Guest guest Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 How about one-legged jump squats -- weighted or otherwise? Gympie, Australia > > A question to ponder: > > Which exercise is more specific (transfers better) to sprinting: the back squat or weighted single leg step up (onto an 8 " Box), and why? > > If specificity is the key to transfer than isn't the step up far more specific given that it is 1)unilateral, 2) allows a greater force output per leg, and 3) uses a range of motion more similar to sprinting? > > Lyndon McDowell > Brookings, SD. > USA > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 One legged squat jumps seem like a good exercise and I will experiment (given that it may be a good agility drill) but, not sure how to put this so excuse my description. Are stationary jump squats not placing to much emphasis on balance and stabilises when compared to running? Running you have the balance brought through the motion - like riding a bicycle balance is easier when you are moving- is that gyroscopic motion stabilising or some term like that? So the single leg squat jumps require too much stabilising and reduce rate of force development which sprinting requires and may teach the body to activate needlessly some muscles as stabilisers which may slow the runner down by tensing at the wrong time? Its a bit like using the hook grip on Olympic lifts, helping the forearms to relax more and helping the arms to move faster relaxed. I have no experience with these squat jumps, just asking the question. Regards Nick Tatalias Johannesburg South Africa > > How about one-legged jump squats -- weighted or otherwise? > > > Gympie, Australia > > > > > > A question to ponder: > > > > Which exercise is more specific (transfers better) to sprinting: the > back squat or weighted single leg step up (onto an 8 " Box), and why? > > > > If specificity is the key to transfer than isn't the step up far more > specific given that it is 1)unilateral, 2) allows a greater force > output per leg, and 3) uses a range of motion more similar to sprinting? > > > > Lyndon McDowell > > Brookings, SD. > > USA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 Neither is very specific - they are too slow. Which is why you have to do something to transfer. The back squat is a base strength exercise. The attempt at mimicry isn't specificity. > A question to ponder: > > Which exercise is more specific (transfers better) to sprinting: > the back squat or weighted single leg step up (onto an 8 " Box), and > why? > > If specificity is the key to transfer than isn't the step up far > more specific given that it is 1)unilateral, 2) allows a greater > force output per leg, and 3) uses a range of motion more similar to > sprinting? > > Lyndon McDowell > Brookings, SD. > USA > > Hobman Saskatoon, Canada Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 Actually, Olympic pulls have been show to be a more effective movement in the development of sprint speed than squats. Kenny Croxdale Orange, CA Specificity A question to ponder: Which exercise is more specific (transfers better) to sprinting: the back squat or weighted single leg step up (onto an 8 " Box), and why? If specificity is the key to transfer than isn't the step up far more specific given that it is 1)unilateral, 2) allows a greater force output per leg, and 3) uses a range of motion more similar to sprinting? ============================ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 Do you have a cite for this? I would tend to agree, but I'd be interested in seeing how they define 'effective'. Anyhow, the squat is a great base strength exercise. But there are some very strong squatters who are slow sprinters. Using a unilateral exercise to build strength means you are spending twice as long building base strength. Why? I would still do squats, cleans (or high pulls or snatch high pulls) and jump training for sprinters. Then I would focus on sprint technique. Of course, I would defer on these exercises to an expert and I'd probably do more if it were a full-time athlete. But as a base strength/power program it would be pretty good. KennyCrox@... wrote: > Actually, Olympic pulls have been show to be a more effective movement > in the development of sprint speed than squats. > > > -- Hobman Saskatoon, CANADA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 K. Hobman, Are you saying that squat and stepup will only transfer to sprinting with the aid of a " transfer exercise? " If so, which one will transfer better (with the aid of a " transfer exercise " )? Also, what exactly is the difference between mimicry and specificity? Why is specificity good and mimicry bad? How can we know whether an exercise is specific or merely mimicry? Thank you, Lyndon McDowell Brookings, SD USA [Mod: Lyndon there is some excellent information in the Supertraining files/archives concerning this topic area.] To: Supertraining@...: kshobman@...: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 06:51:17 -0600Subject: Re: Specificity Neither is very specific - they are too slow. Which is why you have to do something to transfer. The back squat is a base strength exercise. The attempt at mimicry isn't specificity.> A question to ponder:>> Which exercise is more specific (transfers better) to sprinting: > the back squat or weighted single leg step up (onto an 8 " Box), and > why?>> If specificity is the key to transfer than isn't the step up far > more specific given that it is 1)unilateral, 2) allows a greater > force output per leg, and 3) uses a range of motion more similar to > sprinting?>> Lyndon McDowell> Brookings, SD.> USA>> HobmanSaskatoon, Canada[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] =================================== Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 There is an excellent presentation in the Supertraining files on specificity. I'll let you figure out the difference from that. Miimicry is pretty much never good as it ignores basic tenets of specificity and transfer and instead simply attempts to add resistance to a movement that 'mimics' the sporting movement. At best this isn't really going to do any good and at worse it may cause some neural confusion. Squatting is the more efficient exercise for base strength. 'Transfer better' is a bit of a loaded question, since there are far more variables than simply exercise selection which determine that. However, a unilateral exercise simply isn't necessary and by definition would take twice as long to perform. And yes, you have to transfer. Zatsiorsky makes a statement something like 'the transfer of strength to speed is of exceeding difficulty' in the Science and Practice of Strength Training, which anyone coaching sprinters can attest to. Personally, if I could only do one exercise for all athletes for sprinting I think it would be the clean. And my preferred method of transfer would be sprints and sprint starts. Because specificity does rule and if you want to run faster - than run fast. As did say, with more than one exercise I would probably perform squats, cleans or high pulls, glute-ham-gastroc raises and jumps of various types. And, of course, I would sprint. McDowell wrote: > K. Hobman, > > Are you saying that squat and stepup will only transfer to sprinting > with the aid of a " transfer exercise? " If so, which one will transfer > better (with the aid of a " transfer exercise " )? > > Also, what exactly is the difference between mimicry and specificity? > Why is specificity good and mimicry bad? How can we know whether an > exercise is specific or merely mimicry? > > Thank you, > > Lyndon McDowell > Brookings, SD > USA > > [Mod: Lyndon there is some excellent information in the Supertraining > files/archives concerning this topic area.] > > To: Supertraining@... > <mailto:Supertraining%40yahoogroups.comFrom>: kshobman@... > <mailto:kshobman%40sasktel.netDate>: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 06:51:17 > -0600Subject: Re: Specificity > > Neither is very specific - they are too slow. Which is why you have to > do something to transfer. The back squat is a base strength exercise. > The attempt at mimicry isn't specificity.On 18-Feb-08, at 9:21 PM, > McDowell wrote:> A question to ponder:>> Which exercise is > more specific (transfers better) to sprinting: > the back squat or > weighted single leg step up (onto an 8 " Box), and > why?>> If > specificity is the key to transfer than isn't the step up far > more > specific given that it is 1)unilateral, 2) allows a greater > force > output per leg, and 3) uses a range of motion more similar to > > sprinting?>> Lyndon McDowell> Brookings, SD.> USA>> > HobmanSaskatoon, Canada[Non-text portions of this message have been > removed] > > =================================== > > -- Hobman Saskatoon, CANADA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 Nick, I've been trying out all sorts of stuff, including some cleans, pulls, deadlifts and jump squats to prepare for some masters sprinting. I've also been experimenting with high-speed, high leg lifts on a mini tramp as a plyometric approach and also hanging leg raises. There is a study around that found increased sprint performance after a program of hanging leg raises for increased strength in hip flexors. There seems to be a lot of interest in jump squats for sprinters and power development in general, so I figured one-legged might be superior to two-legged seeing that I tend to sprint with one leg on the ground at a time <g>. But I guess this buys into the specificity argument. Demanding exercise though. You could very well be right about balance issues and recruitment of stabilizers that may be counterproductive. Anyway, all I have managed to do so far is pull a soleus muscle, which is a b##$% to heal and has restricted my track training, which is the main focus of course. The soleus went on the track but I wonder if I overdid things in the gym. I'll keep you posted. In a few studies, squat strength seems to be correlated with sprint performance but you have to wonder which comes first in these correlation studies -- perhaps sprinters will naturally have good squat performance; and without those fast twitchers and some stiffness you could squat 1000 pounds and not sprint out of sight on a dark night. Br J Sports Med. 2004 Jun;38(3):285-8. Strong correlation of maximal squat strength with sprint performance and vertical jump height in elite soccer players. Wisløff U, Castagna C, Helgerud J, R, Hoff J. http://tinyurl.com/2vvt3r Anecdotally, a few years ago I trained with a local masters sprint champion for a few sessions. He was a couple of age groups older than me, but an awesome sprinter, especially over 200 and 400. I had just come off marathon training so I was in no real shape for sprinting. I could hold him over 100m but he was quite amazing as distances got longer. I just looked up the world masters records the other day and he now holds the world record >70 for 400 metres at 60.77 seconds and is very close to the 200m record. I'm not surprised. The point here is that he is a relatively small, lean, wiry man and does not look like he has ever been in a gym. I could be wrong of course. Yet sometimes sprinters just seem to be naturals, and as a coach, sometimes I think you have to say to yourself: " don't fool around with this guy too much " . Gympie, Australia Cheers, Gympie, Australia > > > > > > A question to ponder: > > > > > > Which exercise is more specific (transfers better) to sprinting: the > > back squat or weighted single leg step up (onto an 8 " Box), and why? > > > > > > If specificity is the key to transfer than isn't the step up far more > > specific given that it is 1)unilateral, 2) allows a greater force > > output per leg, and 3) uses a range of motion more similar to sprinting? > > > > > > Lyndon McDowell > > > Brookings, SD. > > > USA > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 Well said, . All training with weights is general, performing the task with extra resistance necessarily changes something about how the body performs the task, usually slows it down, and may change the mechanics, more likely than not in a negative way. The only " sport specific " exercises are the actual athletic tasks themselves. Everything else is GPP, which is an important part of training and a beneficial part of training, to be sure. To the original question- do BOTH squatting and step up variations, in addition to the sprint training on the track, not to take the place of the running. Mark , MS, ATC, CSCS Camillus, NY, USA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 I read the presentation in supertraining, and found it quite informative. However, I am still having trouble understanding the distinction between specificity and mimicry. To my mind the purpose of weight training is to increase the ability of the body to produce force in the same muscle groups and ranges of motion that are used in sprinting (for example). Thus, it would seem that the exercises that have the greatest chance of transfering to sprinting are those that work the same muscle groups in a similar way. For example if you were to choose between the bent over row and the bench press to improve shot put performance, you would choose bench press, because it works the same muscle groups as the shot put and it works them in a similar way. Are you saying that the bench press is considered mimicry? Doesn't an exercise have to look somewhat like the sporting action in question to be functional? Could you (or anyone) please explain exactly which 'basic tenets of specificity and transfer' the power clean and squat address, but which the single leg 8 " box step up does not? - None of these 3 exercises can address the speed or 'rate of force development' portion of the speed/power equation, since they are all relatively slow compared to a foot contact time in a sprint. (And according to the presentation - it is not the actual speed of a strength training movement that counts, but rather the intended speed that counts anyway). Therefore all that any weighted exercise can hope to do is improve the force production ability of the body. The effect of this should be that the body 'feels lighter' and can therefore be moved faster. I do not see how the step up is less specific or would cause any more neural confusion than a squat or power clean. It is a technically simple exercise to perform and it allows a far greater load per leg than a squat or power clean. It also works the muscles in a relevant range of motion - developing strength in the top 1/4 of the knee and hip extension and not wasting time, energy and recovery ability developing strength that will not be used while sprinting. Lyndon McDowell Brookings, SD USA ====================================== To: Supertraining@...: kshobman@...: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 13:55:23 -0600Subject: Re: Specificity There is an excellent presentation in the Supertraining files on specificity. I'll let you figure out the difference from that. Miimicry is pretty much never good as it ignores basic tenets of specificity and transfer and instead simply attempts to add resistance to a movement that 'mimics' the sporting movement. At best this isn't really going to do any good and at worse it may cause some neural confusion.Squatting is the more efficient exercise for base strength. 'Transfer better' is a bit of a loaded question, since there are far more variables than simply exercise selection which determine that. However, a unilateral exercise simply isn't necessary and by definition would take twice as long to perform.And yes, you have to transfer. Zatsiorsky makes a statement something like 'the transfer of strength to speed is of exceeding difficulty' in the Science and Practice of Strength Training, which anyone coaching sprinters can attest to.Personally, if I could only do one exercise for all athletes for sprinting I think it would be the clean. And my preferred method of transfer would be sprints and sprint starts. Because specificity does rule and if you want to run faster - than run fast.As did say, with more than one exercise I would probably perform squats, cleans or high pulls, glute-ham-gastroc raises and jumps of various types. And, of course, I would sprint. McDowell wrote:> K. Hobman,>> Are you saying that squat and stepup will only transfer to sprinting > with the aid of a " transfer exercise? " If so, which one will transfer > better (with the aid of a " transfer exercise " )?>> Also, what exactly is the difference between mimicry and specificity? > Why is specificity good and mimicry bad? How can we know whether an > exercise is specific or merely mimicry?>> Thank you,>> Lyndon McDowell> Brookings, SD> USA>> [Mod: Lyndon there is some excellent information in the Supertraining > files/archives concerning this topic area.]>> To: Supertraining@... > <mailto:Supertraining%40yahoogroups.comFrom>: kshobman@... > <mailto:kshobman%40sasktel.netDate>: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 06:51:17 > -0600Subject: Re: Specificity>> Neither is very specific - they are too slow. Which is why you have to > do something to transfer. The back squat is a base strength exercise. > The attempt at mimicry isn't specificity.On 18-Feb-08, at 9:21 PM, > McDowell wrote:> A question to ponder:>> Which exercise is > more specific (transfers better) to sprinting: > the back squat or > weighted single leg step up (onto an 8 " Box), and > why?>> If > specificity is the key to transfer than isn't the step up far > more > specific given that it is 1)unilateral, 2) allows a greater > force > output per leg, and 3) uses a range of motion more similar to > > sprinting?>> Lyndon McDowell> Brookings, SD.> USA>> > HobmanSaskatoon, Canada[Non-text portions of this message have been > removed]>> ===================================>> -- HobmanSaskatoon, CANADA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2008 Report Share Posted February 19, 2008 Combining them is even better. W.G. Ubermensch Sports Consultancy San Diego, CA > > Actually, Olympic pulls have been show to be a more effective movement in the development of sprint speed than squats. > > Kenny Croxdale > Orange, CA > > Specificity > > A question to ponder: > > Which exercise is more specific (transfers better) to sprinting: the back squat or weighted single leg step up (onto an 8 " Box), and why? > > If specificity is the key to transfer than isn't the step up far more specific given that it is 1)unilateral, 2) allows a greater force output per leg, and 3) uses a range of motion more similar to sprinting? > ============================ > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 20, 2008 Report Share Posted February 20, 2008 > > There is an excellent presentation in the Supertraining files on > specificity. I'll let you figure out the difference from that. Miimicry > is pretty much never good as it ignores basic tenets of specificity and > transfer and instead simply attempts to add resistance to a movement > that 'mimics' the sporting movement. At best this isn't really going to > do any good and at worse it may cause some neural confusion. I like this statement by Gallyer from the archives: " Thus a specific exercise may look similar to the event or not at all like the event -- it would be the adaptation (or at least justifiable methods, predicting specific adaptation) that determines specificity. " I'm having trouble deciding what's adaptable and what's not when it comes to mimicry or specificity, but I guess that's the big question, or it could just be my ignorance. Would you say that chutes, harness and bungees for sprint training would qualify as 'resistance to a movement that 'mimics' the sporting movement'? Or perhaps box march plyos? Not challenging just asking. Gympie, Australia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 20, 2008 Report Share Posted February 20, 2008 > > Nick, I've been trying out all sorts of stuff, including some cleans, > pulls, deadlifts and jump squats to prepare for some masters > sprinting. > > I've also been experimenting with high-speed, high leg lifts on a > mini tramp as a plyometric approach and also hanging leg raises. > There is a study around that found increased sprint performance after > a program of hanging leg raises for increased strength in hip flexors. > > There seems to be a lot of interest in jump squats for sprinters and > power development in general, so I figured one-legged might be > superior to two-legged seeing that I tend to sprint with one leg on > the ground at a time <g>. But I guess this buys into the specificity > argument. Demanding exercise though. > ***** I seem to recall some Russian research in the Fitness and Sport Review International, which showed one leg hops (fast) in place training improved sprinting speed. Conversely, bounding (slower) was quite poor at improving sprinting speed. The title of the article was " Muscles and the Sprint " . I'll see if I can dig it out. Carruthers Wakefield, UK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 20, 2008 Report Share Posted February 20, 2008 Sorry, but I don't see the point of chutes, harness or bungees. You are essentially generating an upper body or core force vector with these devices, drastically changing the way force is applied in the sprint. Plus what appears to be missing (and I don't think it is for you - I suspect you have seen the studies and I think you know what to do with chutes!) is the element of speed of the movement as specificity. Charlie Francis and I had this conversation years ago when I was advocating the full squat instead of the partial squat for training and made the mistake of pointing out you could move the lighter weight of the full squat faster near the end of the movement. Charlie made the rather succinct comment that you are still not even in the proper universe (or something like that) of the speed you need for leg turnover for a sprinter. Ditto for a clean. Another consideration is that in highly skilled movement resistance outside of a small. incremental increase or decrease drastically changes the motor recruitment strategy. So if you were to use chutes you'd want to keep the force less than 5% or so. Otherwise you simply confuse the neural pattern. Now I realize sprinting may not qualify to some as a highly complex or skilled recruitment pattern, but I think to a skilled sprinter it is. Just think of how complex the recruitment of the hamstring group is in a sprint. If you screw it up even a little the agonist/antagonist firing pattern is going to slow the sprinter down. Having said that, I have no problem with sprinters squatting or doing step-ups or cleans or all of the preceding (and even more exercises!) for that matter. But realize that you are simply working base strength. If you want to run fast - then run fast for training. Do maximal sprints from the fly, sprint starts. Having a good coach look at your form and make some suggestions can really help. I always wondered why the people who were so enamored with chutes and bungees just didn't find a slight decline slope for speed work and a hill for resistance work? I realize there may be some neural problems here as well, but If I was working with a young person who wanted to run faster and they had slow turnover and too long a stride I'd simply send them to a hill. (I'm thinking rugby here more than sprinting - I'm not a sprint coach.) wrote: > > > > > There is an excellent presentation in the Supertraining files on > > specificity. I'll let you figure out the difference from that. > Miimicry > > is pretty much never good as it ignores basic tenets of specificity > and > > transfer and instead simply attempts to add resistance to a movement > > that 'mimics' the sporting movement. At best this isn't really going > to > > do any good and at worse it may cause some neural confusion. > > I like this statement by Gallyer from the archives: > > " Thus a specific exercise may look similar to the event or not at all > like the event -- it would be the adaptation (or at least justifiable > methods, predicting specific adaptation) that determines specificity. " > > I'm having trouble deciding what's adaptable and what's not when it > comes to mimicry or specificity, but I guess that's the big question, > or it could just be my ignorance. > > Would you say that chutes, harness and bungees for sprint training > would qualify as 'resistance to a movement that 'mimics' the sporting > movement'? Or perhaps box march plyos? > > Not challenging just asking. > > > -- Hobman Saskatoon, CANADA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 20, 2008 Report Share Posted February 20, 2008 If you work a muscle through a full ROM and increase it's ability to produce force by 10% you will increase it's ability to produce force in a partial ROM by the same amount. If you increase a partial ROM there is little transfer outside the ROM worked. So why would you work a partial movement at the expense of a full movement for base strength? The bench press does not work the muscles in the same way and I probably wouldn't use either the bench press or the bent-over row to train a shot-putter. I might consider using a push/press while standing and I'm sure I would use some kettlebell and medicine ball exercises, but I would have to think about that a bit and analyze the shot put biomechanics. Think about where the force vector is in a shot put and in a bench press. Hint - you are lying on a bench. So yes. The bench press is mimicry. The biggest problem is how the force is created by pinning your shoulders on the bench and the fact that you are slowing down at the end of the bench press rather than speeding up. I'd be far more likely to have the shot putter 'pressing' or throwing a medicine ball against a vertical wall for strength training the upper body musculature, simply to address those two problems with the bench. Having said that, you could still bench and I know some putters who have enormous benches. But I also know of some who don't bench at all - including world record holders. My point is simply that the squat, step-up and clean don't transfer that well by themselves. They should not be considered specific exercises for the sprint. They are simply supplemental exercises for base strength. Or GPP, if you prefer that term. Since the adaptation the exercise is attempting to address is 'strength' - choose the most appropriate one. The squat is more efficient for strength for the legs and core than the step-up, so I would tend to go with it. If you prefer the step-up that is fine - use it. But don't argue that it is more specific - it is not. The adaptation you are training is strength. Dr. Siff, the founder of this group, had a simple, but highly effective image that I still use for training programs. He had three non-intersecting lines drawn in the shape of a triangle, except the lines curved away from each other before intersecting. The three lines were labeled 'speed, strength and endurance'. The triangular shape sits on top of a plane labeled 'motor learning'. The point is - your training affects physiological characteristics of speed, strength and endurance on top of an appropriate motor learning pattern for your sport. Every athlete and every sport has a unique 'point' within the triangle. The bench press is a poor motor learning pattern for putting for reasons I mentioned above. So I wouldn't use it. The squat has the same problem with slowing down at the end, as does the step-up. That is why I would supplement with cleans and jump training. You could use the bench or incline bench for shot put and then supplement with medicine ball throws. I couldn't argue with that, because you would have addressed the 'motor skill' end of training. But I still recall how the great weightlifter eiev never back squatted much more than 600 lbs. His point - if his clean and jerk is 560 lbs then his strength base is sufficient if he can squat in excess of 600. He is better training some other aspect of the 'speed/strength/endurance on a motor skill background'. Which he did. Hope this helps. laskji wrote: > The purpose of weight training is to increase the ability of the body > to produce force in the same muscle groups and ranges of motion that > are used in sprinting (for example). Thus, it would seem that the > exercises that have the greatest chance of transfering to sprinting > are those that work the same muscle groups in a similar way. > > For example if you were to choose between the bent over row and the > bench press to improve shot put performance, you would choose bench > press, because it works the same muscle groups as the shot put and it > works them in a similar way. Are you saying that the bench press is > considered mimicry? Doesn't an exercise have to look somewhat like > the sporting action in question to be functional? > > Could you (or anyone) please explain exactly which 'basic tenets of > specificity and transfer' the power clean and squat address, but > which the single leg 8 " box step up does not? - None of these 3 > exercises can address the speed or 'rate of force development' > portion of the speed/power equation, since they are all relatively > slow compared to a foot contact time in a sprint. (And according to > the presentation - it is not the actual speed of a strength training > movement that counts, but rather the intended speed that counts > anyway). Therefore all that any weighted exercise can hope to do is > improve the force production ability of the body. The effect of this > should be that the body 'feels lighter' and can therefore be moved > faster. > > I do not see how the step up is less specific or would cause any more > neural confusion than a squat or power clean. It is a technically > simple exercise to perform and it allows a far greater load per leg > than a squat or power clean. It also works the muscles in a relevant > range of motion - developing strength in the top 1/4 of the knee and > hip extension and not wasting time, energy and recovery ability > developing strength that will not be used while sprinting. > > Lyndon McDowell > Brookings, SD > USA > ========================================= > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > ---------- > To: Supertraining <mailto:Supertraining%40yahoogroups.com> > From: kshobman@... <mailto:kshobman%40sasktel.net> > Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 13:55:23 -0600 > Subject: Re: Specificity > > There is an excellent presentation in the Supertraining files on > specificity. I'll let you figure out the difference from that. > Miimicry > is pretty much never good as it ignores basic tenets of specificity > and > transfer and instead simply attempts to add resistance to a movement > that 'mimics' the sporting movement. At best this isn't really going > to > do any good and at worse it may cause some neural confusion. > > Squatting is the more efficient exercise for base strength. 'Transfer > better' is a bit of a loaded question, since there are far more > variables than simply exercise selection which determine that. > However, > a unilateral exercise simply isn't necessary and by definition would > take twice as long to perform. > > And yes, you have to transfer. Zatsiorsky makes a statement something > like 'the transfer of strength to speed is of exceeding difficulty' > in > the Science and Practice of Strength Training, which anyone coaching > sprinters can attest to. > > Personally, if I could only do one exercise for all athletes for > sprinting I think it would be the clean. And my preferred method of > transfer would be sprints and sprint starts. Because specificity does > rule and if you want to run faster - than run fast. > > As did say, with more than one exercise I would probably perform > squats, > cleans or high pulls, glute-ham-gastroc raises and jumps of various > types. And, of course, I would sprint. > > ================================= > -- Hobman Saskatoon, CANADA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 20, 2008 Report Share Posted February 20, 2008 One thing I missed in the previous reply. Without knowing exactly how a 'box march plyo' is performed I suspect it may have some specificity due the stretch/shortening nature of the movement. So I'll take door #2 for $500.... :^) wrote: > > > > > There is an excellent presentation in the Supertraining files on > > specificity. I'll let you figure out the difference from that. > Miimicry > > is pretty much never good as it ignores basic tenets of specificity > and > > transfer and instead simply attempts to add resistance to a movement > > that 'mimics' the sporting movement. At best this isn't really going > to > > do any good and at worse it may cause some neural confusion. > > I like this statement by Gallyer from the archives: > > " Thus a specific exercise may look similar to the event or not at all > like the event -- it would be the adaptation (or at least justifiable > methods, predicting specific adaptation) that determines specificity. " > > I'm having trouble deciding what's adaptable and what's not when it > comes to mimicry or specificity, but I guess that's the big question, > or it could just be my ignorance. > > Would you say that chutes, harness and bungees for sprint training > would qualify as 'resistance to a movement that 'mimics' the sporting > movement'? Or perhaps box march plyos? > > Not challenging just asking. > > > Gympie, Australia > > -- Hobman Saskatoon, CANADA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2008 Report Share Posted February 21, 2008 This research reflects what Dean Brittenham and I did in the early 90's with sprinters, such as Zmelik, '92 Olympic Decathlon Champion, and other athletes interested in increasing their sprint speed and vertical jump, like Karch Kiraly and Gail Castro, pro beach volleyball, Steve Finley, pro baseball, at the Shiley Elite Athletic Development Program, in La Jolla, CA. Dr. Schmidtbleicher is a world-renowned German researcher who has published a huge body of work in the area of training and adaptation in strength and power sports, periodization, the stretch shortening cycle, vibration training and plyometrics. Here he presented some data from a recent research project he has conducted and also discussed training for power in the context of this current research and his entire body of research. The data he presented was from a study which examined the effects of strength training and jump training on jumping performance. The vertical jump is often used a measure of an individual's power production capabilities (Carlock, 2004). In Schmidtbleicher's study there were three experimental groups and one inactive control group. Group 1 trained exclusively with jump training, practicing vertical countermovement jumps a number of times per week. Group 2 strength trained. They performed heavy squats a number of times per week. Group 3 did a combined training program which involved both heavy squatting and countermovement jump training. There was strong control between groups for training frequency and training volume. Subjects were tested before and after their training intervention in the squat jump (a purely concentric jumping action – it utilizes no stretch shortening cycle) and a countermovement jump. All three groups significantly increased jumping performance (in both squat and countermovement jumps) in comparison to the control group. Interestingly, the strength training group increased jumping performance more than the jump training group by ~3-4% (although not significantly so). Importantly, the combined training program increased jumping performance to a significantly greater extent than the isolated jump training. Schmidtbleicher suggests this data is strong evidence which demonstrates the key role maximal strength plays in dynamic power production. Schmidtbleicher suggests that an increase in maximal strength will result in an increase to power and athletes' rates of force development. W.G. Ubermensch Sports Consultancy San Diego, CA -- In Supertraining , " carruthersjam " wrote: > > > > > > Nick, I've been trying out all sorts of stuff, including some > cleans, > > pulls, deadlifts and jump squats to prepare for some masters > > sprinting. > > > > I've also been experimenting with high-speed, high leg lifts on a > > mini tramp as a plyometric approach and also hanging leg raises. > > There is a study around that found increased sprint performance > after > > a program of hanging leg raises for increased strength in hip > flexors. > > > > There seems to be a lot of interest in jump squats for sprinters > and > > power development in general, so I figured one-legged might be > > superior to two-legged seeing that I tend to sprint with one leg on > > the ground at a time <g>. But I guess this buys into the > specificity > > argument. Demanding exercise though. > > > > ***** > I seem to recall some Russian research in the Fitness and Sport > Review International, which showed one leg hops (fast) in place > training improved sprinting speed. Conversely, bounding (slower) was > quite poor at improving sprinting speed. The title of the article > was " Muscles and the Sprint " . > > I'll see if I can dig it out. > Carruthers > Wakefield, UK > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2008 Report Share Posted February 21, 2008 , Where is that infamous study (that no one can find) that Hatfield speaks of in " Athletes The Olympic Lifts? " http://drsquat.com/home/index.php?option=com_content & task=view & id=95 & Itemid=28 In it Hatfield states, " Sports scientists found that Olympic lifters were able to both vertical jump higher than any class of athletes (including the high jumpers), and run a 25 yard dash faster than any class of athletes (including the sprinters). "  The empirical data indicates that to be true due to the explosiveness of Olympic lifters, being able to quickly generate so much power. In one of Dr Mike Stone's research article, Stone noted Shot Putters displayed the similar power outputs. I have the informamtion, should you want it. As W.G. (Ubermensch Sports Consultancy) basically noted in his post, strength is the foundation on which power and speed are built. So as we know, the first thing to do to increase power and/or speed is to increase strength. As you stated that one should still do squats, Olympic pulls and jumps. This article research hammees your message home. JEFFREY M. MCBRIDE, TRAVIS TRIPLETT-MCBRIDE, ALLAN DAVIE and ROBERT U. NEWTON. 1999: A Comparison of Strength and Power Characteristics Between Power Lifters, Olympic Lifters, and Sprinters. The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research: Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 58–66. The poster children for conjugated training should be Olympic Lifters. Let me add some addtional information. I remember Ian King stating that one of his favorite exercises for improving power off the line in a sprint was the deadlift. Also, in speaking to a former football lineman who played for Arizona (Jack Traehan), he informed me some of the best linemen he'd seen were good deadlifter. With that said, that does not necessairly mean a good deadlifter = great lineman. However, the correlation makes sense. [[Mod: Professor Tom Fahey wrote (see archives): " " I have been interested in strength transfer for many years and have published serveral papers on this topic (Biol.Sport 19:103-108, 2002; Medicina Sportiva 4: 82, 2000). We found that large muscle strength measures (i.e., bench press, dead-lift, Cybex Lift Taskmaster— a $50,000 isokinetic deadlift dynamometer) are highly related to discus throwing, jumping, and sprinting performance. In elite discus throwers (all subjects threw between 60 and 72 meters), for example, the bench press and deadlift were the best predictors of performance. Likewise, in skilled and unskilled sprinters and jumping athletes (high jump, volleyball, basketball), there was a high correlation between jumping and sprinting performance and Cybex deadlifting strength (120 degrees per second). In elite discus throwers, dynamic measures such as vertical jump, standing long jump, standing throw, and 40-yard dash, were poor predictors of performance. Of course, a high correlation does not mean that one factor caused the other (e.g., increasing weight lifted in the bench press will not make an athlete throw 200 feet in the discus). Improving performance in these strength measures (i.e., bench press, deadlift, squat, etc) has no short-term effect on performance. " " ]] Below is some reseach on the correlation of power cleans as a means of decreasing sprint time. The article also notes jump squats as being an effective exercise for sprint training...something that I had forgotten. W.G. also noted how effective jump squat are in his post. I had forgetten that and I hopefully will now commit it to memory. The Relation Between Running Speed and Measures of Strength and Power in Professional Rugby League Players, The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research Volume: 13 Issue: 3 Pages: 230-235. BAKER, DANIEL, NANCE, STEVEN For the 10-m sprint, no absolute measure of strength or power was significantly correlated to performance. However, all measures of power (assessed during SSC barbell jump squats) and the power clean from the hang, relative to body mass, were significantly related to sprint start performance. For the 10-m sprint, maximum strength, as assessed by the full squat, was not significantly related to performance either in absolute terms or relative to body mass. It was thought that maximum strength would correlate highly to 10-m sprint performance because of the inverse of Newton's second law (i.e., acceleration = force/mass). Thus athletes who are strong per kilogram of body mass should theoretically perform well in a 10-m sprint. The fact that the 3RM power clean from the hang, relative to body mass, was significantly related to the 10-m sprint may be due to the fact that this resistance exercise is typically performed as a predominantly concentric activity with a similar knee angle to that of the sprint start. Thus the high force and power outputs typically associated with this type of lift (4) and its highly concentric nature indicate that it is a better predictor of 10-m sprint performance than the full squat. All the measures of jump squat power, relative to body mass, exhibited a similar relation to 10-m sprint performance (r = −0.52–0.61). Young et al. (17) also reported correlations of similar magnitude between 20-m sprint performance, a countermovement jump with no extra load (r = −0.66), and an SSC jump squat with a barbell load of 50% of bodymass (r = −0.47) in young Australian Rules football players. In the present investigation, the highest correlation was exhibited between a jump squat with 100 kg and the 10-m sprint start. For the 40-m sprint, no absolute measure of strength or power was significantly correlated to performance. However, all measures of strength and power relative to body mass were significantly related to sprint performance and exhibited much stronger relations compared with the 10-m sprint. This may in part be due to the increased use of the SSC during the 40-m sprint, and, as a result, tests that involve high-force SSC movements could be expected to exhibit a strong relation (13, 18). The fact that the 3RM full squat, relative to body mass, correlated more highly with the 40-m sprint rather than the 10-m sprint, was initially surprising. Given that foot contact time for elite sprinters is in the order of 0.1 seconds (10), compared with 1–2 seconds for heavy squatting (8), this would indicate that a large portion of low-velocity strength is accessible for high-velocity sprinting. This finding would indicate that maximum SSC strength/kilogram is of importance to athletes who need to sprint over longer distances (40–50 m). Given that strength is therefore related to 40-m sprint performance and that strength performance underlies power performance to a large extent (2), it was not surprising to find increasingly strong relations as jump squat loads increased. The relative power produced against a 40-kg load exhibited the lowest correlation, whereas the maximal power, which could occur at different loads for different athletes, exhibited the highest correlation to 40-m sprint performance. The power produced with 80 kg also exhibited a strong relation to 40-m sprint, as this load is similar to both the maximal power load and the body mass of the subjects. Furthermore, the power clean from the hang, with a mean load of 102.25 kg, and a jump squat with 100 kg also exhibited a similar relation to 40-m sprint performance. This could be ascribed to the similar biomechanics involved in the thrust portion of both exercises (4) and the similarity in the external resistance. With regard to 40-m sprint performance, it would appear that there is a trend for increased resistances involved in the strength and power tests to increase the strength of the relation. However, when the resistances become too great (perhaps over 90–100 kg for the current group), the relation starts to decrease slightly, conceivably due to the decrease in lifting velocity associated with the increased loads. Thus faster, lighter loading and heavier, slower loading, while both being significantly related to performance in the 40-m sprint, are not as suitable as the maximal or optimal power load (10). This finding tends to partially support the notion that there may be optimal power training loads for different stages of the periodized training cycle. In this study, jump squats with 80 kg were the best single predictor of sprint performance over either distance, followed by 60-kg and 100-kg jump squats, which exhibited relations of similar magnitude. These loads would be in the range of 35–60% of the 1RM squat for the current subject group. It should be noted that athletes in different stages of their training cycle or those who would be unfamiliar with some of the resistance exercises (e.g., power clean from hang) may not exhibit relations of similar magnitude. Thus the results of this study would appear limited in application to elite athletes who regularly perform the above resistance training exercises as well as sprint training. Kenny Croxdale Orange, CA ========================================= Re: Specificity Do you have a cite for this? I would tend to agree, but I'd be interested in seeing how they define 'effective'. Anyhow, the squat is a great base strength exercise. But there are some very strong squatters who are slow sprinters. Using a unilateral exercise to build strength means you are spending twice as long building base strength. Why? I would still do squats, cleans (or high pulls or snatch high pulls) and jump training for sprinters. Then I would focus on sprint technique. Of course, I would defer on these exercises to an expert and I'd probably do more if it were a full-time athlete. But as a base strength/power program it would be pretty good. KennyCrox@... wrote: > Actually, Olympic pulls have been show to be a more effective movement > in the development of sprint speed than squats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2008 Report Share Posted February 21, 2008 In a message dated 2/21/2008 12:07:52 PM Central Standard Time, KennyCrox@... writes: In it Hatfield states, " Sports scientists found that Olympic lifters were able to both vertical jump higher than any class of athletes (including the high jumpers), and run a 25 yard dash faster than any class of athletes (including the sprinters). " Dr. Yessis was kind to respond to this issue about a year ago. Apparently, one story was that he had conducted research at the Mexico City Olympics. Here is his analysis of the account: " I don't recall if I mentioned a study or wrote up what I learned in the Soviet weightlifting literature. The information should read that world class weightlifters can out do world class sprinters for the first 5-10 meters. Also, some had better absolute verticals but especially in relation to their size as for example eyev. This does not apply to all weightlifters, only the better ones. " Ken Jakalski Lisle High School Lisle, Illinois USA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Hi Jon While I cannot comment on the study with rugby players I have used up to 100k jump squats with high jumpers / long jumpers - using bungees either side of a squat cage as a height indicator/target.. We have recorded 12cms by a 52k high jump girl at 100k (Olympic athlete) and 15-18cms with 75k boys (university age) at 100k so I suppose they can be considered 'jump squats' With 60K we have regularly recorded over 30cms (female) and 45 with boys. Normally we use sets of three. Anything more and quality drops off. Rep 1 is rarely the best in a set. We bend the knees to a quarter squat on landing to cushion the forces on the back - we always use a neck roll on the bar. We haven't noticed any neck or back problems Denis Doyle Shropshire UK Re: Specificity > Can someone describe how the jump squats in the > referenced study on rugby players are done? The > weights given were 60, 80 and 100 kg or around 132, > 176 and 220 pounds and the study states that 80 kg > (176 pounds) was similar to the body mass of the > subjects. These were not very big guys. If you can > get any vertical lift at all, that is a lot of weight > to have across your shoulders on a steel bar (assuming > they used barbells) when you land. Are these really > more like speed squats than true jumps? > > Jon Haddan > Irvine, CA > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Bill I keep hearing from UK S+C coaches in my sport (T+F) that PL are the best vertical jumpers and then them ramming down T + F coaches throats that cleans and snatches are the only way to develop the power needed for jumping. Yet in all the videos they bring out showing weightlifters jumping onto very high stacks of discs, which admittedly is impressive, they were all landing on the top of the stack with bent knees. They were all making the jumps from a standing start (minimal counter movement). Are you aware of the landing positions of Vlad and Hanman? Denis Doyle Shropshire UK Re: Specificity In regard to the development of sprint power. Vertical jump performance is an excellent indice of power. Powerful leapers can be readily converted to quick sprinters, they have only to learn efficient sprint technique, (which is not as easy as it sounds but far easier than trying to develop power and technique simultaneously). Olympic Lifts and Your hops As much as we play basketball the average D1 basketball players vert is only 28 inches " Nicu Vlad of Romania, World Record holder and Two time Olympic Medallist, came to the United States back in 1990, with now current U.S. National and Olympic Team Coach Dragomir Cioroslan, for a training camp. It was here at the U.S. Olympic Training Center in Colorado Springs, that this 100-kg (220 lbs) weightlifter recorded a 42 " vertical jump. Not to mention he was in weightlifting shoes, which weighs a lot more than tennis shoes and no formal warm-up. (Snatch 200 kg, Clean and Jerk 232.5 kg) Shane Hamman, 2000 Olympic Team Member and current National Super heavyweight Champion, another big man weighing in @ 163 kg (358 lbs) but only at a height of 5'9 " tall, can jump onto boxes @ a height over 42 " high. Of course Shane was also known for his squatting ability of over 1000 lbs. (Snatch 195 kg, Clean and Jerk 230 kg). " W.G. Ubermensch Sports Consultancy San Deigo, CA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Thanks for the links. I would be interested to hear your thoughts on how you view the quality of the performances shown in the two clips. (high and low box marches) bearing in mind the descriptions attached to them on the site. Denis Doyle Shropshire UK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Would stair running be an exercise that would be transferable to sprinting as they are much the same type of movement? Lee Robillard Mississauga Ont. Canada ================================== Hobman wrote: I would agree that the push press and incline are better and I do like the idea of chains and bands. Good idea! made an excellent comment in his reply that the weight room is for base strength and using chains in these exercise makes good sense for base strength and developing an explosive pattern. Doing the same with the squat also makes more sense. And would increase the rate of force development at the end, making it an effective and appropriate exercise for sprint starts. > , > > The phenomenon of slowing down as you execute the bench or squat > are perfect for the application of bands and chains. The > application of these tools make for a more specific sporting > adaptation as it allows the athlete to drive through the lift with > out the inhibition of slowing it down at end of ROM. > > I would think for a shot putter that push presses and incline > presses with bands and or chains would be more the order than a > bench press. > > Damien Chiappini > Pittsbirgh,PA. > > ======================================= > Re: Specificity > > > > There is an excellent presentation in the Supertraining files on > > specificity. I'll let you figure out the difference from that. > > Miimicry > > is pretty much never good as it ignores basic tenets of specificity > > and > > transfer and instead simply attempts to add resistance to a movement > > that 'mimics' the sporting movement. At best this isn't really going > > to > > do any good and at worse it may cause some neural confusion. > > > > Squatting is the more efficient exercise for base strength. > 'Transfer > > better' is a bit of a loaded question, since there are far more > > variables than simply exercise selection which determine that. > > However, > > a unilateral exercise simply isn't necessary and by definition would > > take twice as long to perform. > > > > And yes, you have to transfer. Zatsiorsky makes a statement > something > > like 'the transfer of strength to speed is of exceeding difficulty' > > in > > the Science and Practice of Strength Training, which anyone coaching > > sprinters can attest to. > > > > Personally, if I could only do one exercise for all athletes for > > sprinting I think it would be the clean. And my preferred method of > > transfer would be sprints and sprint starts. Because specificity > does > > rule and if you want to run faster - than run fast. > > > > As did say, with more than one exercise I would probably perform > > squats, > > cleans or high pulls, glute-ham-gastroc raises and jumps of various > > types. And, of course, I would sprint. > > > > ============ ========= ========= === Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 Good question. I'm not sure that hills are even a good idea for a real sprinter. I'd love to hear what some actual coaches have to say about this. Or someone like Dr. Yessis. Those people going to seminars with the great instructors could perhaps include this type of question? LEE ROBILLARD wrote: > Would stair running be an exercise that would be transferable to > sprinting as they are much the same type of movement? > > Lee Robillard > Mississauga Ont. > Canada > > ================================== > > Hobman <kshobman@... <mailto:kshobman%40sasktel.net>> wrote: > I would agree that the push press and incline are better and I do > like the idea of chains and bands. > > Good idea! made an excellent comment in his reply that the > weight room is for base strength and using chains in these exercise > makes good sense for base strength and developing an explosive pattern. > > Doing the same with the squat also makes more sense. And would > increase the rate of force development at the end, making it an > effective and appropriate exercise for sprint starts. > > > > > , > > > > The phenomenon of slowing down as you execute the bench or squat > > are perfect for the application of bands and chains. The > > application of these tools make for a more specific sporting > > adaptation as it allows the athlete to drive through the lift with > > out the inhibition of slowing it down at end of ROM. > > > > I would think for a shot putter that push presses and incline > > presses with bands and or chains would be more the order than a > > bench press. > > > > Damien Chiappini > > Pittsbirgh,PA. > > > > ======================================= > > Re: Specificity > > > > > > There is an excellent presentation in the Supertraining files on > > > specificity. I'll let you figure out the difference from that. > > > Miimicry > > > is pretty much never good as it ignores basic tenets of specificity > > > and > > > transfer and instead simply attempts to add resistance to a movement > > > that 'mimics' the sporting movement. At best this isn't really going > > > to > > > do any good and at worse it may cause some neural confusion. > > > > > > Squatting is the more efficient exercise for base strength. > > 'Transfer > > > better' is a bit of a loaded question, since there are far more > > > variables than simply exercise selection which determine that. > > > However, > > > a unilateral exercise simply isn't necessary and by definition would > > > take twice as long to perform. > > > > > > And yes, you have to transfer. Zatsiorsky makes a statement > > something > > > like 'the transfer of strength to speed is of exceeding difficulty' > > > in > > > the Science and Practice of Strength Training, which anyone coaching > > > sprinters can attest to. > > > > > > Personally, if I could only do one exercise for all athletes for > > > sprinting I think it would be the clean. And my preferred method of > > > transfer would be sprints and sprint starts. Because specificity > > does > > > rule and if you want to run faster - than run fast. > > > > > > As did say, with more than one exercise I would probably perform > > > squats, > > > cleans or high pulls, glute-ham-gastroc raises and jumps of various > > > types. And, of course, I would sprint. > > > > > > ============ ========= ========= === > > __._ -- Hobman Saskatoon, CANADA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2008 Report Share Posted February 22, 2008 , One of thing that I do is perform jump squats with bands attached and bench press throw with chains attached. Bench press throw with chains work much better than the bands. It is hard to propel the bar into the air with bands. I also perform jump squats and bench press throws without the bands and chains. I am sure the training effect is somewhat different with the bands/chans vs no bands/chains. However, I am not sure what the difference might be. In your opinion, what would the differences be? Thanks, Kenny Croxdale Orange, CA ========================================= Re: > Specificity > > If you work a muscle through a full ROM and increase it's ability > to produce force by 10% you will increase it's ability to produce > force in a partial ROM by the same amount. If you increase a > partial ROM there is > little transfer outside the ROM worked. So why would you work a > partial movement at the expense of a full movement for base > strength?The bench press does not work the muscles in the same way > and I probably wouldn't use either the bench press or the bent-over > row to train a shot-putter. I might consider using a push/press > while standing and I'm sure I would use some kettlebell and > medicine ball exercises, but I would have to think about that a bit > and analyze the shot put biomechanics. Think about where the force > vector is in a shot put and in a bench press. Hint - you are lying > on a bench.So yes. The bench press is mimicry. The biggest problem > is how the force is created by pinning your shoulders on the bench > and the fact that you are slowing down at the end of the bench > press rather than speeding up. I'd be far more likely to have the > shot putter 'pressing' or throwing a medicine ball against a > vertical wall for strength training the upper body musculature, > simply to address those t > > 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.