"The Isometric Power Revolution" [A review]

[SevenStar]

..........

Furey is the ultimate promoter for people who buy into the whole "there are fitness secrets which only a select few can reveal to me" angle. If you are smarter than that, then Furey's advertising is over-the-top and laughable.

It's easy to take somebody's quotes out of context and make it appear they are arguing for something they are not. For instance, Pavel not only paraphrased Verkoshansky's list so that it suited his case, but he also flat-out misquoted him. Nevermind the fact that those qotes are from Verkoshansky outlining what isometrics proponents believe are the advantages.

This does appear in Supertraining (which you'd know if you read it), and is followed by a list of drawbacks. Supertraining in and of itself is a theoretical text that puts forth a lot of informaton to give a well-rounded picture of strength and conditioning training and the science behind it. It doesn't have recommended training; only various methods to achieve certain goals with the supporting and rebutting science. The onus is on the reader to determine optimal training plans and implementation. If you look at Yuri's actual training texts like Fundementals of Strength Training and High-level Track & Field training, you'd see where he actually places isometrics in his training guidelines.

[Andy62]

Yes he did,but I don't accept his exlalantion. It is Ford against Pavel and John Peterson-I am going with the latter group.

[Ford Prefect]

Actually, it's Pavel and John Peterson against Mel Siff, Yuri Verkoshansky, Michael Yessis, and Vladamir Zatsiorsky.

I'd go with the latter group. Seeing as how Pavel did ZERO research himself and derives his methods largely from Verkoshansky and Zatsiorsky, I'd go with the men doing the research as opposed to one who didn't.

If one is so inclined, this list found in it's original form as written by Verkoshansky (and not paraphrased by Pavel) can be found on page 224 of Supertraining. On page 225 drawbacks such as fatigue in the nervous system, harmful effect on cardiovascular system, disturb coordination, enhance muscle performance only close to specific joint angle, decrease speed of movement, and diminish soft tissue elasticity are listed. On page 227, a training breakdown common to "Russian coaches" is 75% concentrics, 15% eccentrics, and 10% isometrics.

In the 10%, isometrics is not isolated to contracting against an unmoving object. It also includes weight supporting. Weight supporting is a good way to break through sticking points and plateaus, as I have mentioned plenty of time previously. What Russian coaches will typically do is have a trainee support 120-150% 1RM in the first few degrees of movement. They will also have them support weight at the mechanically weakest spot in a movement in order to strengthen muscles in that particular angle of joint flexion.


Just to reiterate, Verkoshansky is saying that 90% of the work done to train athletes in NOT isometric. The isometric work that is done also includes weight supporting. This is not the person you should be using to bolster an argument for more use of isometrics...

[SevenStar]

oh, snap... Someone's gotta say it, so I guess I will.






0wn3d!!!

[Andy62]

Ford, I would not disagree with your statement,but just the interpretation of it. Weighted averages are an interesting analysis technique. I worked with them extensively during my career in the investment analysis field. They can be deceptive though. Sometimes the more efficient variable is given the lowest percentage rank as it obtains results more quickly. It appears to me that may be what is at work here.

In the words of Prof. Yuri Verkhoshansky himself, "...a ten minute
session of isometric tensions in specially selected exercises will
replace a tiring one hour of weight training."

If 10 minutes of isometrics = 1 hour of weight training to me the conclusion is obvious.

[Ford Prefect]

Ford, I would not disagree with your statement,but just the interpretation of it. Weighted averages are an interesting analysis technique. I worked with them extensively during my career in the investment analysis field. They can be deceptive though. Sometimes the more efficient variable is given the lowest percentage rank as it obtains results more quickly. It appears to me that may be what is at work here.

In the words of Prof. Yuri Verkhoshansky himself, "...a ten minute
session of isometric tensions in specially selected exercises will
replace a tiring one hour of weight training."

If 10 minutes of isometrics = 1 hour of weight training to me the conclusion is obvious.

Actually that is one of the misquotes of which I spoke. The actual quote is "The training is very productive, if the time expended is considered. Each 6-second isometric contraction in its effect to many dynamic contractions (the ballistic type) in which maximal force lasts no more than 0.1 seconds. From a practical standpoint this means that 10 minutes of isometric tension in specifically selected exercises can replace a fatiguing hour of training with weights"

It is paraphrased and misquoted by Pavel to lead one to the conclusion which you reached. In the context of the list and of the surrounding text, it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that it is referring to isometric contractions at a very specific joint angle. Ie if you need to work on strength in a specific joint angle, then depending on goals, isometrics can replace a longer session with weights.

In other words, if you need to concentrate on strength in a static ROM, then moving dynamically and explosively in a much larger ROM won't spend as much time in that static ROM. Wow! Stop the presses! Who would have thought?! Taken out of context, you can praphrase anything to say most anything.

Sorry. You have been exposed.

[Andy62]

Well ofcourse. That brings us back to the 'synapse' effect.


"Isometrics are superior to regular weightlifting because of the 'synapse' effect . When you are performing a standard bench press, for instance, it will take you one or two seconds to move through the entire range of motion yet there is only one point in the range of motion where you are applying maximum strength and the duration of the effort at that point may last only a fraction of a second. Our bodies use only the minimum number of muscle fibers required to perform a movement so the maximum number of fibers are only used at that point of maximum intensity which lasts only a fraction of a second. Conversely with an isometric exercise you are applying maximum tension for the full duration of the contraction whether it be 10 seconds, 12 seconds or longer and as a result you are contracting maximum muscle fibers for the entire length of time that you are performing the exercise."



Checkmate!

[Ford Prefect]

Well ofcourse. That brings us back to the 'synapse' effect.


"Isometrics are superior to regular weightlifting because of the 'synapse' effect . When you are performing a standard bench press, for instance, it will take you one or two seconds to move through the entire range of motion yet there is only one point in the range of motion where you are applying maximum strength and the duration of the effort at that point may last only a fraction of a second. Our bodies use only the minimum number of muscle fibers required to perform a movement so the maximum number of fibers are only used at that point of maximum intensity which lasts only a fraction of a second. Conversely with an isometric exercise you are applying maximum tension for the full duration of the contraction whether it be 10 seconds, 12 seconds or longer and as a result you are contracting maximum muscle fibers for the entire length of time that you are performing the exercise."



Checkmate!

Of course you back yourself in a corner. This brings us back to the fact that isometrics only cause strength gains in very precise joint angles. (ie the angle of flexion plus 15 degrees MAXIMUM) When performing a movement in a large ROM you are limitted by a muscles contractile capacity at its mechanically weakest point. I'll take the bench press example. The mechanically weakest point is obviously the bottom of the bench press. When this point is reached and muscle fibers contract to push the bar upwards, that is the maximum muscle contraction for that muscle. Muscle fibers do not shut off as the bar moves upward. What happens is through principles of leverage, less force needs to be generated towards the top of the movement than at the bottom. The maximal weight you can push directly off your chest is less than the maximal weight you can push 2" off your chest and so on. So the muscle fibers do not shut off as the bar moves upward, but it decreases it's %1RM as the bar moves upwards. Saavy?

However, you are still contracting muscles through the upper ranges of this ROM and you are still getting stronger in the upper ranges of this ROM. For instance, we can look at men who squat 1,000 lbs. If they weren't becoming stronger in the upper ranges of the ROM, then that would mean that they could unrack and support 1,000 lbs as somebody who never touched a weight a day in their life. We know this to be incorrect.

You can't say the same for isometrics. Since they are static, they don't work through a ROM. They only work at a specific joint angle with effects falling off the further you get from that specific joint angle and finally completely falling off at 15 degrees from that joint angle. If you work in motion and need coordinated muscle contractions for movement, then isometrics is far from the optimal choice. In the words of the esteemed Yuri Verkoshansky:

"Research produced the general conclusion that isometric training can be more effective than dynamic exercises in those cases where the specific exercise requires muscle contraction of large magnitude at a certain stage of a movement or during early stages of injury rehabilitation."

He even qualifies this to say it doesn't apply to speed strength with the very next sentence, "If the specific exercise involves high-speed movement, then sustained isometric contraction is less effective."

(Pg 223 Supertraining)

Again. You have been exposed. Try reading the books you attempt to use as evidence. It helps.

[Andy62]

In item 5 Veroshansky
says regarding speed:
"The ability to maintain high levels of speed-strength during
important competitions due to the fact that isometrics expend a lot
less time and energy than lifting weights."

Instead of going back and second guessing people who have done research and trying to bend it to your belief system it would be of more value to you if you would review some to the 5000 years of human history with isometrics. You seem very light in that area.

[Ford Prefect]

In item 5 Veroshansky
says regarding speed:
"The ability to maintain high levels of speed-strength during
important competitions due to the fact that isometrics expend a lot
less time and energy than lifting weights."

Instead of going back and second guessing people who have done research and trying to bend it to your belief system it would be of more value to you if you would review some to the 5000 years of human history with isometrics. You seem very light in that area.

I actually left that open, so you could step in that pile yourself. #5 is in reference to possibly switching to isometrics during a period of "crucial competitions" in order to attempt maintain strength levels gleaned using other methods. Since isometrics are less taxing, they won't hamper performance during this "crucial period" and they will still help to maintain over short periods of time the attributes the athlete gained by long and hard training sessions. ie they are better than not training at all.

Stop the presses again! Wow!

Again, try to read the books you attempt to use to validate your beliefs. You won't look like such a clown even if you are trolling. At least people may take you seriously.

[Andy62]

That is exactly how I interpreted it.

[Andy62]

Ford get that grease paint off of your face!