Measuring, Advancing, Formulating

After a lot of perusing and reading I've really intensified my interest in what mastering gymnastics has to offer to my athletic performance and fitness, but I've a couple of questions that I hope are worthy of some intelligent discussion.

I have yet to purchase the packages and courses, largely because I am a very conservative shopper and I am a little apprehensive in spending a large chunk of change on some media that will be essentially recreational...all of that aside.

From what I gather, success in these programs is largely based on one, maybe two questions: Can you obtain this position? and/or Are you stable in this position? Is success solely based on these measurements? Functionally, one could argue that success training gymnastics is really measured by the ability to do something (ie hold a handstand, successfully achieve a MU). I've been a personal trainer for the last 5 years and have recently been licensed as a physical therapist, so, my mind, in terms of exercise, is very much based in numbers and whatnot. 

Ultimately, I want to know how members and other fanatics have been measuring their success and what benchmarks they are using. For some reason, something in my head is assuming that it HAS to be much more complex than achieving a lower level of difficulty in one task then increasing the level of difficulty in order to progress. If that is the case, then how are things structured as to facilitate good training sessions? I don't want to go into a gym setting and just constantly do something over and over and over until I get it when I may be missing the bigger picture.

thedrzo said:

After a lot of perusing and reading I've really intensified my interest in what mastering gymnastics has to offer to my athletic performance and fitness, but I've a couple of questions that I hope are worthy of some intelligent discussion.

 

I have yet to purchase the packages and courses, largely because I am a very conservative shopper and I am a little apprehensive in spending a large chunk of change on some media that will be essentially recreational...all of that aside.

 

From what I gather, success in these programs is largely based on one, maybe two questions: Can you obtain this position? and/or Are you stable in this position? Is success solely based on these measurements? Functionally, one could argue that success training gymnastics is really measured by the ability to do something (ie hold a handstand, successfully achieve a MU). I've been a personal trainer for the last 5 years and have recently been licensed as a physical therapist, so, my mind, in terms of exercise, is very much based in numbers and whatnot. 

 

Ultimately, I want to know how members and other fanatics have been measuring their success and what benchmarks they are using. For some reason, something in my head is assuming that it HAS to be much more complex than achieving a lower level of difficulty in one task then increasing the level of difficulty in order to progress. If that is the case, then how are things structured as to facilitate good training sessions? I don't want to go into a gym setting and just constantly do something over and over and over until I get it when I may be missing the bigger picture.

Sets and reps are clearly defined in the program.  That measures each progression.  Then once that is "mastered" which entails far more than just being able to hold a position briefly you progress on to a more advanced movement.

More of your questions will be or already have been answered in the course specific forums.

GoldenEagle said:

More of your question will be or already have been answered in the course specific forums.

Thank you for the heads up, I appreciate it.

Daniel Burnham said:

Sets and reps are clearly defined in the program.  That measures each progression.  Then once that is "mastered" which entails far more than just being able to hold a position briefly you progress on to a more advanced movement.

Welp, I guess the real way for me to answer all of my questions would be to just purchase the courses and figure it all out. Eventually...I guess. Essentially what you're saying is that once an athlete is able to safely get into a position, be stable in the position, and then have the necessary strength to transition from the position or exercise then the difficulty must be raised. I'm not too concerned about the sets/reps schema, but rather the principles to live by in order to make training successful.

Actually, if you're a physical therapist, you'll be able to deduce each progressions and their reasoning better than most people could.  Although it's true there are technique evolved, but that's not the "main" principle.  To put it in a better perspective, think of a Olympic Clean.  Sure there's definitely technique evolved, but a high level strength coach also care about whether you have enough ankle dorsiflexion or hip flexion mobility.  Are you able to stabilize your spine.  Can you put that weight overhead. Sure to put it simple enough, you can say an olympic coach would want to make sure "can you achieve the deep squat or rack position," or "are you stable enough once you jerked the weight overhead."  But strength coaches also care about what they should do so you're in a position to be able to success do that.  That's what the courses are about, but simply using a different tool.  Instead of Olympic lifting, it's Gymnastic Strength Training™.

Instead of asking, "can I do this or not," GymnasticBodies is more about "are you physically prepared or not" to do this.  Also, don't worry about spending this purely for recreational use you'll actually find out that many ideas in the program can actually be taken and applied to your professional practice.

The idea of mastering a move is essential to the system.  Not can do a move, not know a move, but master the move.

I did martial arts for years, which means pushups pushups pushups.  Pick a number and I would do it.  Were they good pushups?  Yes.  Were they perfect pushups?  No.

I discovered this for myself one year ago, as I began teaching some classes and holding myself to a higher standard.  I made sure every muscle was tensed, I slowed down, I brought my arms in closer, elbows back, chest all the way down, smooth form with much slower tempo.  I did all the little things right, and suddenly I went from regularly doing 100+ pushups in a class to struggling with one set of 10!

It took about three months, but I successfully mastered the pushup.  I simply realized one day that it no longer challenged me.  For weeks it had gotten easier and easier, but now it didn't even feel like anything, much like how you don't notice your muscles working when you walk.  You are just in complete control.

I just started F1, and I was immediately hooked by the idea of mastery.  Not just getting easier, but making the movement or exercise become almost second nature. The mastery requirements for sets and reps is a way to prove that you are ready to move on but the real beauty, I believe, is the control and satisfaction of moving the body effortlessly in a way that was once impossible.

So, with regards to numbers, every set and rep is spelled out for you, advancing in a progressive manner week by week with room for deload, and the mastery or end goal requirement is the carrot hanging in front of you.  But I don't care about those numbers.  I care about the feeling of physical improvement and advancement, which I'm seeing the beginning of in just my first few sessions.

alan tseng said:

 

...

 

Also, don't worry about spending this purely for recreational use you'll actually find out that many ideas in the program can actually be taken and applied to your professional practice.

If only I could convince those patients who "suffer" from chronic low back pain! I'm sure I will be able to translate many of the prinicples into the clinic. I appreciate your input. I like the idea you drew upon with the Olympic lifting. Technique is paramount in order to maximize efforts... I've read through BTGB recently really understand the progressions intellectually, but I have yet to really understand them physically. I figure I should probably try to understand the principles before throwing myself into the mess whenever possible.

alan tseng said:

... Although it's true there are technique evolved, but that's not the "main" principle.  To put it in a better perspective, think of a Olympic Clean.  Sure there's definitely technique evolved, but a high level strength coach also care about whether you have enough ankle dorsiflexion or hip flexion mobility.  Are you able to stabilize your spine.  Can you put that weight overhead. Sure to put it simple enough, you can say an olympic coach would want to make sure "can you achieve the deep squat or rack position," or "are you stable enough once you jerked the weight overhead."  But strength coaches also care about what they should do so you're in a position to be able to success do that.  That's what the courses are about, but simply using a different tool.  Instead of Olympic lifting, it's Gymnastic Strength Training™.

 

Instead of asking, "can I do this or not," GymnasticBodies is more about "are you physically prepared or not" to do this...

Very well said, Alan.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

thedrzo said:

After a lot of perusing and reading I've really intensified my interest in what mastering gymnastics has to offer to my athletic performance and fitness, but I've a couple of questions that I hope are worthy of some intelligent discussion.

 

1) I have yet to purchase the packages and courses, largely because I am a very conservative shopper and I am a little apprehensive in spending a large chunk of change on some media that will be essentially recreational...all of that aside.

 

 

2) From what I gather, success in these programs is largely based on one, maybe two questions: Can you obtain this position? and/or Are you stable in this position? Is success solely based on these measurements? Functionally, one could argue that success training gymnastics is really measured by the ability to do something (ie hold a handstand, successfully achieve a MU). I've been a personal trainer for the last 5 years and have recently been licensed as a physical therapist, so, my mind, in terms of exercise, is very much based in numbers and whatnot. 

 

3) Ultimately, I want to know how members and other fanatics have been measuring their success and what benchmarks they are using. For some reason, something in my head is assuming that it HAS to be much more complex than achieving a lower level of difficulty in one task then increasing the level of difficulty in order to progress.

 

4) If that is the case, then how are things structured as to facilitate good training sessions? I don't want to go into a gym setting and just constantly do something over and over and over until I get it when I may be missing the bigger picture.

 Hi, there are several different questions and preformed ideas here:

1) You say you are a personal trainer and physical therapist, but at the same time you don't want to spend money on GB because it's just for recreational purposes. It doesn't make sense, just the prehab exercises that you'll find at the course will be paying for themselves in your daily practice. That's just not taking in to account the strength progressions. Getting better at your profession is not a spending it's an investment, even if you end not using GB for you or your clients, you´ll learn a big deal of tricks for your bag.

2) Maybe you refer to straight arm strength and plyometrics, Coach has stated in several interviews and at the seminars that they are one of the secret sauces of gymnast's strength.

But they are also subjected to Progression and Overload, it´s not new, it´s the proved method to develop any physical capability. No miracles there, but what you´ll find here is a set of progressions that are not usually available to the general public. They are only known by a relatively small group of gymnastic coaches to train their athletes. Coach has searched from different top coaches around the world for the most effective ones and has created his own selection, testing and improving them with his own athletes (that are making national team) and forum students. The method has evolved from BtGB book to the Foundation courses, because most people was lacking severely on the mobility and strength foundation and that needed to be addressed.

3) It´s easy, once you reach mastery (a given number of sets and reps or time) at a given exercise, you´ll  proceed to the next one. That will give you stimulus enough to your body to grow and improve, but not too much to produce an injury or stall your progression. Strength exercises are coupled between them to balanced the strength capabilities beyond the known push-pull, ( protraction retraction, etc..) and with prehab and active mobility, so your connective tissue is able to manage the load of the current and next progression.

4) Depending your capabilities you´ll breeze through certain exercises, but some others that are important will get you stuck for months. This is surely due to a lack of previous preparation of that body part, you´ll need to insist (with the adequate progression) till you are able to master them. If you skip the mastering at such exercises thinking that you don´t need them, you´ll eventually stall your progress maybe 2 or 3 exercises beyond the one you have skipped, or simply you´ll leave such an imbalance in your preparation that will lead to an injury when you get to advanced exercises.

EDiT: added straight arm strength and edited for clarity.

thedrzo said:

If only I could convince those patients who "suffer" from chronic low back pain! 

Since when does a therapist need to convince their patients of what therapy they need?  The therapist prescribes and the patient executes.

I would recommend contacting forum member Mark Collins who is a PT in Australia who has had quite a bit of success integrating GST into his patients therapy.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer