just muscular endurance? > > > > > > > > At some point, any exercise builds strength. For > > > > continued progress, though, one needs > > progressive > > > > resistance. For the exercises you mentioned, > > this > > > > usually means adding repetitions. > > > > > > > > There are those who say that beyond 10 > > repetitions, > > > > endurance is developed, more than strength. So > > they > > > > recommend adding resistance (like weights) if > > one > > > > can do 10 to 15 reps of an exercise. Still, if > > one > > > > does not add weight/resistance, increasing the > > > > number > > > > of reps -- doing them to (near) falilure -- will > > > > > > still be a form of progressive resistance and > > there > > > > will be an increase in strength as well as > > > > endurance. > > > > > > > > Then again, why only go for one and not the > > other? > > > > What use is strength if one cannot last? This is > > a > > > > point pushed by Furey, who advocates body weight > > > > exercises like the Hindu push up, Hindu squat, > > > > and bridge, the reps for the first two reaching > > the > > > > hundreds. And he enjoys pointing out how even > > bulky > > > > and muscular body builders could hardly go > > beyond > > > > 25 Hindu push ups or 50 Hindu squats. (In a way, > > I > > > > see this reminiscent of courses like Atlas' > > Dynamic > > > > Tension.) > > > > > > > > Gerry > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 28, 2006 Report Share Posted December 28, 2006 > You see, Lue knew Anerobic > exercise like body building and arobic exercise like > running exercises different types of muscles. We must make a distinction here. Running is not necessarily aerobic. Jogging (which is VERY different from running) is aerobic. But from your story, the running needed by Lou Ferrigno was far from aerobic. Such a relay race (probably 400m or less for each runner) is definitely anaerobic (sprint). And one does not train aerobically for such an event. We also have to make another distinction: aerobic and cardiovascular exercise. Dr. Al Sears has been showing that the two are not necessarily the same. In fact, he shows how aerobic exercise actually makes our cardiovascular fitness worse. Instead, cardio fitness is achieved anaerobically! And I've tried and proven this on myself. The system is a variation of interval training. Do an exercise that you can't sustain for one or two minutes (sprint, speed bike, speed jump rope, burpees, etc., that is, max out your anaerobic capacity), rest or reduce intensity for a minute or so, and repeat cycle for one or two more times. Such a workout would not last for more than 12 minutes, but the effect on one's cardiovascular fitness is quick and dramatic. I saw a dramatic improvement in my own cardio fitness in less than two weeks! (Judged by my own feeling during my bicycle commutes that take me up a steep slope.) So we should dump the aerobic myth. We should develop our cardiovascular fitness, but aerobics is not the way to go. Instead, it's anaerobics that best develops our cardio fitness. Try it yourselves. I'm sure that you'll see the big difference in a couple of weeks. And you won't have to spend so much time as you would for aerobics. I'll send a copy of Dr. Sears' Newsletter wherein he details his cardiovascular fitness program as an attachment in a separate post to the group. And I'll see if I can add it to the " Files " section. > SOme body builders ignore the arobic exercise and > even eat diets high in red meat and fat for the > protien ignoring the effect it can have on thier > arteries. Another myth we must clear up. Fat and cholesterol in the diet hardly affect blood cholesterol/LDL levels. All biochemical and physiological pathways show that blood cholesterol is most affected by blood glucose (mostly from dietary carbs). This is emphatically proven by the action of the cholesterol lowering statin drugs: they inhibit the liver enzyme that converts glucose by-products to cholesterol. (Unfortunately, statins also inhibit production of coenzyme Q10, so takers of these drugs may lower their blood cholesterol level but still die of a heart attack.) Gerry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.