This forum is archived information and is no longer active.

SL PE 1

Started by puertogalera1994, April 1, 2015 · 9 Replies · 131 Views

puertogalera1994
 

hey guys,

after months of doing the arched body hold i just realized that it has been removed for a different exercise.

i would like to hear your thoughts on my form, so that i can go on. i am using abit more than 5 lbs ( 2,5 kg)

 

btw. no offense but why has it been removed? personally it is a bit strange for me . i always thought that the foundations series are a longtime used programm for olympic athletes and this change  just made it a bit unreliable for me...

 

like i said just my thought and no offense....

 

cheers

 


Alessandro Mainente

The form is acceptable.

the arch body is moved forward since the average condition for people (non agonsit gymnast) is far from the starting point of kids so basically they need to spend more time reinforcing other sectors. the program is revisited for normal people.

Awesssss

To me, it looks like you need to keep your hands straight and still and only rotate your upperbody.

 

Alex: Do you think a full gymnastic bridge is necessary to achieve before working on arch body holds to have the mobility/flexiblity for it?

Alexander Egebak
Hollow Man said:

To me, it looks like you need to keep your hands straight and still and only rotate your upperbody.

 

Alex: Do you think a full gymnastic bridge is necessary to achieve before working on arch body holds to have the mobility/flexiblity for it?

I am and Alex too so I will try to give you an answer.

 

No.

 

The end iM goal of FL progressions should not be a required standard to a previous PE 1 iM.

 

Arch Body Hold also requires significantly less flexibility than the ABH demonstrated in the video. To add to that; the ABH shown is the platinum-gold-etc. standard, and it has been stated some times now that "individual variance" is acceptable. Thus going for exact ROM as demonstrated is not necessary.

Awesssss
Alexander Egebak said:

I am and Alex too so I will try to give you an answer.

 

No.

 

The end iM goal of FL progressions should not be a required standard to a previous PE 1 iM.

 

Arch Body Hold also requires significantly less flexibility than the ABH demonstrated in the video. To add to that; the ABH shown is the platinum-gold-etc. standard, and it has been stated some times now that "individual variance" is acceptable. Thus going for exact ROM as demonstrated is not necessary.

I don't know... Doing Arch body holds has let me improve other areas of lower back work. I think it is an important one to have high quality in.

Alexander Egebak
Hollow Man said:

I don't know... Doing Arch body holds has let me improve other areas of lower back work. I think it is an important one to have high quality in.

I could not agree more. I am still doing 1 set to technical failure in order to preserve it until mastery of the other PEs. It just makes me feel so good in my core.

Awesssss
Alexander Egebak said:

I could not agree more. I am still doing 1 set to technical failure in order to preserve it until mastery of the other PEs. It just makes me feel so good in my core.

If you haven't, next time try it while holding a stick in your hand. You should get more flexion in.

Alexander Egebak
Hollow Man said:

If you haven't, next time try it while holding a stick in your hand. You should get more flexion in.

Thank you for your suggestion but my range of motion is already very close to course video

Awesssss
Alexander Egebak said:

Thank you for your suggestion but my range of motion is already very close to course video

Ok, Mr. Big Shot :)

Alexander Egebak
Hollow Man said:

Ok, Mr. Big Shot :)

Not trying to sound arrogant. If it helps I s(t)uck at HBH PE2! :D