Hmm....is it true?

[Cain]

I got the idea of this thread from Ckdstudent's post in the thread 'splitz' ok here goes -

Is it possible that people who have more flexibility kick with lesser power at low level than those with lesser flexibility?........maybe in a flexible person the muscles will be loose and will have lesser power when kicking at lower levels and a guy with lesser flexibility will hv more rigid muscles thus allowing his kick to be more powerful on the lower areas........hmm.....can any of u sifus help me out with this? Thanx
|Cain|

[stump]

i don't think the two concepts are directly linked. Only if you take height of the kick into ac****. For example someone ith limited flexability might be able to get their leg up pretty high but not be able to kick well like this, a flexible person will be able to move effortlesly (or relatively effortlesly) through the range of motion of the kick.

i don't think that less flexible people can kick any harder...but maybe i'm not taking everything into account....anyone like to elaborate on this?

[stump]

emmm....account and what I said previously (unintentionally) are to quite different things....ahem...sorry

[Cain]

Hmm...stump but I meant kicking at a low level like a shin kick it's no doubt thar a flexible person will be able to kick more powerfully at face level but what about lower areas like the shin?
|Cain|

[stump]

I don't think flexibility has a bearing on kicking power in that case. I'd be very curious to know if other people do think it has a bearing and why though

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Nope, wouldn't really have a bearing unless you were actually inflexible enough to have trouble walking.

Have to wonder though, why kick to the shin when there's a lovely knee only a few inches higher?

[Andy Murray]

Shin Kick as in Thai kick Jimmy.
Striking surface is the shin, target area on the legs is just above the knee, on or at the end of the thigh muscles amongst others.

[YODA]

Shin Vs Knee

Why punch the face when there's a lovely throat only a few inches higher?

The shin is a great target - but only if you're wearing shoes - which in JKD is how we train :D

[Cain]

AAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!

What the hell happend to my original discussion??????
|Cain|

[Cain]

Originally posted by ckdstudent
Have to wonder though, why kick to the shin when there's a lovely knee only a few inches higher?

Hmm ckd I meant lower areas and not any specific tarrget and please try to keep the subject in place
Thanx :)
|Cain|

[Andy Murray]

Originally posted by YODA
Shin Vs Knee

Why punch the face when there's a lovely throat only a few inches higher?

The shin is a great target - but only if you're wearing shoes - which in JKD is how we train :D

Err, you fight people upside down Dave? Throat higher than face eh? Hmmmm, stay back after class :D

Sorry about the thread hijacking Cain.

[YODA]

Sorry - typed that just after getting home from Capoeira class :D

[Cain]

Now that things are cleared can we just step back to the subject please.
|Cain|

[YODA]

Hokey Dokey - back to the original subject....

Is it possible that people who have more flexibility kick with lesser power at low level than those with lesser flexibility?..

Nope.

[pgm316]

I've often thought this might be true. Stretching the muscles and ligaments of your leg must have some effect. In effect you’re lengthening them[?]. Possibly making it harder to generate power.

I admit to not being an expert on scientific kicking. I prefer to improve my kicking by using weights more than stretching. I wonder what the footballer theory is on this.

I have more kicking power than a lot of the flexible people I train with, maybe it is because I use weights, and so what’s best?

[LilBunnyRabbit]

In general the more flexible you are the less strength you have, in general, there are very strong, very flexible people.

The reason is that building muscle reduces your flexibility until you've taught the muscle to stretch out, whereas building flexibility tends to do the opposite since most flexibility training is not particularly strength-intensive.

To get flexibility and power you need to work on both.

However, they'll be able to kick with more power at higher levels than you will, since for you it'll be a strain, and for them it'll just be comfortable. Whether this is a good thing is debatable.

[Mike Flanagan]

Just had a look through a medical text on human movement. I think the idea that you can have either strength or flexibility but not both is a myth. Certainly this particular text didn't throw up anything that would indicate otherwise.

To develop strength, you need to train for that. To develop flexibility you need to train for that. As long as you do justice to both training regimes (which are not mutually exclusive in any way) I see no reason why you can't develop both. Its just that the majority of people don't get the balance between the 2 right.

The only danger I can see is in being too keen with the flexibility training and developing hyper-mobility of joints as a result. Hyper-mobility is not a good thing, but strong muscles can mediate its effects - so maybe there's an argument for including some strength training along with any flexibility training.

Mike

[LilBunnyRabbit]

Oh yeah, you can definitely have both, no doubt about it.

We've got a girl with hyperflexibility (pre-existing medical condition) but her kicks are absolutely amazing in power, especially considering her size.

However as you said, most people aim for one or the other almost to the exclusion of the other (did that make sense), so usually people will either be flexible, or strong, rather than both.

[Andy Murray]

Surely strength, and hence power is dependant on the muscles ability to contract from an extended position, be that the one of the average individual, or one of extreme flexibility.

If someone with extreme flexibility has trained in such a way that strength is equal contracting from half flex, or full flex, then their ability is geater due to the versatility they have created for themselves?

The applicition of that ability/flexibility is down to the individual.

As always, it's about striking a balance, and having some understanding of what it is you are trying to develop.

Generally speaking though, guys that work on flexibility, are not always the ones doing power squats in the gym, so I guess that affects the perception of who kicks harder, the stretcher or the squatter.

[Cain]

Hmm....nice view you have got there guys I suppose strength training is also important.....and also thanx for not hijacking my thread further you know how I hate that :mad:
Anyone who like to post further ideas please do.
|Cain|

[YODA]

Originally posted by cain_charlie
Hmm....nice view you have got there guys I suppose strength training is also important.....and also thanx for not hijacking my thread further you know how I hate that :mad:
Anyone who like to post further ideas please do.
|Cain|

So - what do you think of the Firefighter's strike here in the UK? Do they deserve a 40% pay rise?

Hehe

Hehehe

:D

[Cain]

VERY FUNNY!!!!!
|Cain|

[pgm316]

Maybe they do deserve a pay rise Yoda, but should they be allowed to go on strike? Theres a family which have just been burnt to death. People say this wouldn't have happened if they hadn't, Firemen say people burn to death when there working anyway. Who knows, but its a bit like blackmail on the firemens part to me....


Whats your views cain? :D

I've strained my leg badly a couple of times and in a fight i wouldn't kick high because i wouldn't have stretched enough! And my kicking is generally aimed pretty low anyway. So whats the point of me stretching like a TKD person. Some stretching yes but I feel I get more benefit running or doing squats with weights. What do other people think?

[TkdWarrior]

"I've strained my leg badly a couple of times and in a fight i wouldn't kick high because i wouldn't have stretched enough! And my kicking is generally aimed pretty low anyway. So whats the point of me stretching like a TKD person"

this is because u hav been doing passive stretching(hope this is rite word) for example the kind of practice i do enables me to kick at any height without having done stretching even in winters...
the active stretching include the "Intent" part in kicks...
-TkdWarrior-

[Cain]

Ahh....now that's a good point Tkdwarrior :)
|Cain|

[pgm316]

Maybe thats ok where you live, India & Bombay. Have you been to England, its so cold I need to stretch before walking sometimes! ;)

But my flexibility went very bad after I tore some stuff in my leg. Its getting better but still no were like I was. When I stretch it hurts where I injured my leg :(

On the other hand I can still throw powerfull kicks and just about get to head hight

[Mike Flanagan]

Originally posted by Andy Murray
If someone with extreme flexibility has trained in such a way that strength is equal contracting from half flex, or full flex, then their ability is geater due to the versatility they have created for themselves?


The admittedly small amount of literature I've read on this subject suggests that typically the greatest strength (actually the book may have said "power" rather than "strength", without checking I'm not sure) is exhibited at the mid range of the muscle's movement. This seems to be typical, but may vary for some particular muscles.

But I'd have to agree with the general gist of what I think you're saying - if you have strength and flexibility then you are more versatile than if you only focus on one or the other. I presume that relatively inflexible muscles are more prone to damage through extension than relatively flexible ones, regardless of the strength of the muscle (although obviously a stronger muscle will be better able to resist the extension).

Confused,

Mike

[Andy Murray]

Originally posted by Mike Flanagan


The admittedly small amount of literature I've read on this subject suggests that typically the greatest strength (actually the book may have said "power" rather than "strength", without checking I'm not sure) is exhibited at the mid range of the muscle's movement. This seems to be typical, but may vary for some particular muscles.

But I'd have to agree with the general gist of what I think you're saying - if you have strength and flexibility then you are more versatile than if you only focus on one or the other. I presume that relatively inflexible muscles are more prone to damage through extension than relatively flexible ones, regardless of the strength of the muscle (although obviously a stronger muscle will be better able to resist the extension).

Confused,

Mike

Hi Mike, sorry if I confused you, I confuse myself most of the time :D

Personally I believe strength and flexibility go hand in hand.

There are some really good resources on this on the web already. Look out for the stuff by Pavel and Kurz in particular. I believe you'll find links on this forum in the Magazine and Links sections.

[YODA]

Originally posted by Mike Flanagan


The admittedly small amount of literature I've read on this subject suggests that typically the greatest strength (actually the book may have said "power" rather than "strength", without checking I'm not sure) is exhibited at the mid range of the muscle's movement.




That doesn't make sense.

Where in a typical strength training exercise do you get stuck when you reach failure? The middle - which suggests that this is not the strongest part of the movement. e.g. A biceps curl will fail with the arm at a 90 degree angle - a flat bench press will fail half way up.

[Cain]

Now I am all confused up :confused: :confused: :confused:
|Cain|

[Andy Murray]

Originally posted by YODA



That doesn't make sense.

Where in a typical strength training exercise do you get stuck when you reach failure? The middle - which suggests that this is not the strongest part of the movement. e.g. A biceps curl will fail with the arm at a 90 degree angle - a flat bench press will fail half way up.

Daring to argue with Dave without any qualifications, but surely Dave this is about the mechanics of the movement, not the strength of the muscle. If you start a bicep curl, the strength required to move a bar from hanging, to 90 degrees increases logarithmically, with little required to start the movement, and maximal to complete it. Get FF in here. He's an Engineer or summat clever.

[Cain]

Hmm....I myself am wondering....why does not Freeform show his face in any of my discussions? Hmm.....he even preffered to keep quite in a chat with him. I hope I have'nt hut him in any way :( I love his discussions though...
|Cain|

[Mike Flanagan]

Originally posted by YODA



That doesn't make sense.

Where in a typical strength training exercise do you get stuck when you reach failure? The middle - which suggests that this is not the strongest part of the movement. e.g. A biceps curl will fail with the arm at a 90 degree angle - a flat bench press will fail half way up.

Sorry to take so long to come back to you on this. I did post a long detailed, convuluted reply a few days ago, using lots of big, clever sounding words. But my computer crashed when I clicked 'send':mad:

First, I'll reiterate that I don't consider myself expert in this subject. I'm just quoting/paraphrasing things that I've read in text-books. That said, I think its easy for there to be some confusion about the strongest part of the muscle's range. What you're testing above isn't (I don't think anyway) the strength at the midpoint of the range. Rather its the strength moving from the midpoint inwards AFTER you've already moved from the extreme end of the range to the midpoint.

A better test might be to partition the muscle's range into thirds and see which third can move the most weight. So you'd see how much weight you can move from the arm extended fully (180 degrees) to about 120 degrees. After a rest period you'd see how much weight you can move from 120 to 60 degrees. Rest and repeat for 60 degrees to zero (I'm ignoring the fact that the elbow joint can't actually bend to zero degrees because a) the bicep muscle gets in the way and b) the joint can't do it anyway). You should find that the middle third can move the most weight.

Remember as well that this is a typical strength profile for human muscles, some muscles may be exceptions.

Does it make more sense now? Or am I still talking gobbledygook? (wouldn't be the first time).

Mike