High victorian and some other impossible moves

[Yaad Mohammad]

This is the best calisthenics video I have ever seen

http://www.youtube.com/watch?client=mv-google&gl=NL&hl=en-GB&v=quwUyuFNEtQ&nomobile=1

[Guest SuperBru]

You haven't seen nothing yet buddy

 

[Guest SuperBru]

Yes I have, not in person though. Out of curiosity can any of Coaches athletes do a wrist maltese on the floor?  

[ZRX38]

Damn, ive never seen a victorian on bars before... I dont know if that can be called a victorian, but it was pretty awesome.

[Alessandro Mainente]

don't look over the skill and only on the skill, look at the quality of the work that is far more impressive in Coach's guy then in the biggest part of these guys. if you need some example:

 

-some arched planche and arched maltese instead of hollow form

-banana handstand

-banana hanstand push up

-front lever with arched lowerback

-arched back lever

 

is not the skill you made that make the difference, but the little particulars make the difference. this is the reason of why yuri van gelder is not soo competitive in the rings as other elite athletes.

what i'm not understanding of the most calisthenic video is why there is NO legs skills. you can see chicken physique everywhere. so i'm not surprised about this level of upper body strength cause there is no weight over the legs.

 

Probably the skill at 1:57 is the most impressive. but this guy is pretty popular over the calisthenic world, i have no doubt about his actual conditions, he has some serious problem with the legs. probably congenital..

[Guest SuperBru]

I fully understand what you mean by "quality of the work." However the majority of gymnasts and calisthenic practitioners have chicken legs. Let's be honest it looks like they have sat in a wheelchair for their whole life. This is not surprising of course because gymnasts don't need big legs.

[mrpraktic]

I don't understand why people talk about chicken legs in gymnastic and street workout. Gymnastic and street workout should be about performance, not aesthetics. It's like saying: "Your lamborghini gallardo is great, but he can not go through desert". Well, he is not built to go through desert!!! 

Gymnasts are not bodybuilders or models. When they get on rings or floor, nobody will deduct their score because they have chicken legs or because their right biceps is bigger then left.

[Matthew Barrett]

I fully understand what you mean by "quality of the work." However the majority of gymnasts and calisthenic practitioners have chicken legs. Let's be honest it looks like they have sat in a wheelchair for their whole life. This is not surprising of course because gymnasts don't need big legs.

Having very large and muscular legs actually becomes detrimental to tumbling and other acrobatics.  As a muscles grows past a certain point its ability to move other objects increases but its potential for moving itself or the leg decreases.

[Brian Li]

Gymnasts in general have small legs too. Other types of athletes in general other than bodybuilders that have big legs are Olympic weightlifters, powerlifters, and sprinters.

[FREDERIC DUPONT]

You'd be surprised, sprinter's legs are usually not "that" massive.

What matters is to maximize the power / weight ratio.

 

On the other hand, you'd also be very surprised at how fast the massive legs of oly lifter can carry them... As a young and rather dumb sprinter we used to tease and piss off the oly lifters in the gym (they spent a lot of time admiring themselves in the mirrors and made themselves easy targets of our sneer...)... One day though, we pushed the envelope a bit too far and they started chasing us... for the first 50 meters running away, I really thought they were going to get me!

 

One of those "oh shoot" moments: I learned what the cheetah that ventured too close to the lions must feel, & they earned a new respect from me that day!

[Yaad Mohammad]

You haven't seen nothing yet buddy

 

Already seen that, but the form and moves are much better in my video

[Joshua Naterman]

 As a muscles grows past a certain point its ability to move other objects increases but its potential for moving itself or the leg decreases.

I would like to hear a valid explanation on how a muscle loses potential for moving itself or the leg once it grows past a certain size. I'm talking about growth that we actually see in real life, not "if your VMO grew to two feet in diameter" or something insane like that. 

[Blairbob]

" Having very large and muscular legs actually becomes detrimental to tumbling. "

 

Alicia Sacramone and Shawn Johnson, Mary Lou Retton way back when. Think Aly Reisman.

 

This is different for WAG than MAG. A lot of the girls actually have pretty thick legs but this is also because 3/4 of their events are on their feet. A lot of volume on BB and FX besides tumbling or vaulting. If they are specialists such that don't do bars, that means their entire practice is on their feet.

 

In MAG, only 1/3 of their events are on their feet besides landings. Time spent on FX and V isn't always equal to time spent on the other apparatus especially if they are not AA'ers or specialists.

Big legs make good laps that are good for girls to sit in. 

 

These Russian BW enthusiasts do a lot if not most of their work on bars and I'm not exactly sure how much if at all they tumble. A lot of the PK/Free-runner trickster guys don't generally have very thick legs but they are strong enough to get the job done and that's all that is necessary.
 

[Christian Sørlie]

First vid, @1:57 best reverse planche ever on film. No discussion.... Dudes.

[Guest SuperBru]

"Having very large and muscular legs actually becomes detrimental to tumbling and other acrobatics." I already stated this bru "This is not surprising of course because gymnasts don't need big legs." Also "As a muscles grows past a certain point its ability to move other objects increases but its potential for moving itself or the leg decreases." Please post a valid reference/s or I don't believe you.

[Matthew Barrett]

I would like to hear a valid explanation on how a muscle loses potential for moving itself or the leg once it grows past a certain size. I'm talking about growth that we actually see in real life, not "if your VMO grew to two feet in diameter" or something insane like that. 

If you were to double the size of a muscle its surface area would increase by a factor of 4 but, the volume of the muscle increases by a factor of 8.  The strength of muscles is typically considered proportional to the cross-sectional area of the muscle belly.  So, larger muscles are generally stronger.  The doubling of muscle in size gives it strength to weight ratio of .50 and the tripling in size of a muscle gives it a ratio of .33.  So larger muscles gain significant strength to move larger objects but their ability to move themselves or the body is decreased.  You can never just double something in size and expect it to function the same way. 

[Guest SuperBru]

You'd be surprised, sprinter's legs are usually not "that" massive.

What matters is to maximize the power / weight ratio.

 

On the other hand, you'd also be very surprised at how fast the massive legs of oly lifter can carry them... As a young and rather dumb sprinter we used to tease and piss off the oly lifters in the gym (they spent a lot of time admiring themselves in the mirrors and made themselves easy targets of our sneer...)... One day though, we pushed the envelope a bit too far and they started chasing us... for the first 50 meters running away, I really thought they were going to get me!

 

One of those "oh shoot" moments: I learned what the cheetah that ventured too close to the lions must feel, & they earned a new respect from me that day!

What a rebel.

[Guest SuperBru]

Already seen that, but the form and moves are much better in my video

True however that's not the best video. Theres tones more out there on youtube.

[Joshua Naterman]

If you were to double the size of a muscle its surface area would increase by a factor of 4 but, the volume of the muscle increases by a factor of 8.  The strength of muscles is typically considered proportional to the cross-sectional area of the muscle belly.  So, larger muscles are generally stronger.  The doubling of muscle in size gives it strength to weight ratio of .50 and the tripling in size of a muscle gives it a ratio of .33.  So larger muscles gain significant strength to move larger objects but their ability to move themselves or the body is decreased.  You can never just double something in size and expect it to function the same way. 

This is what I was hoping for. You don't understand how muscles work.

 

The size you gain (solid elements, not the water) is about 90% contractile protein, just like the muscle that was there before you grew. Muscle strength is based on the number of parallel contractile units, which is referred to in our profession as Physiological Cross-Sectional Area. PCSA for short.

 

There is something called specific tension, and it refers to the normalized amount of force that human muscle tissue can produce per square unit, usually per square centimeter. I've seen calculations ranging from 80 newtons to 343 newtons, and it is variable from person to person because we each have a different set of Myosin Heavy Chain (MHC) sub-types, in proportions unique to us. There are all kinds of combination fibers.

 

Now, if muscle was getting LONGER, your explanation might have some ground to stand, because more mass in series would technically load the parts of the contractile tissue behind it, thus decreasing net force. HOWEVER: Human muscles don't increase in length unless you do something absolutely insane, like put someone in a body cast with a muscle in a shortened condition or otherwise maintain a shortened posture for months without ever lengthening it. In that case, with motion and stretching it will end up returning to its normal length. Additionally, in young ADULTS there is evidence that muscles tend to lengthen with prolonged stretching routines, but in children and older adults it appears to be the tendons that lengthen.

 

With muscular hypertrophy, you see more parallel sarcomeres form. In other words, they are next to the other units, and support their own weight. There is no extra muscle LENGTH to deal with. You might think "Hey, my quadriceps seem to be way longer after a year" but that would show that you are not familiar with pennation angles. You will have to learn about those on your own if you are not already familiar.

 

So, we have covered the facts regarding muscle hypertrophy and force production. Now let's look at the implications.

 

Since we see parallel hypertrophy, we should see a linear increase of maximal force production along with PCSA. In fact, we do see almost exactly that. In real people. We actually see slightly MORE than a linear gain. Explanation coming immediately.

 

Explanation: A hidden effect is that as the muscle gets thicker, it actually GAINS mechanical advantage! This happens because the tendon is centered on the muscle belly. As the belly thickens, the tendons are lifted and the moment arm of the muscle becomes larger. larger moment arm = more external torque generated by a given internal torque.. So guess what: Bigger muscles actually have better moment arms than smaller muscles, so not ONLY do you gain the specific tension of whatever mass you add, you also gain a small bonus from the moment arm changing as the tendon gets lifted by the thicker muscle belly.

 

 

Your mistake was that you made unfounded assumptions, and I believe this is because you tried to apply math to a situation you did not have a proper understanding of. The mistake was made in good faith, but it was a mistake.

 

I hope you can see that.

[Brian Li]

You'd be surprised, sprinter's legs are usually not "that" massive.

What matters is to maximize the power / weight ratio.

 

On the other hand, you'd also be very surprised at how fast the massive legs of oly lifter can carry them... As a young and rather dumb sprinter we used to tease and piss off the oly lifters in the gym (they spent a lot of time admiring themselves in the mirrors and made themselves easy targets of our sneer...)... One day though, we pushed the envelope a bit too far and they started chasing us... for the first 50 meters running away, I really thought they were going to get me!

 

One of those "oh shoot" moments: I learned what the cheetah that ventured too close to the lions must feel, & they earned a new respect from me that day!

Well sprinters in general don't have legs as huge as Olympic lifters and powerlifters, but from what I've seen in elite athletics and also high school track meets, the 100m-200m sprinters generally have decent or respectable mass in the lower body. If we are talking about mass in the lower leg like the calves then of course they are small because they are small in almost everyone. 

 

Sprinters do a lot of heavy squats and deadlifts as well as some Olympic lifts like cleans. So their glutes, hamstrings, and quads, are usually pretty big.

 

Word on the Olympic lifters' speed. I've read a study where it claimed that oly lifters are the fastest from 0-20m. Not sure how accurate that was, but it's not surprising at all because they are the most powerful in the lower body.

[FREDERIC DUPONT]

(...) oly lifters are the fastest from 0-20m (...)

 

I would not be surprised.

[Guest SuperBru]

Shawn Johnson's legs are massive.  

 

[Guest SuperBru]

What kind of bodyweight exercises can build you those legs, if there are any for that matter? Or is it that she just has good genetics?

[Jono]

Word on the Olympic lifters' speed. I've read a study where it claimed that oly lifters are the fastest from 0-20m. Not sure how accurate that was, but it's not surprising at all because they are the most powerful in the lower body.

That could well be true actually. I remember reading that they're as fast as track sprinters for the first 30m. They also have insane vertical jumps.

 

People also claim that NFL players have a better acceleration than track sprinters. I don't think so though. If everyone lined up at their best, I would say Asafa Powell would have best 40 yard dash time out of everybody. Though in 2009 when Usain Bolt ran a 9.58, he was actually ahead of Powell even at 20m, but I don't think Powell was at his best in that case.

[Brian Li]

Yeah, I'm sure someone like Asafa Powell or Maurice Greene can run a sub 4 second 40 yard dash. Maybe even Usain Bolt too despite his tall stature because he ran a 6.30 60m split before in one of his 100m dash meter finals.