# Weight lifting useless?



## JamesYazell

A friend of mine has lost a lot of weight after following the calestinic workout laid out in the book "Combat Conditioning" The authors website can be found here: http://www.mattfurey.com/

I've actually begun following the workout myself and he brings up some interesting points about weightlifting. I particularly like his reference of animals never lifting weights but only using there own body weight. I just thought alot of his ideas about weight lifting were interesting and worthy of discussion.


----------



## RoninPimp

Bodtweight calestinics are great for conditioning. So is weight training. Matt Furey is wrong and just trying to sell his product.


----------



## Marginal

JamesYazell said:
			
		

> I've actually begun following the workout myself and he brings up some interesting points about weightlifting. I particularly like his reference of animals never lifting weights but only using there own body weight.


 
I've never seen an ape doing push ups.


----------



## Shirt Ripper

Matt fuery is trying to sell a product.  A good product, yes.  Good point about the apes.

If you have the tools, why not utilize them?  I am a proponent of bodyweight based training (as well as many other methods) but to limit oneself to one "set" of ideas is silly ( in my opinion...did I just use a passive tone of voice...oh man!).


----------



## samurai69

Marginal said:
			
		

> I've never seen an ape doing push ups.


 and we dont swing through the trees

what a stupid comment



.


----------



## samurai69

Matt has a lot of good ideas, nothing new to it and it should , along with weights and other forms of exercise, form part of a sensible training programme (ross boxing, cross fit, dragondoor, kettlebell).

Matt is trying to sell a programme,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and not a cheap one at that!!!!


----------



## Jonathan Randall

samurai69 said:
			
		

> and we dont swing through the trees
> 
> what a stupid comment
> .


 
No need to be disrespectful.

I believe he meant that animals don't intentionally exercise for strength and fitness in the same way that humans do and that since we have both bodyweight exercises AND weights to work with, why limit ourselves to one?


----------



## Hand Sword

Weight training, among other things, makes us stronger and faster. How can this be considered usueless? Don't get me wrong, I'm not a weightlifter, but, did so, during sports training in school. My over all performance did improve due to the weights. I think any kind of exercise will be useful.


----------



## JamesYazell

When he trained under a japanese wrestler he says the man(can't think of his name) explained that weight lifting creates cosmetic muscles. They look good but do not have the functunality that muscles developed from calestinics would.


----------



## rutherford

Jonathan Randall said:
			
		

> No need to be disrespectful.
> 
> I believe he meant that animals don't intentionally exercise for strength and fitness in the same way that humans do and that since we have both bodyweight exercises AND weights to work with, why limit ourselves to one?


 
Animals also don't lead the sedentary lifestyle that we do, or eat the poorly constructed foods we typically do.  When your body is trained to burn fat instead of sugar and you lead an active lifestyle, then every motion leads to greater physical fitness.  You even burn fat as you sleep.  

You can see the difference in pet dogs.  If you feed your dog well and allow it excercise, it will have the energy level of a wild animal.  It will move with grace, and no human could ever hope to run so fast.  However, if you have a sedentary dog that is overfed and/or poorly fed, the animal will develop joint problems, overall poor physical health, and typically look terrible.  I feel so bad for those dogs, because unlike all of us they have no real choices.

Those of us with desk jobs absolutely need to have an excercise practice, be it martial arts or weight training or yoga or Circular Strength Training.  There is definitely schools of thought that say you should cross train lots of different excercise programs.  http://www.crossfit.com/ is a great source for this type of program.

Other schools of thought would have you follow a specific program to a mastery level before you try to branch out and confuse your body by working towards often opposed physical goals.

Each has their benefits, and you needto research and choose the path that's right for you.  Much like choosing a martial style, and much like getting good at anything in life.

Whatever you do, it's important to enjoy your excercise practice.


----------



## rutherford

JamesYazell said:
			
		

> When he trained under a japanese wrestler he says the man(can't think of his name) explained that weight lifting creates cosmetic muscles. They look good but do not have the functunality that muscles developed from calestinics would.


 
This charge is usually leveled against body building training.  Who would ever say that a Powerlifter has only cosmetic muscles?  Whatever you say about the health effects, since they're setting world records they are doing something to become STRONG - at least in their specific sport.  And very few of them are good looking.  

And who would say that Kettlebells or Clubbells leads to purely cosmetic strength?

Weight training means a lot of different things.


----------



## mrhnau

JamesYazell said:
			
		

> When he trained under a japanese wrestler he says the man(can't think of his name) explained that weight lifting creates cosmetic muscles. They look good but do not have the functunality that muscles developed from calestinics would.



well, I've lifted weights, and mine never looked too good :rofl:

calesthetics is great for you, but lifting weights tends to focus on a narrower range of muscles. Its not all about looking good. Do you -need- weight lifting? no, but it can help... I don't think you need to go overboard with it, but its good for you... personally, I enjoy jumping on the bench a heck of alot more than I do doing pushups. I think of mix of both is helpful...

was about to comment on lifestyle, but I see rutherford already did that


----------



## rutherford

mrhnau said:
			
		

> personally, I enjoy jumping on the bench a heck of alot more than I do doing pushups. I think of mix of both is helpful...


 
There's pushups, and then there's pushups.%-} 

http://www.extremecst.com/wormpushup.mov

http://www.circularstrengthmag.com/42/sonnon5.html


----------



## samurai69

Jonathan Randall said:
			
		

> No need to be disrespectful.
> 
> ?


 
Sorry , no intention of being disrespectful, just my opinion


----------



## samurai69

JamesYazell said:
			
		

> When he trained under a japanese wrestler he says the man(can't think of his name) explained that weight lifting creates cosmetic muscles. They look good but do not have the functunality that muscles developed from calestinics would.


 

There have been many misconceptions about weight training, ie they make you slower, training shortens the muscles etc

has anyone seen marius pudzanowski performing splits etc and training in karate, he is just as flexible and fast as many other martial arts practicioners

I train with weights 3 times per week, for functional strength, i am 42 years old can comfortablly do box splits,i can also bench press more than my bodyweight comfortably for reps,  my punching speed and power are better than they were before i lifted weights (this way in particular) i am far happier training with a mixture or balance of training methods that allow me to perform than to avoid weightlifting


.


----------



## stickarts

Weight training has helped improve my striking power, grappling strength, and improved my confidence.
It has also helped me in a number of sports that I used to compete in.
Weight training has helped me tremendously.
I think one key is to develop an intelligent routine that meets your goals for your given sport / goal. For example, developing too much bulk if you are trying to develop top speed for point fighting wouldn't work well. 
I had an ideal fight weight and i knew if I overtrained it would slow me down.


----------



## Shirt Ripper

Good post Rutherford and Samurai69.

It all comes down to how one defines "functionality."  For a bodybuilder well developed (size wise), well defined and symmetrical musculature is about as functional as it gets.  For a powerlifter, the ability to exert the most absolute (competitive, depending) strength in the squat, bench press and deadlift will prove the most functional.  For a weightlifter (commonly called Olympic Lifting) maximizing power in the clean and jerk and the snatch is the peak of functionality.

Will this be the same for a sprinter, jav thrower, arnisador, MMA practicioner, rifleman (or woman...), distance runner, swimmer, etc, etc?

Absolutely not!  That's why we have people like me (and mostly the Russians of the 70's and 80's, honestly) who spend their days studying "lifting" in order to devise more practical and _functional_ means of supplementing training in different pursuits in the weightroom.

To not think further of "weightlifting" than what we see in Flex and Shape magazine would be foolish and short-sighted.


----------



## jfarnsworth

Useless? :idunno: 

I believe you will get out of it what you put in it. I've had much success in my program especially the last 2 years. I'm quite happy with what I've done but am nowhere near what I want out of my program. It's still work in progress .  I'm a 5 day a week lifter, hitting each body part once except chest. That's twice a week but due to the complex region of the chest I also have 2 seperate work out sessions. As shirt ripper will tell you (like the above post) my sessions wouldn't be for everyone. Nor somone elses mine. 
Good luck in your training.


----------



## Cryozombie

I think both sides have good points.  I dont think weightlifting is USELESS by any means, but its also not NECCESSARY by any means either.

By that I mean you can still get a _perfectly acceptable_ workout if you have no access to weights, by doing pushups, dips, pull ups, squat thrusts... whatever it is you do... as long as you do SOMTHING.  After all, in basic training, we never used Weights durring P.T.   It was all pushups, Jumping jacks, squat thrusts, Turn and Bounce, dying cockroach... and running, running, running, and did I mention running?  The closest thing to "weights" we did was run with our packs and rifles... and I would say I was in the best shape of my life... even better than when I was going to the gym 4 days a week to lift weights.

Does that make it WRONG to lift weights?  Hell no, just different.


----------



## Shirt Ripper

jfarnsworth said:
			
		

> I believe you will get out of it what you put in it.


 
Probably the best point yet.

I've been curious, having never had the pleasure of experiencing basic training, why would you guess that traditional resistance training is generally excluded from the regiment?

Keeping with the "real" training approach?  Convenience (or lack thereof)?  Perhaps the constant "hustle mode" mentality?

Just curious.


----------



## still learning

Hello, Look at Bruce Lee's body? He must have done something right? and it ain't from reading Matt Fury's book!

The right amount of combination is best..do you agree? and everyone's body and physcial make-up is different and each one will require it's own program and what that person wants' it to be.

It is nice to be as strong as an ape? ....Are you thinking of Planets of the Apes? 

When I was younger ,working as a Carpenter Apprentice, after a while you can swing a 20oz hammer and pound 16 penny nails with three strokes, almost all day long. 

Today lucky I can hit the nail..................Aloha


----------



## Simon Curran

At the end of the day, I think it all comes down to personal preference.
For myself, I did (naiive as I was...) buy the Furey book, and I did get a lot out of it, but I don't really follow his regime any more.
I still train only bodyweight exercises, I haven't touched weights in years, but that's not to say that I am opposed to the practice, I run a lot and do lots of pushups, sit ups, pull ups, dips etc, but I also have a very physical job (I can often be found loading shipping containers with 50kg sacks all day...) and I have found that _for me_ this provides all the strength and fitness _I personally_ need, but that goes back to point one, different strokes for different folks...


----------



## Jonathan Randall

Shirt Ripper said:
			
		

> I've been curious, having never had the pleasure of experiencing basic training, why would you guess that traditional resistance training is generally excluded from the regiment?
> Just curious.


 
Because the emphasis is upon _group _activities such as calisthenics in unison, running and confidence courses (obstacle courses). Also, the set-up time for weight training would be too great and body weight exercises such as pull-ups are more applicable, I believe.


----------



## samurai69

just found this clip of the worlds strongest man

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/73514/worlds_strongest_man/

still able to move well


----------



## rutherford

Simon Curran said:
			
		

> At the end of the day, I think it all comes down to personal preference.


 
I think there's a higher level beyond Personal Preference.  In the RMAX philosphy it's called Intuitive Training.  Basically, listening to your body and developing the attributes and athletic sophstication you personally desire and need to succeed in your own goals and area of performance.

This comes from study and developing a kinesthetic sense of what movements and training do to effect change and growth in a safe and efficient manner.



			
				Jonathan Randall said:
			
		

> Because the emphasis is upon _group _activities such as calisthenics in unison, running and confidence courses (obstacle courses). Also, the set-up time for weight training would be too great and body weight exercises such as pull-ups are more applicable, I believe.


 
Not having been through Basic, I think a lot of the excercise is devoted to training a soldier to be able to push through fatigue and activate a second wind.  This is both a development of mental toughness as well as a physical response.


----------



## JamesYazell

Actually the site claims Bruce Lee did not lift weights. As far as functionality, Matt Furey means combat.


----------



## Shirt Ripper

Jonathan Randall said:
			
		

> Because the emphasis is upon _group _activities such as calisthenics in unison, running and confidence courses (obstacle courses). Also, the set-up time for weight training would be too great and body weight exercises such as pull-ups are more applicable, I believe.


 
That's what I figured.



			
				JamesYazell said:
			
		

> Actually the site claims Bruce Lee did not lift weights. As far as functionality, Matt Furey means combat.


 
Didn't he talk about it...include it in a few of his books and stuff?  Wasn't that how he hurt his back (deadlifting wrong)?


----------



## JamesYazell

I actually have no idea, Im just stating what Matt Furey's site claimed.


----------



## Shirt Ripper

JamesYazell said:
			
		

> I actually have no idea, Im just stating what Matt Furey's site claimed.


 
Fair enough.  I am pretty sure of it.  Dude actually did some specialized grip stuff which is kinda my thing so that's cool.


----------



## bushidomartialarts

it's all about your goals.

you can get plenty strong without lifting weights, but if you want to get ridiculously strong, or if you want bulk, you need to use those tools.  fury's product is good for folks with goals congruent with the benefits of his product.  if you have something else in mind, then you need to use something else.


----------



## Brother John

RoninPimp said:
			
		

> Bodtweight calestinics are great for conditioning. So is weight training. *Matt Furey is wrong and just trying to sell his product*.


DING-DING-DING-DING-DING.........
that's the _*CORRECT*_ answer!!
_X-actly_

Your Brother
John


----------



## Brother John

JamesYazell said:
			
		

> When he trained under a japanese wrestler he says the man(can't think of his name) explained that weight lifting creates cosmetic muscles. They look good but do not have the functunality that muscles developed from calestinics would.


Not true.

Weight training is a form of resistance training.
Bodyweight training is a form of resistance training.
It is the methods used that show if you're just trying to increase muscular aesthetics (looks) or strength/endurance.

Actually: intelligent use of freeweights can NOT be beaten in developing really great levels of muscular strength. Body weight movements won't even come close. BUT: Body weight movements do better at developing muscular endurance...because generally you can get a greater number of muscles firing off at the same time, whereas ....when using freeweights... you are usually restricted in the plane of action and thus the number of muscle groups you can use at the same time. That's why the best "Strength" movements with weights are those that use the greatest number of moving parts..... Squat, Deadlift, Bench-Press, Military Press..etc.

I think that the bodyweight exercises that work the abs/lower back and especially the legs are more advantageous for most martial artists than their free-weight counterparts. The reason I think this is because of "Exercise/USE fit". This is the principle that states that the best exercises to use for a muscle or muscle group are actions that approximate the nature or manner in which they will be used. 
In the Body-weight movements you are moving your body around with your legs and torso strength... just like we do when fighting or drilling in our martial arts.
just something to think about.

IF calisthenics was superior to freeweights then why would ALL professional athletic trainers for ALL sports make such use of freeweights across the board?
Look to the pro's to see who knows.

Your Brother
John


----------



## Marginal

samurai69 said:
			
		

> and we dont swing through the trees
> 
> what a stupid comment


 
It's the same line of reasoning Matt's using to justify bodyweight only training. So yeah, it's supposed to sound stupid.


----------



## luigi_m_

I'm getting off the weights at the end of March, and going on to body-weight only exercises. I know they are still resistance exercises, but I have had a change of heart about "pumping iron". I used to think I could really help my MA with it, but it actually seems to be hindering my performance.

Another way of looking at it, is you are never really going to need to bicep curl type action (I'm sure there are a few times) in a competition or a fight, whereas something like pistol squats may come in useful [some-bloody-how]

In my mind (although this was said to me...), if you are on a body-weight routine, you will allways know how to work out, as all you really need is a ledge of some variety, and possibly a chin-up bar, whereas if you only use weights, if you don't have access to a gym for a month [travelling, holiday, work, you're a paleontologist], you won't have the means to exercise.

Anyway, those are my thoughts on it, criticise me if you must...


----------



## Shirt Ripper

luigi_m_ said:
			
		

> but it actually seems to be hindering my performance.


Then your doing it wrong.  A common problem.  As a martial artist I would do squats (and variations), cleans, overhead press, rows.  Don't "pump iron" in the sense of how most folks think of it...nothing wrong with that...just silly if you are an athlete.

Curls are pretty lame.  I do cheat curls because I'd rather not blow out a bicep flipping a tire.


----------



## luigi_m_

Wel, I was following a routine set out by some MA dude, don't remember his name though...

No, I mean I have lost my explosive strength through lifting weights, but some of my friends in MA used to lift, and now don't. I prefer body-weight exercises anyway, more fun, and less sore after...


----------



## samurai69

Marginal said:
			
		

> It's the same line of reasoning Matt's using to justify bodyweight only training. So yeah, it's supposed to sound stupid.


 
Isnt this the matt furey that talks about kettlebells...........arent they weights????


----------



## samurai69

luigi_m_ said:
			
		

> No, I mean I have lost my explosive strength through lifting weights,...


 
Really is a case of not training properly



.but its your training so stick to what you enjoy


----------



## Brother John

luigi_m_ said:
			
		

> Wel, I was following a routine set out by some MA dude, don't remember his name though...
> 
> No, I mean I have lost my explosive strength through lifting weights, but some of my friends in MA used to lift, and now don't. I prefer body-weight exercises anyway, more fun, and less sore after...



According to the study of exercise physiology, the two absolute best ways to increase "explosive strength" are through:
#1: Plyometrics.
#2: Weight Training.

So if weight training actually caused a decrease in your explosive strength, you were doing something very wrong...I'd dare to say. 

Also: a muscular exercise (resistance training) used to increase muscular strength and/or endurance will cause soreness (due to the break down of glycogen and the build up of lactic acid). IF a resistance routine does NOT do these things, than neither your strength nor endurance is being pushed and therefore cannot produce results in either of these two areas. IF body-weight alone exercises are not producing muscular soreness...maybe you need to go back to weights OR increase the intensity w/in those exercises.  W/out occasionally producing soreness your muscles will not NEED to adapt to accomodate and overcome the new demands and stresses; as these are what causes a neuro-muscular/chemical change w/in the cells themselves.

Professional trainers of Olympic and professional athletes all agree that training with free-weights is the number one means of effectively increasing muscular strength, size, density, elasticity, durability and endurance.
IF bodyweight alone routines were ACTUALLY that good....then the pro's would be using them a lot...
and they aren't.
NOT that they aren't good. I think they are, but I think they should be used in conjunction with free-weights to produce the best effects.

Your Brother
John


----------



## Zujitsuka

Weight training is far from useless.

The key is you have to clearly define your goals.

I actually bought Matt Furey's book a few years ago, and did get great results from what he calls his "Royal Court" exercises. Hey, they are indeed great exercises.

Bodyweight exercises are good for developing relative strength (i.e. being strong compared to others of similar size) and mucular endurance, but there are different types of strength that require external resistance (i.e. weights) to develop. For instance to develop maximal absolute strength, you would have to do lifts with heavy weight (low reps, 2 to 4).

Most athletes have a periodized approach to there training. Here is an example of how it might look for a martial artist:


General physical preparedness -- emphasis on bodyweight exercises to increase relative strength; also core and stability exercises
Lift moderately heavy weights (Approx. 70% of the 1RM or 3RM -- one rep maximum or theree rep maximum. This is the amount of weight the trainee can lift with good form one to three times successfully) to stimulate bulk/lean muscle development (hypertrophy). This will generally include bodybuilding protocols. *Here is what most people identify as weight training and if you stay here for too long, it may have a negative effect on your martial arts training. You may become too big, too slow, and lose flexibility.*
Lift heavy weights to deveop absolute strength. Here you lift 90% to 95% of your 1RM or 3RM. Here the reps are kept very low. Examples of the lifts to do would be the the deadlift, squat, chest press, and the side press.  Certain bodyweight exercises like pistols, one-arm push ups, handstand pushups, and one-arm chinups also develop brute-like strength.
Develop power/speed/rate of force by doing quick lifts with light weight (30% of the 1RM or 3RM). Examples would be the snatch, dumbbell swings, clean and press. Plyometric exercises would also be included here. I'm talking about exercises like medicine ball throws, box jumps and such.
It is important to take adequate rest periods between sets. Please do your own research to learn more about how much rest should be taken between sets. It will depend on the attribute your trying to develop and how much weight you're working with.

Here are some good places to start:

www.mikemahler.com

www.dragondoor.com

www.workingclassfitness.com

Remember first and foremost that your are a martial athlete and dojo/dojang/kwoon time takes priority over the gym. That is to say skills refinement takes priority of weight training or other exercise.

Mix it up and keep it interesting.  Variety is the spice of life.  Besides, if you do the same thing over and over again, you subject yourself to negative returns on your investment and overuse injuries.

Peace & blessings,


----------



## Brother John

Zujitsuka said:
			
		

> Lift moderately heavy weights (Approx. 70% of the 1RM or 3RM -- one rep maximum or theree rep maximum. This is the amount of weight the trainee can lift with good form one to three times successfully) to stimulate bulk/lean muscle development (hypertrophy). This will generally include bodybuilding protocols. *Here is what most people identify as weight training and if you stay here for too long, it may have a negative effect on your martial arts training. You may become too big, too slow, and lose flexibility.*


You reply was informed and intelligent!!! Thank you.
BUT: I must disagree with this one element...
it is a MYTH that weight training for muscular strength will adversley effect flexibility. It's an even greater myth that it will adversly effect Speed! 
Neglecting flexibility exercises will, but weight training will merely set your current levels of flexibility into stone if you NEGLECT flexibility. Check out Tom Platz, one of the strongest and most muscular set of Legs the world has ever seen!!! A three time (if memory serves) Mr. Universe and an Olymian Bodybuilder.... yet from day one till today he can place his forehead on the lower part of his shins, with knees locked, and stay there as long as he pleases. Because he didn't neglect flexibility. INFACT his leg development was BETTER because he didn't neglect that aspect.

and...what creates "Speed"...
A Fast & strong muscular contraction.
How can greater strength cause a loss in speed then?

Your Brother
John


----------



## Zujitsuka

I perhaps wasn't clear in my post. I'm not saying that weight lifting in general will make you slow, but if you spend too much time doing the traditional bodybuilding type of lifts (e.g. bicep curls), it seems that the trainee will shorten his/her muscles and compromise flexibility. This will make one more suceptible to strains, tears, and other injuries. *A shortened, tightly wound muscle just cannot move that quickly and will have a compromised range of motion. This is why Pilates and Yoga are great to add to one's training regimen.*

Once you're pumped up, you have to move into doing lifts to develop explosiveness/power/speed/rate of force development. These lifts are generally done with a lighter load that can be moved fast. Traditional bodybuilding protocols are not designed to enhance ones speed. Coach Charles Staley has written numerous articles on this.

There are different types of strength. Here are a few:

Relative -- how your strength compares to those in your age bracket and weight class

Absolute -- how much you can lift in an all-out effort

Speed --
(a) Explosiveness - how quickly you can turn a bunch of your muscles and keep them turned on (think of lighting a match)
(b) Starting - how quickly you can ignite your muscles (think of a camera flash) 

Local muscular endurance -- How long can your muscles do redundant movements over and over again before giving out (e.g. a judoka that can retain a strong grip through the course of a match).

Again, don't forget that you can be the strongest, best conditioned person out there but if your martial arts technique is weak, well...

Don't neglect your martial arts training. It must take precedence over all else.

Here is a paraphrased quote of the late great founder of Sanuces Jujutsu, Grandmaster Moses Powell said, "I've seen some cats do some crazy stuff man, but can they fight?"

Peace & blessings,


----------



## Hannya

Makes sense Zuji. I noticed a loss of flexability myself recently and was curious if it just came with the territory of bodybuilding or not. Didn't even think about the shortening of the muscles that could have occured, which would explain a couple injuries. Wouldn't excercising properly and doing the full range of motion prevent the muscle from doing this? Also would you recommend mixing bodybuilding type lifts with explosive type lifts?


----------



## samurai69

Zujitsuka said:
			
		

> I perhaps wasn't clear in my post. I'm not saying that weight lifting in general will make you slow, but if you spend too much time doing the traditional bodybuilding type of lifts (e.g. bicep curls), it seems that the trainee will shorten his/her muscles and compromise flexibility. This will make one more suceptible to strains, tears, and other injuries. *A shortened, tightly wound muscle just cannot move that quickly and will have a compromised range of motion. This is why Pilates and Yoga are great to add to one's training regimen.*
> 
> Once you're pumped up, you have to move into doing lifts to develop explosiveness/power/speed/rate of force development. These lifts are generally done with a lighter load that can be moved fast. Traditional bodybuilding protocols are not designed to enhance ones speed. Coach Charles Staley has written numerous articles on this.
> 
> There are different types of strength. Here are a few:
> 
> Relative -- how your strength compares to those in your age bracket and weight class
> 
> Absolute -- how much you can lift in an all-out effort
> 
> Speed --
> (a) Explosiveness - how quickly you can turn a bunch of your muscles and keep them turned on (think of lighting a match)
> (b) Starting - how quickly you can ignite your muscles (think of a camera flash)
> 
> Local muscular endurance -- How long can your muscles do redundant movements over and over again before giving out (e.g. a judoka that can retain a strong grip through the course of a match).
> 
> Again, don't forget that you can be the strongest, best conditioned person out there but if your martial arts technique is weak, well...
> 
> Don't neglect your martial arts training. It must take precedence over all else.
> 
> Here is a paraphrased quote of the late great founder of Sanuces Jujutsu, Grandmaster Moses Powell said, "I've seen some cats do some crazy stuff man, but can they fight?"
> 
> Peace & blessings,


 
Lets look at this bit first 





> it seems that the trainee will shorten his/her muscles and compromise flexibility.


*A muscle will only shorten through its contraction on extension it lengthens, as long as proper stretching (even minor stretching) is done there will be no loss in flexibility*




> This will make one more suceptible to strains, tears, and other injuries


 *Infact an over stretched muscle is more likeley to be suceptible to strains and tears as the newly stretched part of a muscle is at its weakest, proper strenght training will make those weaker areas strong* *-----------**---- * *imagine the red areas as being the newley stretched areas, they are the weak links to the chain, buy gradually strengthening them (turning them black) through weight training you are effectively strengthening the whole chan, which will improve on the flexibility too. *




> A shortened, tightly wound muscle just cannot move that quickly and will have a compromised range of motion.


 *Untrue, infact a tightly wound muscle will move faster and with more power than a loose un strengthened muscle, try winding a couple of elastic bands up and watch them un twist*



> Pilates and Yoga are great to add to one's training regimen.


 *You are absolutely correct, but not for the reason you state, pilates helps strengthen the muscles through resistance (have you not seen the reformer and other pilates equipment) Yoga is an additional form of stretching*




> Once you're pumped up, you have to move into doing lifts to develop explosiveness/power/speed/rate of force development. These lifts are generally done with a lighter load that can be moved fast. Traditional bodybuilding protocols are not designed to enhance ones speed. Coach Charles Staley has written numerous articles on this.


 
*I dont think anybody here mentioned "bodybuilding protocols" but if they did it doesnt matter, there are many different ways of training with weights and there are many different ways for BBers to train with weights, this is not the issue.*
*The pump you talk about happens wether its through weights or bodyweight, its the blood in the muscles increasing to help oxygenate the used muscle.*
*Explosivness is attained by using the weights explosively as are speed and power, hence the sport "POWER LIFTING"*

*I think this is one of those area where facts for weightlifting out way those againsts, but blinkered thinking again gets in the way of proper training*

*If you really want to improve in your chosen art the you really should use a compination of proper weight training, body weight training and good flexibility training (yoga too)*

*as i said earlier in this thread, I am 42 years old, i train with weights regularly and have done since i was 15 or 16, i have trained in the martial arts almost as long, my punching speed and power are high up there with guys far younger, I can still perform box splits and can comfortably kick the heavy bag for far longer and with more power than some of my younger friends (10+ years younger)*


----------



## samurai69

Hannya said:
			
		

> . Wouldn't excercising properly and doing the full range of motion prevent the muscle from doing this? Also would you recommend mixing bodybuilding type lifts with explosive type lifts?


 
Yes and Yes



.


----------



## Zujitsuka

This is a great discussion folks.

Cool Sumurai69. We really don't disagree. One has to mix it up as there is no "magic bullet." I myself do various bodyweight exercises and use weights, stability balls, and other equipment. Like you Samurai, I'm no spring chicken myself at 36 years of age, but I'm faster, stronger, have better wind, and am much more durable than most of my classmates. Nothing special about me.  I have to attribute my performance to committing to doing my homework (i.e. practicing martial arts drills at home - not just in class) and to the scientific approach that I apply to exercise. Thank you Charles Staley, Tom Kurz, Pavel Tsatsouline, J.C. Santana, Mike Mahler, Beth Shaw, and others. I just applied what they teach and got great results.

However, when weight training, you have to build a solid foundation with bodybuilding protocols before moving to quick lifts and plyometrics. Think of yourself as an athlete on an eight week training cycle. You'll develop different types of strength in a scientific sequence and at the very end of the cycle you will be in peak condition for competition (i.e. "the fight"). *This approach is called periodized training.* Please refer to Charles Staley's book _The Science of Martial Arts Training_.

*Periodized training is key as it will help you get the best results and help you less prone to injuries.  Trust me, a new trainee can't jump right into explosive lifts or plyometrics.  Those joints will indeed suffer bigtime!*

In regards to flexibility, if your muscles aren't stretched enough, you can pull them. If they are overstretched, you can injure yourelf as well. What a lot of martial artists don't consider is that when you have extreme flexibility, your muscles will actually be weaker as they don't have that rebounding or snap effect. Tom Kurz talks about this in his book _Stretching Scientifically_, or visit his website at www.stadion.com.

Yoga isn't only for stretching. There are some forms of yoga like Power Yoga, YogaFit, YogaBand (using resistance bands), and Iron Yoga (using light dumbbells) that definitely help with strength. I really can't speak on the Pilates machines as I've never used them. I've only done mat exercises to help with core strength.  My posture aslo improved when I started doing Pilates and Yoga - I "grew" a half an inch in height (spine has been straightened out).

All the best folks.


----------



## Brother John

Hannya said:
			
		

> Wouldn't excercising properly and doing the full range of motion prevent the muscle from doing this? Also would you recommend mixing bodybuilding type lifts with explosive type lifts?


Unless you go in and actually physically CUT a muscles fibres....it will NOT shorten. Muscle "shortening" is done through damage (cutting, like w/ a scalple) or through acute atrophy (Degeneration: the *OPPOSITE* of building strength and size/density). 
The thing is there's two elements to keeping our bodies Truly flexible: There's the range of motion that your limbs can be forced to move to, this is what I refer to as "positional flexibility". Then there is "Dynamic flexibility" which is the range of motion that your muscular strength can reach through volutary action (not velocity or force from an outside source). Positional flexibility is good, it's important, but the greatest good we can achieve is through working toward dynamic strength....and the only way to aquire it is through working to build strength through the greatest range of motion possible....
Weight Training.
PROPER weight training, wether toward the end of Bodybuilding OR Power-lifting.....or whatever, will always include the use of our limbs FULL range of motion. Improper training is Never, ever, advisable; when doing anything.

The thought that weight training....at Any extent...will produce "Shortened" muscles or a restrictive range of motion is an absolute myth. Again: Why would Olympic trainers and the trainers of professional athletes rely SO MUCH on weight training if it did anything like this? These people's livelihood, their career and their reputations DEPEND on them using the BEST methods and staying totally up to date on the best of research in the field of exercise physiology...   

IF Matt Furry's methods were as good as the M.A. fad's exponents would have us believe, then he would be FILTHY rich and his videos wouldn't be shot in his living room with his buddies. 

PLEASE Don't get me wrong, they are good.... but they don't present ANYTHING that anyone with a smattering of college level physical education doesn't already know & understand fully. Infact, his information on exercise is pretty rudimentary. Useable, good, effective....but it's just one more approach amongst other very useable approaches. Many in the field of exercise physiology that have investigated Furry's presentation feel that his methods are lacking. ME? I've seen it before, but I like the way he brings it all together and think it's worth looking into. That's why I've obtained the material.

I DO 110% agree with the assertion that the most important thing we can do, as martial artists, is to NEVER relent in our pursuit of excellence w/in our technical expression of our arts!!! That is KEY.  But the forms of exercise we use to support and elevate our abilities is important too. Knowledge and skill is CRUCIAL, but the physical qualities that we can put into play is also very important.

PROPER weight training, according to the many professional's who job it is to find the best means of elevating human physical performance, can not be beat in regards to building muscular strength, explosiveness (Known in the field as "Speed-Strength"), effective range of motion and durability.
It Cannot and will not 'shorten' or "tighten" a muscle group. Increase it's ability to contract Fully? Absolutely, and then some. But in order to truly exert force in a direction you must be able to control and relax the opposing muscles opposite the contracting muscles (known as the eccentric contraction)...this leads to better muscular control and the ability to better RELAX a muscle group. This too adds to flexibility and elasticity, as well as speed through reduced 'muscular drag' or opposing tension!

(Weight training is also excellent for strengthening bones!!)

Your Brother
John


----------



## Shirt Ripper

Good discussion folks.  Only skimmed the last few posts but good points Brother John.

There is no reason, barring an interest in "getting big" or the sport of bodybuilding, for any martial artist to "train like a body builder."  As to whether or not one should include explosive movements in one's training...of course.  That's what is should consist of!  How does having well defined and bi upper arms or quadriceps help a martial artist?! They don't, and training that way without the interests listed above is silly.  Bodybuilding is probably the most non-functional activity one can take up if training for another sport or activity.  Train for power and  perhaps "absolute" strength not simply for hypertrophy and expect that since your muscles are bigger, you are better (or even stronger!!!).  Another typical philosophy of bodybuilding, especially low level bodybuilding is isolating certain muscle groups.  How does that apply to anything?  It doesn't.

The solution:  Design your program however you want.  At the level of preparedness for resistance training most people here are at, any type of program (# of reps X # of sets) with bring adaptations to greater strength.  The sets and reps are not the important thing for the detrained or untrained...it's the stress.  Include multi-joint exercises like cleans, snatches, squats, overhead press, rows, etc.  TRAIN for flexibity, meaning actually work on it in the weightroom or wherever.  If your weight training program is hindering your performance, IT SUCKS!  Honestly, that's it.  A training program is supposed to make you better and if it doesn't or makes you worse, you have a bad program, period.  

Bigger muscles *are not* necessarily stronger muscles.

Who is more functional (useful)?  I'll give you a hint; It aint number three!  but then who is the most muscular?  Hmmm...
http://smh.com.au/ffximage/2004/08/28/cg_108096272_gallery__550x412.jpg
http://i.a.cnn.net/si/2004/olympics/2004/writers/08/18/ancient.stadium/p1_nelson_all.jpg
http://digilander.libero.it/mikementzer/Coleman18.jpg


----------



## Zujitsuka

Wow...

Good stuff folks.

I hope that visitors are reading the posts carefully and visiting the websites of the suggested sources/citations for clarity and for assistance in developing their own customized routines.

It seems to me that most of us agree that weight training when done properly is beneficial - as are bodyweight exercises.  Also that you have to make sure that there is a flexibility component to your routine.  Either one is a piece to the puzzle and not the puzzle in of itself.

Peace & blessings,


----------



## samurai69

Good discussion yes....dont have much time now, but would like to respond to the topics in the previous 3 or 4 posts....will do tomorrow 



:idunno:


----------



## samurai69

Shirt Ripper said:
			
		

> Who is more functional (useful)? I'll give you a hint; It aint number three! but then who is the most muscular? Hmmm...
> http://smh.com.au/ffximage/2004/08/28/cg_108096272_gallery__550x412.jpg
> http://i.a.cnn.net/si/2004/olympics/2004/writers/08/18/ancient.stadium/p1_nelson_all.jpg
> http://digilander.libero.it/mikementzer/Coleman18.jpg


 
Ok, just had to respond to this bit.........IMO the olyimpic lifter is probably more functionally strong, but the olympic putter is a close second, but i do have to say when ronnie won his first olympia (still a big guy, but not as big) and as a working police officer he remained functional and flexible, i remember seeing ronnie on stage performing full splits.

will respond more later, learning lots


----------



## Shirt Ripper

samurai69 said:
			
		

> Ok, just had to respond to this bit.........IMO the olyimpic lifter is probably more functionally strong, but the olympic putter is a close second, but i do have to say when ronnie won his first olympia (still a big guy, but not as big) and as a working police officer he remained functional and flexible, i remember seeing ronnie on stage performing full splits.
> 
> will respond more later, learning lots


 
I was just showing that functionality means different things.  The main point being muscluarity being decieving.  Ronnie is an exception for BBers because he is really strong (not just big) and has maintained fair flexibility...just too bulky for certain things though...no denying it.  The putter (Adam Nelson) stands just shy of 6 feet  if I recall and can dunk a basketball, not a huge feat but impressive at 260ish.  He's obviously got a build on him but he is by no means hugely muscular...just very powerful.

Pyrros Dimas (the weightlifter) is just a god is all...:uhyeah:


----------



## samurai69

Shirt Ripper said:
			
		

> I was just showing that functionality means different things. The main point being muscluarity being decieving. Ronnie is an exception for BBers because he is really strong (not just big) and has maintained fair flexibility...just too bulky for certain things though...no denying it. The putter (Adam Nelson) stands just shy of 6 feet if I recall and can dunk a basketball, not a huge feat but impressive at 260ish. He's obviously got a build on him but he is by no means hugely muscular...just very powerful.
> 
> Pyrros Dimas (the weightlifter) is just a god is all...:uhyeah:


 
Sure, i anderstand and was probably agreeing with you in a back handed sort of way  

.


----------



## Brother John

I don't think it's really the methods used by bodybuilders that limits their levels of strength, but the fact that SO many of them seek "Mass" through the use of DRUGS instead of EARNING it inch by inch.
That's why Mentzer was one of my big idols. 
Emphasized training HEAVY and HARD, but intelligently. Though for about four years (so I've heard) he did use anabolic steriods while at the height of his Pro-BB career.

Still, in my eyes...he was a man who's mass correlated very closely to his strength.
Too many bodybuilders TODAY emphasize mass and try to get there through water-volume. They end up being very aesthetically pleasing Water-bags.
POWER lifters aren't a great deal better. Strong? Yes!!!! In short bursts. Muscular endurance? 
NO. 
That type of training would defeat their purpose.
I think that the intelligent approach would fall between the two, something along the lines of "HIT" training.
BUT it all depends on what you need the resistance training for. FOR us martial artists, POWER training is much further off the mark than bodybuilding..... but bodybuilding 'Protocols' (as they are being refered to here) need to be geared toward strength, especially speed-strength and muscular endurance.

just some very random, probably disjointed, thoughts early in the morning.

Your Brother
John


----------



## Shirt Ripper

samurai69 said:
			
		

> Sure, i anderstand and was probably agreeing with you in a back handed sort of way
> 
> .


Didn't take it as a disagreement...just thought more on it and expanded...


			
				Brother John said:
			
		

> I don't think it's really the methods used by bodybuilders that limits their levels of strength, but the fact that SO many of them seek "Mass" through the use of DRUGS instead of EARNING it inch by inch.
> That's why Mentzer was one of my big idols.
> Emphasized training HEAVY and HARD, but intelligently. Though for about four years (so I've heard) he did use anabolic steriods while at the height of his Pro-BB career.
> 
> Still, in my eyes...he was a man who's mass correlated very closely to his strength.
> Too many bodybuilders TODAY emphasize mass and try to get there through water-volume. They end up being very aesthetically pleasing Water-bags.
> POWER lifters aren't a great deal better. Strong? Yes!!!! In short bursts. Muscular endurance?
> NO.
> That type of training would defeat their purpose.
> I think that the intelligent approach would fall between the two, something along the lines of "HIT" training.
> BUT it all depends on what you need the resistance training for. FOR us martial artists, POWER training is much further off the mark than bodybuilding..... but bodybuilding 'Protocols' (as they are being refered to here) need to be geared toward strength, especially speed-strength and muscular endurance.
> 
> just some very random, probably disjointed, thoughts early in the morning.
> 
> Your Brother
> John


I'd say it's a fair bet that most pro's (particularly in bodybuilding) used/are using.  So are you a proponent of HIT, as in you use it?  You've been pretty successful with it?  I only ask because HIT seems to be one of the big black and white issues in strength and conditioning.  Your either a proponent of it or you reject it completely.
In my early days (when I had some interest in bodybuilding) I was a fan of Mentzer, which was around the time he died, so long after his competitive career, I as my studies developed I think I generally disagree with the HIT philosophy on a lot.  I dunno...


----------



## samurai69

Shirt Ripper said:
			
		

> Didn't take it as a disagreement...just thought more on it and expanded...
> 
> I'd say it's a fair bet that most pro's (particularly in bodybuilding) used/are using. So are you a proponent of HIT, as in you use it? You've been pretty successful with it? I only ask because HIT seems to be one of the big black and white issues in strength and conditioning. Your either a proponent of it or you reject it completely.
> In my early days (when I had some interest in bodybuilding) I was a fan of Mentzer, which was around the time he died, so long after his competitive career, I as my studies developed I think I generally disagree with the HIT philosophy on a lot. I dunno...


 

I have to say i never got on with HIT, however Dorian Yates'es HIT i think was a little mis-understood, and there in lies the problem i think with many of the systems, I personally am a fan of the old time lifts and lifters.


----------



## Shirt Ripper

samurai69 said:
			
		

> I personally am a fan of the old time lifts and lifters.


 
Now you're talking my language.  The biggest issue in strength and conditioning is people getting too caught up on "systems" and not simply busting tail and getting better.  You've got to kind of take the Bruce Lee approach to it and "be like water."  If you are tightly wound to one "system" or style of training you are missing something and limiting yourself.


----------



## Shirt Ripper

I got to thinking about an article Louie Simmons put out a while ago regarding HIT...It was March of 2001.
http://www.westside-barbell.com/articles.htm
Check out the rest of his articles too...he gives his use of many of the right ideas floating around in strength in conditioning...from Siff to Verkoshanksky to Zatiorsky.


----------



## Brother John

Nah....
I'd not call myself a "Proponent" of HIT, but it makes good sense.
At last count, 12 NFL teams, most of the NHL and lots of the NBA use it.
Infact, If memory serves, even the women's Olympic basketball team used it.

No, I'm not a hook-line-and-sinker HIT guy. I use it, but I cycle through it. I do about five weeks of it...just to REALLY shock my body into some growth. I have five phases that I cycle through. ONE of them is even HVT, the polar opposite of HIT. Then I switch it around somemore. I'm a bit more of a traditionalist usually; still like a lot of thing that Arnold put in his HUGE book. But when you're at a sticking point...there's nothin like "HIT". HARD/INTENSE...great for building power!!!  But I think that TOO much of it (for me, more than 6 weeks)  harms the joints and the connective tissues.... TOO much stress for tooo long.
Yates was a Hero of mine too, but check out that Pec-tear!!!! Not good.

My weight training isn't aimed at improving my martial arts, I should mention.
I don't believe in needing accelerated athleticism to make my martial arts skills effective. SKILL makes my skills effective. 
I lift weights for the added strength (for doing work, my friends ALWAYS call me up to help them MOVE big things....ends up getting me more steak dinners) for my Wife (Because she likes how it makes me look/feel...and it's better to be looked over than overlooked)....and because it just plain makes me feel good to lift and see/FEEEEEL the results.

Your Brother
John


----------



## Soldier

I just saw the title of the thread was like  WOW. Than I saw Matt Furey was like Oh ok now I understand. lol


----------



## samurai69

Shirt Ripper said:
			
		

> Now you're talking my language. The biggest issue in strength and conditioning is people getting too caught up on "systems" and not simply busting tail and getting better. You've got to kind of take the Bruce Lee approach to it and "be like water." If you are tightly wound to one "system" or style of training you are missing something and limiting yourself.


 

Oh yes, we are in agreement 100% (at the moment  )


----------



## samurai69

Brother John said:
			
		

> No, I'm not a hook-line-and-sinker HIT guy. I use it, but I cycle through it. I do about five weeks of it...just to REALLY shock my body into some growth. I have five phases that I cycle through. ONE of them is even HVT, the polar opposite of HIT. Then I switch it around somemore. I'm a bit more of a traditionalist usually; still like a lot of thing that Arnold put in his HUGE book. But when you're at a sticking point...there's nothin like "HIT". HARD/INTENSE...great for building power!!! But I think that TOO much of it (for me, more than 6 weeks) harms the joints and the connective tissues.... TOO much stress for tooo long.
> Yates was a Hero of mine too, but check out that Pec-tear!!!! Not good.


 

Dont forget the tricep torn apart too

I do think sometimes when BBers in particular get these tears it could/would be down too the "drugs" that some of these people use
a muscle grows in strength very quickly whilst on AAs, however the tendons get stronger at a much slower pace so when put into a "HIT" type position of pushing extreme weight like that the MTJ (muscle tenon join) is much more likely to snap.
Its a common injury without AAs usage, magnified by them.


----------



## Shirt Ripper

samurai69 said:
			
		

> Dont forget the tricep torn apart too
> 
> I do think sometimes when BBers in particular get these tears it could/would be down too the "drugs" that some of these people use
> a muscle grows in strength very quickly whilst on AAs, however the tendons get stronger at a much slower pace so when put into a "HIT" type position of pushing extreme weight like that the MTJ (muscle tenon join) is much more likely to snap.
> Its a common injury without AAs usage, magnified by them.



That's a good point.  Also, don't forget that the typical bodybuilding program doesn't take into consideration training for "structural strength" instead it will have a heavy focus on the muscles as that is what the sport is all about...


----------



## samurai69

Shirt Ripper said:
			
		

> That's a good point. Also, don't forget that the typical bodybuilding program doesn't take into consideration training for "structural strength" instead it will have a heavy focus on the muscles as that is what the sport is all about...


 
Exactly, that is why i like the old time lifters, they built strong functional and, by comparison, big bodies..........."structural strength" and they did it without modern supplements and with relatively basic weights (kettlebells etc )


----------



## JamesYazell

Well I have recently begun a program of diet along with some cardio, free weights, and body weight excercises! I am really enjoying it and my body is feeling good already!


----------



## Shirt Ripper

JamesYazell said:
			
		

> Well I have recently begun a program of diet along with some cardio, free weights, and body weight excercises! I am really enjoying it and my body is feeling good already!


 
Good.:asian:


----------



## samurai69

so shirt ripper, a strongman and an aikdoka...........Intersting  

JamesYazell...........great, keep at it and enjoy  



.


----------



## Shirt Ripper

samurai69 said:
			
		

> so shirt ripper, a strongman and an aikdoka...........Intersting
> JamesYazell...........great, keep at it and enjoy
> .


 
I like exploring disciplines and the acquisition of skills.

I have found much parallel between Aikido and throwing (discus, hammer, shot, weight for distance, etc.) which has helped me to grasp the aikido techniques.

Aikido, as it appears now, will likely be a breif encounter, unfortunately.


----------

