My Favourite Assistance Exercises

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119760140#Comment_119760140

Was thinking more about performance in terms of alignment, force production etc. Or people who get injured due to voluntary bad positioning. I certainly wouldn't hold up elite athletes as evidence of optimal for the general population. They are pushing their bodies to the limit for their sport, not for GPP or health. I also don't think athletic outliers are very good evidence for gen pop.

Using Phelps as the example, yup terrible posture. It's probably common in many sports that are very asymmetric. and it likely helped in his sport, I don't think it helps his body long term. FMS or any movement screening needs to be within the context of the person being assessed. It's not diagnostic, its a screen. If Phelps did a FMS, the outcome should have acknowledged why he was perhaps like that.

Lamar Gant had a medical condition that made deadlifts relatively easier. His 5x was not equal to an other persons. That's the sport of course. But it was due to the physical shape of his body. Not a movement he did. If somebody was pull a DL moving sideways like that they should probably be stopped immediately.

Valgus knee. Many elite runners have wonky movement. I actually think elite long distance running is very far from optimal. Valgus knee might be inconsequential for an elite runner. But doing that when squatting, of in a sport that loads the knee and you'll probably blow an MCL.

Cill94

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119760328#Comment_119760328

There's a lack of logical consistency here.

First you say movement screening should surely improve performance and injury. Then you say only performance. Then I show you examples of champion level performers who would fail those screens (of which there are many more), and now you say we can't look to them because they're genetic outliers. 😂 This is called shifting the goal posts.

Essentially it boils down to how adaptable you think the human body is. I think highly, given ample load and recovery. Greg Lehman's blog is what changed my mind on this issue (I used to be in kinesiopathological camp), and it has lots of interesting references.

https://www.greglehman.ca/blog/2019/1/30/the-wedge-that-divides-what-creates-a-movement-optimist

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119762145#Comment_119762145

It’s really not shifting the goal posts. Did you miss this part.

Was thinking more about performance in terms of alignment, force production etc. Or people who get injured due to voluntary bad positioning.

Voluntarily loading the spine in a bad way is a bit different to a genetic disorder.

Then I show you examples of champion level performers who would fail those screens (of which there are many more),

I explained in a lot more detail why they were bad examples. Assume elite performance is indicative of overall health or function is an error imo.

Gant has a genetic disorder. It’s not simply movement. Applying his conditions to others is silly. Phelps was training for win. Not for health. Many elite athletes end up with issues from their training. LeBron’s toe?? 😂 so what? I dint think it would limit his ability. Really not sure what your point is there.

I never referred to FMS (the trademark system) in my original. That’s a strawman you introduced. I said TGU as a functional test. If Lamar Gant, Phelps or LeBron can do a TGU, then they passes. Are you suggesting they might fail?

Essentially it boils down to how adaptable you think the human body is. I think highly, given ample load and recovery. Greg Lehman's blog is what changed my mind on this issue (I used to be in kinesiopathological camp), and it has lots of interesting references.

I definitely give it a read and check it out. But I’m skeptical as to whether adaptability is a counter to my point. If somebody can adapt , in order to do a move, then they pass. The issue arises when there is an inability to perform

Cill94

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119763468#Comment_119763468

What I'm not sure about is the idea that small asymmetries or deviations from ideal notions of posture is a big deal in the grand scheme of what influences pain, injury, and performance. The lack of evidence for the KSP model is incredible for how mainstream it is. FMS is just an example of the most popular screen, not trying to strawman you there. Any 'mvmt screen' is inherently just as flawed, as its not validated for what it claims to test.

But, I think we're in agreement that if someone is so asymmetrical that clearly loading one side way more than the other, or its getting in the way of them performing, then it's worth investigating. I.e. doing a unilateral exercise to strengthen a significantly weaker limb.

Black Sheep

I trained in Santry sports stadium for a while and there was a coach there who would do privates and put young athletes through an FMS. These were teenagers mainly, parents in tow.

Never saw them leave without getting the "bad news" that they failed aspects of the screen. But the "good news" was that the coach knew how to help them, it would just require more coaching from him.

On other occasions I saw him coach people who were deadlifting moderate but grand numbers- 140kg plus say, and he would tut about some element of their movement and they'd be relegated back to potato sack deadlifting a 20kg KB until some sign was discerned that they were now ready to use a barbell with 10kg a side.

I couldn't help but feel that the FMS is very convenient in that way, its a particularly good way to take a lot of people, even good athletes, and put them in a position of needing the coach more than they did before they did the screen.

I'm not outright saying it's become scam, I don't know enough about it and I don't feel invested enough to learn, but to be honest it would be low down my list of things I'd recommend someone try.

Cill94

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119767184#Comment_119767184

Jesus, imagine being that bad at your job that you actually manage to make someone weaker. 😂

Unfortunately that kind of carry-on is mainstream now and even perceived as ‘evidence based’. Where is the evidence? Nobody knows.

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119766415#Comment_119766415

I don’t think small deviations are an issue. Nor do I think they would prevent somebody doing a TGU. I would probably fail a FMS myself, terrible arches and I slouch.

I think an important distinction is that I’m not talking about FMS™ or some other notional view of optimal movement. I’m referring to a TGU as a functional test. If somebody can do it, they pass. If they can’t do one, there is to a degree a lack of sane function.

Black Sheep

I forget the details but there was a fun diagnostic going around a few years ago ... You lie on your back and you had to basically just get to your feet. The optimal score was to not use your hands at all. Using one or both hands meant losing points, as did getting to one or both knees.

silverharp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119770651#Comment_119770651

I randomly saw this on twitter, Im doing progressions to the pistol squat, not sure if its physically possible for me to ever do below, but Ill give it a try after I get the other one under my belt

https://twitter.com/keithwalkiewicz/status/1582862007791161344

Black Sheep

Yeah what he's doing there is the way to do it hands free for sure.