Strength Strength Strength

Hi guys, going through Instagram I saw this video and I was wondering about several things:

1. What do you guys think about it?

2. He has impressive straight arm strength, even more than many ring-athletes you see over there (besides maybe top 8 of the world) - so, my question is: If you are supposed to get incredibly muscular out of straight arm strength, why is he so not muscular in comparison with the vast part of ring-athletes? Which leads me to the next question:

3. Are the muscles of many ring specialists of not so much quality as his? Which leads me to the next question:

4. Is it better to have least muscle-element ratio as possible? What I mean is: Is it better to be the least muscular possible but still muscular enough to perform the skill? Which leads to the last question: 

5. Are ectomorphs in advantadge towards endomorphs and mesomorphs (I would understand that an ectomorph or an endomorph is in advantadge towards mesomorph, but between ectomorph and endomorph)

Thanks in advance!

Sorry, I mixed up mesomorph and endomorph!

@Alessandro Mainente @Coach Sommer @Everett Carroll

Strength is determined by mitochondria in your muscles. How healthy those "energy" cells are and their actual density in muscle tissue are important factors that determine possible strength output. 

Genetics and training are big influences and proper nutrition obviously. 

Hope that helps. 

Bigger muscles are potentially stronger by default.Strength apart from being a physiological adaptation is also a skill and depends on how well trained is your nervous system that is responsible for muscle contractions.

obviously for gymnasts it is more advantageous to have least muscle and plenty strength.

Its also worth mention that real strength comes from deep muscles and not the superficial ones.

Really interesting things stated above. I asked that because I've noticed many skinny guys showing high amounts of strength output, while other more muscular guys not so much. I guess that genetics are important, but I guess that the most important is the way you train. And muscles, as you mentioned, adapt physiologically depending on type of stress they are exposed to. I guess that a training in which high levels of strength are required in relationship to your weight, results on small but strong muscles in order to keep that strength-bodyweight ratio as optimal as possible... Am I right? That said; a muscle only grows the least necessary? Is it optimal? Or should the muscle receive another extra stimulus in order to make a better performance.

To put an example: There is a super skinny gymnast that is able to do a maltese, his muscles are the smallest necessary to hold the position.

-Would he perform it better by adding some extra muscle grow stimulus?  

-Would it be even wise to make it grow in another way except with the specific maltese work?

Thanks for the response before guys... Really appreciate it @Michael Batuk @Mike Inglis

1. Meh

2. Straight arm work is a portion of what is needed to develop gymnasts quality strength. The mitochondria in tissue have their part just as development of the tendons has its part in overall strength.

3. Huh?

4. Your body will develop only the needed muscle fibres or tendon tissue. Until your body has adequately developed what is physically required for the task you seek to complete.

5. The amount of muscle fibres a human has does not automatically translate to more innate strength, If your tendons have not been developed adequately.
In regards to strength... Your tendons connect your muscle to your bone. As your tendons continue to develop your body uses more individual muscle fibres, which then increases the perceived strength and muscle definition/tone.  If your physical body does not have tendons, it will not be able to move regardless of muscle belly size. 

On 9/7/2017 at 10:31 AM, Oscar Riaño said:

 

1. What do you guys think about it?

2. He has impressive straight arm strength, even more than many ring-athletes you see over there (besides maybe top 8 of the world) - so, my question is: If you are supposed to get incredibly muscular out of straight arm strength, why is he so not muscular in comparison with the vast part of ring-athletes? Which leads me to the next question:

3. Are the muscles of many ring specialists of not so much quality as his? Which leads me to the next question:

4. Is it better to have least muscle-element ratio as possible? What I mean is: Is it better to be the least muscular possible but still muscular enough to perform the skill? Which leads to the last question: 

5. Are ectomorphs in advantadge towards endomorphs and mesomorphs (I would understand that an ectomorph or an endomorph is in advantadge towards mesomorph, but between ectomorph and endomorph)

@Oscar Riaño

1. The athlete in the video you shared is most certainly very strong. This is most definitely impressive.

2. While this athlete is incredibly strong, it is very unlikely that he's even in the same caliber of ring strength as an elite level gymnast.

To answer your question, the ring athletes you are referring to have dedicated a vast majority of their lives to gymnastics ring training, which will indefinitely lead to muscle hypertrophy due to the instability of the rings. The athlete in the video, while strong, probably doesn't have the extensive training history as these "ring athletes" you are referring to.

3. Many of the skills you see ring athletes perform are multitudes more difficult than this and there is no doubt that this could potentially be a part of their warm up for ring specific training.

4. There is a reason why a majority of elite gymnasts are of a smaller stature. The larger, either in weight or height, a person is the more force their muscles will need to produce to perform the same amount of work. This gives smaller athletes with less mass a big advantage in performing advanced skills.

5. Ectomorphs may have a slight advantage when it comes to gymnastic Strength Training since they tend to have the lowest fat mass. However, with proper training and nutrition endo and mesomorphs can experience the same success. In fact, many of top ring specialists are of the mesomorphic body type. Think Yuri Van Gelder

13 hours ago, Mikey Cunanan said:

@Oscar Riaño

1. The athlete in the video you shared is most certainly very strong. This is most definitely impressive.

2. While this athlete is incredibly strong, it is very unlikely that he's even in the same caliber of ring strength as an elite level gymnast.

To answer your question, the ring athletes you are referring to have dedicated a vast majority of their lives to gymnastics ring training, which will indefinitely lead to muscle hypertrophy due to the instability of the rings. The athlete in the video, while strong, probably doesn't have the extensive training history as these "ring athletes" you are referring to.

3. Many of the skills you see ring athletes perform are multitudes more difficult than this and there is no doubt that this could potentially be a part of their warm up for ring specific training.

4. There is a reason why a majority of elite gymnasts are of a smaller stature. The larger, either in weight or height, a person is the more force their muscles will need to produce to perform the same amount of work. This gives smaller athletes with less mass a big advantage in performing advanced skills.

5. Ectomorphs may have a slight advantage when it comes to gymnastic Strength Training since they tend to have the lowest fat mass. However, with proper training and nutrition endo and mesomorphs can experience the same success. In fact, many of top ring specialists are of the mesomorphic body type. Think Yuri Van Gelder

Hi Mike, thanks a lot for your extense reply

Nevertheless, I would say that most of the elite ring athletes are overrated, with the exception of most of the Chinese athletes and some others. In any case... the only advantage that an ectomorph would have is because of his tendency to have lower body fat, but not because they would have more quality muscles, right?

Thanks again

10 hours ago, Oscar Riaño said:

Hi Mike, thanks a lot for your extense reply

Nevertheless, I would say that most of the elite ring athletes are overrated, with the exception of most of the Chinese athletes and some others. In any case... the only advantage that an ectomorph would have is because of his tendency to have lower body fat, but not because they would have more quality muscles, right?

Thanks again

 

On what do you base the idea that most elite ring specialists are overrated? The video is cool but this is legit warmup level for our national all-arounds let alone ring specialists or higher level guys. And we (Australia) are (currently) outclassed compared to the US or the other big boys.

Rather than quality of muscles, differences can exist in proportionate length of muscle bellies vs. tendons - greater proportion of tendon length in a limb can improve leverage and allow better demonstration of strength. This proportion is seen in a lot of smaller guys who display exceptional strength on rings. Certainly this plus exceptional muscular development goes into a rings elite - they have it all.

As for different -morphs, if I can't change it then I don't care about it, it isn't a factor that will affect your training or mine  

I'd guess (in the same way I'd guess at a horoscope, because I really don't believe in this kind of body typing) that I'm primarily endo with some meso in there, but I have mostly good proportions for rings with short limbs and carry most of my muscle in my torso. What do I do with this information? I just note that it's more fun for me to train rings. If I had hundreds of athletes and needed to statistically divide them into most likely to succeed at the top 1% to filter my competitive streams, that might be different, but for me and my athletes it's a page out of Coach Sommers' book and have them go as far as their talent allows. Sort out who's stronger in competition with facts rather than pondering it, is my view.

Parting thought; amongst elites, ring specialists are the most muscular. I couldn't say for sure whether the others avoid building muscle (although I am aware that they do emphasise development towards preferred/specialist events) but even all arounders do not develop like a van gelder or a yibing.

That's not to say don't question things of course, I welcome further discussion

Sorry about that, I accidentally deleted your post while replying it's below.

  On 9/19/2017 at 11:51 AM, Jon Douglas said:

On what do you base the idea that most elite ring specialists are overrated? The video is cool but this is legit warmup level for our national all-arounds let alone ring specialists or higher level guys. And we (Australia) are (currently) outclassed compared to the US or the other big boys.

Rather than quality of muscles, differences can exist in proportionate length of muscle bellies vs. tendons - greater proportion of tendon length in a limb can improve leverage and allow better demonstration of strength. This proportion is seen in a lot of smaller guys who display exceptional strength on rings. Certainly this plus exceptional muscular development goes into a rings elite - they have it all.

As for different -morphs, if I can't change it then I don't care about it, it isn't a factor that will affect your training or mine  

I'd guess (in the same way I'd guess at a horoscope, because I really don't believe in this kind of body typing) that I'm primarily endo with some meso in there, but I have mostly good proportions for rings with short limbs and carry most of my muscle in my torso. What do I do with this information? I just note that it's more fun for me to train rings. If I had hundreds of athletes and needed to statistically divide them into most likely to succeed at the top 1% to filter my competitive streams, that might be different, but for me and my athletes it's a page out of Coach Sommers' book and have them go as far as their talent allows. Sort out who's stronger in competition with facts rather than pondering it, is my view.

Parting thought; amongst elites, ring specialists are the most muscular. I couldn't say for sure whether the others avoid building muscle (although I am aware that they do emphasise development towards preferred/specialist events) but even all arounders do not develop like a van gelder or a yibing.

That's not to say don't question things of course, I welcome further discussion

Hi Jon, 

I´m really (really) skeptical about Australian athletes being able to do things like those that are shown in the video. Prove me wrong, show me a video. US ring athletes? Also a big no. I've never seen between the elite ring specialists of the US such a strength output. China, Russia, (perhaps other East-European countries), Greece... maybe. All the others have crappy forms :/  (Bananas/squeezed triceps to the lats/retracted scapulae...)

On the other hand... is additional muscle gain in the agenda of ring specialists? Or just the according muscle gain related to straight arm (and bent arm) strength is the optimal?

Thanks for the reply, Jon, and looking forward to watch those videos/have a nice discussion

Cool man, be skeptical. No one said you have to agree with or listen to me

Deliberate muscle gain for optimal str/weight ratio and performance is getting out of the scope of my knowledge; @Alessandro Mainente or @Coach Sommer would be a better call on that one.

For a rings specialist the weight it is important, for their purposes the absolute strength it is the primary goal. The fact that the strongest have more muscles mass depends on their routine. chen yibing, matteo morandi, yuri chechi, yuri van gelder, zanetti, tulloch, witthemburg, wynn...they have much more absurd strength part.

In order to be able to perform these parts in a routine, you need to be able to repeat some parts in a state of fatigue. train in a state of fatigue means a response of the body which tends to increase the structural part of the muscles cell involved in glycogen stores.

-back in 2012 when morandi won the bronze medal, he was training the strength part of pechino 2008 routine with 24 kg weigthed belt around the waist.......and then you can say that they are underrated.

-Yuri chechi was able to hold the cross with his coach Bruno Franceschetti , who is one of mine personal friend, grabbing his feet...and then you can say that they are underrated

-a good example of drop set on the rings by the specialist MingYong 

- strength routine with 7 kg belt

- When a gymnast performs on the rings he is doing all the strength position at 1/3 or 1/4 of the maximum hold if not less. This is necessary to ensure that the body it is not fatigued and the quality it is big from the beginning to the end. when you train for quality and not fatigue you are performing at the 60-65% of the maximum strength. This should be enough to understand that the strength of a rings specialist cannot be evaluated from a routine.

the only one person who knows everything about the strength of a rings specialist it is HIS COACH, everything else is simple talk.

Hi Alessandro, thank you for your response and to clarify the muscle mass part related to a fatigue training

Also cool to hear about some examples of raw strength of those athletes. As a result of what you said, one doubt arised. 

In the beginning you said:

5 hours ago, Alessandro Mainente said:

For a rings specialist the weight it is important, for their purposes the absolute strength it is the primary goal.

But if weight matters, this means that their purpose should be a high strength-bodyweight ratio and not absolute strength?  

I'm not underestimating them (at least not all of them). I said that China's Team is great concerning strength. In comparison, US Team isn't. I've not seen a good maltese so far, and a good form is a better synonym of strength. For me, it does not matter if you can do a all strength sequence if you are doing bananas, hollow back inverted crosses, and so on... I think you should agree on that

Mingyong is great, one of my favourites. The second video wasnt good. Why would you put 7kg if you are attaching the rings to your forearms? Wouldn't it more wise to develope first the maximal strength and then do it without? 

9 hours ago, Jon Douglas said:

Cool man, be skeptical. No one said you have to agree with or listen to me

Deliberate muscle gain for optimal str/weight ratio and performance is getting out of the scope of my knowledge; @Alessandro Mainente or @Coach Sommer would be a better call on that one.

I honestly doubt everything until I see it. I could tell you as well that i can press from front lever to victorian, would you believe me? 

7 hours ago, Oscar Riaño said:

Hi Alessandro, thank you for your response and to clarify the muscle mass part related to a fatigue training

Also cool to hear about some examples of raw strength of those athletes. As a result of what you said, one doubt arised. 

In the beginning you said:

But if weight matters, this means that their purpose should be a high strength-bodyweight ratio and not absolute strength?  

I'm not underestimating them (at least not all of them). I said that China's Team is great concerning strength. In comparison, US Team isn't. I've not seen a good maltese so far, and a good form is a better synonym of strength. For me, it does not matter if you can do a all strength sequence if you are doing bananas, hollow back inverted crosses, and so on... I think you should agree on that

Mingyong is great, one of my favourites. The second video wasnt good. Why would you put 7kg if you are attaching the rings to your forearms? Wouldn't it more wise to develope first the maximal strength and then do it without? 

 

Remember ALWAYS and I will say always again that when there is poor quality there is a poor approach o a lazy coach. where you fail on good technical development you are failing on the final result. no top 3 rings medalists have bad lines.

What is it the purpose of the straps on the forearms? well, this is a basic strategy of rings specialist. you cannot train all the days, all the time on straight arms due to the elbows stress. in this way, you are reducing the leverage on the elbows. by adding weight you can focus on maximal effort. Please notice that all the movements especially the butterfly should be executed at the maximum speed in order to obtain both strengths and if necessary functional specific hypertrophy. why it is necessary this tempo it is a deep and wide discussion and this is not the place for it.

16 hours ago, Alessandro Mainente said:

Remember ALWAYS and I will say always again that when there is poor quality there is a poor approach o a lazy coach. where you fail on good technical development you are failing on the final result. no top 3 rings medalists have bad lines.

What is it the purpose of the straps on the forearms? well, this is a basic strategy of rings specialist. you cannot train all the days, all the time on straight arms due to the elbows stress. in this way, you are reducing the leverage on the elbows. by adding weight you can focus on maximal effort. Please notice that all the movements especially the butterfly should be executed at the maximum speed in order to obtain both strengths and if necessary functional specific hypertrophy. why it is necessary this tempo it is a deep and wide discussion and this is not the place for it.

 

You shouldn't have mentioned that Alessandro... now I'm extremely curious haha  

I always thought that the straps were useful as a progression for the full version... or as a warm up, like Mingyong's video. What I want to ask is: Is it optimal to work with a reduced leverage (aka less intensive but more repetitions) or with a reduced number of sets (and perhaps more variety)? Or is it even optimal to reduce leverage for straight arm strength instead of resting of this elbow stress? This said, I took your advice of mastering the main foundation elements (Planche, FL, Manna, RC...), before getting into more advanced rings elements... Unfortunately I am a student who can't afford to follow the courses (I did a big effort by purchasing Thrive tho),  nevertheless I'm trying to stay as mobile as possible . After you master foundations, is there any other type of strength to work with besides straight arm strength? Or how would the training look like after foundations? Do you then neglect for example Manna or front lever training? I'm now training like 3h/day and trying to squeeze everything in ( Handstand, "Basic" strength elements, progressions of the book BtGB, and Mobility). What happens after that?? haha . Longer trainings? More load? 

Thank you for taking time, really appreciate it!
 

In regards to routine advice... read this post from 2014, by Cole Dano.

If you look at the background of the video you are referring to, there is weird stuff going on which makes me wonder if the whole thing is real in the first place... 

Also, better to start training than to wonder about ring specialists and ecto/meso/etc morphism..., IMHO