Full Planche Is Impossible?

1) Start off with Coach's post. Train consistently and follow the steps, starting with step #1. Don't skip steps.

2) After your workouts, EAT. As long as you aren't consistently eating nothing but sugar (literally zero protein or other nutrients), in other words as long as you are eating FOOD there will be enough in it for you to grow. Eating crap may keep you at 13% instead of 8%, but you'll still grow strong. If you really get on point with your nutrition you will see much more dramatic changes, but the #1 thing is this: You NEED energy surplus in the moment to power accelerated metabolism!. Just eat food, and worry about details when you have the time and money.

3) Stop thinking about other people. You can't make them weaker, or dumber, or less dedicated. You can't affect their genetics, and you can't change their training history.

4) Start thinking about yourself! You CAN change YOUR training history starting with today's workout. As you work out, genes that are inactive BECOME active and your body will express a different phenotype when you work out regularly, all the way down to cellular energy metabolism.

Bottom line: Forget about everyone else and focus on yourself by training regularly and following the set progressions, starting with the first. If you've almost mastered the 5th and haven't even touched 1-4, start spending more time on 1 and less time on 5. Maintain your strength, but spend most of your time training the things you skipped. Continue focusing on yourself by making sure you are eating enough food, and if possible try to keep the food quality high (but quantity comes first when talking about strength gains).

Follow the bottom line and you will be on the path to success. And planche.

Nic Branson said:

Most people just have not spent the time doing the work. They lack the strength, the coordination, and the joint preparation. This is a long term achievement for almost everyone who gets it. Having the information and then implementing it properly are very different things. The timeline for everyone is different, I certainly could not comment on his potential over a forum.

I'm not saying this about you or your friend but many people make a lot of talk but then are unwilling to do the work and persevere when it is boring or hard.

Actually, I'm making him record every single one of his WODs and posting them on YouTube - all the videos are private though. I give him feedback and then assign the next day's WOD. I'll let you guys know if/when he's successful

Well, emos, I think we're in agreement.

emos said:

Who are you thinking of here? I always enjoy success stories.

Frits.

pinoyako said:

I was referring to people that achieved a full planche in their late teens or early adulthood. And I don't think I have come across a post in the GB forum where someone in that age group was successfully able to do a full planche other than mine (not trying to brag because my form is not perfect.) Because there should definitely be a sticky for people who successfully achieve a full planche!

I achieved perfect full planche at age 20 and my max hold time was about 5 seconds. What I'm going to say next about me may sound unbelievable or pure BS, but I assure you that I'm telling the truth and there's nothing beneficial I can get out of from making lies on a forum. It took me about 5 total months of specific planche training to get full planche starting from tuck. They were not consecutive months and I first started training planche in December of 2010 and achieved full planche in mid-June to July of 2012. I stopped training planche for several long periods between the years and when I resumed planche training in about mid-May 2012 I was at adv tuck and rapidly progressed to full planche in mid-June or July. The previous month of planche training before the last was in December of 2011.

Now that last month may sound fake, but I swear it isn't. I believe what made me achieve planche so fast was because I was 5'4" 115-120 lbs with non-bulky legs (not stick skinny either) and I probably have genetics that are gifted for strength training. I also had some weight training background, but I didn't work on my presses much so my pushing strength wasn't that strong from it. I achieved both my back and front levers before even starting planche training in 2010. I also trained it differently from the approach at GB; I trained planche by leaning into it and using a body position where I could only hold it from 1-4 seconds most of the time and sort of in a GTG manner, but I would also include some full workouts from time to time. I trained it almost every day during each planche training period. Now I'm not advocating anyone to follow what I did because I know Coach and the others will heavily object to it with good reason because of the high injury potential unlike a SSC, but that was the way I did it and I never had any problems with joint or tendon pain.

Now like I said before, that was all real and if anyone here wants to ask me to post a video of my planche, I would gladly do it, but I don't have access to a camera/recorder at the moment so you guys would have to wait. I wasn't trying to brag either by the way.

What I'm going to say next about me may sound unbelievable or pure BS, but I assure you that I'm telling the truth and there's nothing beneficial I can get out of from making lies on a forum. It took me about 5 total months of specific planche training to get full planche starting from tuck. They were not consecutive months and I first started training planche in December of 2010 and achieved full planche in mid-June to July of 2012. I stopped training planche for several long periods between the years and when I resumed planche training in about mid-May 2012 I was at adv tuck and rapidly progressed to full planche in mid-June or July. The previous month of planche training before the last was in December of 2011.

That sounds perfectly believable to me. What you say raises an interesting point about timescales, though. When we talk about how long it took to achieve something, it's not always entirely clear how we should answer. You've explained at three different levels of magnification, so to speak, which is much more informative and helpful. Firstly, the 18-month period in which the training sat, then the number-of-active-months (five), and then in even more detail, an idea about actual workout time within those months.

I'd venture that the longer total period (18 months) was important and you wouldn't have got there in five months straight. As you noted yourself, some of the time off didn't seem to have hurt your progress very much.

I think people often find that to be the case. Personally, some of my skill-hobbies are seasonal and after months or even YEARS of not practicing them whatsoever, I return and, after a few hours, days or weeks (depending on the nature and personality of the skill) to get back into the swing of things, I'm considerably better. It's as though the body needs only to be gently encouraged in the right direction, I reckon. So long as you don't over-work it, it will progress at its fastest possible rate if you just let it.It's a bit like trying to make a horse go where you want it, and as fast as it can. You do have to stay in control, and make constant inputs, but they're relatively gentle inputs compared to what you *could* give and beyond that it doesn't really help. And if you keep pushing it harder then soon you reach a point where the horse will just buck you off and trample you, then run away.

I don't know, but I thought I might have been able to get it in a shorter time of total planche training if it was contiguous. I lost some strength in the planche when I got back to retraining in May when adv tuck was pretty hard for me and I was able to do a brief straddle in the previous December. In my first month of planche training from December 2010 to Jan 2011, I started with barely able to hold a tuck to barely able to hold a straddle (~90 degree straddle angle) at the end if I remember correctly. I do remember very clearly that I was able to hold adv tuck for 10+ seconds in that period.

In the month or weeks prior to beginning my last planche training period before achieving full planche, I've tested some weight room numbers for dips, military press, and bench press. My max weighted dips was +45lbs for a 3RM, military press was 90lbs for 3RM on a smaller bar and 1RM with an olympic barbell, and I was barely able to bench 135lbs at my bodyweight of around 120lbs. I never did those exercises regularly and I just did mainly BL to maltese to planche dumbbell presses on a bench for my pushing strength during intervals of non planche training. Now you can say those dumbbell presses were planche specific, but I didn't really think they were that much since you go from BL and maltese with planche being only at the end ROM and I only got up to 22.5lbs for a few reps with those. No idea how much I can lift for those and the weight room exercises now after achieving full planche. I also lost my full FL and BL in the same period of time as those tests, but I reattained it in the summer along with getting planche. This is just to give you an idea of my pushing strength and what I did on the non-planche training periods before the planche achieving month.

So, planche training has always been odd for me. And the most recent turn of events have done something that I've never experienced.

I never really focused on it because it was slow on progress, but then I decided to change it up. I did planche leans, deep, and upped the volume each workout.

The result changed a very weak and inconsistent tuck planche into a longer and what feels like a much more solid tuck planche. Immediately.

It was like a kick start in the right direction, because it clearly meant that I wasn't ready for tuck planche yet.

Now, the real concern. I also wasn't joint ready for the planche leans with fingers facing backward, with that kind of volume each workout.

I believe my bicep tendon is really workout out...

I feel nothing when doing nothing, but in a very small ROM beginning with a locked elbow(~180°) to around 140° without flexing I feel nothing. But when I flex my bicep in that ROM, the bicep tendon is just sore. Soreness might be only way I can describe it, but since its not a muscle its an alien feeling.

I didn't know that something like that could even be... sore. Because its been sore for nearly 2 Weeks, without much change. It is slowly feeling better, but very very slowly.

I've mainly been avoiding all elbow taxing exercises, but not all exercises in general. Is that appropriate?

raja said:

As for the threshold, that doesn't actually exist. Many people make the mistake of keeping all training variables constant for too long. They see no progress and even regress, but if you add the right amount of variation and the correct stimulus, they will see progress. Too many people only do isometric work for straight arm scapular strength - this is a mistake! The goal should be to progress to dynamic(not necessarily ballistic) straight arm work. Coach Sommer and other successful coaches don't exclusively use isometric FSPs to achieve the isometric positions(FL, PL, BL, etc.). A smarter approach is needed.

Hey raja, I wanted to ask you about this bit of your post. At what point do you think it best to make this progression? As soon as possible? When a certain static progression is mastered? When stalling?

Would, for example, movements like Cranks, Front Pulls etc. replace static FL training altogether? Or just complement it?

red1392 said:

Hey raja, I wanted to ask you about this bit of your post. At what point do you think it best to make this progression? As soon as possible? When a certain static progression is mastered? When stalling?

Would, for example, movements like Cranks, Front Pulls etc. replace static FL training altogether? Or just complement it?

Personally, I've found that dynamic work is not needed to transition from tuck to adv tuck in general. The transition from adv tuck to 1 leg or straddle is difficult and requires more than exclusively isometric work. Full lay generally won't be achieved without dynamic work.

You can't use dynamic work if you can't hold the position isometrically though, so isometric holds are still important. The hierarchy is that your strength in eccentric > isometric > concentric. Eventually, even building up to 15 or even 30 second isometrics may not provide enough adaptation to progress. For example, a 30 second 1 leg FL doesn't necessarily mean that you can move on to a straddle FL. But the correct dynamic work can improve progress and cause the desired adaptation. To answer your question, I believe that after a base has been established with the isometric hold, you should progress to dynamic work with the progression. If you cannot properly(be honest with yourself about your form) do dynamic work, you are definitely not ready for it with that progression. A good number to aim for may be 15 seconds(for straddle or 1 leg) and 30 seconds(for adv tuck).

At the end, dynamic work is essential for improving upon and maintaining strength. It may not be enough to maintain strength in the isometric position, so some(but not as much) work will be beneficial to maintain. Instead of 60 seconds of work, maybe 30 seconds of work will be enough. But I believe that dynamic work is essential. A person that can do a straight arm FL pull can certainly hold a FL isometrically, but the opposite may not be true.

As far as changing your routine, I am a fan of frequent - but not excessive - variation. Changing your routine every 4-8 sessions(of the same kind) is a useful rule of thumb. Performing the same routine more than that isn't going to help as much as a new stimulus(routine) would. Don't wait until you plateau, but wait until gains slow down with a particular routine. I'm a big fan of undulating intensification and accumulation phases, and there are a lot of possibilities within that template.

raja said:

Personally, I've found that dynamic work is not needed to transition from tuck to adv tuck in general. The transition from adv tuck to 1 leg or straddle is difficult and requires more than exclusively isometric work. Full lay generally won't be achieved without dynamic work.

You can't use dynamic work if you can't hold the position isometrically though, so isometric holds are still important. The hierarchy is that your strength in eccentric > isometric > concentric. Eventually, even building up to 15 or even 30 second isometrics may not provide enough adaptation to progress. For example, a 30 second 1 leg FL doesn't necessarily mean that you can move on to a straddle FL. But the correct dynamic work can improve progress and cause the desired adaptation. To answer your question, I believe that after a base has been established with the isometric hold, you should progress to dynamic work with the progression. If you cannot properly(be honest with yourself about your form) do dynamic work, you are definitely not ready for it with that progression. A good number to aim for may be 15 seconds(for straddle or 1 leg) and 30 seconds(for adv tuck).

At the end, dynamic work is essential for improving upon and maintaining strength. It may not be enough to maintain strength in the isometric position, so some(but not as much) work will be beneficial to maintain. Instead of 60 seconds of work, maybe 30 seconds of work will be enough. But I believe that dynamic work is essential. A person that can do a straight arm FL pull can certainly hold a FL isometrically, but the opposite may not be true.

As far as changing your routine, I am a fan of frequent - but not excessive - variation. Changing your routine every 4-8 sessions(of the same kind) is a useful rule of thumb. Performing the same routine more than that isn't going to help as much as a new stimulus(routine) would. Don't wait until you plateau, but wait until gains slow down with a particular routine. I'm a big fan of undulating intensification and accumulation phases, and there are a lot of possibilities within that template.

Thank you for such a detailed reply!

I wanted to clarify a couple of things (a lot of this is new to me), if you don't mind answering:

By variation in routine, do you mean, for example: every 4-8 similar workouts, a front lever row would be replaced with an ice cream maker (both bent arm movements), then switched back in another 4-8 weeks, etc?

Or do you mean switching between bent/straight arm dynamic movements every 4-8 weeks?

Or does it not matter/depends on current capabilities?

Thanks a lot in advance.

raja said:

As far as changing your routine, I am a fan of frequent - but not excessive - variation. Changing your routine every 4-8 sessions(of the same kind) is a useful rule of thumb. Performing the same routine more than that isn't going to help as much as a new stimulus(routine) would. Don't wait until you plateau, but wait until gains slow down with a particular routine. I'm a big fan of undulating intensification and accumulation phases, and there are a lot of possibilities within that template.

Personally I tend to agree with this - and I had to learn the hard way that I can't just keep doing the same thing forever and expecting it to continually give results. But I note that Coach Sommer and several other senior members vigorously object to this approach, and I expect we'll hear from them shortly!

I thought I should point out the potential controversy for people trying to learn from this thread. But I the end, I suppose what works for someone, works for them.

There is a difference between jumping from one thing to the next in between workouts, never really putting hard work into one movement; and varying your routine to bust through plateaus as you encounter them.

emos said:

Personally I tend to agree with this - and I had to learn the hard way that I can't just keep doing the same thing forever and expecting it to continually give results. But I note that Coach Sommer and several other senior members vigorously object to this approach, and I expect we'll hear from them shortly!

I thought I should point out the potential controversy for people trying to learn from this thread. But I the end, I suppose what works for someone, works for them.

All I can say is to wait for BtGB v2 before completely judging them.

red1392 said:

Thank you for such a detailed reply!

I wanted to clarify a couple of things (a lot of this is new to me), if you don't mind answering:

By variation in routine, do you mean, for example: every 4-8 similar workouts, a front lever row would be replaced with an ice cream maker (both bent arm movements), then switched back in another 4-8 weeks, etc?

Or do you mean switching between bent/straight arm dynamic movements every 4-8 weeks?

Or does it not matter/depends on current capabilities?

Thanks a lot in advance.

Variation in the form of all training variables: tempo, reps, sets, frequency, assistance work, implement used, etc.

Pick one routine and use it for 4-8 sessions, as the gains slow down, change something. It could be tempo, volume, intensity, or the movement. The change can be large or small and something even as simple as changing the grip can have huge effects. For example, changing from chin ups to pull ups may be enough, depending on the adaptation desired. Charles Poliquin has written about this in the past, but uses 6 sessions as his cutoff.

You don't need to alternate straight arm and bent arm dynamic work, but you should be doing them. It mostly depends upon current capacities. If you aren't close to a full lay FL, you won't benefit much from doing full lay ice cream makers. The ice cream makers are there mostly to help in moving to the next progression. Front lever rows are used to master a particular progression. Remember, bent arm strength does not affect straight arm strength very much, but certain elements can be useful to supplement with.

Note: beginners need less variation than more advanced trainees. Untrained individuals may benefit from a particular routine for a longer period of time. As you are more trained, you tend to adapt faster, requiring more variation. This is of course dependent upon many factors such as fast/slow twitch fiber composition, type of training, etc.

I tend to prefer a frequent approach of particular sessions. 2-3 sessions per week of the same, with the 3rd being a deload with 40% volume and a straight arm/bent arm/legs approach that Ido Portal uses.

raja said:

I tend to prefer ... a straight arm/bent arm/legs approach that Ido Portal uses.

This is one of the approaches that gymnasts have been using for many decades now.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Coach Sommer said:

This is one of the approaches that gymnasts have been using for many decades now.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

In my experience doing this protocol I find that it is better left to someone with a decent amount of experience with gymnastics. For a beginner it isn't very useful to try and dedicate a day to straight arm. There just isn't that much straight arm exercises that a beginner really needs dedicated time for. When you get to more advanced movements like 360 pulls, cross pulls, and straight arm presses it can be beneficial. My point is if you are just starting don't waste time by trying more advanced protocols when you cant execute enough movements for it yet.

Ive found the further I get into my training the more I have to segment it. Meaning the more I have to give dedicated time to new things that before I wasn't able to get a big stimulus from because I wasn't able to do enough movements of that type.

Jeez you guys really do over think this stuff don't you. Why does it matter how long it takes you to do something. A friend on mine recently benched 405 lbs. In his state that is the record for his weight class. It took him almost 13 years to get there. Does that make it any less impressive? It took me over 3 years to get a legitimate one arm chinup. Never during that time did either me or him go, well this is taking too long perhaps we aren't genetically meant to do it.

I am not concerned how fast or slow I get my skills; unless I plateau, then it's time for a change.

B1214N said:

Now like I said before, that was all real and if anyone here wants to ask me to post a video of my planche, I would gladly do it, but I don't have access to a camera/recorder at the moment so you guys would have to wait. I wasn't trying to brag either by the way.

I believe what made me achieve planche so fast was because I was 5'4" 115-120 lbs with non-bulky legs (not stick skinny either) and I probably have genetics that are gifted for strength training

You can do your full planche with hands backwards right? For 5 seconds? You must really feel that in your bicep tendons right? Did you ever manage to do half lay or straddle planche push ups or maybe even full lay in that hand position?

I'm also 5'4'' and weigh 120 lbs too! Did you ever get a full planche press to handstand? I'm about to post a couple of attempts in the digital coaching section soon. I've been practicing it for a little over a month now.

pinoyako said:

You can do your full planche with hands backwards right? For 5 seconds? You must really feel that in your bicep tendons right? Did you ever manage to do half lay or straddle planche push ups or maybe even full lay in that hand position?

I'm also 5'4'' and weigh 120 lbs too! Did you ever get a full planche press to handstand? I'm about to post a couple of attempts in the digital coaching section soon. I've been practicing it for a little over a month now.

Yes, I do mines with hands backwards and my max was about 5 or 6 seconds, but I'm not consistent at getting over 4 seconds nowadays. I've done straddle with the hands sideways before, but it was very painful on the wrists. I barely feel any stress on my biceps tendons and elbows with the hands backwards unless I'm not warmed up. I think it was because my biceps were very strong before I started Gymnastic Strength Training™ more than 2 years ago and when I first started straight arm work like rings support and supinated BL, my biceps tendon development greatly accelerated. I also like to attempt floor malteses with the body very close to the floor and I feel noticeably more tendon and elbow stress in those than the hands backwards planche.

As for the planche push-ups, I cannot do them, not even a good one in straddle. I think it was because I relied too much on straight arm work for planche and did hardly any PPP or planche progression push-ups. I do know that planche push-ups can be done with the fingers back and also on rings. I also can't do a full planche press handstand because I don't have my HS yet . How many seconds of a static planche do you think is needed for a planche press handstand or planche push-up? Also, do you feel the hands backwards planche is a lot harder to balance than sideways or forwards?

raja said:

All I can say is to wait for BtGB v2 before completely judging them.

Variation in the form of all training variables: tempo, reps, sets, frequency, assistance work, implement used, etc.

Pick one routine and use it for 4-8 sessions, as the gains slow down, change something. It could be tempo, volume, intensity, or the movement. The change can be large or small and something even as simple as changing the grip can have huge effects. For example, changing from chin ups to pull ups may be enough, depending on the adaptation desired. Charles Poliquin has written about this in the past, but uses 6 sessions as his cutoff.

You don't need to alternate straight arm and bent arm dynamic work, but you should be doing them. It mostly depends upon current capacities. If you aren't close to a full lay FL, you won't benefit much from doing full lay ice cream makers. The ice cream makers are there mostly to help in moving to the next progression. Front lever rows are used to master a particular progression. Remember, bent arm strength does not affect straight arm strength very much, but certain elements can be useful to supplement with.

Note: beginners need less variation than more advanced trainees. Untrained individuals may benefit from a particular routine for a longer period of time. As you are more trained, you tend to adapt faster, requiring more variation. This is of course dependent upon many factors such as fast/slow twitch fiber composition, type of training, etc.

I tend to prefer a frequent approach of particular sessions. 2-3 sessions per week of the same, with the 3rd being a deload with 40% volume and a straight arm/bent arm/legs approach that Ido Portal uses.

Again, thank you so much for all this detailed info! This level of advice is what makes this forum so great.

I think what is getting confused here is that skill-based fitness is like an inverted pyramid:

All levels here are arbitrary and meant to illustrate the concept that as you are capable of more things you will, by nature, have more things to train. This doesn't mean that your muscles need more variety to keep getting stronger, it means that you have more unique movements to learn as you complete each basic level. Variety is a consequence of being ready to do more unique movements, and not an inherent requirement for increased force production. 

Please understand that this does not reflect the GB program.

At level 1, there are the basic body shapes. These represent the pointy block that the inverted pyramid is on.

Next are the basic movements like pull ups, push ups, etc that are performed while maintaining these shapes. That's level 2.

You're going to have several more possibilities at level 2 than level 1, because you can both press and pull with any given shape, and so by nature you need more variety to fully develop level 2 movements. These are high leverage movements.

Level 3 ends up being movements that require lower leverage, but use similar shapes and both similar and dissimilar planes of movement. These can be considered a natural progression from level 2. This also includes movement variations of level 2 exercises. Example: Level 2 = hollow pull up and arched pull up. Level 3= Arched FL pulls, hollow FL pulls, front pulls in both positions, static FL (would be a beginning Level 2 or 3), uneven pull ups ( pulling more towards one hand), rope climb variations, behind the neck pull ups, single arm progressions, explosive progressions, etc.

You can see how there are many times the number of movements, but that you can't do single arm variations until sufficient strength is built, or uneven variations, or multiplanar variations.

It quickly becomes a briar patch of skill trees that all branch off in many directions.

This is why we essentially have 2 primary options:

1) Follow the developmental path that Coach lays out. This is designed to develop each "level" of physical ability and provides more to do as we get stronger and more capable. This path allows for the acquisition of many, many skills. At first it seems slow, but as certain thresholds of all-around ability are achieved the skills all of a sudden start appearing like magic in your repertoire and you end up being able to do a lot of different things.

2) Follow specific progressions for a few specific positions. This allows you to progress down certain paths faster, but also means that your physical ability in other areas remains severely under-developed, and this will dramatically slow your overall athletic development.

For example, if you take option 2 and go for direct FL, planche, and OAC right off the bat they are going to take up the majority of your training time. They take a while to learn, and if you don't even do the beginning development work you may not ever even achieve them. Even if you take it slow and learn to do things with proper body shape, you won't have a good handstand, or an L-sit, or ring support, and it takes time to develop those as well.

This path spends time on very specific things that don't generalize across the board to more advanced skills.

Option 1 would involve going through the pre-requisites, building your handstand and L sit and XR support, pull up strength, muscle ups, and so on, all of which will contribute directly to your PL, FL and OAC as well as giving you the ability to perform many more exercises that in turn prepare you for an even greater number of physical expressions.

In terms of total return on time, Option 2 will always look better for the first 6-12 months, but by that point the people who choose Option 1 are going to be nearly caught up AND have quite a number of abilities that the Option 2 people do not have. From there it just becomes a blowout, with Option 1 continuing to allow you to develop more and more and more.

I don't think there's a "right" way to go, but to me it's silly to train the same amount of time and have less variety to show for it, especially when you know that in the end you'll have those big skills anyways.

It's also safer to take option 1, because you are going to be working your entire body much more evenly, and this makes it harder to develop imbalances.

In the end, just make sure you cover all your bases for whatever skills you ARE going for, because if something is missing you may end up thinking you're just not genetically equipped to do something when the truth may simply be that you missed a vital developmental point and are stuck as a result.

To this end I will always suggest that people follow Coach's templates, as they have worked steadily for a long time.

Good post. I have definitely found that stalled progress (sometimes for years!) in various physical and non-physical pursuits (though I might argue that is often not a useful distinction...) can usually be overcome - and quite quickly when one gets around to it - by remembering that you're building that sort of shape and not just a tall, narrow column upwards - which, as you note, is not nearly so stable a structure. When I reach out to either side and start working around the skill, and under the skill, and even a bit above it - then progress continues and the original target skill just casually appears in my repertoire one day.

And the good thing is that if you do have a good general ability in level x then particular skills in levels < x which you may never have even touched upon specifically will usually be a free gift as soon as you try them. Personally, I have found that focussing too specifically on individual skills themselves has often been my downfall. For me it's a beneficial model to consider that skills arise from the background of good general ability and "strength", so to speak, rather than the other way around. But of course one gains that "strength" through training with what one can only consider skills, in the first place - I realise.

Probably the biggest single tip I ever received for my handstands was along the lines of, "yes, it's balance - but it's balance through strength."

That's why repeatedly kicking up into a horribly-arched handstand and falling over immediately won't get anyone anywhere, because the whole of their body is simply too weak to manage it, no matter how well they understand the move. This is acknowledged in the much more sensible progressions discussed around here (and elsewhere) that involve developing one's strength and coordination to an appropriate level long before trying free-standing handstands.

An external example - with juggling, in which there are 1000s of very particular tricks to be learning. I often got stuck in a rut trying to practice the specific skills themselves, individual tricks, each of which can only provide you with a finite usable training stimulus. Instead, I have to remind myself that the aim is for me to improve my brain's general ability to make accurate throws via my hands, to track multiple objects moving through space, and make accurate catches according to the trajectories it calculates - and quickly. Then, any trick is within my grasp with only a little bit of learning. I made some related analogy about musicians recently, I think.

In the same sense - perhaps we shouldn't become blinkered and planche-obsessed (not that anyone here appears to be) and realise that the aim, in the broadest of terms, is to develop exceptional strength, coordination and balance across our body - some people start with much more and some with much less - but we all want more of it. Having that, the skills we desire will be attainable.

Sommer talks about this as well - how there's a big difference between short-term learning of a skill (or gaining strength in something) where a new skill is brought up to your current ability level, and actual, real gains in your base ability/strength over all.

Joshua Naterman said:

This is why we essentially have 2 primary options:

 

1) Follow the developmental path that Coach lays out. This is designed to develop each "level" of physical ability and provides more to do as we get stronger and more capable. This path allows for the acquisition of many, many skills. At first it seems slow, but as certain thresholds of all-around ability are achieved the skills all of a sudden start appearing like magic in your repertoire and you end up being able to do a lot of different things.

 

2) Follow specific progressions for a few specific positions. This allows you to progress down certain paths faster, but also means that your physical ability in other areas remains severely under-developed, and this will dramatically slow your overall athletic development.

 

 

For example, if you take option 2 and go for direct FL, planche, and OAC right off the bat they are going to take up the majority of your training time. They take a while to learn, and if you don't even do the beginning development work you may not ever even achieve them. Even if you take it slow and learn to do things with proper body shape, you won't have a good handstand, or an L-sit, or ring support, and it takes time to develop those as well.

 

This path spends time on very specific things that don't generalize across the board to more advanced skills.

 

Option 1 would involve going through the pre-requisites, building your handstand and L sit and XR support, pull up strength, muscle ups, and so on, all of which will contribute directly to your PL, FL and OAC as well as giving you the ability to perform many more exercises that in turn prepare you for an even greater number of physical expressions.

 

In terms of total return on time, Option 2 will always look better for the first 6-12 months, but by that point the people who choose Option 1 are going to be nearly caught up AND have quite a number of abilities that the Option 2 people do not have. From there it just becomes a blowout, with Option 1 continuing to allow you to develop more and more and more.

Well I guess I took option 2 then. I did not work on my handstands nor did I work on planche push up progressions, so I lack balance and struggle to open my shoulders and pushing strength as well. I will be working on those skills for the next couple of months next year to fix my planche press. Flexibility is also another area I need to improve if I hope to acquire a manna press to handstand. 

The good thing is that it's never too late to switch paths, in either direction

ewethestuff said:

Wow - nice post, Josh.

 

There's always someone on the internet saying they achieved a full planche in the first month of trying such-and-such program, but it usually turns out they were strong as heck to begin with. I'm putting a lot of trust in coach's program delivering the goods for someone who started out weak. (Which is why I post on like every WOD - I want proof of it in the future).

 

I kind of wish people with low levels of strength would post more so we could see how they turn out a year from now, or two or five.

 

Anyways, 3-5 years from now I want to have achieved something impressive enough that I can point back to this July, when I was barely getting through 3x30s of the prereqs, and say "see, I started from there."

Are you concerned by the apparent lack of case studies?

emos said:

"Are you concerned by the apparent lack of case studies?"

Are you using the ones which have already been provided?  Have you perused the GB Success Stories or reviewed the many fine phyqiues developed thru the GB program in the GB facebook seminar photo albums?

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer