My Favourite Assistance Exercises
-
30-09-2022 11:50pm#1
My Favourite Assistance Exercises
Assistance exercises are those done for three main reasons:
- Build muscle
- Build work capacity
- Provide movement variation
Basically, it's the stuff that fills in the gaps left by the big barbell stuff. I don't think there are any must-do exercises, but the following are some of my personal favourite based on my experience training myself and others:
Push-ups
I've been doing push-ups for 13 years now. It hards to argue with the lack of equipment needed to do these. If you're a beginner, these would cover your bases for both pushing muscle and strength.
If you're more advanced and can easily bust out 20+ of these, then they are going to be more useful for gaining muscle and/or as part of a circuit.
You can add weight, elevated your hands, elevate your feet etc. to make them harder.
The reality is, anybody could build some great upper body mass with just push-ups.
Prowler/Sled Pushes
I can't think of many exercises that get so much done at once.
The prowler will build your legs and your lungs, and can be a nice way of getting a lot of movement through the hips.
A test I like to have people try is pushing half their bodyweight for about 2 minutes. Being unable to do this means you're either weak, out of shape, or both.
Chins
My favourite pulling exercise. Like the push-up, these require little equipment to get a huge stimulus from. I'm a big fan of peppering these in between other exercises so that you can do lots of sets (6-12) of few reps (1-4).
Of course they can be weighted as well. And you should be mixing the grips up regularly.
If you get strong at chins, you're gonna get big arms and a big upper back.
Reverse Hyper
These are not super common machines. Even in gyms that do have them, most people just seem to use them as a **** coffee table.
They have no idea what they're overlooking. This thing can absolutely smoke your posterior chain muscles and get your back strong as hell.
If you don't have a reverse hyper, the 45 degree back raise is another solid option.
Walking Lunges
Far less hassle to jump into than the overrated Bulgarian split squat. If you're trying to build your legs, you should be doing these on lower body day. Work up to doing them weighted for long ass sets. I'm talking 30+ strides. Everything will get huge. Just remember to treat them as assistance. They're NOT a main exercise.
Dumbbell Rows
This is an unpopular opinion but, most people short-change their strength and mass gains by trying to make this exercise look 'perfect'.
The reality is that if you load up a heavy enough weight, every row is eventually going to require some amount of heaving to get the weight moving. It doesn't matter, you'll still get loads of work through your lats and upper back, and this will build the other lifts tremendously. Try avoid straps if you can. The grip gains from doing dumbbell rows will come in handy (excuse the pun).
Dips
The big brother of push-ups. Dips are great but you've got to come to them with the ability to do about 10 solid reps - otherwise they'll eat into recovery, and maybe get your hurt. If you can only do a few, then you need more push-ups and main lift work. Or you can just use a band.
Regardless, this more than anything else has built my upper body. I love this exercise, and being able to do them weighted has made a big difference for my chest.
Curls
This might come as a surprise, but curls are actually pretty damn useful. Not only do they grow your arms, but they carry over to all your other pulling exercises. Plus when they get heavy, you'll get a pretty good ab workout if you focus on saying super stiff in the core.
2
Comments
-
I think this is probably my favourite of the articles you've shared.
There's nothing wrong with the others at all, but I think is the one that is informative for beginners but also speaks to people who have been training longer, and either opens a discussion or corrects some misconceptions.
Some general thoughts on points raised:-
"There are no must-do exercises" is definitely a maxim I follow. There are equipment limitations or specific genuine issues that will rule out a particular assistance or accessory movement for someone, and there's no reason they can't substitute in something that is the 'same but different'. I do think beginners need to exercise a tiny bit of caution here, there's a rudimentary understanding of what muscle groups are being targeted, but equally the level of knowledge required to substitute is not as great as sometimes suggested. I know people who insist on doing things like DB flyes even though they aggravate their shoulders. A standing cable flye at a different angle, or a DB floor flye, or a pec dec machine might be completely pain free, but they're slaves to what's written down on their program. Same deal with lying ez curl bar tricep extensions. If they hurt your elbows or shoulders then do them with DBs, or do some other of the dozens of tricep extensions out there.
That said, while there are no "must-do" exercises, I do think it's reasonable to say there are staples, and as you point out things like push-ups and chin or pull-up variations are hard to beat.
I don't share your love of the reverse hyper, I had one and sold it. I really wanted to believe what I'd read, and the testimonies of people who found benefit in them (Not just for low back health, but as a training movement), but I fall into the naysayer camp at this stage. I think this was one of the few things Louie possibly was probably more wrong than right about.
Dumbbell rows... Love them. But as a movement they're nearly an umbrella term... So versatile. Even using a hex DB depending on the position you row from, arm angle, and to where, and it's more like several different back exercises. It might not matter which one a beginner learns and sticks with and gets strong on, but it's handy as an intermediate to know the differences.
As for curls, I agree they are actually an underrated overall upper body mass builder. Even if you do them seated with your back against a bench, or flat against a wall, and take as much body english out as possible, when they get heavy they are going to challenge more than just the brachialis or bicep brachii that are the main targets of a curl variation, depending on which one someone does.
Post edited by Black Sheep on1 -
I was going to list "my favourite" accessory movements, but really I don't have that many favourites.
In general terms I think the key is something that you can progressively load for as long as possible, and which you can perform well and pain-free for a long time. That does sometimes rule out certain movements.
If I had to pick favourites at the moment, that people might not be that aware of...
Meadows row (in place of DB row and similar)... John Meadows has a youtube video showing the execution. The reason I like these is that they only require a barbell, plates and corner (You don't even need a landmine), and they tick all of my boxes mentioned above, particularly the ability to continue loading with small plates as needed. The meadows row offers some extra stability that makes it a good choice in hypertrophy programmes.
Rack chins... A favourite of Dante Trudel. Set up an adjustable bench with the bench at an angle facing you, and stand in the rack facing out. Set up a barbell a little above your head or otherwise at a height where you can hang off it with your body piked, and feet resting on the top of the back of the bench. Now perform pull ups or chin ups. The bench unloads the bottom of the movement and provided you try to keep it strict you have a vertical pulling movement where you will be able to perform a considerable amount of reps. If I want to do a high volume of vertical pulling and I'm at home without access to a lat pulldown, then this is what I'll do instead of banded pull-ups or band pull-downs. You can also load these if you want, with a dip belt or similar.
I also think there's a lot of good niche accessory stuff out there that you can't suggest for the general population but has really specific applications for particular people. For people in sports where they need ankle stability then you can use a tib bar to do circles. For runners you've again got the tib bar or you can just do bodyweight tibialis raises for high reps in the warm-up (Even casual runners can benefit from these). And for grapplers you've got direct neck training via neck harness or neck extensions and timed holds off a bench, and also direct trap training... Regular shrugs, kelso shrugs and overhead plate raises.
1 -
Thanks for your thoughts!
Interesting you didn’t get much out of hypers. That being said, at first I went far too heavy on them. I got the most out of it when I did them super strict with light weight or even just bodyweight for sets of 20+. Taking bodyweight to failure on it is brutal but also not that fatiguing. Made my back feel great and very durable.
In general I think there are two mistakes people make with assistance work.
The first is that they get too wrapped up in it and start majoring in minors. We all know the guy who wants to perfect the mind muscle connection on his leg extensions, but still hasn’t back squatted his bodyweight.
The other mistake, ironically, is not pushing the assistance work hard enough. For example, my chest has been a weak point for ages, but I’d just fart around with some pec flyes every now and then. Since I started actually smashing those weekly and trying to really tax the pecs, things have started noticeably improving.
1 -
My favourite and terrifying is a sled workout 1min rounds 20ish on balance off, I was doing 30 rounds and adding weight each session, decided to change it recently to 15 20 25 30 so it doesnt become a chore. My goal was to hit a point where I cant stay on my toes. After that am planning to halve the weight and chip away at the time to do the 30. Thought it would be a good work capacity builder. Brutal on my cardio
On the topic of capacity building I saw one workout was to do as many reps as possible in 40 min at 55% of you 1RM of you lift of choice , doing them in blocks of 3 until you are down to singles by the end. I had started doing this with the trap bar but using a lower %, I could see progress but I wanted to do the sled in preference, might give it a try next year.
Im doing a couple of nice ones in the Smith machine, A weighted lunge , and a weighted step up on 2 bumper plates (foot flat). Its a convenient way to do the exercises and to add weight.
A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer
0 -
Nothing wrong with exposing yourself to insanity every now and then!
0 -
Advertisement
-
I like most of those. (No exp of reverse hyper).
Press ups, Lunges, Dips are assistance I’ve occasionally used.
Rows, Curls, Chins are assistance I always (and currently) use.
Prowler is just horrible resistance-cardio.
Current favourite assistance-ish lift is;
Turkish Get-Up
Well known, rarely used. Probably because people try them out at a low weight and write them off as too easy. But increase the load until they are “hard” and there’s nowhere to hide.
Pressing, hinging, lunging, core strength, shoulder stability, mobility. It has a lot of requirements. And where and how you fail gives feedback on where you’re weak.
If you can do a set of TGUs with 1/2 your bodyweight. You are strong imo.
(Although I wonder if the typical IFBB Pro could do that?)
1 -
Just my 2 cents but tbh many of those are the reasons why I'm not a fan of the TGU. 😂
I'd agree that they work loads of things at once, but I see that as a con, in that nothing is really getting trained has hard as it could be. Though I think exercises like that are fine for mobility or as a conditioning circuit, as the goal isn't strength or muscle in that context.
RE: your 1/2 bodyweight standard - I have friends who can do one with half their bodyweight, but ironically none of them needed to train the get up to do that. They just have really strong squats and overhead presses. Whereas you could train yourself to do a 1/2 bwt get up and still have a pretty sh*t squat and press (I've seen this too). Which I personally think says a lot about where a TGU sits in the hierarchy. Hence I see very few big strong people (like IFBB pros) doing them.
0 -
Respectfully disagree.
Yes it hits loads of things, without maximally targeting most. Bit it’s a a secondary lift. That’s only a criticism if somebody was only doing that lift. Like how only chins does nothing for your squat.
I’d argue that shoulder stability is being trained pretty hard. Overhead carry’s are the only thing that matches it.
Though I think exercises like that are fine for mobility or as a conditioning circuit, as the goal isn't strength or muscle in that context.
Not every exercise has to be 100% dedicated to your prime goal. I see plenty of people that are strong, but have crap mobility. With better mobility they could have better overall fitness - obvious some only care about single aspects.
RE: your 1/2 bodyweight standard - I have friends who can do one with half their bodyweight, but ironically none of them needed to train the get up to do that. They just have really strong squats and overhead presses.
It was a standard for being strong, you said they were really strong. They presumably had to train to get strong squats and presses. It shouldn’t be surprising that there is carry over. I don’t see the irony tbh.
Whereas you could train yourself to do a 1/2 bwt get up and still have a pretty sh*t squat and press (I've seen this too).
Slightly skeptical of that. At least in regards to the press. I can’t see how somebody can do the TGU with 1/2BW locked out overhead and not have at least a decent 1AOHP.
they could probably do it and neglect their squat. But I feel that a criticism of neglecting squats. You could train chins and curls like crazy and still have a crap press and squat FWIW.
Hence I see very few big strong people (like IFBB pros) doing them.
they are training specifically for size. it it’s not really conducive to that goal so I’m not surprised it’s not a popular BB lift. BBs are not exactly known for their mobility work.
The question was if they could do it given they’re so much heavier.
0 -
That’s only a criticism if somebody was only doing that lift. Like how only chins does nothing for your squat.
That's a false equivalency though, because the goal of a chin-up is not to train your legs. But it is excellent at what it's designed for - which is developing upper pulling strength and mass.
The TGU on the other hand claims to train legs, shoulders and most everything - except I just don't see what it's bringing to the table that's all that compelling when I have limited training time and energy to use for my primarily goal of strength and muscle. Someone who with other goals mightn't care about these details. According to what you said:
Pressing, hinging, lunging, core strength, shoulder stability, mobility. It has a lot of requirements. And where and how you fail gives feedback on where you’re weak.
If you can do a set of TGUs with 1/2 your bodyweight. You are strong imo.
I think there are better ways of training all the above, that's all. If I want mobility I just do 5-10 mins of dedicated stuff I'm bad at.
If they work for you though then by all means. 🤙
0 -
The TGU is a really high skill and low stability movement. I think it's better as a *display* of strength and mobility together than a way to train strength and mobility.
That high skill element is why I bet, yes, a lot of otherwise strong people might do a bad job of it or even fail on their first few tries.
1 -
Advertisement
-
I don't think any one claims the TGU trains you like in the way squats do, or well they shouldn't. I certainly don't consider it to do that. It's using your full body, but the load on legs is pretty low. That's a given consider we're talking about is fractions of BW rather than multiples of.
I just don't see what it's bringing to the table that's all that compelling when I have limited training time and energy to use for my primarily goal of strength and muscle
A lot of people who focus on strength and muscle do so by focusing on the big PL lifts, or the classic BB beach lifts. As a result they are pretty dysfunctional imo. I see people all the time who are big and/or strong but move pretty badly. Continuing to maximise strength and size doesn't help. If they are strong enough to do a TGU to a reasonable load, but can't do it, then they have an issue imo.
If people only measure their ability by their max bench or squat, it's not going to help them much. Ditto if somebody is a competitive bodybuilder. I'd rather improve functionality. To me there is little point getting stronger/bigger if you can't utilize that strength.
If somebody is a elite weightlifter with mobility out the window. Then sure, they may max a TGU off the bat and would benefit little from training them. But they'd also benefit little for most conventional training. The benefit in my view is for people who can't do them - as there must be a reason.
I think there are better ways of training all the above, that's all. If I want mobility I just do 5-10 mins of dedicated stuff I'm bad at.
For leg and shoulder strength obvious you should be training a squat variation and a press variation. Core strength can be done a number of ways (but people generally suck at active core strength). But curious what you choice would be to train shoulder stability and/or loaded mobility better? As above overhead carries feel similar to me.
Most people ideas of doing 5 mins of mobility is some pretty useless stretching. Occasionally means a good warm up. But I rarely see people with bad mobility doing strength work to improve, rather that work around it. For example, for a long time my squats were slightly high, and I excused it on poor mobility. But it was also because I was chasing bigger barbell numbers and excusing by depth. Switching to a deeper, lighter squat and working in that range has done far more for my mobility and usability of strength in that range that chasing the bigger low bar numbers.
If they work for you though then by all means. 🤙
Absolutely. The above it based on my priorities. Others will have their their own set.
0 -
Agree and Disagree. As I said to Cill, you definitely want to be training you presses and squats. Which will do more for raw strength. To me TGU is a means to utilise that. But the stability also requires also strong stablising muscles is ROMs that you might not otherwise use.
There is definitely a skill element. Every lift with technique is a skill to a degree. And I agree that is a good reason somebody otherwise strong enough might fail off the bat - they simply lack the movement skill. But on the other had, if somebody learns the move, and can do lots of reps with 16-20kg, but they fail when they try with 32-40kg. That indicates to me that it's not a skill failure. But at the same time, I appreciate that if somebosy works from 20kg to 40kg, they won't have gotten twice as strong.
0 -
'Dysfunctional' is not a term I'm a fan of tbh. It tends to create a lot of fear around movement and it's not something based in any kind of science. It seems to reside within an entirely unsupported idea of what is 'good/bad' movement, mostly used by hack PTs to sell their wares. Powerlifters and bodybuilders are bad at heavy turkish get ups not because they're 'dysfunctional', but because nothing about their sport has anything to do with getting off the floor with a kettlebell in one hand. So 'functionality' is task specific. It'd be like being expecting a gymnast to deadlift triple bodyweight.
As for the shoulder stability, I think pushing and pulling covers that pretty well. For example, I tried a TGU cold yesterday for the craic and I managed one with 35kg, which is 40% of my bwt. I don't do any specific stability exercises. I would think few more weeks of practice and I'd do half bodyweight.
Overall I do kind of get what you mean though. Yes there are some basic movements that most people would find benefit them. Reaching fully overhead, lunging down, etc are all 'functional' for day to day life at least. Doing TGUs is one way of approaching this for sure. I just prefer to do basic strength stuff, and then fill in the gaps with accessories that are more suited to also gaining strength and muscle. (E.g. an overhead press and a lunge).
Post edited by Cill94 on0 -
Exactly this. Yes, strong people will be decent at it. But that doesn't mean it's a great tool to get to 'strong'. Much harder to 'skill' your way into a bodyweight overhead press or double bwt squat. That requires years of significant strength and muscle adaptations.
0 -
I wouldnt even class an OHP as an accessory , though clearly not everyone does them based on observation
A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer
1 -
Yeah I use barbell press as a main lift. DB or KB as an accessory. All of them criminally under-utilised due to silly claims around shoulder health.
1 -
'Dysfunctional' is not a term I'm a fan of tbh. It tends to create a lot of fear around movement and it's not something based in any kind of science. It seems to reside within an entirely unsupported idea of what is 'good/bad' movement, mostly used by hack PTs to sell their wares.
I think its more just English than a scientific definition. If somebody is missing some expected function, they are 'dysfunctional'. You might not frame it that way with a client, for risk for freaking them out. But we're speaking openly here. The baseline function might also be variable based on the situation. I'm sure plenty of hacks butcher all sorts of idea to flog something. But the idea of mobility screening/tests is not remotely hack science imo. A simple example might be the ability to touch your toes or sit in a squat. Not necessary by any means, but very closely related to injury risk and performance.
Powerlifters and bodybuilders are bad at turkish get ups not because they're 'dysfunctional', but because nothing about their sport has anything to do with getting off the floor with a kettlebell in one hand.
Nothing about their sport has anything to do with bicep curls, yet I bet they can do them pretty well. If they have more than enough strength to do a move, but cannot. There is something missing. t's not like we're talking about doing the splits, the bar is pretty low.
So 'functionality' is task specific. It'd be like being expecting a gymnast to deadlift triple bodyweight.
No really a fair comparison. As you're adding a strength/performance requirement. Not being able to run is dysfunctional, not being able to run a 4min mile is not. A gymnast can the movement required for a deadlift - and probably lifts a significant multiple of BW having never trained it.
As for the shoulder stability, I think pushing and pulling covers that pretty well. For example, I tried a TGU cold yesterday for the craic and I managed one with 35kg, which is 40% of my bwt. I don't do any specific stability exercises. I would think few more weeks of practice and I'd do half bodyweight.
I'd imagine you'd get there pretty quickly for sure. But I'd also imagine you are in far beyond typical condition for a ~88kg guy. For comparison purposes, what's your press? Press will obviously do a lot. As you have to stabilize the shoulder to press from it. But that's in a static position with everything locked down. TGU requires you to move through a ROM while stable, lock the shoulder, but move everything else. Similar to loaded carries like waiters/rack carries. Maintaining strength and stability while the rest of you is unstable.
My shoulders and pressing where the best while I was doing loaded carries. But haven't been able to train it for a over a year. Time to test it I guess.
0 -
But the idea of mobility screening/tests is not remotely hack science imo. Not necessary by any means, but very closely related to injury risk and performance.
It's actually not though. Have you read the literature on movement screens? They are a resounding failure at predicting injury. Better scores on them don't reduce injury risk. Probably because they're comprised of standards that aren't evidence-based to being with. Injury is far more complex than that unfortunately. Loading is the only thing that consistently shows up as important, and even that is a headache.
Nothing about their sport has anything to do with bicep curls, yet I bet they can do them pretty well. If they have more than enough strength to do a move, but cannot. There is something missing. t's not like we're talking about doing the splits, the bar is pretty low. No really a fair comparison. As you're adding a strength/performance requirement. Not being able to run is dysfunctional, not being able to run a 4min mile is not. A gymnast can the movement required for a deadlift - and probably lifts a significant multiple of BW having never trained it.
I think I probably made this point poorly. I'm specifically referring to your half bodyweight TGU thing. I'd fully agree that if a powerlifter can't get off the ground with like a light kettlebell in one hand then yeah, they're pretty fucked GPP wise. I'd be very surprised if that was the case for anyone outside someone who's strong but very overweight. And actually I sucked at curls when I first started doing them, despite having okay-ish main lifts. Empty bar curls fucked me up. Have them in their now to look like I lift.
But I'd also imagine you are in far beyond typical condition for a ~88kg guy. For comparison purposes, what's your press? Press will obviously do a lot. As you have to stabilize the shoulder to press from it.
Best I've done was 75 x1, weighing about 92kg. Haven't tested 1RM in like a year but can do 60kg x5. This is kind of my point though. If the TGU is a test of shoulder stability, but I can do a decent weight on one with only having done basic strength work, does that not indicated that stability is already covered pretty well by just doing normal push and pull work?
0 -
I used to be quite big into kettlebells, read a lot of Dan John, Pavel etc. It's interesting that although all of them still advocate the TGU as a movement, it's changed quite a bit over the years.
I forget who said it, could have been Dan John, but there's an argument as well that doing a half TGU gets you 80% of the benefits of the TGU and saves a lot of time. By the time you get to one knee, the KB is already overhead and hopefully stabilised. Standing up tall and back down again is the point in the movement where there is the least resistance / challenge going on.
I have done TGUs with 32kgs in the relatively recent past, but I don't think I've ever attempted it with my 40kg KB. I've jerked that KB overhead and found that challenging enough. Not sure I want to risk cracking my skull open with a TGU at that weight. For reference, my best barbell press was 65kg at a BW of 88kg. I think fair to say I'm not drawing on any mad pressing strength... I still think it's mainly about knowing what lines to try to sit up on, how to organise your transitions between the positions, and then there's like a minimum buy-in of general shoulder and upper back strength and balance that lets you keep the weight stabilised overhead. Getting the weight overhead isn't really a test of pressing strength since most people assist the KB up there until their arm is straight with the offhand anyway.
If anyone has small kids, it is genuinely fun to do a TGU with them, provided they consent.
1 -
Wendler talks about how many people abandoned basic principles when kettlebells came on the scene. A new thing comes along every year and claims to do it all. But KBs, they are a handy tool. I like them for beginners to do deadlifts with and for assistance work. Bottoms up presses are good for teaching people how to stack their joints. Dan John was an adjunct professor on my Masters programme and he still preaches basic barbell lifts as the main thing to focus on. Lovely guy to boot.
And yeah I think just doing the first part of a TGU would make a lot more sense. Abs are usually the limiting factor in that exercise and that's where they're maximally challenged.
0 -
Advertisement
-
Yeah Dan John seems like a cool guy. Loved his book NEVER LET GO.
1 -
Farmers Walks surely deserve a mention based on the three criteria mentioned in the OP.
Assistance exercises are those done for three main reasons:
- Build muscle
- Build work capacity
- Provide movement variation
0 -
What do you reckon? this guy did 214 reps at 315 freedom units (143KG or 55%1RM) in 40 min. When I did it for about 2 months my capacity for that exercise did increase , I went from about 130 reps up to 180 mostly lower than 55%, I was going to target 200 and leave it there and focus on increasing the weight, but decided to stick with the sled for this year.
Curious how building capacity can be framed, given that the outputs might be fuzzy, do you want to do more vol in other workouts without feeling too exhausted, it contributing to max effort lifts, or improving performance in another cardio related exercise?
A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer
0 -
It always comes back to what the goal is. Not sure what that is with this approach? If it's just general health, then by all means. He's lifting some weight and getting his heart rate up. Bad approach for someone more concerned with strength and muscle, but maybe that's not his gig.
0 -
Personally not a big fan of them but I know some people love them.
0 -
Im.sorry, bulgarians are over rated??
Im sorry... what? You like dips (and curls) but think bulgarians are overrated!! Bulgarians are probably better for your shoulders than dips
Theyre phenomenal exercises. Bulgarians not the other 2
0 -
-
Apologies for the delay wasn't about for a bit. Don't want to drag the conversation out unnecessarily. But TBH, this has been the msot active/interesting tread about here in a long time. Other that SpamBots waffling about vitamins.
It's actually not though. Have you read the literature on movement screens? They are a resounding failure at predicting injury. Better scores on them don't reduce injury risk. Probably because they're comprised of standards that aren't evidence-based to being with. Injury is far more complex than that unfortunately. Loading is the only thing that consistently shows up as important, and even that is a headache.
I wouldn't have expected movement screen to predict injury. Does anyone claim that? I haven't got any literature to back it up, but from experience I'd expect a high sore on a movement screen to corelated to improved performance. Injury I'd expect to occur, among other areas, more often a higher levels of intensity, even where people are athletes moving and perform better.
I think I probably made this point poorly. I'm specifically referring to your half bodyweight TGU thing. I'd fully agree that if a powerlifter can't get off the ground with like a light kettlebell in one hand then yeah, they're pretty fucked GPP wise.
The 1/2 BW is an arbitrary target. The point it is to be somewhat heavy so as require good form and strength. A strong person could probably compensate for bad alignment with strength. By holding a 16kg at an angle and doing the rough move. If its heavy enough to be slightly difficult, it should expose and weak points. I should probably stress that it's not a movement that I'd be grinding reps. As with carries, the point is to stop when the movement breaksdown not failure.
I recall Dan John talking about doing one with a glass of water as a test. I like as a test too, if you spill it at the same point each time, it would suggest and weak point.
Best I've done was 75 x1, weighing about 92kg. Haven't tested 1RM in like a year but can do 60kg x5. This is kind of my point though. If the TGU is a test of shoulder stability, but I can do a decent weight on one with only having done basic strength work, does that not indicated that stability is already covered pretty well by just doing normal push and pull work?
There is more than one way to train any body part. You can have a strong chest with only bench press, doesn't means flies/press ups etc are redundant. The topic was assistance lifts, which essentially means inherently optional. Its not about if you need to do it, but its you'd have been better if you had. We can't tell that from current 1RM.
Press is definitely an important strength builder. But it think there are ways to lean, and grind out reps that are not great. I think TGU helps focus on stability, form and control.
Post edited by Mellor on0 -
I agree with ding a TGU as far as one knee (as opposed to just turkish sit ups) as that cover the key points for me.
Rolling up to an elbow. High Bridge. Alignment of joint/support and moving horizontal support to vertical support. Knee to standing is the easiest part. I'm happy to get more time in a loaded carry. But if pressed for time, I'll stop at the knee.
I have done TGUs with 32kgs in the relatively recent past, but I don't think I've ever attempted it with my 40kg KB. I've jerked that KB overhead and found that challenging enough. Not sure I want to risk cracking my skull open with a TGU at that weight. For reference, my best barbell press was 65kg at a BW of 88kg. I think fair to say I'm not drawing on any mad pressing strength... I still think it's mainly about knowing what lines to try to sit up on, how to organise your transitions between the positions,
My gym has a 40kg too. But its's a huge bulky one not a competition KB, so it's very awkward feeling in all positions. Even attempting to rack it was a bad idea. No idea where my press is not. Will let you know.
On the line in bold, the I think there is a huge carry over there, conceptually, to movement and framing in jiujitsu
I think them, but vary it by doing all sorts of carries.
Dan John is a big advocate for carries. From memory his list of gamechanging lifts are;
Bench press, Deadlift, Squat, Pullups, Loaded Carry, Getup
0 -
Advertisement
-
For sure an interesting topic.
Well you did say you think it should be closely related to injury and performance to be fair. The vast majority of the research published on movement screens is in relation to injury as that's what the likes of the FMS was primarily sold as.
But even if staying in the realm of performance, there are so many world class athletes that move outside the scope of what's considered 'optimal'. I'll attach some slides from a presentation I did on this topic.
They'd likely all fail the FMS or similar movement screens.
Could anyone seriously say with a straight face that Phelps would have won another gold medal if he'd just got a better FMS score? If this stuff mattered so much, we wouldn't see so many people make it to this level with such large deviations from 'optimal'.
I just think the whole idea is kind of farcical, and lacking in both academic and real-world support. There are certainly basic mvmt strategies that will help you in any sport, and these are the ones we see everyone at a high level use, but there's a lot of scope for individual variance as well.
0
