Why bent arm strength doesn't translate to straight arm?

Besides the obvious reality, could someone explain the neurophysiology of why bent arm strength doesn't translate to straight arm strength?

You see all kinds of recommendations concerning for example, auxiliary drills for planche, and despite of the said impossibility of translation, people keep recommending exercises like weighted dips and some coaches even bench press. Though I get the general idea of the difference of both kinds of strength, I have my doubts if bent arm drills are totally useless, since I've seen some progress myself after some time without almost no training with the planche progression and just doing weight lifting (and bodyweight exercises like pushups, pullups, etc.) and after some time I just went from the simple frogstand to the tuck planche without passing through the straight arm frogstand (which is more difficult to me than the tuck planche itself). So I wonder if the usual exercises just strengthened weak points that I had for example in the triceps and wrists that helped progress in the planche.

Also, if bent arm exercises are that irrelevant, I wonder if there is any advantage in doing straight arm weighted exercises, like dumbbell raises, straight arm pull downs, straight arm pullovers, etc.

Anyway, I'd like to know the neurophysiological basis that makes straight arm strength different and specific.

Th reason is specificity. You get better at the things you specifically do, meaning that you get stronger at the angles you specifically train. So, bent arm will not transfer well to straight arm because there is only a 15 degree transfer in range of motion. What that means is that you will get stronger at the angle your arm is bent plus an extra 15 degrees. The exception is when the angle you are working at is the most mechanically disadvantaged. When you train at the most mechanically disadvantaged position it transfers through the entire range of motion.

When you trained with weights you probably hit the entire range of motion, including the angles at which we work when doing straight arm exercises.

Bent arm strength does translate to straight arm to some extent. Think of your body as a whole organism. When you train your whole body, the entire organism adapts. So when you do straight arm work or bent arm work you are getting stronger overall. The thing you need to be cautious about is the connective tissues in the elbow and wrist. Straight arm work puts unique stresses on these joints that bent arm work does not. Thats why you need to go slowly in your straight arm progressions for things like planche and cross so your connective tissue has time to adapt. Some mutants might be strong enough to hold a full planche right away but I doubt their elbows will be able to take it without going through the proper progressions. I have personally seen muscle heads come into our gym here at Virginia Tech and jump on the rings and hold a cross (so they are really strong in their shoulder girdle and arms) for 1-2 seconds and then come crashing down holding their elbows in pain, partly due to bad technique but mostly lack of elbow conditioning . . . they rarely ever come back. I however do sets of spotted crosses (and my spotter knows how to make me work!) and havnt had a single problem with my elbows, my biceps and forearms get sore as heck though! And if you look in the BtGB book you will notice that just about all of the movements are bent arm strength movements.

There are auxiliary weighted movements for elbow condition like maltese and victorian dumbbell presses, I dont know about the ones you listed but general shoulder girdle strengthening movements couldnt hurt.

Have fun, train hard but more importantly train smart.

IMHO when you work bent arm you use more your little muscles (biceps and triceps) compared to the straight arm muscles (latissimus, pectoral)

Felipe said:

IMHO when you work bent arm you use more your little muscles (biceps and triceps) compared to the straight arm muscles (latissimus, pectoral)

That is the single most fallacious (false) statement I have yet to read on this board. I can't even bring myself to give a proper explanation of why, because it is so obvious. It's like believing water turns into peanut butter when you blink.

Nifty gave the correct explanation. Because of the motion arms and angles involved inside the joints with straight arm work, the tendons and ligaments are put under substantially more stress. Ligaments and tendons do not have as good of a blood supply as muscle tissue, and because of that they heal slower. If you heal slower, you strengthen slower. So, it takes much longer for the connective tissues to get stronger than the contractile tissues(muscle). Now as far as neurological specificity, the straight arm movements are quite literally completely different from bent arm. The motion arms are different and muscle activation is different, and the movement of the center of gravity relative to the rest of the body is different, which leads back do different motion arms and muscle activation.

When you are doing a press to handstand by going from straight arms to bent arms and then back to straight, the bending of the arms allows the center of gravity to move less in the vertical plane. Because of the change in the number and angles of the motion arms(directions in which force is being exerted and movement is achieved), the burden of lifting the body is borne primarily by the triceps, as they must straighten the arm to complete the press. In the straight arm press, that work is done primarily by the shoulders, upper back and spinal erectors. There are a ton of other muscles working to stabilize, but those are the primary muscles responsible for the movement. Every movement requires different amounts of force to be exerted by different muscles. You therefore need high levels of strength in all muscles to perform these movements, as well as very strong tendons and ligaments.

Why is bent arm work recommended as a method to develop straight arm work? Bent arm work allows the muscles themselves to be strengthened. Some muscles don't get worked enough to do their job in straight arm motions when they are only worked in straight arm movements. So, you use bent arm movements to make the muscles strong enough to do their job in straight arm movements. Bent arm will not build tendon strength to the degree required for straight arm movements, which is why to succeed you must do both bent AND straight arm work.

Using slowly increasing loads with straight arm weighted lifts is a good idea, which Gregor can tell you. He does a number of lifts like that when he is not specifically preparing for his competitions. He has a very detailed training log, and if you read through it you will see that he does several straight arm presses with dumbbells.

No one that I have seen here has ever claimed that there is no translation from bent arm to straight arm work, or visa versa. If I somehow have missed that and they have, they are wrong. What is routinely claimed, and is also quite correct, is that one cannot succeed in achieving the straight arm positions without any bent arm work. Whether it is done together or the bent arm work was done years before, there is always bent arm work involved. All successful gymnasts use the combination.

As slizzardman mentioned, I always do combination of both. Straight arm work is all about ring woek and main focus of bent arm work is to increase eficiency of straight arm work. You must understand, biceps is main protector for elbow. So when your arm is streched, biceps is compesating it to not get overstreched. From there you can feel all of tension from straight arm work. More mass on biceps you have and more strength you have, less elbow pain and lower the risk factor of injury is.

Of course there is als very important of your tendon strength to, and muscular balance between biceps brachii, brachialis, brachioradialis, triceps.

slizzardman said:

Nifty gave the correct explanation. Because of the motion arms and angles involved inside the joints with straight arm work, the tendons and ligaments are put under substantially more stress.

If that's the main reason then heavy weighted partial reps could have a similar result to strengthen tendons and ligaments

http://forums.anabolex.com/showthread.php?t=39240

slizzardman said:

Now as far as neurological specificity, the straight arm movements are quite literally completely different from bent arm. The motion arms are different and muscle activation is different, and the movement of the center of gravity relative to the rest of the body is different, which leads back do different motion arms and muscle activation.

That's the main point I'd like to know more. I don't want to be a nerd or loose myself in theoretical speculations but I'd like to know the science behind it. So far nice explanations were given more at a macroscopical level (angle difference and histological difference of connective tissue), what about at cellular and molecular level? Take for instance Greasing the Groove which is explained with synaptic facilitation. When you say different muscle activation what do you mean exactly? Difference at the synapses? At the motor neurons firing/stimulation?

I agree with you fundamentally and I can't see why bent arm strength or overall strength wouldn't contribute to straight arm strength but...

slizzardman said:

No one that I have seen here has ever claimed that there is no translation from bent arm to straight arm work, or visa versa.

Maybe I misunderstood Coach Sommer here:

http://gymnasticbodies.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=2819&p=18734&hilit=bent+arm+strength+carryover#p18734

Coach Sommer said:

No, straight arm strength and bent arm strength are completey different animals. Profiency in one usually has little to no carryover to the other which is why the correct development of both is essential.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Though he said both are essential he also said it has little to no carryover... :?

Romulo said:

slizzardman said:

No one that I have seen here has ever claimed that there is no translation from bent arm to straight arm work, or visa versa.

Maybe I misunderstood Coach Sommer here:

http://gymnasticbodies.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=2819&p=18734&hilit=bent+arm+strength+carryover#p18734

Coach Sommer said:

No, straight arm strength and bent arm strength are completey different animals. Profiency in one usually has little to no carryover to the other which is why the correct development of both is essential.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Though he said both are essential he also said it has little to no carryover... :?

I stand corrected. Coach says there is little to no carryover. I am going to make the unpopular statement that that is simply not true. For the most part, functionally speaking, there's going to be a greater carryover from bent arm to straight arm than the other way around, because of the greater amount of damage and therefore remodeling done.

I believe that perhaps what Coach Sommers is referring to is that if you practice handstand pushups you will not get better at straight arm handstand presses, which is of course true. He is referring to the neurological conditioning aspect. You have to practice a movement to get better at that movement. I do not think he is claiming that the actual strength that a certain muscle group, say the deltoids, gains during bent arm movements(pseudoplanche pushups, for example) will not carry over to the straight arm planche. He is simply saying that your body will not learn how to do a planche by doing pseudoplanche pushups all day long. because it is not learning the specific pattern of motor neuron activation that achieves a successful planche. That's just how our bodies work. Muscular strength exhibition is present in any position in which a muscle works, whether it is straight arm or bent arm. No matter how you strengthen that muscle, the extra strength is present. There is strength carryover, but there is not skill carryover. Getting good at handstand pushups will not make you any better at straight arm handstand presses if you never practice them, but the strength will be there and will make the learning process faster, because it will be purely an issue of neurological adaptation.

I will use myself as the example for this. Before February I had never done any straight arm exercises, ever. EVER. No gymnastics strength work. I did, however, do very heavy lifting. Because of this, it took me 3 months to achieve a 4 second full lay front lever on the short rings. I dare you to fond anyone here who achieved that faster. That does not make me better than anyone, that simply demonstrates that the high degree of bent arm strength that I had directly carried over to a straight arm position. The same thing happened on planche. I had short straddle holds after around 4 months. The problem there was that I have not conditioned my elbow connective tissue to handle that stress, and because of that I developed tendonitis. Nevertheless, my bent arm strength had direct carryover to straight arm positions. It did not, by any means, make me magically able to perform them, but it made the acquisition of the new skill come MUCH faster, as I already had the strength necessary. If there was no strength carryover, I'd be in the same position as most other people here, training over a year to achieve a decent flat tuck or the beginnings of a straddle.

I do not intend these statements to be inflammatory, I am merely pointing out as a primary source that bent arm strength does have carryover to straight arm. The cast wall walks are improving everything that I do with my shoulders, somewhat similar to a TGU, and so I also claim that cast wall walks, a straight arm exercise, have direct carryover to my bent arm performance. They do not make me magically able to bench press or do HeSPU perfectly with no practice, but instead provide me with extra shoulder strength which in turn improves my bench press and HeSPU.

Romulo said:

slizzardman said:

Nifty gave the correct explanation. Because of the motion arms and angles involved inside the joints with straight arm work, the tendons and ligaments are put under substantially more stress.

If that's the main reason then heavy weighted partial reps could have a similar result to strengthen tendons and ligaments

http://forums.anabolex.com/showthread.php?t=39240

Heavy partials do help. They cannot approach the same stresses achieved during disadvantaged lifts such as the planche. No matter how heavy you do partial benches, and I know this for a fact because I used to do 4-6 inch partial reps on a smith machine with 675(7 45's on each side plus the bar, which is about 45 lbs), yea, that's not a mistype, you can't put as much stress on the elbow connective tissue as you do in a full planche. They will make you stronger, for sure, and they will do more for your tendons than the weights you use during full ROM lifts, but they cannot fully prepare you. Math doesn't let them. Stupid, stupid math... As a side note, despite being able to move that on the smith, I could move but not control 405 on a free bar. Smiths do NOTHING for your stabilizers. My free bench press 1RM did go up from 320 to 385 over a 4 month period due to the strength gains from the heavy partials.

Romulo said:

slizzardman said:

Now as far as neurological specificity, the straight arm movements are quite literally completely different from bent arm. The motion arms are different and muscle activation is different, and the movement of the center of gravity relative to the rest of the body is different, which leads back do different motion arms and muscle activation.

That's the main point I'd like to know more. I don't want to be a nerd or loose myself in theoretical speculations but I'd like to know the science behind it. So far nice explanations were given more at a macroscopical level (angle difference and histological difference of connective tissue), what about at cellular and molecular level? Take for instance Greasing the Groove which is explained with synaptic facilitation. When you say different muscle activation what do you mean exactly? Difference at the synapses? At the motor neurons firing/stimulation?

There isn't much to say here, you should be able to figure this out with a little common sense. When you perform any movement, say walking for example, your body learns to do a whole bunch of things at the same time, without you thinking about it. That process takes a long time. You use the same muscles standing up, but babies get good at standing up way before they get good at walking. Why? They use the same muscles to stand up as they do to walk, how come they aren't able to just walk all over the place? After all, if they can stand up on their own they are plenty strong enough.

The reason is that their body has not yet learned the specific pattern of motor neuron activation that allows efficient walking. That's all it is. Becoming proficient with movements is nothing more than the combination of 2 factors: the requisite muscular strength necessary to achieve the movement, and the learning of the motor neuron firing patterns that actually cause the muscles to successfully produce said movement.

In some skills, such as rings handstands straight arm movements are harder to stabilize than slightly bent arm movements because of the inherent instability in trying to stabilize one joint versus two in the frictionless plane. Compensation is easier when you can move two joints simultaneously. Slightly bent arm handstands are about 4-5x easier than a straight arm handstand on rings. Same with straight arm supports versus slightly bent arm supports. Even most people when they are beginning handstand work have the tendency to bent their arms slightly instead of locking the elbows out in a non-frictionless plane.

In skills that require control, flexibility, and strength expressed simultaneously such as straight arm press handstands bent arm strength teaches incorrect movement patterns. There is very little to no carryover with bent arm work to such skills.

Otherwise, the rest is due to lack of time spent developing certain positions or neurally knowing what the position feels like so it's hard to apply any strength you may have developed. This is especially true with isometrics versus dynamic movements and the time spent on developing each.

braindx said:

In some skills, such as rings handstands straight arm movements are harder to stabilize than slightly bent arm movements because of the inherent instability in trying to stabilize one joint versus two in the frictionless plane. Compensation is easier when you can move two joints simultaneously. Slightly bent arm handstands are about 4-5x easier than a straight arm handstand on rings. Same with straight arm supports versus slightly bent arm supports. Even most people when they are beginning handstand work have the tendency to bent their arms slightly instead of locking the elbows out in a non-frictionless plane.

In skills that require control, flexibility, and strength expressed simultaneously such as straight arm press handstands bent arm strength teaches incorrect movement patterns. There is very little to no carryover with bent arm work to such skills.

Otherwise, the rest is due to lack of time spent developing certain positions or neurally knowing what the position feels like so it's hard to apply any strength you may have developed. This is especially true with isometrics versus dynamic movements and the time spent on developing each.

Precisely. Skill-wise, there is no real carryover because they require completely different neural patterns. However, if the reason one cannot perform a handstand press is because the shoulders are too weak, using bent arm work to strengthen the shoulder will be beneficial. It won't help any in the neural learning process, but the increase in muscular strength will remove an obstacle, namely insufficient strength. At that point the neural learning will be the only obstacle remaining. Additionally, if one can perform a straight arm handstand press correctly but can only perform 2 repetitions before fatiguing, increasing muscular strength will enable the athlete to perform additional repetitions, or to continue to perform other skills afterward without reaching fatigue. In either case, bent arm work can and in most cases should be used to develop muscular strength/endurance, in concordance with a complete training program. This will not impact neural learning, but it will still improve the straight arm capabilities of the athlete.

slizzardman said:

That is the single most fallacious (false) statement I have yet to read on this board. I can't even bring myself to give a proper explanation of why, because it is so obvious. It's like believing water turns into peanut butter when you blink.

slizzardman said:

primarily by the triceps, as they must straighten the arm to complete the press. In the straight arm press, that work is done primarily by the shoulders, upper back and spinal erectors

Why do you have to be so ruthless on me just because I didn't write a long post like you?

You wrote similar concepts in your post too, so how can it be "the single most fallacious statement you have yet to read"?

Slizzardman said:

Felipe said:

IMHO when you work bent arm you use more your little muscles (biceps and triceps) compared to the straight arm muscles (latissimus, pectoral).

That is the single most fallacious (false) statement I have yet to read on this board. I can't even bring myself to give a proper explanation of why, because it is so obvious. It's like believing water turns into peanut butter when you blink.

I admit, many times I could be more delicate. However, claiming that you use little muscles more than big muscles during bent arm work, as well as implying that there is any such thing as a straight arm muscle, is so far from any kind of fact that it's honestly hard for me to figure out how such a thought would arise. If I said something similar, like "I believe that there are some proteins better for strength and some better for endurance" I too would deserve a scathing response, because it would show that I a) have no idea how the body metabolizes proteins and/or b) builds and repairs muscle tissue, and/or c) haven't stopped, checked on actual facts, and then put those facts that I find and verify together with any conjectures I may have, based on my knowledge(gained from a combination of gathering and assimilating information and experience). Your statement clearly showed that, regardless of what your physical capabilities are, you don't have a working knowledge of how the human body achieves movement. I didn't call you any names, I simply attempted to point out the unsound nature of the comment. If I had taken one line out of an explanatory post and said the same thing, perhaps I would have been out of line, but I did not. There was the one line quoted, and that's all. If your feelings are hurt, I apologize to them for their pain, but I stand by what I said.

Felipe said:

You wrote similar concepts in your post too, so how can it be "the single most fallacious statement you have yet to read"?

I never once stated or implied there is any such thing as a straight arm or bent arm muscle, and to imply that I did shows a complete lack of reading comprehension skills. I specifically said that certain muscles play more of a role in certain straight arm movements, but that they all are important to both straight arm and bent arm movements. I then proceeded to explain how strength gains do carry over from straight arm to bent arm, even though the development of a straight arm skill will not usually carry over directly to the development of a bent arm skill, because skill is the adaptation of the nervous system in order to activate motor groups in the correct order, quantity, and duration to successfully perform a given skill. As such, each movement must be independently learned even when sufficient muscular and connective tissue strength is already developed.

As a matter of fact, if you really want to be technical about it, the smaller muscle groups are much more important than the big muscle groups when it comes to straight arm work. They are the limiting factors. Here is a fairly decent list of what the limiting muscles are for certain positions:

In Iron Cross work, it's shoulders and biceps, along with some of the forearm flexors. In the Planche, depending on what direction your fingers are pointing, it is a combination of the shoulders, biceps, triceps, and various forearm muscles, with the possibility of spinal erector weakness as well. In the Front Lever it is rear delts, trapezius and rhomboids, triceps, and hip flexors(which do happen to be a combination of smaller and larger muscles, the large one being the rectus abdominus, but without the small muscles being able to do their job, one cannot hold the position even if the big muscles are strong enough). In the back lever it is forearm flexors, biceps, front(anterior) deltoids, and the spinal erectors (which are all rather small). These are the muscles that are taxed the hardest in straight arm exercises. The reason for this is that the larger muscles such as the lattisimus dorsi and the pectoralis major are primarily for pulling the upper arm close into the body. Because most straight arm work involves the arms remaining at a fixed width, these muscles are less of a contributor than the smaller muscles that are more directly involved with movement around the joint. In bent arm exercises the upper arm moves significantly more as a general rule, and therefore the larger muscles are a bit more involved on the whole.

I will say that with certain movements, the Cross Pull most specifically, it is certainly possible for the pectorals and/or lattisimus muscles to fail first, though it is much more likely that the muscles responsible for maintaining a straight arm will fail first. As soon as you have bent your arms even one degree, you have changed the cross pull to a bent arm exercise, and the limiting factors will change accordingly. For most other presses and pulls the deltoids will still be the first thing to go, followed by the biceps which is why the rings specialists tend to have huge shoulders and biceps compared to their other muscles. Having said all of that, they are still all important, and both big and small muscles are involved pretty heavily in everything we do physically.

There are other exceptions, like on the rings, where constant stabilization forces more work to be done by the lats and the pecs. They are still not the muscles that limit one's ability to hold certain positions. It's almost impossible to have rear delts that are proportionally stronger than the lats. That COULD be accomplished, but it would require very specific training with that particular goal in mind. In general, the smaller muscles lag behind the bigger muscles. That is why pre-hab is so important, especially for the straight arm skills/exercises. Those smaller muscles, along with connective tissues, are the ones that get injured due to comparative weakness in the position held. Because of that, if anything could be considered a straight arm muscle, which I again reiterate is a completely fallacious concept, because all muscles are used in both straight and bent arm exercises, it would be the smaller muscles. Having said that, there are still no such things as straight arm muscles or bent arm muscles.

In the cross, people will bend the arms for 3 different reasons:

1. shortens the lever for the chest/lats strength

2. shortens the biceps which make it easier to protect the elbow

3. puts the elbow backwards which emphasizes more lats (lats are stronger than chest).

To say whether it is the biceps or chest/lats or even forearms it's very hard to say which is actually failing first in the movements. That's because the arm bending constitutes a systemic change in the movement reducing all of the qualities that make the strength move hard.

Most likely what is weaker will change as you get more advanced if you started from scratch at least, so I wouldn't go as far to say it's one specific thing. If you're coming in stronger it's usually the biceps/elbows/connective tissue that is going to fail first though.

I have to say that sounds pretty reasonable. I can only imagine there would be some point where with proper training the small muscles are able to their job long enough in the straight arm position for the larger muscles to work to fatigue. I can't imagine being at that point right now

Thanks for your input on the cross In the straight arm version, in your opinion, which of the muscles gives first? Have you reached the point where you can exhaust your chest/lats before you have to bend the arms?

slizzardman said:

I have to say that sounds pretty reasonable. I can only imagine there would be some point where with proper training the small muscles are able to their job long enough in the straight arm position for the larger muscles to work to fatigue. I can't imagine being at that point right now

Thanks for your input on the cross In the straight arm version, in your opinion, which of the muscles gives first? Have you reached the point where you can exhaust your chest/lats before you have to bend the arms?

Yup. After your body is used to it you're golden. I went through the elbow tendonitis phase as well.. if anything that's where it would come back.

Most people's weak chest & elbows are the most common culprits to the bent arms IMO. rings flys may be a good choice to help build up the straight arm + chest

IMHO when you work bent arm you use more your little muscles (biceps and triceps) compared to the straight arm muscles (latissimus, pectoral)

It was poorly written, in fact the main point for misunderstanding is that it should been written "compared to the big muscles in straight arm work". Sorry for that (I noticed it only now! I'm not english)

So, it was a not quite clear sentence, but you are deducting that it was my entire knowledge on the argument.

I havent any doubt that in a bench press you are using your pectoral more than your shoulder even if it's bent arm work, or that in a maltese you keep even your forearm muscle in great tension even if it's straight arm work.

My simple thought was about the intensity of the work (like you said about rings, "more work to be done by the lats and the pecs").

My statement showed that I didn't have time or will to wrote a good post, it was a quick opinion (IHMO).

Even the worst posts help the better ones (like yours on big/little muscolar imbalance) to emerge.

That's the spirit of a discussion forum.

No worries Like I said, no disrespect intended. I can only go on what you show, because I do not know you in real life and I can't look in your head. Again, for any hurt feelings I apologize.

Joshua Naterman said:

(...) It's like believing water turns into peanut butter when you blink (...)

Joshua Naterman said:

(...) many times I could be more delicate (...)

ROFL... There are many, many gems in the archives... B)

We still love you Joshua...

trianglechoke7 said:

When you train at the most mechanically disadvantaged position it transfers through the entire range of motion.

This is quite a bold statement. Have you got a source?

Here's another explanation:

It is different motor patterns. In much straight arm work muscles like serratus ant., traps, rhomboids, levator scap, pec minor, coracobrachialis (all which most often play a stabilizing role) suddenly play an dynamic function - whilst normally dynamically functioning muscles suddenly act stabilizing (pec major, biceps brachii, lats).

Ask a muscular dude to do an IC pullout with straps. He can't! But the second he bends his arms slighty, he can fire the pressing pattern.

Good thread. I wanted to clarify about this statement made by Gregor (where the hell did he go anyway?)

Gregor said:

You must understand, biceps is main protector for elbow. So when your arm is streched, biceps is compesating it to not get overstreched. From there you can feel all of tension from straight arm work. More mass on biceps you have and more strength you have, less elbow pain and lower the risk factor of injury is.
 

Does this mean accessory bent arm work such as ring curl progressions would help protect my elbows/bicep tendon during straight arm work?

Yes, in combination with straight arm work it will help; but in isolation without straight arm work it will not.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Interesting... may just help with the minor golfer's elbow I seem to be getting from pullup training. Thanks Coach!

red1392 said:

Interesting... may just help with the minor golfer's elbow I seem to be getting from pullup training. Thanks Coach!

No You shouldn't have problems from pullups. Cut volume