Foundation series for children?

Hej everyone,

My 5 year old cousin saw me watching some gymnastic videos and now seems obsessed with being able to move like them. I asked if he was keen on competing but he just seems to want to do what they do. Would you recommend the foundation and handstand series for him to get started I'm thinking of signing him up with some classes to try it out as well. Is foundation for children as well or is it better that he just learn through the classes without this foundation series?

In my eyes it`s way too early to even think about F1 and H1. At that age movement varitey in a playful manner is the key for a child`s proper development. That beeing said, entering a gymnastic class for children is definitly the way to go

Well the thing about my cousin is he is pretty focus for a child. Actually he is stricter than I am when it comes to training. Once I a. While I let him train with me and he kept calling me opeverytime my form failed even slightly so he need to mix it up and make it playful isn't even am issue for him. The question is really is he too young for this kind of work or is the foundation stuff acceptable for children as well? I've heard that children need a far smaller work load than adults but I have no idea really.he can already do a few pull ups and push ups

I don't know. Foundation is also based on Coach's observations on the difference between training adults and children. If anything I'm betting kids will have an easier time with probably less volume as long as they're consistent and patient with it.

dritar said:

I don't know. Foundation is also based on Coach's observations on the difference between training adults and children. If anything I'm betting kids will have an easier time with probably less volume as long as they're consistent and patient with it.

Coach does make some explicit points on this in BTGB--

Most trainees should plan on working in sets of either 3x3 or 3x5; with all of these being work sets. There are two exceptions however to this general rule. Typically it is best for pre-pubescent athletes to use a very simple template of 1x3-5 reps. While it is true that these younger athletes are capable of incredible gains in strength, the total volume (tonnage) of weight moved in higher volume work simply cuts too deeply into their limited recovery ability.

This was before Foundation work and the focus is 100% on max strength and increasing the load relatively rapidly. So it's a case of probably, sadly, watching your cousin shoot ahead of you in very quickly because of his much more rapidly increasing strength to weight ratio

If he finds it fun, I see no reason he shouldn't do it, and it may spark an interest in other movements-- gymnastics, martial arts, etc.

Hmm well maybe ill put him onto foundation and hs just significantly cut the volume for "mastery" requirements?

I have a couple ideas but anything I say is going is going to be fairly arbitrary. Someone with experience with kids is going to have to take over here...

Interesting proposition. A 6 year old we look after enjoyed playing on my rings - he's the only kid who can do a skin the cat. But the rings have been away for the past while...   

If he's strict enough to follow the program, I would say it's a good idea to get him doing foundation.

Yeah, I don't see how Foundation could be bad for him. It may not be ideal because children progress very differently compared to adults for various reasons (bodyweight, a lot fewer mobility issues, etc), but Foundation was created in order to bring adult athletes that do have mobility issues and/or are beginners to a good level a gymnastics strength.

How could it not work for him given he'll have advantages over us ?

In my opinion, taking him to gymnastics classes is still the way to go, but depending on the gym (level of seriousness, number of classes per week, money, etc), it could be useful to still have him follow Foundation.

I think you could put him on the series, no bodyweight movement can hurt a child's development, just dont  give him bigger weights for the weighted work.

Another thing I was thinking about is cutting the mastery for them as you said. It was written in BtGB that the volume should be cut down because they have a limited recovery. So, Just go one set or maximum of two with everyhing and work him up to the mastery holds, so when he can hold 1x60s FL/PE1 for example, go on to the next progression.

Now it could be a total bullshit what I'm saying but kids have an incredible ability to gain strength, plus they are much more flexible so they do not need that much work with the iMs. Plus they have a low bodyweight and if they gain this strength now, they will have a huge advatage.

If a professional answer will come for this topic, like the post of Blairbob or Coach Sommer, then of course that is the standard

EDIT: keep the 12 weeks for tendon strength just cut the volume

The consensus here seems to be that he should try the foundation program.... but he is FIVE years old... I´m studying to become a teacher and we are taught about the principles of a child`s proper development. And neither in the theory nor in the practice there is such a specalization not to mention strength training. Of course i have to admit that exercices like ABH or HBH is definitly beneficial even at his age and i could imagine that such exercices are used in gymnastic classes for children as well but not in a structured manner of a weekly schedule. By all means that`s just my point of view... if your cousin wants it so badly and you think it`s ok, then try it !

Edit: I`m not only refering the child`s proper development to motor abilities but rather cognitive, affective and social ones. And therefore the playful way of practice is definitly a must at this age.

He loves to play but when he wants something man he goes for it..... When he first saw me do a pull up he tried and couldn't I told him how I was able to do it by training in a certain way. Without any help from me or any involvement he went away by himself and trained until he got it. So if you are worried about forcing him I to some sort of structured routine then fear not this kid does it himself.

ausswe said:

He loves to play but when he wants something man he goes for it..... When he first saw me do a pull up he tried and couldn't I told him how I was able to do it by training in a certain way. Without any help from me or any involvement he went away by himself and trained until he got it. So if you are worried about forcing him I to some sort of structured routine then fear not this kid does it himself.

No no my friend, did i mention anything about the fact that you might try to force him ? Not at all.... so just try it. I`m curious as well

I'm interested in learning more about this as well. I have a couple of boys aged 10 and 13, and I have them do some GTG style pullups and pushups.

I tell them that I want them to do 5 chinups and 10 pushups for every hour they spend in front of a screen (TV, iPad, Xbox etc). It may sound militaristic, but they have gotten a lot stronger, and they seem to enjoy being able to do stuff most of their peers can't. Some days they have performed five or six sets (typically weekends or holidays), but this is rather seldom; most days they are doing a set or two.

Ravn said:

I'm interested in learning more about this as well. I have a couple of boys aged 10 and 13, and I have them do some GTG style pullups and pushups.

I tell them that I want them to do 5 chinups and 10 pushups for every hour they spend in front of a screen (TV, iPad, Xbox etc). It may sound militaristic, but they have gotten a lot stronger, and they seem to enjoy being able to do stuff most of their peers can't. Some days they have performed five or six sets (typically weekends or holidays), but this is rather seldom; most days they are doing a set or two.

I think that`s a good approach. Especially the "....do 5 chinups and 10 pushups for every hour they spend in front of a screen (TV, iPad, Xbox etc)" is an excellent idea in my eyes

Facts regarding children and strength training:

Assuming that good nutrition is in place, the only activity that is known to increase risk for injury is excessive endurance training. Strength training, assuming good form, will not hurt your child. If anything, it can increase their growth potential.

I started strength training at 7 years old, as a statistically meaningless example that I am going to use to illustrate the point. My superior strength and development kept me ahead of my peers in overall raw athletic ability. Don't cheat your child out of a similar fate by being afraid to perform strength training. Simply know that because children do not add muscle mass particularly easily (low testosterone), they are better suited to a more strength-oriented routine. Single sets, performed 1-2x per day, can be outrageously effective.

I also loved to work out. It was fun, and I liked how it made me feel. At the age of 12, I was stronger than most of the adults that went to my YMCA. It's a shame I stopped working out from 13-18 years old...

If you care for more formal, research driven opinions, ACSM suggests that children never perform less than 8 reps on an exercise, but specifically point out that if you aren't abusing your child with excessive volume you're probably going to INCREASE their health. Children also prefer spurts of activity to long, protracted bouts, so you might just want to do one or two exercises at a time, chill for a few minutes, and then perform the next 1-2 exercises. Make them into games where you two are competing and the kid probably won't even know he's working out.

Here's an article I read a while ago, with some decent referencing in it to back up its point. http://breakingmuscle.com/family-kids/strength-training-better-soccer-kids

Admittedly right at the top it says "strength training can safely start as early as age seven" but my personal opinion on the matter is that he's talking about barbell lifts, and not gymnastics/bodyweight strength training.  My copy of BtGB shows Alan Bower demonstrating a manna at 7 years old, but I doubt he started training for it that year.

Remember, coach trains children that young, and I'm sure he uses a similar program with them.

If the lil dude can do pullups already, I can't imagine regressing to the early rope climb progressions would do him any harm.

Thanks for all the responses guys. Well I can always challenge him to exercises to make it more of game that should work well, it will probably make him more determined. He can do 6 strict pull ups with a 2 2 2 2 tempo hollow body and bar to chest 5 push-ups protracted with strict form and I got him to do leg lifts which he managed 3 toes to hands underarm grip. Man it is going to suck when he is better at this than me probably in the ext half year -.- . I've started looking into some gymnastics classes for him to give him a taste for it so we will see how that goes. In the mean time I've put him on the foundation work with 1 set as mastery. I told him he needs to complete one set of each exercise throughout the day so what he went and did was F7 all of the exercises back to back -.- this kid is crazy. Anyway looks like he is into the f7 three times a week now.

Is this okay or should I get him to cut back a bit?

He basically lives off of vegetables and seafood with some occasional red meat thrown in like kangaroo or lamb. So,e times I see him have some fruit for a treat every now and then but that's about it. His parents don't have anything else in the house so all he can easily access is fruit unless they cook for him which is as I said above veggies and meat.

From a Physio's perspective there is no problem with starting these exercises. They are safe and are only progressed when mastered.

We really start intense strength training from birth. When a baby lifts its head it is really heavy for them. It would be like us wearing a really heavy helmet and trying to lift our head when laying on our stomach. Think of all the full squats we did as a baby and a lot of them were one rep maxes, with static holds and forced reps by our parents. I remember my daughter trying to roll for 15 minutes. After grunting and groaning she finally got there. She couldn't do it for another week. I am sure she had some muscle soreness the next week, which stopped her from rolling.

I think these exercises are a natural progression of human that would promote tremendous balance and symmetry in any child. As long as they have the discipline to follow a structured program. My children would not follow a structured program, but they will do some deck and twisting squats during their physical play.

I am curious why you do not just sign him up for a children's gym class? There are loads of those classes around, with professional instructors, and they do jumps and ring work etc. I would think gymnastics is much easier for children, because their bodies weigh less (or technically, their weight scales with their height to the third power, but the cross-section of their muscles (i.e. strength) scales with their height to the second power). So probably he does not need such a gradual muscle and tendon preparation as F1 to learn to do what the gymnasts in your film does.

Gymnastic classes are a complicated thing. First some quick background ... I have two boys, my oldest is 11 and does rec classes twice a week for an hour each. My youngest is 8 and has been on team for about a year now, but before that was in their team development programs for the prior 2+ years, he currently practices 3 times a week for 2 hours each (just back down from 2.5 hours each for the summer).

Obviously, the team program is ideal for progress purposes. However, it is a ton of training, and the child has to be somewhat competitive to even make it onto team. At the lower levels they are a bit loose about that requirement probably due to wanting to encourage boys in a sport that has very weak boy participation, but regardless it is a lot of time/money to invest and a child that doesn't want to compete will just dread that aspect making the whole thing very unproductive.

The rec programs are a mixed bag. For the most part though the majority of the kids in there aren't really trying for anything and unfortunately it reflects in the coaching. These kids don't want to compete, so they are basically overlooked and it usually seems to be expensive babysitting with an semi-athletic focus so parents don't have to feel bad about little Johnny sitting in front of the TV at home. There might be some gyms with decent coaching for their rec program, but every one I have seen follows the above prescription. As for the instructors, the ones used for the rec classes aren't typically "professional instructors" at all (as alluded to above), the majority are young adults (18-25) that went through the program at that facility and have zero training otherwise.

So, there is a huge chasm between the two programs at gymnastic facilities. I know because my oldest is caught in there right now, on the one hand complaining about a lack of progress and other kids screwing around so they don't get to actually do anything, but also not being the type to want to be anywhere near team. Our solution for the time being has been to put him into a 'learning to flip' class instead of basic rec as it changed the focus and brought some fun back into things. Not very useful in the scheme of things, but he is enjoying it at least.

However, in my ideal world, these places would offer a strength oriented program, meant to prepare these kids for sports in their future. More strength never hurts. In fact it would probably look a lot like the F-series of programs.  And, with that in mind, I see no problems with a kid following along - presuming they can take the monotony of that type of training and don't need the typical kids style instruction/sessions.

- Chris

My oldest son, 13, just told me that he'd like to start foundation. Having read BtGB, Coach recommended 3 sets instead of five, and I suspect that he based this observation on his experience with coaching children. So should I put my kid on F1, but using just three sets instead of five? I've got a feeling that five sets would be over the top at his age.

Bump, 5 or 3 sets of F1 for 13 y.o. kid?

I've known 13 year olds than can bench near twice bodyweight.  5 sets will be fine.

Ravn said:

My oldest son, 13, just told me that he'd like to start foundation. Having read BtGB, Coach recommended 3 sets instead of five, and I suspect that he based this observation on his experience with coaching children. So should I put my kid on F1, but using just three sets instead of five? I've got a feeling that five sets would be over the top at his age.

I'm 14 and I'm on Foundation. My brother's 13, and he's been doing it for the past two weeks.