 |
Search misc.fitness.weights |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
misc.fitness.weights -> Strength Symmetry
There are 9 messages in this thread.
You are currently looking at messages 1 to 9.
|
Author: JohnDate: 22:24 25-02-06
|
|
What would be an indicator of good strength symmetry from opposing muscle
groups? For example, 1RM bent over BB row is 95% of the 1RM BB bench press,
or the 1RM shoulder press is 65% of the 1RM pull-up.
I see a lot of people in the gym that have 300# BP's, but they row with
135#. To me, that doesn't seem like good symmetry.
|
|
|
|
Author: GeorgeDate: 01:52 26-02-06
|
|
"John" <y_tu_momma_tambien@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Zb9Mf.8564$Zw.671@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> What would be an indicator of good strength symmetry from opposing muscle
> groups? For example, 1RM bent over BB row is 95% of the 1RM BB bench
> press,
> or the 1RM shoulder press is 65% of the 1RM pull-up.
>
> I see a lot of people in the gym that have 300# BP's, but they row with
> 135#. To me, that doesn't seem like good symmetry.
>
I don't think that's easy to compare. With BP's you have your arms plus
back muscles involved. Curls are just biceps, rows use different muscle
groups, etc. etc. ..... But yes your example does seem unbalanced.
|
|
|
|
Author: JohnDate: 18:28 26-02-06
|
|
"George" <absolutely@anti_fat.com> wrote in message
news:afcMf.37684$F_3.8077@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
>
> "John" <y_tu_momma_tambien@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Zb9Mf.8564$Zw.671@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > What would be an indicator of good strength symmetry from opposing
muscle
> > groups? For example, 1RM bent over BB row is 95% of the 1RM BB bench
> > press,
> > or the 1RM shoulder press is 65% of the 1RM pull-up.
> >
> > I see a lot of people in the gym that have 300# BP's, but they row with
> > 135#. To me, that doesn't seem like good symmetry.
> >
> I don't think that's easy to compare. With BP's you have your arms plus
> back muscles involved. Curls are just biceps, rows use different muscle
> groups, etc. etc. ..... But yes your example does seem unbalanced.
Maybe it is a bit harder to come by, so for comparison sake, what is
everyone's percentages? No need to list the amounts, unless you want to.
Mine are as follows:
BB row is 97% of BB BP.
Curl is 55% of pushdown.
Shoulder press is 62% of pull-up.
Leg curl is 58% of leg extension.
Squat is 91% of DL. (I know, it's not really opposing, but references are
often made of these)
|
|
|
|
Author: Steve FreidesDate: 19:16 26-02-06
|
|
"John" <y_tu_momma_tambien@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Zb9Mf.8564$Zw.671@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> What would be an indicator of good strength symmetry from opposing
> muscle
> groups? For example, 1RM bent over BB row is 95% of the 1RM BB bench
> press,
> or the 1RM shoulder press is 65% of the 1RM pull-up.
>
> I see a lot of people in the gym that have 300# BP's, but they row
> with
> 135#. To me, that doesn't seem like good symmetry.
There is no need for such symmetry.
-S-
http://www.kbnj.com
|
|
|
|
Author: JohnDate: 19:23 26-02-06
|
|
"Steve Freides" <steve@fridayscomputer.com> wrote in message
news:46eum3Famk8jU1@individual.net...
> "John" <y_tu_momma_tambien@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Zb9Mf.8564$Zw.671@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > What would be an indicator of good strength symmetry from opposing
> > muscle
> > groups? For example, 1RM bent over BB row is 95% of the 1RM BB bench
> > press,
> > or the 1RM shoulder press is 65% of the 1RM pull-up.
> >
> > I see a lot of people in the gym that have 300# BP's, but they row
> > with
> > 135#. To me, that doesn't seem like good symmetry.
>
> There is no need for such symmetry.
Um.... Would Pavel agree with you? ;) So you're saying it's ok to have a
monstrous bench press and a row as weak as Billdo's?
|
|
|
|
Author: Steve FreidesDate: 21:54 26-02-06
|
|
"John" <y_tu_momma_tambien@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:LDrMf.11336$Zw.7693@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> "Steve Freides" <steve@fridayscomputer.com> wrote in message
> news:46eum3Famk8jU1@individual.net...
>> "John" <y_tu_momma_tambien@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:Zb9Mf.8564$Zw.671@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>> > What would be an indicator of good strength symmetry from opposing
>> > muscle
>> > groups? For example, 1RM bent over BB row is 95% of the 1RM BB
>> > bench
>> > press,
>> > or the 1RM shoulder press is 65% of the 1RM pull-up.
>> >
>> > I see a lot of people in the gym that have 300# BP's, but they row
>> > with
>> > 135#. To me, that doesn't seem like good symmetry.
>>
>> There is no need for such symmetry.
>
> Um.... Would Pavel agree with you? ;) So you're saying it's ok to have
> a
> monstrous bench press and a row as weak as Billdo's?
Pavel doesn't bench and neither do I, and I don't believe you'll find
him doing many rows - you won't find me doing them (with the possible
exception of the two-kettlebell Renegade Row but that's a pretty
different kind of move). What I was trying to say is that certain
movements are more useful than others if your goals are, like mine,
simply overall good strength and good health, and the concept of
balance/symmetry comes up only because some movements are, by their very
nature, unbalanced. The bench press is one such move - rare is the
person who benches a lot and doesn't have to do something for "balance".
Read deltoid work is often mentioned, rows are another. But if you do
what I do, which is press kettlebells overhead, your shoulders each find
a good path for the movement and you don't need anything else for
"balance."
The best example I can think of is overhead pressing and pullups -
because of the pressing movements I practice and the way I practice them
with an active, controlled negative, my pullup numbers go up every time
my pressing numbers go up, even though I don't regularly train pullups.
In other words, I'm not "missing" pullups or "unbalanced" because I
don't train them regularly or otherwise have a "pull" to match the
"push" of the kb military press. My pullup numbers do get better, of
course, with regular pullup practice, but I haven't done that in several
years. Every time I try (like in response to DZ's weighted pullup
challenge), I seem to stop shortly thereafter. My 1RM for a kettlebell
overhead strict press is about half my bodyweight, and my max with a
weighted pullup is bw + 100 lbs, the latter set after training them for
a while a few years ago and it doesn't seem to have gone down much
since.
The one-armed overhead press is an excellent movement, and it comes in
many forms, perhaps the best of which is the old-fashioned barbell bent
press, a move I plan to work on more at some point in the future. The
combination of a one-armed overhead press and a barbell deadlift is
really a pretty complete and "balanced" lifting program as far as I'm
concerned. Unless you think big chests belong on men instead of women,
in which case you might want to bench press as well. :)
-S-
http://www.kbnj.com
|
|
|
|
Author: JohnDate: 00:58 27-02-06
|
|
"Steve Freides" <steve@fridayscomputer.com> wrote in message
news:46f7ujFak516U1@individual.net...
> "John" <y_tu_momma_tambien@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:LDrMf.11336$Zw.7693@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > "Steve Freides" <steve@fridayscomputer.com> wrote in message
> > news:46eum3Famk8jU1@individual.net...
> >> "John" <y_tu_momma_tambien@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> news:Zb9Mf.8564$Zw.671@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> The one-armed overhead press is an excellent movement, and it comes in
> many forms, perhaps the best of which is the old-fashioned barbell bent
> press, a move I plan to work on more at some point in the future. The
> combination of a one-armed overhead press and a barbell deadlift is
> really a pretty complete and "balanced" lifting program as far as I'm
> concerned. Unless you think big chests belong on men instead of women,
> in which case you might want to bench press as well. :)
Nah. I'm more concerned with my lower body and back. My bench sucks for my
weight, but I don't really care about it. I just think it's funny to see
guys with hyoooge chests and no lats or legs. It's more of the younger crowd
that displays that kind of ignorance and they chastise themselves later in
life for having horrible symmetry.
|
|
|
|
Author: HobbesDate: 12:24 27-02-06
|
|
In article <LDrMf.11336$Zw.7693@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"John" <y_tu_momma_tambien@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Steve Freides" <steve@fridayscomputer.com> wrote in message
> news:46eum3Famk8jU1@individual.net...
> > "John" <y_tu_momma_tambien@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:Zb9Mf.8564$Zw.671@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > > What would be an indicator of good strength symmetry from opposing
> > > muscle
> > > groups? For example, 1RM bent over BB row is 95% of the 1RM BB bench
> > > press,
> > > or the 1RM shoulder press is 65% of the 1RM pull-up.
> > >
> > > I see a lot of people in the gym that have 300# BP's, but they row
> > > with
> > > 135#. To me, that doesn't seem like good symmetry.
> >
> > There is no need for such symmetry.
>
> Um.... Would Pavel agree with you? ;) So you're saying it's ok to have a
> monstrous bench press and a row as weak as Billdo's?
>
>
Won't happen. Steve is correct in that strength development cannot be
measured in different individuals based on such arbitrary exercises and
techniques. Remember that intitial levels of strength are largely neural
adaptation. OTOH, there is some need to develop opposing muscle groups.
The easiest way is simply to do compound movements.
--
Keith
|
|
|
|
Author: John HansonDate: 10:45 28-02-06
|
|
On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 11:24:41 -0600, Hobbes <khobman800@yahoo.com>
wrote in misc.fitness.weights:
>In article <LDrMf.11336$Zw.7693@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> "John" <y_tu_momma_tambien@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "Steve Freides" <steve@fridayscomputer.com> wrote in message
>> news:46eum3Famk8jU1@individual.net...
>> > "John" <y_tu_momma_tambien@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> > news:Zb9Mf.8564$Zw.671@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>> > > What would be an indicator of good strength symmetry from opposing
>> > > muscle
>> > > groups? For example, 1RM bent over BB row is 95% of the 1RM BB bench
>> > > press,
>> > > or the 1RM shoulder press is 65% of the 1RM pull-up.
>> > >
>> > > I see a lot of people in the gym that have 300# BP's, but they row
>> > > with
>> > > 135#. To me, that doesn't seem like good symmetry.
>> >
>> > There is no need for such symmetry.
>>
>> Um.... Would Pavel agree with you? ;) So you're saying it's ok to have a
>> monstrous bench press and a row as weak as Billdo's?
>>
>>
>
>Won't happen. Steve is correct in that strength development cannot be
>measured in different individuals based on such arbitrary exercises and
>techniques. Remember that intitial levels of strength are largely neural
>adaptation. OTOH, there is some need to develop opposing muscle groups.
>The easiest way is simply to do compound movements.
Right. Body structure also plays a role.
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
Contact | Fitness
|
|
|
