Gymnastics Strength in Fighting - some talk

[Norbert Marko]

Hello guys!

I'm sure that many of you have opened a topic like this and there are many martial artists here who figured this out already but this stuff bugs me for a while now so I would like to ask it.

Here is the thing: 

I read that GST gives the best strength-to-weight ratio out of any sports or training type. Let us assume that we have a guy with the weight of 200 pounds and he finished foundation 4 ( I want to be formal to have a good discussion ) and already did a good amount of dynamic training for good power output.

 As a consequence he has  good mobility, so any kind of split or something like that could not be a limiting factor.

He can lift good amounts in the heavy lifts as an expansion to his GST ( squat, deadlift)

So what I have heard that GST is not the optimal way for fighters because they should train for maximal power output and perfect their moves and that is the reason why I made the points above clear, to cross these out as limiting factors.

The actual question is this: Wouldn't our GST trained guy beat all the other fighters in terms of power output? Wouldn't he came across as an absolute wreckingball?
What about if he has this foundation of power, and he starts to train like a fighter for maximal power output while maintaining his GST strength?

Any toughts?


 

[Joshua Slocum]

A great deal of gymnasts' training is in fact focused on maximal power output. Examples of this sort of training would be wheels, clapping pushups, squat jumps for height, etc. However, these exercises carry considerable potential for an inexperienced or weak athlete to hurt themselves, so they are not contained in the Foundation series. Originally this sort of training was supposed to be covered in a GB volume called "The Dynamic Physique" but since BtGB2 became the Foundation series, I would guess that a Foundation-style dynamic strength course is in the works as a sequel/continuation to the Foundation series. [This is explored in the dynamic strength/movement portion of the seminars, too]

 

A fighter who had completed Foundation and Handstand as well as a hypothetical GB rings-strength and dynamic-strength course would be the most physically powerful fighter in nearly any ring (s)he stepped into. 

 

GST carries an additional advantage over weight-lifting in that it develops your intuition for body mechanics and movement. When you lift weights, your body learns how to move weights up and down in very specific patterns. When you do GST, your body learns how to move itself through space in a huge variety of movements. In my opinion, this alone is reason enough to consider GST over weight-lifting. 

[Jon Douglas]

So.... completely ignoring all skill and psychological training factors?

And working on the basis that a fight ends in one big punch?

 

Not trying to come across as sarcastic, but you're making some big, sweeping statements there which I don't think cover it. Factors like shoulder mobility helping to throw a better, more efficient punch, and str-endurance to throw more of them at 80% than one or two big swings, to name just two.

[Jon Douglas]

GST carries an additional advantage over weight-lifting in that it develops your intuition for body mechanics and movement. When you lift weights, your body learns how to move weights up and down in very specific patterns. When you do GST, your body learns how to move itself through space in a huge variety of movements. In my opinion, this alone is reason enough to consider GST over weight-lifting. 

Mine too. I'm not investing my time in GST because I think it's equal or inferior to smart weights-based training, but because I think it's clear that long-term it's the most efficient way to acquire the broadest spectrum of superior physical abilities. Add intelligent and dedicated skill training to that...

[Joshua Slocum]

So.... completely ignoring all skill and psychological training factors?

And working on the basis that a fight ends in one big punch?

 

Not trying to come across as sarcastic, but you're making some big, sweeping statements there which I don't think cover it. Factors like shoulder mobility helping to throw a better, more efficient punch, and str-endurance to throw more of them at 80% than one or two big swings, to name just two.

 

Agreed, there's a lot more to fighting than just being stronger than the other person. Still, it can be a advantage, so by my reckoning it's worth asking which training method leads to better results, all else being equal. 

[Jon Douglas]

Agreed, there's a lot more to fighting than just being stronger than the other person. Still, it can be a advantage, so by my reckoning it's worth asking which training method leads to better results, all else being equal. 

Same as gymnastics, in fact. Odd how that lines up

[Norbert Marko]

So.... completely ignoring all skill and psychological training factors?

And working on the basis that a fight ends in one big punch?

 

Not trying to come across as sarcastic, but you're making some big, sweeping statements there which I don't think cover it. Factors like shoulder mobility helping to throw a better, more efficient punch, and str-endurance to throw more of them at 80% than one or two big swings, to name just two.

 

I think that you misunderstood me a little bit. I was excluding those things and every other thing because I was curious about only one aspect of the whole fighter thing and that is the power output. The thing why I asked is that I saw some fights on EuroSport(  one of the biggest sports channel here) and the MMA guys ( again I do not want to specify the fighting style let's say MMA for now) tried to throw each other quite a lot. Then came the tought ---> what if the guy was so much more powerful? Could he throw the poor fella around?

Does that makes sense now?

I attended some martial arts classes in the past (practicularly muay thai) and even if I had the technique down perfectly I couldn't pull the bigger guy too effeciently even if he lets me have a good grip on him.

Then again, I do not want to go into the technical part. just stay at the strength/power output aspect.

And I was not asking because I'm considering weightlifting above the F1/H1. GST is my religion now. It was merely theoretical.

 

[Jon Douglas]

I think that you misunderstood me a little bit. I was excluding those things and every other thing because I was curious about only one aspect of the whole fighter thing and that is the power output. The thing why I asked is that I saw some fights on EuroSport(  one of the biggest sports channel here) and the MMA guys ( again I do not want to specify the fighting style let's say MMA for now) tried to throw each other quite a lot. Then came the tought ---> what if the guy was so much more powerful? Could he throw the poor fella around?

Does that makes sense now?

I attended some martial arts classes in the past (practicularly muay thai) and even if I had the technique down perfectly I couldn't pull the bigger guy too effeciently even if he lets me have a good grip on him.

Then again, I do not want to go into the technical part. just stay at the strength/power output aspect.

And I was not asking because I'm considering weightlifting above the F1/H1. GST is my religion now. It was merely theoretical.

 

The weights was just for the sake of comparison

Well, if one is bigger and stronger, then of course it helps. The relevant old Chinese saying here is 'heart, strength, techniques,' in descending order of importance in a fight.

[Joshua Naterman]

OP, I don't think you actually understand fighting... If you did, you would not try to remove skill from the equation. You cannot throw someone effectively with pure strength. You have to create levers, and then move in a way that most rapidly accelerates the other person into the ground. That is called technique. 

 

There is always a certain amount of strength that is required for good technique to be utilized, but there are a crapton of stronger guys that have lost decisively to people like Roy Jones Jr, Anderson Silva, Fedor, Antonio Nogueira, etc. 

 

You cannot distill fighting into a pure strength argument and expect to get meaningful results, because strength only matters when you have the other person in a position of disadvantage, which requires technique and experience. Punches that break mountains don't matter when they miss, and as long as the other guy punches the stronger man's chin hard enough to make the mandible hit the TMJ socket, it's lights out. Doesn't matter if it's 30% the power of the stronger man's punch, it's enough.

 

MMA, in particular, because of the techniques used, is about having strength and power in awkward situations, like low mechanical advantage. Powerlifting and Olympic Lifting, by nature, build strength in highly advantageous positions. Gymnastics, by nature, builds strength in positions of low mechanical advantage. There's a lot of shoulder rotation strength that gets trained in gymnastics but not powerlifting type stuff, and if you don't think that rotation strength matters a hell of a lot then you've never rolled against someone who has it. 

 

As for the Muay Thai comment, if you are trying to fight a bigger guy the same way he fights you, you're an idiot. The only way to beat a bigger opponent who has equal skill in Muay Thai is to attack his joints directly so that you can disable his main weapons. You're not allowed to do this in the ring for the most part, which puts you at a huge disadvantage against a bigger opponent. 

 

However... in the full martial art of Pahayuth... well, there's nothing that isn't intended to maim or kill. Muay Thai, whether you believe it or not, is just the stuff you can put kiddie gloves on. The real thing is nasty.

[Marios Roussos]

I think that you misunderstood me a little bit. I was excluding those things and every other thing because I was curious about only one aspect of the whole fighter thing and that is the power output. The thing why I asked is that I saw some fights on EuroSport(  one of the biggest sports channel here) and the MMA guys ( again I do not want to specify the fighting style let's say MMA for now) tried to throw each other quite a lot. Then came the tought ---> what if the guy was so much more powerful? Could he throw the poor fella around?

Does that makes sense now?

I attended some martial arts classes in the past (practicularly muay thai) and even if I had the technique down perfectly I couldn't pull the bigger guy too effeciently even if he lets me have a good grip on him.

Then again, I do not want to go into the technical part. just stay at the strength/power output aspect.

And I was not asking because I'm considering weightlifting above the F1/H1. GST is my religion now. It was merely theoretical.

 

I think it's a tough question to answer with certainty given that carryover effects are hard to gauge, but I believe that for sheer power, i.e. the ability to move a heavy weight at high speed, olympic lifting is hard to beat. I knew a guy who was on the provincial judo and olympic weightlifting team here, and though he was a little smaller than me, the power with which he could move me was unbelievable. Was that due to the O-lifting? I don't really know, but it seemed like a reasonable conclusion at the time. 

 

I'm not saying GST isn't useful (I personally only do the Foundation and Handstand series), but I'd assume that O-lifter's are more "powerful" then gymnasts when it comes to moving an external object that's resisting you. If that wasn't the case, Olympic lifters would probably be doing Gymnastic Strength Training™. This still doesn't prove that O-lifting is better than gymnastics for MMA though.

 

Georges St. Pierre has talked about changing his training around so that all his strength and conditioning come in the form of Gymnastic Strength Training™ and sprinting. If you google it, you'll find a bunch of you-tube videos about it. I personally believe there's no better combination out there, but that's also why I'm here. I'm biased. 

[Jon Douglas]

 

I'm not saying GST isn't useful (I personally only do the Foundation and Handstand series), but I'd assume that O-lifter's are more "powerful" then gymnasts when it comes to moving an external object that's resisting you.

Great point.

[Joshua Naterman]

There are advantages to external loads, like getting used to  (and being better at) moving external loads... but in MMA, more often than not, you are moving yourself around another person much more than you are moving them around you.

 

Notable exceptions were Parisian and... well, he's the only person that I can remember who repeatedly threw people in the same fight. I mean really threw, like Judo style, not the "he's grabbing my arm so I'm going to deadlift him and drop him" thing that you see a lot (no disrespect to that, it works quite often). There may have been others, but he's the only guy I can think of who did this multiple times in every fight. Not a trip, but an actual throw.

 

The interesting thing about gymnastic pressing vs powerlifting pressing is that GST utilizes the serratus anterior (SA) to a much greater extent than powerlifting or O-lifting.  The SA is called the Boxer's Muscle for good reason... it's what powers the scapular movement that delivers a punch, and it absorbs a lot of the recoil shock that's produced when your fist hits another person. This leads to a faster acceleration of their head, which is more likely to lead to brain on bone impact, which is a major reason why people get knocked out.

 

So, to my mind, GST actually prepares a structure that is more suited to delivering powerful hits.

[FREDERIC DUPONT]

 (...) The only way to beat a bigger opponent who has equal skill in Muay Thai is to attack his joints directly so that you can disable his main weapons. You're not allowed to do this in the ring (...)

 

MT is a rule set for the ring; this is why there are weight classes.

Attacking the joints is only one way, there are many other ---> the best one IMHO is "don't be there" when a fight happens.

[Craig Mallett]

This is a bit of a loaded question; power output is almost 100% to do with technique, that includes striking power.

 

I've visited a lot of martial artists, and the handful of people I've met with truly extraordinary striking power (or wrestling power) weren't exceptionally strong in any discipline of strength training.  What they did all have in common is an extremely refined (and relaxed) technique that allowed them to hit with minimal loss of force, meaning their whole body weight was behind every strike, and they were able to masterfully manipulate your structure once in close to  put you in the most disadvantaged position leverage wise.  They were essentially masters of physics, both in their control of their own body, and their listening and manipulation of others.

 

That being said, since starting GST, I have noticed increased awareness of lines of connectivity in the body, and increased awareness of relaxation/tension levels of muscles.  This has helped me refine my technique and make my strikes more powerful.  I imagine stronger connections between each of the extremities and the lower back has also contributed, although not nearly as much as the proprioception gains.

[Norbert Marko]

The topic got many answers and thank you guys for that! Many of them contains interesting points.

@Josh Naterman I love your detailed insights into various topics and the answer as a whole is very nice but with all due respect, you did not understand the real question even though I marked it:

The actual question is this: Wouldn't our GST trained guy beat all the other fighters in terms of power output?


 

 

So i did not tried to remove technique from the equation, simply I examined another aspect of fighting. I get it - power output in fighting comes very much from the tehnique but for now I do not care how fighting works, only where the better power output comes from if technique is on par. Now, it is possible that post was not perfectly composed so the misunderstanding could came from there.
Also, I was not acting like an *idiot* with the bigger guy, it was not a sparring session, it was skill work/ technique refining ( I do not know the exact english word for this), so we paired up and practiced the same technique over and over again, it wasn't my choice.

I pretty much agreed with the rest of your post, and you're right Pahuyuth is nasty, I've hear things too

@-MR yes G. St. P. is one good hint of what could happen if someone got into the thing with GST and I like his style. Guess we are all biased on that one.

@Fred I do not want to be there just curious of the theory because I don't think that there was a single full powered gymnast in the field of fighting and the tought fascinates me.

@Craig You are right, and I 100% with you, but then again, I was excluding technique not because I wanted to know who will win the fight, but because I wanted to know that which strength training method is more efficent for fighting IF the techniques are already practiced and sparred properly.

[George Vere]

Some great points here! I have relatively little martial arts experience, having only been going just over 1 1/2 years, but I'll add my thoughts.

 

I'm on a hiatus at the moment but, mainly in my group we worked on grappling with a little bit of free fighting here and there. I'm getting better of course, but since starting F1/H1 I found my technique as a whole improved. It is very multifactorial, but I would say GST makes up a large slice of the pie. My technique as a whole is still lacking, I don't relax enough while fighting and I'm too predictable, but that's improving. I've got a few months to just work on footwork/stances due to upper body injury, so it should improve even more. At a slight tangent, I was capable of holding off the attacks of a much, much heavier purple belt (I'm an orange belt) while grappling, and it was due to my increased strength, mobility and awareness.

 

Joshua's mentioning of the SA, is in my opinion, of the reasons GST is so important - I see protraction and retraction as the two keystones of upper body strength and GST does a fabulous job of developing this, which other modalities do not focus on. Consider the levers and planche work! Combined with the awareness in space and mobility, I think this is why GST is so good.

Joshua - when you say attacking the joints, briefly, what do you mean?

 

One thing I think you are missing Nobert is that force production and technique are fundamentally linked - technique isn't just some sort of arbitrary yes/no thing - punches aren't "good" or "bad" but it lies on a continuum. This means that a punch can always be improved as it's due to efficiency. Best to be strong AND have good technique though than just one or the other.

[Jon Douglas]

@Fred I do not want to be there just curious of the theory because I don't think that there was a single full powered gymnast in the field of fighting and the tought fascinates me.

@Craig You are right, and I 100% with you, but then again, I was excluding technique not because I wanted to know who will win the fight, but because I wanted to know that which strength training method is more efficent for fighting IF the techniques are already practiced and sparred properly.

I believe there are several gymnasts who transitioned succesfully to grappling competition, although names escape me at the momen. Anyone remember?

Re Craig's point, I wanted to mention this myself but did try to limit the discussion as you said; when the strength/mobility program works in true synergy with the skill training and progress in one enhances the other, how can you possibly isolate the effects?

 

 

Sorry to flood this topic guys, I get passionate occasionally too

[Norbert Marko]

Re Craig's point, I wanted to mention this myself but did try to limit the discussion as you said; when the strength/mobility program works in true synergy with the skill training and progress in one enhances the other, how can you possibly isolate the effects?

 

true, you cannot, this is why it is only theoretical and I tought of it as lets say:
a, GST training + clean technique
b, some traditional strength training what they do in martial arts + clean technique
c, olympic lifting + clean technique

you see, I do not separate them it is just I took them as a constant. But all of you guys are right with the thing. The two CANNOT be separated I know that, it is just I wanted to discuss what strength training complements fighting better. 

I do not know why I didn't see Joshua's second comment when I made a response to him  


 

[Jon Douglas]

b, some traditional strength training what they do in martial arts + clean technique

Even this is a much broader topic-- it's not just hundreds of pushups and situps! In my kung fu school we use the stone locks (sort of like kettlebells), weighted staff sets, weighted staff wrist and rotation drills, iron rings and of course hours in stance, on the bags, pushing against each other. Traditional karate uses the wrist rollers, the stone 'clubs' (I forget what they are called; I want to say ishi-something), and free weights for conditioning. Thai boxing and several wrestling styles use the heavy bags for clinch and grappling strength. I could go on and on.

 

(Not trying to be difficult, I just feel I have a little to say on this topic so I'm running with it ).

 

In my eyes it's about movement and what primes you and promotes your ability to generate, control and (in a specific way) withstand force. The comprehensive gbodies program, not just the strength training, delivers IMO. What advantages I can get from training with weights are the way Coach described it in BtGB ime-- if str goes up, endurance down, better press-- worse vertical jump, etc. Plenty of people get a lot of benefit from the weights-- good for them, it left me somewhat unsatisfied and feeling like I was compromising dfferent aspects. I just feel this is both a more efficient and a plain qualitatively better approach to improving the whole rather than parts at a time.

[Connor Davies]

Well lets ask a guy who trains professional fighters.  Ross Enamait is fairly famous in the bodyweight world thanks to his book Never Gymless, and he doesn't rate gymnastics training when it comes to fighters.  However, the only reason he gives for this is that if your schedule is already full learning combat techniques, sparring ect, it would be a huge drain of time and energy.  Which is fair enough, but I think when he said this he was refering to gymnastics as a sport, rather than Gymnastic Strength Training™.  Also, his recommendations for bridges, L sits, rope climbs and handstand pushups (among others) seems to have a high crossover with Gymnastic Strength Training™ anyway.  It seems to be the levers that he neglects, possibly because when you train straight arm strength you can't train with the same intensity that you can with bent arm strength.

 

As an aside, he's also a fan of deadlifts.  I have to assume his opinions on the olympic lifts would be similar to his opinions on gymnastics, ie that it requires/creates incredible stuff, but would take too much time to learn which could be better spent learning how to actually fight.

 

Something no-one has yet mentioned is that fighting is a fairly hip dominant sport.  Kicking, grappling, throwing, even punching are all either primarily hip dominant or require a lot of hip involvement.

 

Personally I think that Gymnastic Strength Training™ would develop incredible tendon strength, core strength and body awareness that would all give you an edge in a fight, but if it was your only method of strength training you would be selling yourself short.  Deadlifts, squats, olympic lifts, weighted carries and sprints should all have a place in your program.

[FREDERIC DUPONT]

(...) the stone 'clubs' (I forget what they are called; I want to say ishi-something) (...)

 

Close: They are called Chi Ishi

 

[Joshua Naterman]

The topic got many answers and thank you guys for that! Many of them contains interesting points.

@Josh Naterman I love your detailed insights into various topics and the answer as a whole is very nice but with all due respect, you did not understand the real question even though I marked it:

 

So i did not tried to remove technique from the equation, simply I examined another aspect of fighting. I get it - power output in fighting comes very much from the tehnique but for now I do not care how fighting works, only where the better power output comes from if technique is on par. Now, it is possible that post was not perfectly composed so the misunderstanding could came from there.

Also, I was not acting like an *idiot* with the bigger guy, it was not a sparring session, it was skill work/ technique refining ( I do not know the exact english word for this), so we paired up and practiced the same technique over and over again, it wasn't my choice.

I pretty much agreed with the rest of your post, and you're right Pahuyuth is nasty, I've hear things too

@-MR yes G. St. P. is one good hint of what could happen if someone got into the thing with GST and I like his style. Guess we are all biased on that one.

@Fred I do not want to be there just curious of the theory because I don't think that there was a single full powered gymnast in the field of fighting and the tought fascinates me.

@Craig You are right, and I 100% with you, but then again, I was excluding technique not because I wanted to know who will win the fight, but because I wanted to know that which strength training method is more efficent for fighting IF the techniques are already practiced and sparred properly.

I didn't mean to say you were an idiot with the bigger guy, that was just a general statement that is true: A smaller man is always disadvantaged when he tries to fight a bigger man by using the bigger man's game plan.

 

Technique practice is totally different, and is really a great reminder of why bigger people are difficult to deal with when you are significantly smaller than they are. It's also better practice for the smaller man than the bigger man in defensive drills... gets you ready to deal with a reach disadvantage.

 

As for the force production... I think it is a more fair AND accurate statement to say that they gymnast would probably transmit more force to the opponent's face and body, assuming similar levels of intrinsic force production.

 

Gymnastics is all about actively transmitting force explosively through the shoulder girdle, to a MUCH greater extent than any other strength training or sport modality.

 

Olympic lifting is the pinnacle of actively transmitting force explosively through the hips and legs. Obviously there's a lot of force going through the upper body as well, but it isn't in a manner similar to how force is delivered in a punch so I don't think they will have the overall advantage.

 

For a fighter, specifically, a combination of the two (gymnastics for upper body force transmission and O-lifting for lower body force transmission) would be the most ideal scenario.

 

You still can't discount specific technique though. That's why you can never compare strength performance between fighters and know who will win.

[Kasper Stangerup]

My primary martial art is ju-jutsu (not BJJ; it is very similar to Krav Maga, but has about as much focus on competition as it does on combatives). In my time, I have coached two junior (under 21) world champions, and several other high level players. In ju-jutsu fighting competitions at this level, the skill level of all the players is very very high. Naturally, everyone looks for any edge they can get, and physical strength is one such edge.

 

Ju-jutsu competition fighting consists of three phases: Standing karate, standing judo and ground fighting (judo/BJJ). As such a large portion of the fighting comprises judo, all high level ju-jutsu players attend extra judo training at dedicated dojos and judo actually involves many gymnastics-inspired strength excercises (at least the schools that I know of). In addition to this, judo (and grappling in general) obviously involves a lot of unpredictable external resistance. Everyone also lifts weights. 

 

So what I am trying to say is this: In well-rounded, competitive martial arts with actual fighting disciplines (such as MMA), I think that all high level players already employ a mix of GST/calisthenics and weightlifting. So, Ithink that you need to focus on the quality of the GST, if you want an edge.

[Jon Douglas]

My primary martial art is ju-jutsu (not BJJ; it is very similar to Krav Maga, but has about as much focus on competition as it does on combatives). In my time, I have coached two junior (under 21) world champions, and several other high level players. In ju-jutsu fighting competitions at this level, the skill level of all the players is very very high. Naturally, everyone looks for any edge they can get, and physical strength is one such edge.

 

Ju-jutsu competition fighting consists of three phases: Standing karate, standing judo and ground fighting (judo/BJJ). As such a large portion of the fighting comprises judo, all high level ju-jutsu players attend extra judo training at dedicated dojos and judo actually involves many gymnastics-inspired strength excercises (at least the schools that I know of). In addition to this, judo (and grappling in general) obviously involves a lot of unpredictable external resistance. Everyone also lifts weights. 

 

So what I am trying to say is this: In well-rounded, competitive martial arts with actual fighting disciplines (such as MMA), I think that all high level players already employ a mix of GST/calisthenics and weightlifting. So, Ithink that you need to focus on the quality of the GST, if you want an edge.

Great post.

[Joshua Naterman]

Nice post Kasper!

 

Quality of work should be a pre-supposed requirement for ANY training.