Bodybuilding
 
Gymnastic on rings for better body
1 2 Next Last
 

saleb
Level

Join date: Feb 2011
Posts: 23

Starting with gymnastic is similar to start walking as a child. First, you look at it and see some funny positions easy looking to hold. Then you try it and appear like a toddler lying on his back waving arms in space and crying.

It is not easy to do gymnastic, gymnastic is mean bitch, but when you are patient enough and give her some passion you can benefit very well from it. Strength and flexibility of muscles and tendons as well as functional strength (the real one!), stability, core, locomotion and mobility as well as muscle volume and overal aesthetic look. That is why gymnastic is worth doing!

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

melanieamber12
Level 1

Join date: Feb 2010
Posts: 877

Awesome work. Good for you. That shit is terribly difficult.
I do it for fun, and to show off in the gym.
But I can't do any of what you are doing!

_Mel

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

hungry4more
Level 2

Join date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6874

Assuming that's you in the vid...if so, nice work, you seem to have it down pretty well.

Please don't perpetuate that whole "functional strength" fallacy though, it won't get you a positive reaction from most advanced people. I really hate to even say that, but I don't understand why people feel the need to "justify" what they're doing by throwing that stuff in there. If what you're doing is truly impressive, your actions will speak for themselves, you won't need to brag about why it's better than what everyone else is doing.

Again though, good job.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Swolegasm
Level

Join date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1312

Well done, thats pretty impressive.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

want2getlean
Level

Join date: Nov 2011
Posts: 581

saleb wrote:
functional strength (the real one!)



What's non-functional strength?

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

saleb
Level

Join date: Feb 2011
Posts: 23

hungry4more wrote:
Assuming that's you in the vid...if so, nice work, you seem to have it down pretty well.

Please don't perpetuate that whole "functional strength" fallacy though, it won't get you a positive reaction from most advanced people. I really hate to even say that, but I don't understand why people feel the need to "justify" what they're doing by throwing that stuff in there. If what you're doing is truly impressive, your actions will speak for themselves, you won't need to brag about why it's better than what everyone else is doing.

Again though, good job.


Yes its me...I personally hate term "functional strength" due to his over-using today, but really in this gymnastic shit I feel that. Its much more different to perform handstand pushup than a bodyweight military press - or to do a back lever - you use muscles in ways you never used them so if there is only strength you cant do it, there must first come functionality - you must be able to use all that muscles one by one and tendons too to build a solid base from that your are moving to positions. For example just for going from L-sit to shoulder stand you need to use you brachialis, triceps, rhomboids, delts, traps, abs, spine erektors and others to work particaly synergistically to hold your body stable but partially antagonistically to move your body up in the space.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

JayPierce
Level 1

Join date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3424

Definitely tough to pull off smoothly. Moving through all the joint angles like that will reveal any weak points in a hurry.

I've wanted a set of rings for a while now, but I have nowhere to put them. The ceiling in my gym is only a little over 7', so I can't even press with the 45's on the bar.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

ground control
Level 1

Join date: Mar 2012
Posts: 63

hungry4more wrote:
Assuming that's you in the vid...if so, nice work, you seem to have it down pretty well.

Please don't perpetuate that whole "functional strength" fallacy though, it won't get you a positive reaction from most advanced people. I really hate to even say that, but I don't understand why people feel the need to "justify" what they're doing by throwing that stuff in there. If what you're doing is truly impressive, your actions will speak for themselves, you won't need to brag about why it's better than what everyone else is doing.

Again though, good job.

Damn right! On every point.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

IFlashBack
Level 1

Join date: Feb 2011
Posts: 909

I heard Branch Warren does his levers and crosses real sloppy, but he makes gains anyways.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

ronald1919
Level 1

Join date: Jul 2010
Posts: 271

I tried rings for about 4 months
gave me rosacea and little muscle gain (might have lost some actually)
true story

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Anus Bleach
Level

Join date: Sep 2011
Posts: 269

If "functional training" is so great then how come most athletes (real athletes, not crossfitters) prefer to lift weights instead of doing some fancy bodyweight or stability ball shit? Their real functional training comes from doing sport specific stuff.

So unless you're a competitive gymnast, then flopping around on the rings will not make you anymore "functional" then someone who just lifts weights and does some basic conditioning.

Not insulting your abilities btw, only your choice of words.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

JayPierce
Level 1

Join date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3424

IFlashBack wrote:
I heard Branch Warren does his levers and crosses real sloppy, but he makes gains anyways.

Ooooooh. Nice thread cross-reference.

*e-knucks*

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

JayPierce
Level 1

Join date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3424

ronald1919 wrote:
I tried rings for about 4 months
gave me rosacea and little muscle gain (might have lost some actually)
true story

How did you put them into your routine?

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

saleb
Level

Join date: Feb 2011
Posts: 23

Anus Bleach wrote:
If "functional training" is so great then how come most athletes (real athletes, not crossfitters) prefer to lift weights instead of doing some fancy bodyweight or stability ball shit? Their real functional training comes from doing sport specific stuff.

So unless you're a competitive gymnast, then flopping around on the rings will not make you anymore "functional" then someone who just lifts weights and does some basic conditioning.

Not insulting your abilities btw, only your choice of words.


In my point of view its similar to weightlifting. Most of the athletes (sprinters, hockey players, american football players, MMA fighters) put some principles of weightlifting into their training (they most often use power clean from hang) to build some "abilities" they need (in this case explosivness, whole body explosive projection and acceleration). They dont use whole weightlifting routines, they do not train 6x per week front squats and they not learn how to perform full clean and jerk. But they take the principles of weightlifting that are useful for them in this case same partional lifts (from hang, from blocks) and put them into they weight training.

And same it might be with gymnastics. Just to be sure we are talking about gymnastics on rings, on floor, on paralettes etc. with background in competitive gymnastics not about balancing on fitball or doin ostrich emu pose on bossu - that is not gymnastics. I am not advocate of anything called functional training, I am tryin to say that if something build strength that can be told "functional" that it is gymnastics.

So why athletes dont include gymnastics in their weight training if it is so good? Answer is just because they dont know about its benefits. As in the example with weightlifting its nonsense to do same things as professional gymnasts. But we can take some principles from their training that can be included in everyones training because of their power. As with weightlifting athletes take power clean from hang, from blocks, power snatch from hang, jumps etc., they may to learn how to hold some basic positions on rings, paralletes etc. such as L-sit, handstand, HSPU, back lever, iron cross etc. And by the way of learning them, gymnastics give them tremendous functional strength of back, abs and biceps. And strengthened their tendonds.

So while principles of weightlifting and powerlifting give athletes strength and explosivness of performance muscles: delts, pecs, triceps, hamstrings, calves and partialy quads - learning of gymnastics is here mostly for backs, core and biceps and tendonds - parts of body using to hold better body tension - where better ability to hold body in high tension means better background for doing weight lifts. Thats why if someone start with gymnastics - other lifts such as squat and deadlift goes up.

The real athletes these days dont do squats 5 sets per 10 reps in 60% zone, they do 8 sets of triples of squats with maximal force and velocity with weight near they maximum - this type of squating build functional strength (by sarcomere hypertrophy and high threshold motor units recruitment) while 5x10 build non functional strength (by sarcoplasmic hypertrophy). And same: doin bent over rows and biceps curls build nonfunctional strength of these muscles while microsocilating and functional and overcoming isometric in gymnastics exercices build functional strength in this muscles. And same it is with core and stability. Balancing on bossu do shit but balancing on one hand in handstand is royal way to control every muscle in your body to hold a balance.

It is not about doing just gymnastics - its about combination of weightlifting/powerlifting and gymnastics and sprints (for examples) to have overall functional physique.

There is video of me not doing just gymnastics:





and here is one of the best MMA fighters od all times George Saint Pierre and his very wise training of combination of weightlifting and gymnastics:)




  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

ronald1919
Level 1

Join date: Jul 2010
Posts: 271

JayPierce wrote:
ronald1919 wrote:
I tried rings for about 4 months
gave me rosacea and little muscle gain (might have lost some actually)
true story

How did you put them into your routine?


some moves at end of workout like ring pushups/flyes at the end of chest, cross/skin the cat at end of shoulders ect. and one day just for tougher moves like back/front lever. following Thibs tips mostly. I also had to reduce my lifting volume obviously.

at first it was addictive and fun. but as you progress the learning curve becomes too steep and there is no point going further unless u want to be gymnast. Besides, my face would turn bloody red at the end of back and front lever something that never happens to me when i lift heavy.

Apparently it helped CT bring up his back...but I never had problems activating my back with pullups and machine rows. my midsection got stronger but muscle wise I shrunk a bit.

overall nice for supplementing your workouts but shouldn't be an integral part. Throw in the fact that you have to carry it around and attach it which takes time...I would just stick to weights lol.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Anus Bleach
Level

Join date: Sep 2011
Posts: 269

saleb wrote:
- learning of gymnastics is here mostly for backs, core and biceps and tendonds - parts of body using to hold better body tension


You can easily and efficiently train those things with weights.


saleb wrote:
- where better ability to hold body in high tension means better background for doing weight lifts. Thats why if someone start with gymnastics - other lifts such as squat and deadlift goes up.



For an untrained individual maybe. I really doubt that a high level strength athlete, who knows his weaknesses and works on them, would benefit in any way from doing gymnastics.


saleb wrote:
The real athletes these days dont do squats 5 sets per 10 reps in 60% zone, they do 8 sets of triples of squats with maximal force and velocity with weight near they maximum - this type of squating build functional strength (by sarcomere hypertrophy and high threshold motor units recruitment) while 5x10 build non functional strength (by sarcoplasmic hypertrophy). And same: doin bent over rows and biceps curls build nonfunctional strength of these muscles while microsocilating and functional and overcoming isometric in gymnastics exercices build functional strength in this muscles. And same it is with core and stability.


looooooooooooooool nonfunctional strength

I'm done here

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

IFlashBack
Level 1

Join date: Feb 2011
Posts: 909

Ok first off I would like to say that I kind of hope that English is your second language.

Second, some of the statements are just wrong

"The real athletes these days dont do squats 5 sets per 10 reps in 60% zone, they do 8 sets of triples of squats with maximal force and velocity with weight near they maximum - this type of squating build functional strength (by sarcomere hypertrophy and high threshold motor units recruitment) while 5x10 build non functional strength (by sarcoplasmic hypertrophy). And same: doin bent over rows and biceps curls build nonfunctional strength of these muscles while microsocilating and functional and overcoming isometric in gymnastics exercices build functional strength in this muscles. And same it is with core and stability. Balancing on bossu do shit but balancing on one hand in handstand is royal way to control every muscle in your body to hold a balance."

Really, you think that a 5x10 at 60% routine will cause someone to not make any kind of myofibrilar hypertrophy? In the Boring but big routine in the JW 5/3/1, it is literally MADE for this purpose. He uses the 5/3/1 for strength and the boring but big for the hypertrophy, and this is a dude who played a lot of sports.

Are we even talking about the same thing here? I thought when you posted this on a BB forum you were talking about... you know bodybuilding. It seems (as I read your post for the second time) that you are focusing your idea for training for sports.

And seriously, what the PHUCK is micro-oscillations? I'm pretty sure thats the technology that my electric toothbrush uses. Seriously I have never heard a top level bodybuilder talk about how they are trying to micro oscilate the muscle.

Overall, functional training is just shit that makes you better at your sport. For example, when I was a pitcher I had tight hips, foam rolling was functional for me. For me, no weight or ring was gonna make me throw as hard as just going out on the field and practicing the movement pattern of pitching everyday day.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

yolo84
Level

Join date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1436

None of this BS should be in this forum.

OP maybe you should train your brain to be more functional.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

A.Lurker
Level

Join date: Nov 2011
Posts: 167

It's ages since i last heard Enya

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

Anus Bleach
Level

Join date: Sep 2011
Posts: 269

saleb wrote:
doin bent over rows and biceps curls build nonfunctional strength of these muscles while microsocilating and functional and overcoming isometric in gymnastics exercices build functional strength in this muscles.


Just to drive the point home about how utterly clueless you are. Discus throwers have been doing curls since forever because it makes them throw farther. Strength athletes, nfl players, wrestlers, etc have been doing bent rows since forever because it makes them better at their sport.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

A.Lurker
Level

Join date: Nov 2011
Posts: 167

microscowhatthefucking

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

StateOfPsychosis
Level 5

Join date: Aug 2008
Posts: 579

I picked up some rings a while back and have a new found appreciation for stuff like this, mainly because it is hard as fuck haha. I definitively find myself having fun while using the rings, they are something new and a whole different kind of challenging. Plus they woke up my lats which has lead to a huge jump in back strength and also my core feels a lot stronger.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

JayPierce
Level 1

Join date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3424

A.Lurker wrote:
microscowhatthefucking

Your avatar reminds me of George Burns. True Story.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

louiek
Level

Join date: Nov 2011
Posts: 639

I made some oly rings. I hung them from my powerrack and started doing my pushups and planks and stuff on them. Developed my abs and stability, but that's about it. Anything that utilizes stability is great for extra workouts, though, and I like doing gymnast moves when I can. I don't believe it really helps me strength or size, but I do think it helps my skill with bodyweight movements.

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
 

saleb
Level

Join date: Feb 2011
Posts: 23

IFlashBack wrote:
Ok first off I would like to say that I kind of hope that English is your second language.

Second, some of the statements are just wrong

"The real athletes these days dont do squats 5 sets per 10 reps in 60% zone, they do 8 sets of triples of squats with maximal force and velocity with weight near they maximum - this type of squating build functional strength (by sarcomere hypertrophy and high threshold motor units recruitment) while 5x10 build non functional strength (by sarcoplasmic hypertrophy). And same: doin bent over rows and biceps curls build nonfunctional strength of these muscles while microsocilating and functional and overcoming isometric in gymnastics exercices build functional strength in this muscles. And same it is with core and stability. Balancing on bossu do shit but balancing on one hand in handstand is royal way to control every muscle in your body to hold a balance."

Really, you think that a 5x10 at 60% routine will cause someone to not make any kind of myofibrilar hypertrophy? In the Boring but big routine in the JW 5/3/1, it is literally MADE for this purpose. He uses the 5/3/1 for strength and the boring but big for the hypertrophy, and this is a dude who played a lot of sports.

Are we even talking about the same thing here? I thought when you posted this on a BB forum you were talking about... you know bodybuilding. It seems (as I read your post for the second time) that you are focusing your idea for training for sports.

And seriously, what the PHUCK is micro-oscillations? I'm pretty sure thats the technology that my electric toothbrush uses. Seriously I have never heard a top level bodybuilder talk about how they are trying to micro oscilate the muscle.

Overall, functional training is just shit that makes you better at your sport. For example, when I was a pitcher I had tight hips, foam rolling was functional for me. For me, no weight or ring was gonna make me throw as hard as just going out on the field and practicing the movement pattern of pitching everyday day.


Yes English is my second language, so sorry for bad form of my text. Its for sure that 5x10 scheme does A LOT for hypertrophy but these days we already know that there are two types of hypertrophy - functional and nonfunctional (google it). athletes are going for functional, where are not as much muscle gains as in classic bodybuilding non-functional hypertrophy but every ounce of muscles gained by this type of training is capable of produce high amounts of power.

Yes I was writing about including gymnastic for better performance as a part of weight training of athletes, but that was just reaction on users Anus Bleach text about functionality. If someone asks about aplying gymnastics for bodybuilding I answer that.

Btw that reaction abou micro-oscilation is kinda funny:D Its term that I heard from Christian Thibaudeau here on T-Nation in Livespill - In Indigo2 project they experiment a lot with gymnastics for body performance and composition changes and talked about microsocilating in muscles (very short explosive movements in muscles) when you are trying to hold some position for a while which is very nonstable. And by this leads to adaptation in body by better HTMR recruitment and building a new muscles.

And once again I am not talking about what is and what is not functional training I am talking about gymnastics (and weightlifting) as a functional strength (or functional hypertrophy as it is called more often) builder tools

  Post New Thread | Reply | Quote | Report
1 2 3 Next Last