Very newbie question: Where are the exercise descriptions

Hi all,
I bought Foundation One a few weeks ago and have started doing the exercises, and so far I enjoy the program. But as I am clicking around I have a very hard time finding the exercise descriptions.

It is, e.g., hard for me to tell what the difference is between an 'elevated row' and a 'bulgarian row' (no, I am not doing any of those yet), except that the bulgarian row seems to have slightly wider arms? Also, I found as a response in one of the forums that Scapular Shrugs should be done with a hollow body, but could not find this as part of the exercise description - and little idea what a hollow body is and how to perform it correctly, other than I guess it is what you do when you do a hollow body hold?
I have really tried to look around for the descriptions, but cannot seem to find them anywhere. In many free communities I would expect to have to scour the forums, but for a paid course I would believe the descriptions should be easily available. I may just be looking in all the wrong places, though.

Coming from the outside, it seems as if the community consists mainly of people who have trained this a long time and know the nomenclature, but the course is recent, so much of the old material is no longer available online. Is this correct?

Sorry if this question is really dumb.

Thanks!

Hi Michael. I'm in a similar position and feel the same way. I've gone through a lot of trial and error, doing F1 PEs only to come across a forum post that points out I've been training a movement incorrectly for months. It's very frustrating.

I think the best thing you can do is spend lots of time on these forums. There's some amazingly talented and helpful people here.

But it is unfortunate that newbies have to dig through forum topics to get this essential information for how to do the exercises.

In my opinion, a lot more explanation in the actual product would be very valuable for raising the quality of training for us new F1 students. Even a community-made Wiki that consolidates all the best forum posts about what to focus on for each exercise would be amazing.

It's not a dumb question.

The exercise descriptions are provided in video format so that you can see how the exercise is meant to be performed. Coach Sommer has then added a couple of important form cues to each exercise to make sure that you are performing them correctly.

If you are still unsure then you can post up a video here or ask questions and people will be happy to give you pointers on your form.

Your mission is to copy what you see on the video exactly.

I agree that there should be a more complete explanation, but that is not the current official opinion at the moment. Since you will be spending a bit of time with each exercise, it might not be too burdensome to simply ask a question here each time you reach a new exercise progression.

Having said that, you should realize that having to determine and type out all of that stuff, given Cory's schedule, will probably add at least 6 months to release dates. The price for more detail is longer development periods. Perhaps once F1-4 is released, it would be more appropriate to consider starting this process.

For now, the product forums can serve this function adequately.

wheezer said:

.....a community-made Wiki that consolidates all the best forum posts about what to focus on for each exercise would be amazing....

There....  There aren't words for how much I want this now.

Michael, it can be a little frustrating trying to piece together perfect form.  Just focus on trying to look like the video.  There's a lot of little details you might miss on the first viewing, so make sure you re watch them every so often.

wheezer said:

Even a community-made Wiki that consolidates all the best forum posts about what to focus on for each exercise would be amazing.

That's not a bad idea at all... I guess I have re-read BTGB so many times that I take it for granted that everyone else knows it by heart too

Charm said:

I guess I have re-read BTGB so many times that I take it for granted that everyone else knows it by heart too

Yep! I think quite a few experienced gymnasts here don't consciously realise how much they have learnt - how much is not obvious to us newbies.   I put up with it because you are all so freakishly talented and awesomely helpful.

Joshua Naterman said:

Having said that, you should realize that having to determine and type out all of that stuff, given Cory's schedule, will probably add at least 6 months to release dates. The price for more detail is longer development periods. Perhaps once F1-4 is released, it would be more appropriate to consider starting this process. For now, the product forums can serve this function adequately.

Who says Cory has to write it? No-one is asking for a thesis-quality essay about every physiological response to a given exercise. We just want to understand how to do them to get the result!   There are many ways to do this. Just for example, one of his experienced students could sit down and draft together - say, a paragraph of 5-10 sentences, or 5-10 bullet points - based on each exercise's newbie FAQs. A senior staff member could then review this volume of text for F1-2 & H1 in maybe an hour, tops. Alternatively, a Wiki that this forum's more experienced members contributed to (and could then link to, instead of answering questions repetitively) would be awesome.

I love this product and it pains me to have any criticism... But when there are so many of us in a constant state of confusion about how to do F1 exercises, despite being at least reasonably-intelligent and highly motivated, the forum is not as adequate as things could be. That's not a comment about anyone on here, it's just the nature of a forum.

- I understand your frustration, but what you are requesting is unrealistic.  10-15 bullet points per exercise would accomplish nothing other than completely confusing the reader.  As such, I have included only the one or two most important cues for you to focus on initially.

- It is literally impossible to comprehensively describe each and every exercise in words to someone who does not already possess a serious gymnastics background.  This is a case of you "not yet speaking the language and possessing the appropriate frame of reference" as it were.  

The best solution to the lack of a common language I have found are the action photos and illustrative videos for each of the exercises.  

And your spending time learning, exploring and taking ownership of each exercise through daily practical experience.

- In combination with the videos/photos; the GB private forums provide the most complete training support available anywhere in the world.  For example there are currently 654 topics and 6,001 replies in the F1 private forum alone.  

- When in doubt, perform the exercises and iM exactly as performed in the videos and photos.  If you are still in doubt, film yourself and compare the two.  If you are still in doubt, post your video(s) here for analysis for the other forum members and moderators.  If the doubt continues, then you may want to consider enrolling in our OLC program.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Thanks Coach. Yeah - I see your point that exercise physiology is not a common language, and concentrating on the visual is a good work-around.

Time for me to be more proactive in self-checking, and seeking feedback earlier and more often.

Thanks all for your responses, and especially to Coach Sommer for weighing in with the thinking behind this. I completely buy the point that it would be confusing to keep track of 10-15 points at the same time, and focusing on a few key points should be more productive.

Some points are hard for me to glean from a video (e.g. 'protract and depress shoulder blades when doing PPP, and lean far enough to almost balance on the arms' - or 'tense the glutes when doing HBH', which are two pieces of advice from the forums). I do not think it is too burdensome to post a question every time I start a new exercise (after doing what I can with self-checking etc.). But I do worry about exhausting the patience of the people who answer these forum posts, if too many questions are the repeated.

Thus, I really liked the idea of structuring part of the forums as a wiki, with one page per exercise, based on the forum posts. That would make it easy to locate information so we newbies do not waste forum members time by repeating FAQs. A really simple way of doing this would be to have a subforum for each exercise, to be read before asking new question on that exercise.

I share Wheezer's perception that these exercises and the program are solid gold, and that the forum members are unusually helpful and good at giving feedback. But information that would make the transition into the appropriate frame of reference would make a big difference.

The research is the fun part.  You learn better if you go looking for it rather than if someone is forcing it down your throat.

Just pay attention to your body.  When you have good form, you can feel it.

Bipocni said:

The research is the fun part. You learn better if you go looking for it rather than if someone is forcing it down your throat.

Just pay attention to your body. When you have good form, you can feel it.

That too. Nic and Cole have both mentioned their avoiding over coaching elements.

Michael Borregaard said:

Thanks all for your responses, and especially to Coach Sommer for weighing in with the thinking behind this. I completely buy the point that it would be confusing to keep track of 10-15 points at the same time, and focusing on a few key points should be more productive.

Some points are hard for me to glean from a video (e.g. 'protract and depress shoulder blades when doing PPP, and lean far enough to almost balance on the arms' - or 'tense the glutes when doing HBH', which are two pieces of advice from the forums). I do not think it is too burdensome to post a question every time I start a new exercise (after doing what I can with self-checking etc.). But I do worry about exhausting the patience of the people who answer these forum posts, if too many questions are the repeated.

Thus, I really liked the idea of structuring part of the forums as a wiki, with one page per exercise, based on the forum posts. That would make it easy to locate information so we newbies do not waste forum members time by repeating FAQs. A really simple way of doing this would be to have a subforum for each exercise, to be read before asking new question on that exercise.

I share Wheezer's perception that these exercises and the program are solid gold, and that the forum members are unusually helpful and good at giving feedback. But information that would make the transition into the appropriate frame of reference would make a big difference.

That would indeed be a nice feature, but on the other hand there is a search function for a reason and I don't think it's unreasonable to expect someone to do a search for the exercise(s) that they have questions about prior to making an entirely new thread about their question.

That said, while it may not be unreasonable, IME with online forums it is probably unrealistic, hence the reason why there are multiple threads about essentially the same questions regarding some exercises. I don't really see a way around this though as even if you were to put a sticky thread in huge bold capitalized letters saying "READ THIS BEFORE STARTING A NEW THREAD!!!!!" You'd still get people starting up new threads without having read it.

Let's face it, as a culture (talking about the US and Western Civilization in general) we are impatient, used to and therefore expect instant gratification, and fickle. We don't want to have to read through pages upon pages of replies to see if our question has already been answered (even though doing so would probably be hugely beneficial for us, even if we never found the answer), we want the answer right at the tips of our fingers instantly.

Similarly, most of us, when we come to GST initially, are looking to "get to the finish line" as quickly as possible and are looking for shortcuts to get us there. Unfortunately, GST training seems to demand patience, attention to detail/focus, and pretty much a complete paradigm shift in terms of how we view and approach exercise from what the mainstream exercise industry preaches.

I know that I personally have really changed my focus from the end goal and getting there ASAP to really focusing on the exercise(s) that I am currently working on and truly mastering them and surrendering to my body's recovery/adaptation schedule rather than trying to force an arbitrary time frame on it and have seen great improvements as well as learned a great deal about how my body works (and this is coming from already having a degree in exercise science, being a certified and practicing personal trainer, someone who has been active and athletic all his life, and having done martial arts and reached a fairly high level of proficiency).

Ok, I'll step off my soap box now. Sorry for the rant. Hopefully someone finds it useful.

You have to remember that in the end, physical expression is you communicating with your body. There are no words involved, and words can't make the connection between mind and muscle... only your own practice can do that.

Keegan Y said:

That would indeed be a nice feature, but on the other hand there is a search function for a reason and I don't think it's unreasonable to expect someone to do a search for the exercise(s) that they have questions about prior to making an entirely new thread about their question.

That said, while it may not be unreasonable, IME with online forums it is probably unrealistic, hence the reason why there are multiple threads about essentially the same questions regarding some exercises. I don't really see a way around this though as even if you were to put a sticky thread in huge bold capitalized letters saying "READ THIS BEFORE STARTING A NEW THREAD!!!!!" You'd still get people starting up new threads without having read it.

Let's face it, as a culture (talking about the US and Western Civilization in general) we are impatient, used to and therefore expect instant gratification, and fickle. We don't want to have to read through pages upon pages of replies to see if our question has already been answered (even though doing so would probably be hugely beneficial for us, even if we never found the answer), we want the answer right at the tips of our fingers instantly.

Similarly, most of us, when we come to GST initially, are looking to "get to the finish line" as quickly as possible and are looking for shortcuts to get us there. Unfortunately, GST training seems to demand patience, attention to detail/focus, and pretty much a complete paradigm shift in terms of how we view and approach exercise from what the mainstream exercise industry preaches.

I know that I personally have really changed my focus from the end goal and getting there ASAP to really focusing on the exercise(s) that I am currently working on and truly mastering them and surrendering to my body's recovery/adaptation schedule rather than trying to force an arbitrary time frame on it and have seen great improvements as well as learned a great deal about how my body works (and this is coming from already having a degree in exercise science, being a certified and practicing personal trainer, someone who has been active and athletic all his life, and having done martial arts and reached a fairly high level of proficiency).

Ok, I'll step off my soap box now. Sorry for the rant. Hopefully someone finds it useful.

Beautifully stated.

I also find totally unnecessary and irrelevant to be so descriptive when we have a video reference, isn't an "image worthier than a thousand words"?.

Here in Japan I find tremendously annoying the fact that they became excessively descriptive, maybe because of Western influence, since the traditional way of learning, say for example, a martial art, was always "by eye", as they say. If you asked the teacher for an explanation, he'd just say " watch me and copy it".

I find totally boring the way they are now, spending so much time explaining. I attended some lessons in the past(yoga, fitness, etc) and the amount of time not doing anything and just listening to the explanation was awful.

I just felt like saying, please shut up, show me the thing and let us do!

Romulo said:

I also find totally unnecessary and irrelevant to be so descriptive when we have a video reference, isn't an "image worthier than a thousand words"?.

Here in Japan I find tremendously annoying the fact that they became excessively descriptive, maybe because of Western influence, since the traditional way of learning, say for example, a martial art, was always "by eye", as they say. If you asked the teacher for an explanation, he'd just say " watch me and copy it".

I find totally boring the way they are now, spending so much time explaining. I attended some lessons in the past(yoga, fitness, etc) and the amount of time not doing anything and just listening to the explanation was awful.

I just felt like saying, please shut up, show me the thing and let us do!

I agree that some people tend to "major in the minors" and thus explain things to the point of being so complicated that the students/onlookers wind up utterly confused as to what they should be focusing on during the movement/exercise.

That said, I think there is also a point at which too little instruction is given or where obvious "foundational" mistakes are being made in the movement and not being corrected. This is equally bad for the student as the more they ingrain these incorrect movement patterns, the harder it will be for them to eventually correct them.

For instance, I can count on one hand the number of people I've seen perform standard push-ups (in person) up to GB standards, yet push-ups are generally considered to be one of the most basic bodyweight exercises. I'm sure that if you've spent any time in commercial gyms or in athletic endeavors you've witnessed the same phenomenon (and with many more exercises than just push-ups). Yet, since these people are never corrected (specifically corrected about what they need to change), they continue to perform the exercise while erroneously believing that they are performing it correctly. When/if they are finally corrected they may find that they have a difficult time making the necessary corrections because they lack the strength in the correct muscles needed to perform the exercise correctly and have to play a significant amount of "catch-up" to get back to where they had previously thought they were.

Remember that the old saying "practice makes perfect" is in actuality incorrect. Practice does not make perfect; practice only makes permanent. The correct statement would be "perfect practice makes perfect." In other words we will get good at what we practice, but it we will only get good at doing things correctly if we always strive to do them as correctly as possible.

Having the videos included in the Foundation/Handstand courses at our immediate disposal thus becomes a huge asset as we have an easily accessible "perfect" example of how the exercise should be performed to inform our own practice. If we continue our study of the exercise and our "perfect practice" we will likely discover finer details that we might have missed earlier in our study/practice that will help us to further refine the movements/move towards mastery.

But, not all of us are as athletically inclined/neuromuscularly coordinated and thus require an outside eye to possibly catch and correct our mistakes. This is where the forum really helps. There is also a great benefit to learning from others mistakes/experiences and the forum provides a great resource for this as well.

I think what confuses us at times is less that there is too much or too little information and moreso knowing when and how to use the resources at our disposal and when to trust our own experience.

@Keegan Y: I agree that there is no need to explain every detail if there are video demonstrations, but I would like to talk about the standard of basic push-ups. In my opinion, the GB standard of basic push-ups are a variation the puts a bit more emphasis on the triceps due to keeping the arms in. I feel that the true standard of regular push-ups are done with the elbows flared out 45 degrees. Maybe it's because I was always introduced and taught that way for the standard push-up. It feels more natural for me with the elbows flared out 45 degrees. Of course elbows tucked in is a bit harder, but harder doesn't equate to being more correct. I feel that they are both not incorrect, but just different variations.

B1214N said:

@Keegan Y: I agree that there is no need to explain every detail if there are video demonstrations, but I would like to talk about the standard of basic push-ups. In my opinion, the GB standard of basic push-ups are a variation the puts a bit more emphasis on the triceps due to keeping the arms in. I feel that the true standard of regular push-ups are done with the elbows flared out 45 degrees. Maybe it's because I was always introduced and taught that way for the standard push-up. It feels more natural for me with the elbows flared out 45 degrees. Of course elbows tucked in is a bit harder, but harder doesn't equate to being more correct. I feel that they are both not incorrect, but just different variations.

Compare:

with 

https://gymnasticbodies.customerhub.net/hbp-pe2

and see if you can answer your own question.

B1214N said:

@Keegan Y: I agree that there is no need to explain every detail if there are video demonstrations, but I would like to talk about the standard of basic push-ups. In my opinion, the GB standard of basic push-ups are a variation the puts a bit more emphasis on the triceps due to keeping the arms in. I feel that the true standard of regular push-ups are done with the elbows flared out 45 degrees. Maybe it's because I was always introduced and taught that way for the standard push-up. It feels more natural for me with the elbows flared out 45 degrees. Of course elbows tucked in is a bit harder, but harder doesn't equate to being more correct. I feel that they are both not incorrect, but just different variations.

There are of course different correct variations of exercises. The big thing that most people tend to have trouble with is maintaining externally rotated shoulders during their push-ups (stemming from a lack of shoulder stability strength). Performing push-ups with the elbows and hands kept in close mandates that this occurs, while allowing the elbows to flair will allow some degree of internal rotation (unless the hands also turn out), thus not building the same degree of shoulder stabilization strength.

Due to this lack of shoulder stabilization strength and the increased ROM the triceps may takeover/become the weak link. In reality though this is just illustrating a weakness that we already possessed and therefore yes is better IMO.

I was moreso talking about having to use full ROM (chest touches the ground at bottom, arms lock out at top), no momentum, and a tight core throughout the movement while maintaining a stable shoulder position though.

I understand what you mean Cory.   That elbows in push-ups are specific to the HBP since they are both elbows in. My point was against what Keegan believed elbows in push-ups to be the only correct standard of push-up as a body weight exercise and not as a prerequisite for HBP.

Keegan Y said:

There are of course different correct variations of exercises. The big thing that most people tend to have trouble with is maintaining externally rotated shoulders during their push-ups (stemming from a lack of shoulder stability strength). Performing push-ups with the elbows and hands kept in close mandates that this occurs, while allowing the elbows to flair will allow some degree of internal rotation (unless the hands also turn out), thus not building the same degree of shoulder stabilization strength.

Due to this lack of shoulder stabilization strength and the increased ROM the triceps may takeover/become the weak link. In reality though this is just illustrating a weakness that we already possessed and therefore yes is better IMO.

I was moreso talking about having to use full ROM (chest touches the ground at bottom, arms lock out at top), no momentum, and a tight core throughout the movement while maintaining a stable shoulder position though.

You make a very valid point there. That elbows in push-ups are more beneficial overall. Push-ups with elbows flared out 45 degrees works the chest a bit harder though. I consider both variations to be correct.

Agreed.

B1214N said:

You make a very valid point there. That elbows in push-ups are more beneficial overall. Push-ups with elbows flared out 45 degrees works the chest a bit harder though. I consider both variations to be correct.

I'm assuming you would also think that a wide hand placement on a pushup would engage the chest more than a diamond pushup.  Actually, the opposite is true.  The wider hand placement aligns the muscle fibers in the pecs, but an EMG will show more muscle fiber recruitment with a close hand placement.

Just because you feel it in one part of your body, doesn't mean it's not working another part of your body even more.  Take arch body holds.  When I do them focusing on keeping my knees together, I feel it in my hamstrings and I don't even feel it in my lower back.  The next day, my hamstrings are fine by my back muscles are killing me.

As to proper pushup form, external rotation of the shoulders with the elbow pits facing forward, neutral/posterior pelvic tilt and full scapula ROM are all necessary.

The push-ups I was talking about are both done with shoulder width grip. Just one has the elbows flared out no more than 45 degrees and the other one has the elbows kept closely in. 

To answer your question about if I think a wide grip push-up would work the chest harder than a diamond push-up, I'm not sure about that one since I have read from Overcoming Gravity that a diamond push-up does indeed put additional torque on the chests. All I know is that both a wide hand placement push-up and diamond push-up work the chests harder than standard push-ups with a shoulder width placement.