Progressing dislocate elements

Hi all,

So I'm thinking about dislocates lately. I'm happy with 20kg (45lb); it's a nice round weight, conveniently in bar form, and obviously it's better to progress in width than weight. It's plain going to get awkward to add much more weight to the bar; it's 1/4 of my bodyweight at arms length.

 

It seems to me that this is a good point to plateau the weight, and put the focus in these entirely on narrowing my grip, and work to increase the weight on the prone dislocates instead.

 

I could go a bit heavier on the standing ones, but I'm wondering whether I've gotten the majority of the benefits of this exercise and that I would be hitting diminishing returns for my effort from here; it makes sense to me to work the strength side of things with an objectively harder element and keep these as pure prehab/mobility work.

 

So, a few questions here;

 

1. Do I have the right idea here at all?

 

2. I don't know what kind of weight is actually possible in the prone dislocates. Long-term, what is a reasonable goal to shoot for? I haven't really tried them with more than 6-8kg and that was significantly harder than the same weight standing.

 

3. Alex told me about a still-harder variation on the prone dislocates using a decline bench to disadvantage the leverage further and make it even harder on the traps. Am I better off working up to significant weight on 'lower' tier exercises for reps or less weight on higher tier? (or which first at least? )

 

Discussion welcome, thanks in advance

I hope ^ was all clear, but my intention is to work to 10 normal/dorsal standing dislocates at 45# and near shoulderwidth as regular prehab/mobility, then consider that 'finished' and not worry about progressing them further.

I'm a big fan of extending range of motion first and then gaining strength there. I didn't do weighted with anything much beyond shoulder width.

Not much comment on the rest.

Daniel Burnham said:

I'm a big fan of extending range of motion first and then gaining strength there. I didn't do weighted with anything much beyond shoulder width.

Not much comment on the rest.

Understood. I've worked up to reasonable weight at shoulder width, but 20 is a bit too heavy to bring back over the top at that width it will come. I'm just considering, no further weight bumps once I have this fully under control.

- 20kg is sufficient for the standing dislocates.  

 

- For the prone weight, I am not sure what the upper ceiling is.  

 

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Coach Sommer said:

- 20kg is sufficient for the standing dislocates.  

 

- For the prone weight, I am not sure what the upper ceiling is.  

 

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Thanks Coach, that covers it

With the prone dislocated i passed the 14.5 kg with 75 cm grip, my goal is 20 kg there.

Improved it coupled with the last 3 IM is a powerful tool to increase the "rounded-back" in handstand.

 

Coach , as i said to Jon, in the Milan gym i've seen a couple of students that actually cannot do the last one IM due to wrists problems , and they perform the prone dislocated on a declined bench of about 45-60° with locked feet. Have you ever experimented this exercises?

alex87 said:

With the prone dislocated i passed the 14.5 kg with 75 cm grip, my goal is 20 kg there.

Improved it coupled with the last 3 IM is a powerful tool to increase the "rounded-back" in handstand.

Yes, I felt something similar, my traps and mid back engagement is much better with the dislocate series.

20kg is ambitious but reasonable? Cool. Benchmark goal all around then XD

I don't really have an answer for you, for sure as the weight increases there is the sensation of the torso that is moving up. for certain reason squeeze the abs helps to prevent this. i can say that progress over the 10 kg on IM8 is more more slow then the standing dislocate. 

alex87 said:

I don't really have an answer for you, for sure as the weight increases there is the sensation of the torso that is moving up. for certain reason squeeze the abs helps to prevent this. i can say that progress over the 10 kg on IM8 is more more slow then the standing dislocate.

Ok, i will get onto it and see how progress goes

Having sat at the broomstick for months I'm in awe of anyone that is discussing these as a weighted progression!!

Bradjm said:

Having sat at the broomstick for months I'm in awe of anyone that is discussing these as a weighted progression!!

Welcome to Jon 'Mutant' Douglas doubts!

No, I have not yet worked with the decline variation.  

 

What wrist issues are preventing them from the prone variation?  Is this a wrist issue that perhaps may be rectified with prehab?

 

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Anyone think it's possible to work up to bodyweight with dislocates?

Coach Sommer said:

No, I have not yet worked with the decline variation.  

 

What wrist issues are preventing them from the prone variation?  Is this a wrist issue that perhaps may be rectified with prehab?

 

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

 

Maybe i've expressed myself bad. usually they perfom the very last element of H1 (IM)to increase strenght for bodyline, they perform both variations: with hands on the floor, body at 45° and feet of floor (that is what you propose) ..and also the opposite variation so hands on wall, body al 45° and feet on floor. 2 guys got some problem during repetitive vault impacts. If there are no possibilities to do those variations they move over prone declined dislocation.

alex87 said:

With the prone dislocated i passed the 14.5 kg with 75 cm grip, my goal is 20 kg there.

Improved it coupled with the last 3 IM is a powerful tool to increase the "rounded-back" in handstand.

 

Coach , as i said to Jon, in the Milan gym i've seen a couple of students that actually cannot do the last one IM due to wrists problems , and they perform the prone dislocated on a declined bench of about 45-60° with locked feet. Have you ever experimented this exercises?

 

14.5 kg is serious weight, impressive...

Bipocni said:

Anyone think it's possible to work up to bodyweight with dislocates?

 

No.  

 

Nor do I think it is necessary.  So far 20kg has provided all of the benefits and more that we were looking for.

 

This is a little bit similar to the history of HS wall runs.  I originally started my athletes with a single set of 10 minutes.  When that was so productive I then expanded the time to 15 minutes and then expanded again up to 20 minutes.  However the minimal ROI (return on investment) gained from moving up to 15 and then 20 minutes did not justify the additional expenditure in time and energy, so I dropped the time back to 10 minutes and it has remained there ever since.

 

The lesson is that there is no inherent advantage in always striving to train more.  'More' must always pay dividends, otherwise more may actually be 'less'.  The trick is figuring out just where that sweet spot is.

 

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Coach does this sweet spot remains the same for different bodytypes in your experience ? For example I am taller and heavier than a typical gymnast, could this spot for wall runs be 6 minutes for me ? I mean should I expect it  being significantly less in some exercises.

No, I have never made allowances for different body types with wall runs.  Ten minutes has been an acceptable minimum which has been productive for all of my athletes and is by no means an extreme amount of handstand work.

 

The chinese national team athletes hold thirty minute wall handstands twice a week.  The least we can do is our ten minutes of wall runs when appropriate.

 

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

http://youtu.be/lW459zuruY0

 

the first part is the prone dislocate with approximately 14.8 kg.

the second part is a way to emulate the declined bench prone dislocate. i have to admit that the traps work is far bigger then the normal dislocate (IM7), especially the negative phase. of course the flexion seems to be harder while the extension is easier.

alex87 said:

http://youtu.be/lW459zuruY0

 

the first part is the prone dislocate with approximately 14.8 kg.

the second part is a way to emulate the declined bench prone dislocate. i have to admit that the traps work is far bigger then the normal dislocate (IM7), especially the negative phase. of course the flexion seems to be harder while the extension is easier.

Damn, thanks for bringing some perspective. I thought 10 kg would be impressive, currently working on 6-8 kg prone dislocates myself and can't even fathom working on 14kg+. The first half which is trapezius domintant is the toughest. By the way, how much weight are capable of handling with Prone Floor Handstand Flexions ?

i can manage probably 4-5 kg more then the version demonstrated in the video...i will try,,

What is considered "full ROM?" in a dislocate? I see some people using weight plates on the center of the bar; this makes for a few degrees fewer in the ROM because the plates are several inches in diameter. Is this significant? I can't quite touch my butt with an empty bar, but I *can* do 10lbs because of this.

 

... sometimes I think I've got a technique solid, then I learn that an aspect I didn't think was significant is actually quite important...

At what point should we stop trying to achieve a closer hand placement, and start working on adding weight?  Or should dislocates eventually be treated as two separate exercises ie weighted and unweighted?

the plates make the exercises easier since the rom is a little bit less? mm i can say no!

talking about IM7 and IM8. if you have a plates you cannot start in an optimal position, since the traps are near the point of maximum contraction and here the muscle is weak and, due to the shortening of the muscles , you cannot use the stretch reflex to help your movement, so you are actually doing something more difficult.