Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
Daniel Jorgensen

Ring strength/skills vs. height of individual

Recommended Posts

Daniel Jorgensen

It seems none of the real skilled ring specialist are much taller than 160-170 cm.

Is it at all possible to perform any of the implemented strength moves (like nakayama, or "just" a single maltese) for guys taller than 180?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Razz

It has to be! Don't believe anything else :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlexX

Train for it and find out. Honestly it's pretty ignorant to say that anything is impossible in terms of strength potential. Records are constantly being broken in every sport. A 350 lbs clean and jerk was a record lift at one point now featherweights are putting that weight up. A 400 lbs squat use to be a rare occurrence now it is common amongst most leg dominant athletes. I use to think a one arm chinup was pretty strong. Then I saw John Grimak do 7 of them with each arm at 200 plus lbs of weight and Jasper did 20 of them. Now I barely would consider it intermediate for a 160 lbs person. Don't limit yourself and you'll reach your goals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Newguy

I don't want to be rude, but I keep hearing sooo many people using there height as an excuse!!! Seriously, if you just train consistently, properly, smartly, and quite hard. I have pretty much no doubt that in 4-5 years time ANYONE can have a Maltese (Gregor has said that he thinks the Iron cross and Full lay Planche are skills within the reach of any average hard working athlete)

No most ring specialist's are that tall. So what, that is because it takes less work for a shorter athlete, not because it is impossible for someone taller to reach that goal!

Good luck, Train well, And never forget, Gymnastics is code for Fun :D

The Newguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Daniel Jorgensen

come on - i'm not looking or asking for an excuse! I'm asking out of curiousity, as I have never seen any "tall" guys do any of the high lvl strength movements on rings!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Razz

Well I'm like 172 and hopefully you'll see me doing a maltese in a year or two :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlexX

We are all rooting for you Razz :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Coach Sommer

Alexander Shatilov is 6'1"/183cm tall and placed 8th on in the floor exercise finals at the 2008 Olympics in Beijing.

In the following video he is performing his ring routine during the all around finals at the 2009 World Championships. Not a ring strength monster by any means, inverted cross is his most difficult strength element, but quite respectable nonetheless. Especially when you take into account that he is approximately 12" taller than the current World Champion on the still rings, Mingyong.

Dw5W5SUgJEs

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Daniel Jorgensen

OKay, this might be a stupid question - forgive me :)

Following a classic height/weight ratio - 160 cm/60 kg - Alexander Shatilov should be less that 70 kg (154 pounds at 6 foot 1 inch).

That would make him extremely skinny and not allow for much muscle mass. In my imagination doing monster strength in rings at such a height would require MUCH more lean muscle than 70 kg. of bodyweight would allow.

Why does my math not follow my imagination?

(yeeees, know it a kind a over-thought example)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Razz

Dany Rodgrigues, one of the worlds best rings competitors, is not very big at all. Funny enough he's the only guy competing a decent victorian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlexX

Because the human body doesn't follow those equations very well and the greater the gap the more off the calculations will be. Your gap was huge 5'2 in half individual compared to a 6'1 just doesn't allow for very good math. The reason for the larger the gap the more off it is that it is a basic calculation, a true formula comparing two heights of individuals would be an extremely complex formula to accommodate the larger broader bone structure, water storage, glycogen storage and so on.

Simply put the 6'1 person is not just a large scale replica of a 5'3 person. The body just doesn't work that way. On another note that video is quite awesome. I also recall coach linking a video of a 170 lbs gymnast that was around 5'8 or 7 and very competitive. Can't quite remember the name but the guy had a very inspirational build (at least to me since I am the same height).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Coach Sommer
Following a classic height/weight ratio - 160 cm/60 kg - Alexander Shatilov should be less that 70 kg (154 pounds at 6 foot 1 inch).

Alexander's weight is listed as 77kg/170lbs.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Daniel Jorgensen
Following a classic height/weight ratio - 160 cm/60 kg - Alexander Shatilov should be less that 70 kg (154 pounds at 6 foot 1 inch).

Alexander's weight is listed as 77kg/170lbs.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Exactly!! My point/question was, that if Shatolov should match a hight vs. weight ratio like the one of say Van Gelder, then Shatilov should be around 72kg/154lbs

Van Gelder: 160/63 = 2,54 (In my thinking, this number would be a factor describing the amount of force available per cm. of body hight)

Shatilov: 183/77: 2,38

183/2,54 = 72,05 kg

Meaning, if Shatilov should follow the classical ring ratio(here exemplified with Van Gelder) he (shatilov) should be 72 kg.

My question is: Should he, if wanted to aim for more strength orientated rings series, lose mass? Or should he (as I imagined without thinking in terms of hight/weight ration) gain more strength through more lean mass?

(hmm, it's okay to smile at my thinking)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Coach Sommer

It is not only height and weight that must be evaluted; but also limb length ratios, body type, connective tissue attachments, metabolism, degree of fast twitch etc. A very fine line must be walked with each individual athlete; too little muscle mass reduces strength, too much muscle mass may reduce explosiveness or compromise ROM.

For his height, Shatilov's weight is fine as evidenced by his already high level of performance at a world class level. To lose weight at this stage in his career would almost certainly negatively effect his ring strength. If anything, by my evaluation of his physique, he may benefit from additional muscle mass, not less. However attempting such a gain in lean muscle mass may have a detrimental effect on his other events while only providing a marginal increase in his ring strength.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Joshua Naterman

Weight added per inch is not a linear scale either. You would be better off taking relative dimensions, scaling up to the height, and then taking a look at how much he should weigh.

Think about this: I'm 220 lbs at 6'2" and around 10% BF. Yuri Van Gelder, if you scale his picture up to my size, is actually bigger than me in the upper body. Significantly so. So much so that I wouldn't be surprised if he would weigh 200-210 even taking smaller legs into account. That is how I know what my muscle mass will need to be in order to handle these harder ring strength moves. That is also how I know that JUST in terms of muscular development (not even talking about connective tissue here) I am at least 2-3 years away from being where I need to be for a maltese and other advanced ring strength. With everything involved, I'm expecting a 5-7 year development time. So, to be safe, I figure that I should be able to hold a maltese by the time I am 35 or so, if I stay consistent and stick to the plan. Will it happen? I dunno! I'm just sticking to the plan and seeing how it goes.

Even as I am now, the only thing I could do on pommel horse is a comedy routine. Can you imagine if I was bigger in the upper body? YIKES.

Edit: The other thing to consider is that ring strength is not explosive for the most part, and seems to require quite a bit of practice. It is probably not possible to maintain an optimal level of explosive work along with the amount of work that it takes to develop the ring strength to such a high degree in a competitive setting. The neural stimulation is just too different, they are opposing characteristics. You train grinding strength to a high degree like pressing from BL to maltese and you lose some of the contraction speed characteristics of the 2a fibers because they are contracting relatively slowly during this kind of movement. This works directly against maximum explosiveness since that requires the fastest possible muscle contraction. Strange, but true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Joshua Chan

The other thing to consider is that ring strength is not explosive for the most part, and seems to require quite a bit of practice. It is probably not possible to maintain an optimal level of explosive work along with the amount of work that it takes to develop the ring strength to such a high degree in a competitive setting. The neural stimulation is just too different, they are opposing characteristics. You train grinding strength to a high degree like pressing from BL to maltese and you lose some of the contraction speed characteristics of the 2a fibers because they are contracting relatively slowly during this kind of movement. This works directly against maximum explosiveness since that requires the fastest possible muscle contraction. Strange, but true.

I would have to disagree with you on this one. If what you say it's true, rings specialist could not be able to perform properly in any other apparatus. Yes, Yuri Van Gelder is a true specialist, he doesn't do anything else but rings. But what about Chen Yibing, he's got a pretty good all round. Chechi was great on floor as well. Jordan Jovtchev is the perfect example. He was a floor finalist many times, with super explosive acrobatics and an incredible flair sequence. Also great Pommel which is all about being fast and explosive, and nice PB's.

This guys have an outstanding dynamic strength, that's why they look so good on other apparatus. One more thing, Ring routines are supposed to look smooth, they can't look hasty or fast. They works pretty slow cause it look better. Take Gregor, he works really slow when he does his Iron Cross press to Inverted, but works really fast doing kip kip to L-sit.

Look at this muscle up (wide, no false grip) form both Chen Yibing and Yang Wei. They both take less than a second.

8nr_XGfbhPc

And I thought you might be interested in this, not as tall as Shatilov, but something out of the ordinary for a ring finalist.

1whNYbTdDVg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Erik Sjolin

Jeezum crow, that guy is a beast! :shock: Not just build, but holding a Cross for that long, and looking frakin' bored while he was doing it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Joshua Naterman

The other thing to consider is that ring strength is not explosive for the most part, and seems to require quite a bit of practice. It is probably not possible to maintain an optimal level of explosive work along with the amount of work that it takes to develop the ring strength to such a high degree in a competitive setting. The neural stimulation is just too different, they are opposing characteristics. You train grinding strength to a high degree like pressing from BL to maltese and you lose some of the contraction speed characteristics of the 2a fibers because they are contracting relatively slowly during this kind of movement. This works directly against maximum explosiveness since that requires the fastest possible muscle contraction. Strange, but true.

I would have to disagree with you on this one. If what you say it's true, rings specialist could not be able to perform properly in any other apparatus. Yes, Yuri Van Gelder is a true specialist, he doesn't do anything else but rings. But what about Chen Yibing, he's got a pretty good all round. Chechi was great on floor as well. Jordan Jovtchev is the perfect example. He was a floor finalist many times, with super explosive acrobatics and an incredible flair sequence. Also great Pommel which is all about being fast and explosive, and nice PB's.

This guys have an outstanding dynamic strength, that's why they look so good on other apparatus. One more thing, Ring routines are supposed to look smooth, they can't look hasty or fast. They works pretty slow cause it look better. Take Gregor, he works really slow when he does his Iron Cross press to Inverted, but works really fast doing kip kip to L-sit.

Of course. I think we have an error in communication here on my part: I'm definitely not going to claim that you can't have extremely high levels of both, because you can, but they each interfere with each other being developed to the HIGHEST degree. A few things to consider here are that the interference will be present in the ranges of motion that are trained slowly the most. It isn't an overall thing that affects your entire body unless you train your entire body slowly, which no gymnast on any apparatus does. Unfortunately all this training costs energy both in the gym and in recovery, and it is not possible to put in the energy required to be the best in both a primarily explosive and a primarily strength event. This is the reason that you aren't going to find Olympic Lifters in the top ranking of powerlifting organizations. They are still monsters, but they are not top level strength guys because they NEED max speed. They COULD be stronger, but that ends up getting in the way of their performance. The same is going to go for gymnastics, as we will see.

Like everything else in life you must recognize where your strengths are and work with that. You shore up your weak points so that they do not hold you back, and you strive for balance to the point you can achieve it, but your strengths will always be your strengths and if you do not focus on them you will never achieve your highest peak. That doesn't mean you don't do other things, that just means you adjust your priorities accordingly. If you choose to be a true all around-er and finish 10th in everything (if that is possible) you will never be the best at anything except not being the best at anything. You will be the best of those who are not best at any one thing. Nothing wrong with that, but we are what we are. Usually even the all around-er has a specialty, or so it appears in the numbers below.

My point is that you must decide which is your true priority, accept that you are sacrificing some performance in other areas, and do your best to keep the other areas/events as strong as you can. You can see the difference between a true rings specialist like Van Gelder or Rodrigues and a more all-around athlete like Yibing or Yovchev who specializes on the rings, but there is still a clear disparity between their rings ability and ability in other events. Consider these results:

Rodriguez:

Games â–´ Age City Sport Phase Country Rank

2008 Summer 23 Beijing Gymnastics Men's Individual AA France FRA 80 QR

2008 Summer 23 Beijing Gymnastics Men's Team All-Around France FRA 8

2008 Summer 23 Beijing Gymnastics Men's Floor Exercise France FRA 62 QR

2008 Summer 23 Beijing Gymnastics Men's Rings France FRA 5

2008 Summer 23 Beijing Gymnastics Men's Pommelled Horse France FRA 61 QR

Chen Yibing:

Games â–´ Age City Sport Phase Country Rank

2008 Summer 23 Beijing Gymnastics Men's Individual AA China CHN 24

2008 Summer 23 Beijing Gymnastics Men's Team All-Around China CHN 1 Gold

2008 Summer 23 Beijing Gymnastics Men's Floor Exercise China CHN 42 QR

2008 Summer 23 Beijing Gymnastics Men's Parallel Bars China CHN 46 QR

2008 Summer 23 Beijing Gymnastics Men's Horizontal Bar China CHN 43 QR

2008 Summer 23 Beijing Gymnastics Men's Rings China CHN 1 Gold

2008 Summer 23 Beijing Gymnastics Men's Pommelled Horse China CHN 27 QR

Yibing still isn't in medal contention or even the finals for anything but rings, including all around.

Now let's take a look at Jovchev:

Rings:

Games â–´ Age City Sport Country Phase Rank

1992 Summer 19 Barcelona Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 34T QR

1996 Summer 23 Atlanta Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 4 9.800

2000 Summer 27 Sydney Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 3 9.737

2004 Summer 31 Athina Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 2 9.850

2008 Summer 35 Beijing Gymnastics Bulgaria Final 8 15,525

2008 Summer 35 Beijing Gymnastics Bulgaria Qualification 2 QU 16,275

Pommel Horse:

Games â–´ Age City Sport Country Phase Rank

1992 Summer 19 Barcelona Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 37 QR

1996 Summer 23 Atlanta Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 29T QR

2000 Summer 27 Sydney Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 33T QR

High Bar:

Games â–´ Age City Sport Country Phase Rank

1992 Summer 19 Barcelona Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 77T QR

1996 Summer 23 Atlanta Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 16T QR

2000 Summer 27 Sydney Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 29T QR

Parallel Bars:

Games â–´ Age City Sport Country Phase Rank

1992 Summer 19 Barcelona Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 58T QR

1996 Summer 23 Atlanta Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 29T QR

2000 Summer 27 Sydney Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 15T QR

Horse Vault:

Games â–´ Age City Sport Country Phase Rank

1992 Summer 19 Barcelona Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 58T QR

1996 Summer 23 Atlanta Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 20T QR

2000 Summer 27 Sydney Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 39T QR

Floor:

Games Age City Sport Country Phase Rank

1992 Summer 19 Barcelona Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 53T QR

1996 Summer 23 Atlanta Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 13 QR

2000 Summer 27 Sydney Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 3 9.787

2004 Summer 31 Athina Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 3 9.775

All around:

Games Age City Sport Country Phase Rank

1992 Summer 19 Barcelona Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 55 QR

1996 Summer 23 Atlanta Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 17T 57.124 (7th in H bar, 4th rings, 9th floor, 20th pommel, 34th PB, 26th vault)

2000 Summer 27 Sydney Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 8 57.887 (Floor 11th, vault 17th , pb 11th, hb 11th, rings 2ND!, Pommel Horse 4TH!)

2004 Summer 31 Athina Gymnastics Bulgaria Final Standings 90 19.512

Keep in mind that those high placing finishes are relative to the other all around-ers and are not placings in the finals. For example, Jordan got 4th on pommel horse out of the all around competitors but was 33rd in the final event rankings. I an not 100% sure how all that is done, but that's what everything looks like.

Even the great Yuri(Juri) Chechi has a similar profile. Dominating on rings, two 17th all around finishes and then a 85th in all around. Look at his 1996 scores, arguably his peak. 1st on rings. Next best event finish (not counting AA) was 20th on Vault.

Juri Chechi:

Games Age City Sport Phase Country Rank

1988 Summer 18 Seoul Gymnastics Men's Individual AA Italy ITA 17

1988 Summer 18 Seoul Gymnastics Men's Floor Exercise Italy ITA 15T QR

1988 Summer 18 Seoul Gymnastics Men's Horse Vault Italy ITA 33T QR

1988 Summer 18 Seoul Gymnastics Men's Parallel Bars Italy ITA 18T QR

1988 Summer 18 Seoul Gymnastics Men's Horizontal Bar Italy ITA 66T QR

1988 Summer 18 Seoul Gymnastics Men's Rings Italy ITA 6T

1988 Summer 18 Seoul Gymnastics Men's Pommelled Horse Italy ITA 22T QR

1996 Summer 26 Atlanta Gymnastics Men's Individual AA Italy ITA 17T

1996 Summer 26 Atlanta Gymnastics Men's Floor Exercise Italy ITA 47T QR

1996 Summer 26 Atlanta Gymnastics Men's Horse Vault Italy ITA 20T QR

1996 Summer 26 Atlanta Gymnastics Men's Parallel Bars Italy ITA 87 QR

1996 Summer 26 Atlanta Gymnastics Men's Horizontal Bar Italy ITA 65 QR

1996 Summer 26 Atlanta Gymnastics Men's Rings Italy ITA 1 Gold

1996 Summer 26 Atlanta Gymnastics Men's Pommelled Horse Italy ITA 39T QR

2004 Summer 34 Athina Gymnastics Men's Individual AA Italy ITA 85

2004 Summer 34 Athina Gymnastics Men's Team All-Around Italy ITA 12 QR

2004 Summer 34 Athina Gymnastics Men's Parallel Bars Italy ITA 30T QR

2004 Summer 34 Athina Gymnastics Men's Rings Italy ITA 3 Bronze

2004 Summer 34 Athina Gymnastics Men's Pommelled Horse Italy ITA 54 QR

All information is courtesy of http://www.sports-reference.com/olympics.

I want to emphasize that I am not trying to take away from any of these guys. They are insanely talented!!! Especially Yovchev. Absolutely incredible that he has managed to be a finalist in 2 events, and nearly medalling in both. I think that these numbers go to reinforce what I said, which is that you are not going to be the BEST at something that is primarily a strength event AND something that is primarily an explosive event. You can be very, very good at both if you are inherently gifted and supremely well trained, as Yovchev has shown us, but let's be real: that's once in a lifetime. Gymnasts like him are so rare that they re-inforce the "rule."

I simply think that it is important for me to back up what I have said with real, uncontroversial data. In regards to rings specialists not being able to perform "properly" in other areas I believe this is actually supported by what I have shown. "Properly" having an operational definition here of at least reaching the finals on a consistent basis in another event. The only one was Yovchev in floor, and he is an anomaly.

The unmentioned yet impressive Yang Wei is apparently a true all-arounder, but his best event is still Rings. He also finished 4th on Pommel in 2008 AND 4th in floor at the 2000 Olympics. I actually think this is pretty awesome, because rings guys usually have a lot of trouble with pommel, at least from what I've heard and seen in the rankings. Even so, there is a marked difference between his rings performance and his performance in the other events just like the other gymnasts mentioned.

Coach probably has much, much greater insight into this as A) he's been involved in the sport longer than I have been alive and B) He has a natural all-arounder in his gym. I, for one, would love to know what he thinks about all this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlexX

Although I can't say that I agree with slizzardman's suggestion that maximal strength work interferes with speed work, in terms of fiber type, to a great extent (this is just a personal opinion as I am aware that there is evidence to suggest that it does, I am just not convinced in the amount. Although reports have been made to support both our views).

But on the other hand it certainly is easy to see that when you spread your training stimuli around, you reduce the amount that can be dedicated to each training goal. There is some carry over from one to another but specificity always rules. And I think his example of olympic lifts and powerlifters is spot on. Both require a tremendous amount of technique and time under the bar. If you pursue both sports in a competitive manner you'd be average in both even though in theory the powerlifts should transfer over to olympic lifts at least to some extent. A person that persued only one of those sports would be at a much greater advantage than a person who tried to do both. The old adage jack of all trades, master of none certainly applies to training as each person has a limited recovery capacity.

My views are strictly from a weight training/speed work perspective as I have no knowledge in training for all around gymnasts or how they even begin to organize such a massive amount of work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Joshua Naterman

I don't think it's a fiber type issue so much as a neural adaptation issue. In the case of gymnasts I think there are also physiological developmental limits that interfere between events. Rings guys tend to be very thick in the upper body and for that reason seem to have more trouble with pommel horse. Flexibility can also be an issue for many. It's the old paper-scissors-rock game... none are superior, each has a strength and a weakness the others do not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Razz

Maximal strength work interfering with speed work sounds new to me.. I'd think they always complement each other, isn't that what the whole famous WSB program builds on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Joshua Naterman

They do for a while, but at very high levels they interfere with each other. Coach has talked about this at the seminars, how there is an ideal balance between them for a gymnast. As strength gets higher beyond a certain point, it becomes difficult to maintain an extremely high level of explosiveness, which is absolutely necessary for many apparatuses. As an all-arounder, Allan Bower's performance suffered some because of too much maximal strength. He started getting slower. As Coach realized this and adjusted Allan's training accordingly, performance picked back up. You can not be master of both strength and speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlexX
Maximal strength work interfering with speed work sounds new to me.. I'd think they always complement each other, isn't that what the whole famous WSB program builds on?

Westside is a bit different. I don't think anyone would call them speed monsters. These guys training program has strength as the one and only goal. They supplement it with some speed work. They do speed work one to two times per week and only for their main lifts. Their supplementary exercises are still in the max strength/slow category and the volume in relation of max strength to speed would be something like 5 to 1. Hardly someone who spends a lot of time on speed work.

Sprinters do speed work 4-5 times per week and lift from 2 to 4 times per week. Their volume of speed work is much greater than their slow/strength work. Olympic lifters tend to be closer to sprinters in term of the volume spent of explosiveness vs max strength work.

The key point here is that each group uses the other side as a supplementary activity, they are not pursuing both strength and speed at the same time. I hope this makes sense.

The best analogy I have ever heard of speed and strength is in Pavel's book "Power to the People." He mentions how the max strength athlete is like a truck and the speed athlete is like a ferrari. Both have tons of horsepower but you wouldn't expect a truck to accelerate very fast or the ferrari to tow a car out of a ditch. I realize that the example isn't perfect but it does make the point easier to understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlexX
I don't think it's a fiber type issue so much as a neural adaptation issue. In the case of gymnasts I think there are also physiological developmental limits that interfere between events. Rings guys tend to be very thick in the upper body and for that reason seem to have more trouble with pommel horse. Flexibility can also be an issue for many. It's the old paper-scissors-rock game... none are superior, each has a strength and a weakness the others do not.

That neural adaptation issue is an interesting one and I, personally, really wish there was some research done on intermediate athletes about it. Are you aware of any studies by any chance? Although I am really in-between about it, logically and anecdotaly speaking I'd say that I agree. The reason I am in-between is because it is so hard to classify what a sufficient amount of strength is (before diminishing returns), not to mention the fact that it probably also varies from athlete to athlete. To quote Chad Waterbury "The nervous system is the final frontier is exercise physiology."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Joshua Naterman

WSB uses a training cycle very similar in concept to the WODs, in that it focuses on explosive strength, stretch reflex, tempo work, and maximal strength all in one large cycle. However, WSB is for powerlifting. They are a powerlifting gym. For them, strength is the most important thing and these other elements are all used to keep strength rising. They know that they aren't going to be the best explosive lifters because that is not their sport and therefore not their primary goal, but they will still be very powerful! See what I mean? In gymnastics, almost every event depends far more on explosive strength and the stretch reflex than on maximal strength. Rings are an exception, as they can go fairly far either way, but the highest scoring guys are strength guys. Sure, they still have great swings, kips, and rolls but you don't have to be an explosive specialist to do that. You just need GOOD explosive strength and GOOD stretch reflex, NOT the best.

The high end strength work will interfere with the body's ability to perform the fastest possible rate of voluntary force development because it does not TRAIN this characteristic and this characteristic is not necessary for SR domination. Yes, you do get very high expression of force, but it is not being developed at absolute maximum speed. That slower rate of force development conditions the nervous system to be better at that particular pattern of innervation, and this pattern displaces the maximal rate of force development pattern. You don't need to go from BL to PL in .2 seconds to get the points, and you don't get the most points for doing so. You get points for LONGER holds for the strength stuff and perfect position. Not faster holds or faster rolls. You just need to be able to do them and make them beautiful, and if you can hold a position longer (more strength required) you get more points. Pressing from one hold to another is also a huge feat of strength, and many of these presses do not involve stretch reflex. Some, like Nakayama, do, but the majority do not. Because of this, I make the case that SR is an event that emphasizes maximal strength over what we here refer to as dynamic strength. That is just the nature of the beast, it is neither good OR bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

Please review our Privacy Policy at Privacy Policy before using the forums.