Some questions about my current routine (OAC training)

After a very lengthy break in my training due to an injury (a year) I have resumed gymnastic style training, I have a new routine that follows the kilroy7 template that was popular back then, 4 days, one day being horizontal pushing and pulling, the next being vertical, the net being inverted and the final day being for muscle ups. I am currently unable to do ring dips due to my injury, they are substituted for exercises specific to my rehabilitation.

 

My main goal over the next year is to attain the OAC, however I am only doing specific OAC training once a week with this current routine (Chin ups where I hold my wrist with one hand and the bar with the other currently). My other pulling exercises are front lever rows and inverted pull ups, I am training front levers, back levers, planche and L sit too.

 

Will this be enough to make decent progress, or should I do the OAC exercises again, perhaps on the muscle up/ misc day?

 

 

Thanks 

 

No, you won't achieve a OAC just by doing that.

Try searching around the forum bud. You may find some OAC training threads, because believe it or not, other people have asked before you!

 

Or buy Foundation 1/Series, master rope climb, and become a OAC BEAST.

I have searched the forum, and I have one of the original BTGB books.

 

I know about the movements required to get the OAC, I am pretty good at negatives and rope climbing, my question is about how often to train it.

I'm still not convinced about that RC thing. RC is essentially no different than an assisted OAC, except with the added grip strength requirement. And IMO it's harder to track your progress this way (if you're doing it solely for attaining the OAC), unless you have someone with a ruler measuring the distance between each hand of each part of the climb. Plus, correct me if I'm wrong, I thought I remember reading that none of Coach's athletes could do OACs (despite being very proficient at RC), yet still preferred reverse MU training because OAC was too easy.

 

Evilllamas said:

I have searched the forum, and I have one of the original BTGB books.

 

I know about the movements required to get the OAC, I am pretty good at negatives and rope climbing, my question is about how often to train it.

I think anywhere from 2-3x per week is good. I personally do an easier assisted variation in the 5-8 rep range 1x, and a harder variation in the 1-4 rep range 1x. Depending on what else is in your program will depend whether you can add an extra day or not.

Jono said:

I'm still not convinced about that RC thing. RC is essentially no different than an assisted OAC, except with the added grip strength requirement. And IMO it's harder to track your progress this way (if you're doing it solely for attaining the OAC), unless you have someone with a ruler measuring the distance between each hand of each part of the climb. Plus, correct me if I'm wrong, I thought I remember reading that none of Coach's athletes could do OACs (despite being very proficient at RC), yet still preferred reverse MU training because OAC was too easy.

Coach noted at one point that he's since reduced the amount of training time on OAC, as it hasn't the carryover to ring strength training that RC does or that he'd expected. There was a short discussion on its utility.

I see it as sort of equivalent as the V-sit; cool and developing nice but narrow str, a bit of a dead-end in itself. Whereas aim higher-- for a manna or more difficult RC variants -- and you pick up that skill 'for free'.

Plus, ring str prep. No-brainer IMO.

So what, apart from the grip strength element, would be the difference between doing cirques down a rope, and doing several OAC negatives one after another on a bar, switching arms, repeating for desired reps?

 

The V-sit thing makes sense, but I'm not sure how it is analogous to RC and OAC. I can't see RC being any harder, even if you did maximum ROM climbing per hand. To get to a maximum ROM climb would basically be a dead hang OAC for each climb, which you would build up to by gradually grabbing higher as you get stronger- this is basically the same as reducing the assistance used in the assisted OAC variations, surely?

 

And the only other way I can see RC being "harder" is if you're climbing up and down for several laps (which is arguably more endurance than strength)- but surely if you went from being able to do 3 reps to 10 reps of a certain assisted OAC variation, it would have the exact same effect?

OP: if you're hoping to improve your OAP/C, you should be directly working it 2-3 times a week. But you need to make sure to take the progressions slowly, and balance all your pulling work with some good pushing work. Obviously following Foundation would be the best way to achieve a level of strength and preparation where you're ready to pursue dedicated OAP/C work. Unless your solitary goal is to learn the OAP/C as quickly as possible, and you don't mind having a high risk of plateauing soon after (or before) achieving it. 

 

Jono said:

I'm still not convinced about that RC thing. RC is essentially no different than an assisted OAC, except with the added grip strength requirement. 

 

I would tend to disagree. OAC/OAP is largely about pulling the elbow down as far as possible. Rope climbs have an additional internal rotation element, which works a lot of the smaller muscles that come in handy for rings.  

Ah I see. So the internal rotation difference means it'll be more useful for rings.

Jono said:

Ah I see. So the internal rotation difference means it'll be more useful for rings.

Don't take that as gospel. It's conjecture on my part.

Joshua Slocum said:

I would tend to disagree. OAC/OAP is largely about pulling the elbow down as far as possible. Rope climbs have an additional internal rotation element, which works a lot of the smaller muscles that come in handy for rings.

OAC/OAP also internally rotates the humerus. As you pull the elbow down, it also goes towards the center of your body to balance instead of straight down.

rope climbing is better then oac/oap.

oap and oac as a pull movement that involves the lats is for definition something that increase the internal rotation. the substantial difference is the forearm rotation that for one version is externally rotated involving more the long head bicep, the other is internally rotated that involves more the brachialis and brachioradialis.

the RC with semipronated grip involves both the muscles of pronated and seminpronated grip. in addition you have to add the upper back component during the switch of the arm that works for the traps. Also the grip used has a great transposition over pbars planche grip.

any reason to consider OAP/OAC same as rope climbing?

Well you can do neutral grip OAP/OAC or one on the rings where you can freely pronate and supinate the forearm during the rep.

I consider OAP/OAC work to be very similar to RC because of the movements. OAP can also be done on a rope.

Ok, so while RC might be better for overall and future gymnastic development (I never denied this), I still don't think it's the correct recommendation to make for someone who is trying to create a program solely to learn the OAC/OAP (like the OP).

 

RC will not make you an OAC/P beast any more so than any other other assisted OAC/P variation. And even if it did, I'm confident that the assisted OAC/P route will make you more of an OAC/P beast as well as doing so in much less time. And the argument about injury /tendinitis is not true; I remember someone saying OAC/P assist will inevitably result in tendinitis, but I never had tendinitis at all! 

Yes, OAC look very cool; but the fact remains that reverse muscle ups and RC are far more difficult and effective.  

 

Feel free however to spin your wheels and learn this lesson the hard way.

 

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

I think most people are saying here that you can get the OAC while also accomplishing some other goals which will save you time.

For example, I no longer deadlift. I think it isn't the best use of my time considering that squats and GST pretty much handle all of what I need. My deadlift still goes up and I don't even have to work it. Good deal.

If the rope climb progressions are what I think, it would probably work the same way. In theory, OAC is probably easier and requires much less of the grip. And in my experience, whenever the grip is strengthened and then the requirements are taken away, people tend to do the none-grip requiring task even more effective (less neural drive being used up by the grip muscles).

If your goal is simply a OAC, that is the best way to work directly the OAC, just like I could work deadlifts. But why bother if it will come along for the ride later and take even less time to train while you also have MORE abilities. Namely a grip strong enough to make a grown man cry during a handshake.

Lastly, rope climbing does indeed help with tendonitis. It's actually what I give most people with tedonitis as a goal to work toward. Usually it then resolves itself.

Coach Sommer said:

Yes, OAC look very cool; but the fact remains that reverse muscle ups and RC are far more difficult and effective.  

 

Feel free however to spin your wheels and learn this lesson the hard way.

 

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

No argument there regarding reverse MUs being cooler and harder than OAC, but I think you're comparing apples to oranges there. OAC is a pulling move mainly using the lats and rear delt while the reverse MU is a body weight curl followed by a HSPU. Very different movements using different muscles. 

 

Can you elaborate more on why you feel that the RC is more difficult than OAC? Were you referring to a very advanced variation of the RC that is currently only shown in the seminars and F4? I agree doing RC may be more effective overall than doing OAC work, but I think the basic legless rope climbs and the more advanced cirques are easier than doing a full OAC/OAP while both are pretty much working on the same movement. Thanks in advanced!

I thought you'd be able to do Cirques by the end of F4, since that's what Daniel was doing in the Foundation thread. Cirques, maybe Chameleons, and regular Rope Climbs are the goals of Foundation. However, there may be other stuff as well. I haven't even come close to those exercises.

Jono said:

....I can't see RC being any harder....

What if you did it upside down?

B1214N said:

No argument there regarding reverse MUs being cooler and harder than OAC, but I think you're comparing apples to oranges there. OAC is a pulling move mainly using the lats and rear delt while the reverse MU is a body weight curl followed by a HSPU. Very different movements using different muscles. 

 

Can you elaborate more on why you feel that the RC is more difficult than OAC? Were you referring to a very advanced variation of the RC that is currently only shown in the seminars and F4? I agree doing RC may be more effective overall than doing OAC work, but I think the basic legless rope climbs and the more advanced cirques are easier than doing a full OAC/OAP while both are pretty much working on the same movement. Thanks in advanced!

That's what I meant to say. Couldn't word it properly.

And what is the difference between doing cirques down a rope and doing the same number of oac negatives on a bar, alternating arms immediately after one another? I'd imagine cirques to be easier since most people skip the full ROM of the negative in these

Aadil Siddiqi said:

I thought you'd be able to do Cirques by the end of F4, since that's what Daniel was doing in the Foundation thread. Cirques, maybe Chameleons, and regular Rope Climbs are the goals of Foundation. However, there may be other stuff as well. I haven't even come close to those exercises.

Im really curious about how curl work will slot in there against multi plane pulling, kr IF it will. Going to be some slapped foreheads when the next one comes and we get a look at the broader pattern

I'm guessing you'll learn the grip and technique, and maybe Mastery will be for time instead of reps!