No. Look at Olympic weightlifters. They perform squats in almost every training session as it is the basis of their two lifts. They have enormous leg size but are also very flexible.
Ye you got a point there. Because I heard it only shortens the front upper-leg muscles, which probably aren't important for flexibility.
MucKSW, Squats can actually improve your range of motion because they are performed through a full range of motion. Wires, Yoga will only be beneficial to a fighter if a specific yoga discipline includes exercises specific to the fighter's goals. If the fighter just wants to kick high, then all they need is dynamic stretches and a few static stretches. Most yoga disciplines do not include dynamic stretches or the correct way of doing them. Regards, Dan
Really? Glad to hear that. But what's the principe behind sprinters or footballplayers get unflexibel legs (because of the little explosiveness of the legs). That's ******** too?
Any strength exercise worked through a full range of motion will contribute to gains in flexibility. If you exercise through a narrow range of motion (e.g. like basketball players or cyclists) you will make the muscles stronger, but not in their full range of motion. It is this (strengthening in a short range of motion) that can cause a reduction in flexibility. So as long as you are working strength exercises through a full range of motion, and supplementing the exercises with stretches, you will be fine.
I see, thanks a lot again Btw, do you have any knowledge by stretching our lowerback? I'm also working to have a flexibel lowerback, since im doing a sport called tricking, which includes flips. A flexibel back can help a lot. I have been doing the Cobra stretch, seen at this site http://www.howtostretch.com/backstretches.html But what actually happens when stretching our back? Because it has nothing to do with tension as in our legs, right? We stretch our spine? In general, does it take long to stretch our lower back? Thanks in advance.
For tricking you will need strength more than flexibility in your back. Twisting at an awkward angle is a common trait in a lot of trickers, and as a result back pain is common. By far the most common cause of back pain is muscle strain. The back muscles can usually heal themselves within a couple of weeks, but the pain can be intense and debilitating. Other common injuries to the back (in tricking) are disc problems, such as limbar disc herniation (imagine squashing a jam donut with a brick... yeah, that's your spine!) and even fractures, such as an osteoporotic fracture. So I would advise you definitely focus more on strength than stretches if you're into tricking. I would follow the guidelines listed by howtostretch.com. You are right, there is a difference when it comes to stretching your back and stretching your legs. When you stretch your legs you can hold the stretch all day long. When you stretch the back (e.g. standing toe touches) you do not want to hold a stretch any longer than 30 seconds. This is because the spine is held together by sheets of thin ligaments, and stretching these can cause your spine to become loose. Something you most definitely do not want! But remember to build up that strength in your back, and balance it out by building strength in your abdominals and obliques too. Regards, Dan
So I should let the back stretching aside, and concentrate on the strenght in my back? Do you know some good exercises for my back, which will help me in tricking?
I was reading this Post and have to disagree with you Superfoot. Zaichik knows what he is talking about. He puts videos on youtube from time to to time. I suggest you look at them. They are very helpful. I am also taking his flexibility seminar and it covers way more then Stretching Scientifically. I am very surprised to hear someone say something negative about him, that's why I have to reply. Have you tried any of his streching dvds or watched his youtube video? He does deserve the credit when it come to being informed about flexibility. Peace
Do you Go to www.trickstutorials.com for all your tricking pleasures Zaichik is very flexible. I won't take that away from him. But the quality of his products is very poor (from a grammatical and even spelling point-of-view). He often contradicts himself in his writing and his material leaves too many questions unanswered. In my opinion he is nothing more than a flexible guy telling others how to do exercises that may not be at all benficial. Now let's compare him to Kurz. English is not Kurz's first language (he is Polish) yet he writes with perfect grammar and spelling - an indication that he is as educated as he claims to be. His products are not only backed by sound scientific evidence, but also with unsolicited customer testimonials. Just look at his website (www.standion.com) compared to that of Zaichik (www.elasticsteel.com) - Kurz has dozens of photographs from customers who have achieved maximal flexibility through the Stretching Scientifically method, yet where are the photo testimonials from Zaichik's customers? I will believe in Zaichik's method when his customers demonstrate the same results as those of Kurz. And this is not even taking into consideration the research I have done on both methods (I have bought and tried the books and DVDs from both individuals), and I have found Kurz's method to be the most effective (not only for myself, but for my students too). In my opinion, Zaichik has done nothing more than attempt to repackage what Kurz has taught all along. And Zaichik does it in a very poor way, too. Kurz has videos on Youtube too. He also has an excellent column on stadion.com in which he discusses the different types of flexibility and their associated stretching methods, the correct sequence of efforts, optimal training loads, micro- and macro-cycles, rest and recovery, injuries, and lots more. If you have found Zaichik's material useful then all the power to you friend. Kind regards, Dan
Dan, Let's see. There were a few gramatical errors in Zaichik's book. I won't argue that. He is very flexible himself, that is true. I got Kurz book in early 90's. Soon after that I got his VHS. They did not work for me. Few years ago I got Zaichik's material, which did help me to get flexible and get a all three splits. (Zaichik recognizes 3 splits) I really don't think that Zaichik is repackaging Kurz material, because he he gives so much unique information in his seminar and it is very different from what I got out of Kurzs book and VHS. (Yes, back then it was VHS lol ) Don't get me wrong Kurz method obviously works for many people. All those people sitting in splits on his webpage are a proof. I don't argue against that. His method did not work for me. I needed more then what I got from Kurz material. Zaichi's emphasis on massage, conditioning, split specific warm up, etc. helped me to get splits. Kurz doesn't talk about those. Obviously many people got their splits without them. Who knows if they would have done even better if they used Zaichik's material in addition to Kurz's. Anyway. I am not trying to say one system is better then other. It's just that one worked for me and one did not.
Kurz and Ziachik pretty much provide the same information, only Kurz backs it up with hard scientific research and photographic testimonials from his customers. Oh, and he can spell.
I can compare the Kurz VHS and Zaichik's DVD on splits. Conditioning Kurz with Weight Zaichik Bodyweight and Elastics Posture$ breathing Kurz Non Zaichik Does that Target specific muscles Kurz. With cables Zaichik Bodyweight and Elastic Massages Kurz Non Zaichik. Shows them Split specific warm Kurz non Zaichik big section on it Strech Progression Kurz non Many streches for all groups Spelling lol Good Mistakes So if I want to learn to spell I'll buy Kurz stuff, If I want flexibility I'll buy Zaichik's stuff.
Kurz advocates becoming proficient with bodyweight before adding external resistance. Example: adductor flies. Using freeweight over resistance bands ("elastics") is that you can add more resistance with freeweights once your body has adapated, whereas resistance bands have a limit on their resistance. Kurz emphasises correst alignment of the joints in all positions ("posture") as well as correct methods for breathing when stretching. He states this clearly on the DVD as well as in his book. Couldn't grasp the essence of what you were saying there. A 'split specific' warm-up is highlighted by Kurz when he explains the correct sequence of efforts in a workout, and when he demonstrates stretches leading to the front and side split. By the way, there are only two types of split: the side and the front. The other types (toes-up and toes-forward side split, and left or right leg forward front split) are just variations. Kurz emphasises stretch progression quite a lot in his materials (books and DVDs), i.e. stretches leading up to the splits and his notes on limitations. Additional pro's/con's: Kurz explains the science behind stretching. Zaichik doesn't. Kurz provides example routines for various sports disciplines. Zaichik doesn't. Kurz provides an immense section on typical Q's and A's (in the book). Zaichik doesn't. Kurz cites references of well known and proven scientific studies. Zaichik doesn't. Kurz has been teaching this stuff for 20+ years. Zaichik (and Tsatsouline) have been around 5, maybe 10 years tops. Look more carefully and you will see everything Zaichik et al teach was already being taught by Kurz. If you want repackaged flexibility training, buy Zaichik. If you want to learn to spell AND have phenomenal flexibility, buy the proven and original Kurz material.
That's a lot of stuff. I just came home from work. But, here goes. Kurz explain in his book, not in his DVD. Zaichik explains the basics in his book as well. He does explain a lot in his youtube videos. Do you want to read about stretching or learn how to stretch? Kurz put a lot of ink in there, probably to fill the pages. Kurz can write? I am not sure about that. It seems like he just got a good editor. That is not the point though, it's about flexibility. I will give you one thing. Zaichik doesn't go into various sports in his book, Kurz does. If you want the splits, then it doesn't matter which sport you want them for. Again more ink to fill the pages. Kurz have been around for 20 years and Zaichik probably 5 or maybe less. So does that mean old is better then new? Why have airplanes, we can ride horse. Do you have Zaichiks splits DVD? Yes or no? Zaichik has a very specific split specific warm up. Which gave me a great leap into a side split. If Kurz had that I probably would not get Zaichik's material. Zaichik covers which muscle should be stretches in correlation to the other. Kurz does not. Zaichik covers pressure point massage and oil massage. Another part of his DVD which worked great for me when I used it. I don't use it now. What do you have to say now?
Anyone I know who has used Kurz's DVD agrees that he explains the same concepts and principles as he does in his book. Only he explains them in more detail in the book. But they are still there in the DVD. Turns out you can only read about stretching from Kurz because Zaichik's messages are all jumbled up. But seriously though, Kurz explains the what/how/why/when of stretching in greater detail than Zaichik does, and this is a serious advantage over the Elastic Steel method. So he got an editor to reply to all the e-mails I've sent him? Not sure about that. Plus if you see him in person at a seminar you will discover he is a very articulate and educated individual, one capable of writing in the context found in Stretching Scientifically. His books and DVDs are all about flexibility. They are presented in a clear and professional manner to get the message across clearly. Zaichik's are quite messed up, especially the books. Perhaps an indication of who is the more knowledgeable individual? If you knew anything about proper physiology of exercise you would know this is not true. Kurz talks about which stretches are required for various sports, which is important when considering optimal performance and injury prevention. If you're a kicker and all you want to do is kick high, then you don't need the split. You just need the dynamic stretches Kurz describes. If you're a gymnast then you would obviously focus on the split specific training methods. The correct sequence of efforts is a major theme through Kurz's material and is one of the main reasons why so many athletes fail to achieve their full potential. Zaichik doesn't even come close to covering this aspect in the same detail as Kurz. Zaichik's is more of a 'stretch and hope' concept, like I said, he's a very flexible dude who is just teaching a series of stretches that may not actually be beneficial for a lot of people. I am happy Zaichik's methods worked for you; but more people say that Kurz's method worked for them which counts for something. I don't think you understood what I wrote. No it does not mean the old is better than the new. It means the new is the same as the old, just with a different (and rather shoddy) packaging. To use your analogy of horses and airplanes: Kurz introduced the airplane to the world of stretching two decades ago, whereas Zaichik is just a different airline. Kurz would be the Beoing 777 and Zaichik would be a paper airplane - a very cheap and ineffective imitation. Yes, I did. I tried it for a while. Like I said, nothing new. I was pleased when I got my refund. Agonists, antagonists and synergists. It's all in Kurz's material. If you don't understand this terminology then read/watch Kurz's material again, or google it. Kurz doesn't cover this because it isn't necessary for developing flexibility. Sounds like, what did you call it? Oh yes, "a lot of ink to fill out the pages". I think I've said enough. I do quite enjoy our debates
I know you are just clowning around. You can possibly think that Thomas Kurz is more informed then Paul Zaichik about flexibility. That is just absurd. Mr. Kurz is an old man who still selling the same things thing he sold in the 80's through Black Belt Magazine ads. Mr. Zaichik looks and talk like Adam Sandler, but when it comes to stretching he is top notch. I know for a fact that you are not familiar with his work and methods. IF you were, you would not say what you say. And you the other guy. Don't bother with this debate. It's stupid. Let him believe what he wants.
