TvA advocates

[Guest guest]

Casler wrote:

Hi S, it seems that you don't grasp the function and the forces

involved in the action of the Abdominal complex and the creation of IAP

(Intra-Abdominal Pressure)

First and foremost, the TvA is only a " player " , and not the whole system in

the creation of IAP, and other elements of Torso and Spinal Stabilization.

Scherger wrote:

I would agree with you that it is possibly a " player " . But it appears to me

at this time it would be something that has no real consequence. I see it as

something that would stabilize abdominal contents rather stabilize trunk.

Casler writes:

If you understood that creating IAP (IntraAbdominal Pressure) does

contribute to the stabilization of the trunk, then you would be able to see

the contribution.

Sherger wrote:

As a player do you see it as having no significant value in trunk

stabilization and therefore no real value at all for strength and

conditioning?

Casler writes:

Do you even understand why all the abdominal muscles are arranged in an

" oblique " fiber arrangement to each other?

The three main ab tissues all run at an oblique fiber arrangement.

Scientific minds understand the value of this. A two tissue arrangement

does not have the same strength and capacity.

Sherger wrote:

And if it is a player what would you state at this time? Something

significant say in the 5-10% range or some thing insignificant say in the

..25% range. I think we need to go deeper to determine just how it functions

to stabilize the spine.

Casler writes:

The very fact that you ask the question displays that you have not fully

considered the stabilizing forces in " your " computations. This is further

evidence of the fact that they are not only inaccurate, but of no " real

world " usefulness.

Again I can only " instruct " you that trying to dissect a % of TvA

participation is a rather futile effort. The TvA acts on an " as needed "

reflexively initiated basis, and only in conjunction with other elements of

the TSM (Torso Stabilization Mechanism)

I don't think " WE " need " to go deeper to determine just how it functions " .

I think " YOU " need to take some elementary biomechanics courses, and cease

trying to apply you " spot light " physics and math games.

Casler wrote:

...there are 3 primary elements at play here relating

Torso and Spinal Stabilization. :

1) The stability created by IAP

2) The stability created by lateral tensioning of the Thoracolumbar Fascia

3) The stability created by the abdominal muscles bridging the gap from

lower ribcage to pubic arch

Sherger wrote:

I agree with number 3 because these are muscles that cross joints and

therefore can leverage bones against a force essentially stabilizing them

against that said force that would cause them to move at the joint out of

say a desired position into say flexion or extension. At this time I cannot

see how 1 and 2 have any value.

Casler writes:

, again you do not understand.

Have you noticed that the thoracic vertebrae and discs are " MUCH " smaller

than the lumbar? Yet, when we perform 700 and 800# squats, the " same " load

is placed on them too?

Do you know why they can take a greater load for their size than the much

larger and stronger Lumbar?

I'll give you a hint: The ribcage and IntraThoracic Pressure.

Maybe you can explain how these elements stabilize the thoracic spine and

vertebrae and we can then move to the Lumbar and its stabilizing elements.

Casler wrote:

Your further speculation that IAP pushes " individual " vertebrae also allows

us to see that you don't understand the biomechanics of the three elements

above, when they are initiated and implemented under modulated control

(usually reflexive).

Sherger wrote:

I see how number 3 can push a bone because a muscle that crosses a joint can

effectively create shear forces that will push the bone away from the other

bone it is articulating with at the joint. It is number 2 & 3 I can not see.

Casler writes:

Well that certainly confuses me. First you say: " I agree with number 3 " ,

then you say: " It is number 2 & 3 I can not see. "

I might continue, your visualization of #3 is incorrect. The abs (trunk

flexors) " balancing " the force of the trunk extenders is only part of the

equation. Their most important roll is creating a " rigid " containment wall

for the IAP. Take a hot water bottle and take out the top so there is no

pressure in it. Now stand on it. It will collapse. Now fill it with

water. Stand on it again.

It will support your weight. Now imagine you have a Hot water bottle with a

couple inches (thick) of muscle that changes from a pliable sheet, to a

rigid solid sheet, that contains pressure. That sheet becomes a " support

wall " . And because it is " leveraged " to the front of the ribcage, it, and

the internal IAP create a stabilizing group of forces to the anterior spine.

To visualize #2 just look at a " trampoline " . It has many " laterally

tensioned " connections that " tension " it and cause it to want to remain

stable even though forces are trying to deform it. It is caused to absorb

force by this lateral tensioning.

Sherger wrote:

Now when someone hurts their lower back they can be put in a corset that

would mimic the TvA muscle. However for the corset to be effective to keep

the spine in a upright stabilized position, metal stays are added that cross

the spinal joint to keep it held in position. Wrapping the spine without

the stays does not prevent it from bending.

Casler writes:

I trust you have never used a " nylon " weight training belt. It is soft and

pliable, has no stays, and conforms to the torso. when it is tensioned

(tightened) it offers some of the best support.

I was under the impression you where a physics expert. This stuff is

elementary.

Casler wrote:

This serves to illustrate elements of how the TSM (Torso Stabilization

Mechanism) assists in maintaining spinal alignment and stability.

I would suggest that you not get " hung up " on " individual elements " and

anatomy, except only to the point of understanding the " roles " and

" contributions " to the system as a whole.

S. writes:

I do not see how we can not be expected to get " hung up " on " individual

elements and anatomy if we are truly to

understand how something is supposed to work.

Casler writes:

" WE " ? who is we? Most others know much of this, and that is why they

aren't asking questions. Your lack of awareness in this field and further

lack of understanding of the components and elements involved is troubling.

Sherger wrote:

The TvA crosses from the two hip joints forward to the aponeurosis of

internal oblique. I think every one would agree that if the muscle at this

point contracted that the only thing stabilized would be the contents of the

pelvis and not the pelvis itself.

Casler writes:

if you cannot understand the " hydraulic stabilization " of the lower

torso, then who am I to teach you. But let me assure you, I feel it my duty

to inform those who don't have a more comprehensive background, the

incorrectness to your meanderings.

Sherger wrote:

Now C. I have never seen you being a real advocate of the TvA training.

Are you just trying to defend its possible miniscule .25% significance. You

write like possibly you are just doing that.

Casler writes:

, I am an advocate of " understanding " . I regret that my tone must be so

condescending, but you simply need to go back and re-educate yourself, as to

the forces and mechanics of the Torso. Your enthusiasm is beyond reproach,

as is your determination, but you continue to promote theory, that is

totally lacking in understanding and perception.

The very fact that you think that you could establish a % of significance to

a component to the TSM shows you haven't a clue. Additionally, the

assignment of .25% is a severe distortion, and only serves to display your

comprehension levels to the subject.

Your math and physics are incomplete and flawed. I seriously do not like

this role, but you have just enough knowledge to be taken seriously by those

who might not have the educational tools to decipher your message for what

it is lacking.

Sherger wrote:

Is it just me or does anyone else not see just exactly how the TvA is really

supposed to do anything of value? Can advocates of TvA training please come

up with the actual anatomical mechanism by which it works in real world

against just exactly what force that would destabilize the spine in what

direction of movement.

Casler writes:

I have told you several times, that fighting the TvA " windmill " is

pointless. It cannot accomplish much except very minor stabilization on its

own. In fact, it originally served as a passive spinal stabilizer to

quadrupeds. The weight of the abdominal contents, created a tensioning of

the ThoraColumbar Fascia for a mild stabilizing effect.

I love when you ask for " real world " ideas, and then present the snapshot,

isolated leverage physics you use. None of these offer " ANY " useful and

applicable information to our daily training.

I issued you a " Challenge " in my last post. I await your response.

Regards,

Casler

TRI-VECTOR 3-D Force Systems

Century City, CA