Evidence of shin conditioning dangers

First off you told me I was dead wrong and offered your own questions and answers. Then you didnt suggested that I never say toned, you told me. I never said isolation was best for training. I said it can be good for definition, but not the best. I can't say it enough times, people keep taking what I say out of context.

And aml01_ph I disagree with your statment about toning to a degree. If somebody already has minimal fat on their stomach, sit ups and other excercises will tone them. But once more, isolation training, IN ADDITION TO, other training, can very well tone somebody's arms, or whatever body part that theyre working. And it can be related more to strength, depending on how they lift. If somebody lifts a heavy weight for 10 reps, there results will be different than if the're doing 100 lighter weight lifts.

 

I think I am going to explode from all the use of the word tone.

Generally what people mean by tone is a combination of low body fat and an appreciable amount of muscle. What tone, or tonus, actually means is the contractile state of a relaxed muscle. This is why using the word tone in this situation is a complete misnomer and is why socrastein is trying to ascertain why you used that word specifically.

Bowflex and most other home gym type machines suck. Previous discussion:

http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=55697&highlight=bowflex
http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53295&highlight=bowflex
http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=32590&highlight=bowflex
http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21137&highlight=bowflex
http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10182&highlight=bowflex

Let's put it this way: how many big, strong guys have you ever met who trained solely with a bowflex or other crappy machine? How strong do you think any of them would have been if they had used better methods?

 

reply...

AdmcG: Best post so far But again, I wasn't talking about solely training with the bowflex. If you strictly use the bowflex, great results would be far and few between. But in combination with other forms of training, I still uhold that it can be very effective. The only people who train solely with a machine are paid by commercial producers to say that they do. All im saying that in addition to other excercise, it can work.

 

You must really love playing the victim Kenpoguy. I didn't say you were flat out wrong. I said "What did you mean by this? Did you mean this A, cause that would be wrong. Did you mean B, cause that would be wrong. Did you mean C or D? Cause those would be wrong. If you didn't mean these, what did you mean?"

That was my post in a nutshell. Turns out you were wrong, but I didn't really know what you were saying at first, so I wasn't so bold as to say, yet, that you were wrong. I know you never said isolation was best for training - you said it was best for toning...

...which is false, by all definitions of the word, including the one you were using.

And yes, I did suggest that you not use the word tone, at all. If this thread and every other thread in which the word is ever mentioned isn't good enough reason for that suggestion, well I don't know what is.

Other exercises might, but situps won't. At all. You can't expect hypertrophy of the abdominals from anything that's so easy you can do it 100+ times in a row, like a situp or a crunch.

I'm curious, if it sucks by itself, what makes it so great when you do other things? If I was to start using the Bowflex on weekends, in addition to my free-weight compound routine I perform during the week, it would little, if anything, to my results. I'd still be growing in strength, but that would have NOTHING to do with the bowflex. So, with or without better exercises, the bowflex still sucks. There's no reason to waste time on it that could be better spent on better exercises. Same goes for isolation. And situps. And a lot of the other crap you keep saying works well with things.

 

reply...

Socrastein, you've really got a warped attitude. I never even said isolation would be best for training. I said it can work, which it does. And you did call me flat out wrong from the get go. And sit ups WILL tone your stomach(Unless the person has a good amount of fat on them). I've done it myself, as have my students and clients. And while i've never used a bowflex day after day, I have used a Total Gym(which is basically the same principle). And I got plenty of results. I'll say it one last time. If you consider weight loss, you can't lose a whole lot of weight doing situps. You lose weight from cardiovasicular activity. But when you combine sit ups and cardio you will have stronger more defined abs, and the fat around them will literally melt away. What so many people out there forget is that RESULTS ARE VERY EASY TO GET FROM ALMOST ANY EXCERSISE. But the results mean NOTHING unless you eat properly and train properly. I train from a variety of everything. I lift weights 6 days a week. I run a minimum of a mile a day at least 4 times a week. make sure that I do plenty of other cardio and other bodyweight excercises, and finally I teach for countless hours in a weak, and I do my own martial arts training on the side. That is my combination that I use. During the winter months or months that I slack in, I do mainly bodyweight excercises such as situps, pushups, leg ups, crunches, side bends, twists, etc. Very simple excercises that work!

And just remember that you could spend 30 minutes on a treadmill and burn 400 calories. But all it takes is one piece of cake to ruin all the work. It totally negates it. Before you say anything won't work, at least say it won't work from personal expereince and not what you read.

 

This seems to be the key point here. You are arguing from a purely subjective, anecdotal position against people who study the science behind exercise and nutrition. You seem to have a big problem with people who actually study and read up on subjects before coming to conclusions, and you seem to think it highly effective to base conclusions on what you feel or think is true, regardless any evidence to the contrary.

You "feel" like isolation works. Studies show that it is inefficient for hypertrophy, for strength development, for caloric expenditure, for muscle coordination, and for muscle stabalizers. In every way that counts, it is inferior to compound movements, except for very specific circumstances that Wazzabi did a good job of detailing.

You can plug your ears and scream "LA LA LA I know what I know!" all you want, but all the evidence flies in the face of what you're saying.

You also "feel" like simple bodyweight exercises like situps, crunches, pushups, side bends, etc. "work". However, due to the nature of muscle fiber stimulation and hypertrophy, unless you are horrendously weak (can only do a few situps, can't do a single pushup, etc.) simple bodyweight exercises will do nothing for you in terms of strength development or hypertrophy. You won't get a ripped stomach from doing situps, regardless of how much fat you have. Most people can lay down and belt out a couple hundred situps before they reach failure. If you would take some time to read about how and when muscles grow, you'd realize that they do not do so unless placed under significant strain, and heavy loads. If you can do hundreds of something, you're not straining any muscles, you're not using heavy loads, and thus you're not doing anything useful. If somebody can do more than 15 or so pushups in a row, they need to be using weights to add more resistance, they need to be benching. Not benching as well as doing pushups, not doing "a little of everything", they need to be pressing heavy weights. This really isn't debatable.

You may "feel" that your total gym was a good investment and you get a lot of great results from it. I don't care how you feel about it, the fact is that it is vastly inferior to free weight, heavy compound movements like full squats, deadlifts, cleans, snatches, and other exercises that the total gym doesn't even have a substitute for. Most people, when given the choice between "Sorta works kinda" and "Works great!" don't have a hard choice to make. And once again, no, there's no reason to use a crappy machine along with free weights - invest the time you WOULD use on a bowflex or total gym into more time with the free weights.

Ironically, the exact opposite is true. Results are very hard to get unless you're actually using useful methods. Go to any local commercial gym, and you will see it full of weak, unfit, fat people who have been "working out" for months, sometimes years! If results are so easy to get from doing almost anything, then why is it that millions of people waste so much time and money trying, and failing, to get results?! How is this contradiction not blatantly obvious to you?

I'm sorry, but nearly every post you make contains a new blatantly false statement that you base solely on personal experience and opinion, and you seem bewildered and offended by the fact that people keep telling you you don't know what you're talking about.

 

Socrastein I have never EVER insulted anybody on MAP before(until I called you an egghead). But you are hands down the biggest moron that i've ever come across on here. Your arguing against what has been proven true, and saying its not. Quit reading books and actually get out there and try stuff for yourself. And once you do that quit listening to the voices in your own head and look at history. Most great boxers never lifted a single weight in their life. Take that into consideration. I stand 180 lbs, 5'11 and am packed with muscle. Don't tell me that i may "Feel" how i train works. It does. Quit insulting my intelligence and i suggest that you get a better outlook on the people around you. I wouldn't be surprised if your instructors kick you out of the studio because they get tired of your wise attitude. The last thing im going to say here, is that this post should be closed and im going to contact the admin to do so. It's totally off of the orignial topic and right now it's just an arguing match. So in conclusion, when you come asking for advice listen to it. Don't give it about what your asking.

 

I see no reason to close this thread other than the fact that you don't seem to be able to take objective criticism of your opinions and don't like evidence being placed in front of you to prove points (which you cannot provide). You are definitely not the only person to react when their beliefs are challenged (completely natural reaction for many people) but you might want to take a step back and see what is being presented in a pretty civil manner by socrastein and others. I for one happen to agree with almost everything he said.

Are you exactly at where you want to be with fitness? Are you insanely strong, fast and conditioned (even compared to pros)? Are you making progress towards these goals? Have you been doing for the past however long you have been training? Do you have the ideal physique you might want? If you have been training with good methods for years, the answers to all these questions should be yes. I highly doubt that, as 180lbs at 5 11 is not what I would personally call "packed with muscle." These are questions that everyone who is training should ask themselves. The best people to go to for advice on this subject are professional strength and conditioning coaches, and all of these coaches will confirm to you that what socrastein said is basically true.

This is the main point and might help you to understand where we are coming from: There are good, better and best ways of training.

Good methods of training basically involve you doing anything at all and making some form of progress, no matter how slow. Bear in mind there are a hell of a lot of pseudo-scientific explanations in this area, such as "push ups are good for the chest." Yeah, they might be decent for those who can't do many reps, but you won't see anyone who does just push ups who has a big chest or is very strong around that joint. If you are just doing push ups, the imbalances created here can also be dangerous for the joint and weakening in some bigger movements.

Better methods involve ones that are more structured and might take other things into consideration such as goals and the best anecdotal ways to achieve these goals such as target attributes, injury prevention etc. This might be things like doing sets of chin ups which as we and others know will do plenty for your strength and conditioning. You might choose to structure volume and exercise selection across a period of time for various reasons.

The best methods are those proven to work by countless coaches worldwide, backed up by the scientific data that we have in abundance (see books like Mel Siffs Supertraining and Kelly Baggets Vertical Jump Development Bible). The proof is in the pudding: If a coach gets an athlete to break records using their training methods that are scientifically proven, surely this is amongst one of the best methods to use? These methods will give the best results in the quickest time.

Of course it's a huge generalisation, but you hopefully get the jist of what I am saying. Good, better and best. Good is better than nothing, but there are many better ways of training. If you can't accept this then stick to the bowflex and isolation and make less progress than you could if you opened your mind a little.

PS. Be prepared for contact from an admin/global with regards to your personal attacks.

 

I wouldn't call the manner that Socrastein has been talking completely civil. In general, there is a horrible bias on this board and it's not something I even care to discuss anymore. As far as the personal attacks go, i've been a member of map since '04. And i've never been this outraged by a thread like this. Debating is what we came here to do, but thats not what's been done at all. End of story.

 

Just a question, why do you attribute "tone" to muscle strength? Muscle definition is almost totally a function of body fat % and has little do do with actual muscle strength. I have seen a few guys at the hospital that were highly "toned" but who I could snap in half (fees extra).

And I am afraid that Socra, as much as it pains me to agree with him , is correct. Testimonials are not evidence, though I would venture that isometics and isolation are much better then sitting on your butt all day.

 

reply...

wrydolphin, thanks for having one of the first respectful posts that i've seen so far on here. I never said toning was muscle strength though. What i've been contiunously trying to say is that by a combination of training you can achieve both at the same time. And you just said isolation training is better than sitting on your but all day. Which I agree with. Thats pretty much what i've been saying all along. isolation training can be good if done right. I never called it great or the best. And your absoultely correct testomonials aren't always evidence. But again take into consideration some of the worlds best fighters in the world. Look at early Russian athletes and the way many members of Japenease karateka are built. They did their conditioning thorough means other than lifting weights. What Socrastein and this thread's "fabulous" moderator are trying to say, is that sit ups and pushups and any other body excersise is virtually useless. It's good to know that our militaries of the world got to where they are now only by lifting weights Not.

 

Kenpoguy, I know you think I was being a jerk, but try to keep in mind that it's very difficult to tell someone they're wrong in a completely inoffensive manner. I can't really think of a way to tell someone who doesn't know what they're talking about that they don't know what they're talking about without offending them in some way. Keep that in mind when you're reading my posts and others'. I'm not trying to offend you, I'm trying to explain to you that you're wrong, in a direct manner. I'm aware that it seems offensive, but truth concerns me more than someone's ego.

Boot camp trains you for psychological endurance, and physical endurance. They don't create athletes, they don't create powerlifters, they train people who keep pushing when they want to quit, that's really about it. Being in the military will give you some nice aerobic conditioning, but little more than that. I hate to keep saying it, but the fact is that simple bodyweight exercises are just too easy to render gains.

And please don't insult Adam... subtly or not, I don't care. He knows more about anatomy, physiology, nutrition, resistance training, and everything health related than you could ever dream to. Humble yourself a bit and listen to what he has to say, and you won't find yourself embarrassed and frustrated in threads like these.

 

Quite true.
One only has to look at the vast majority of armed forces style training out there to realize that their focus by and large is on endurance not on strength or explosive power etc. That's as it should be... fighting battles for grunts doesn't generally consist of the need for explosive strength (at least not the kind we're talking of ) and it isn't overly concerned with power. It is however very concerned with endurance. It's simply the nature of battle.

This is why any number of so called Navy Seal/SAS/Marine Corp workouts consist of copious amounts of bodyweight exercises. Press ups, pull ups, dive bombers, rope climbs, and the aerobic aspects of training such as running until your legs fall off. Very few if any actually focus on Oly lifting, anaerobic fitness or plyometrics.

 

What is said about military training is correct. In many ways it is as much psychological as it is physical. The entire point of military physical training is to instill not only endurance but the sense that without you pushing yourself to the limit, you are letting down your entire team. You are very much made to feel like a cog in an engine, and no matter what that cog is supposed to do, if it breaks down and quits, the entire machine will also break down. Keep in mind the specifics of what military training is for- creating a UNIT that will not break under extreme conditions. This has been my (limited) experience of military conditioning.

Ad Mc is not only a highly experienced mod, he also knows more then even I do about anatomy and physiology- which is saying a bit as I have also taught the subject. So I would urge you to listen to what he is saying without letting your ego get in the way. Isometrics are not at all in the same league as real strength training.

 

Hijack much?

Hey OP, did you find any information about shin conditioning? That's why I was monitoring this thread.

 

Yeah, I sent e-mails to 4 different Muay Thai training camps in Thailand asking how they condition their shins. They all said the same thing, our fighters only condition their shins on the pads and bags, nobody we know of in Thailand hits their shins with hard objects, only people who don't know any better do this.

I printed them out, along with a couple articles I found only on the subject as well as what Slip said, and showed it to my instructor. This is an actual quote:

"I'm a pretty open-minded guy, and I'll read through this stuff, but nothing you or any doctors say will change my mind, I'm still going to do this, and I'm still going to tell other people to do this."

Then he told me about how doctor's told Bruce Lee he'd never walk again, and they told his son he'd have a hard time in school (he didn't say what's wrong with him, but he said he is on honor roll, so he must have overcome some sort of mental difficulty), so he doesn't really have much respect for what doctor's have to say.

So it seems I pretty much wasted my time.

 

Well.. In Thailand they kick banana trees a thousand times a day with each shin. The ONLY 2 reasons they do it, is becasue to:
1. Increase the density of the bone
2. Deaden nerves, so that they don't feel as much.

Simple as that. Nobody said it was healthy to smash heavy duty bricks either.

 

No, they don't. They used to, before modern pads and heavy bags came around. Nobody kicks banana trees anymore in Thailand.

 

Thats the difference between traditional and now days.
Just because Most doesn't perform hardcore iron body in their kung fu routines, doesn't mean the shaolins dont now does it? Those are my heroes in the MA world btw <3 Along with Emelianenko brothers.

But honestly. I never use boxing gloves while "bagin' " because, how am i supposed to strengthen my hands and wrists in a realistic way without putting stress to it? And i don't flap about my arms like some shadow boxer either.
Full power, full speed! Prefferebly on the lower section since it's the hardest.

And yes, i get swollen like i had some wierd disease, and yes it hurts a bit, and skin goes of my knucles almost every practice, but you what?
I like it!

 

I haven't though about it alot, but this is very real!
And frankly, I believe that those who do real gains over years and years Without any significant "gene advantage" like having strong parents and other blood realtives etc, are a pretty small minority.
Pure will however, will get you there, most people just doesn't understand what Must be done in order to get there. To gain some weight, to get stronger and bigger.

I for example, I made barley any gains when i started lifting, becuase the foods my family made were simply not good enough.
Of course, they being from the old school I had to "work out hard and eat alot of food" true ture.. But eat alot of what really? As soon as i got my own place not to long ago, i made gains like mad and everyone thought i was on roids But when my employer had everyone tested for "drugs and steroid use" use, I turned out to be clean, and everyone was chocked and couldn't understand at all.

The right technique, the right type of foods and plenty of rest got me here.
Not bitching and reading BB mags, while stuffing my face with supplements all day. And speaking of wich, I've never used any supplements for the purpose of gains. I did try creatine this spring and summer, just to look bigger (lol, i know, i have a body complex issue xD).

Wtf.. I'm not here to tell life stories.. Damit.. Bye..