Go Back   Bodybuilding.net - Bodybuilding Forum > Main Forums > Training


Lower back pain doing Rippetoe's



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 01-16-2009, 07:35 AM
iron_worker's Avatar
iron_worker iron_worker is offline
Rank: Light Heavyweight
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Saskatoon, Sk, Canada
Posts: 3,272
Send a message via MSN to iron_worker
Default

I'm guessing back rounding at the bottom due to lack of mobility and going too deep is the cause as well. Not very many people are flexible enough to do an A2G squat without rounding their back when they first start out doing A2G squats... myself included.

Take a video of your squat. I'm almost positive that its lower back rounding. If you squat without weight watch your side profile and if you see that your butt "winks" at the bottom of your squat or starts getting pulled under you... Then you know you have a mobility issue. And I'm going to guess thats its due to tight hamstrings. But it could be a combo of other things as well. (Ankles, hip mobility, etc).

BTW, good post Eric. Way to rip on Rippe.

IW
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-16-2009, 08:04 AM
EricT EricT is offline
Rank: Heavyweight
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,314
Default

IW I hate to Rip on anyone, you know? But sometimes it is just necessary. Ripp is an example of a coach whose IMAGE has grown beyond his ABILITY.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IW
'm guessing back rounding at the bottom due to lack of mobility and going too deep is the cause as well. Not very many people are flexible enough to do an A2G squat without rounding their back when they first start out doing A2G squats... myself included.
Right on. What you basically have are very supple lower backs and very immobile hips and ankles...I mean commonly.

Your back is simply taking over for the lack of mobility where it sould be. If it didn't...this equilibrium we are talking about could not happen. This is an example of "the body doing what it has to do".

But of course Kane is right that you want a strong lower back. I think it is EXTREMELY important to define the nature of this strength though. You want a STABLE lower back. You want to be PROTECTED from dangerous end-range of motion.

Too often the standard advice is to "strengthen" the lower back. What they mean is learn to "flex" the back out of end-range of motion that it never should have been in in the first place. So achieving strength in the lower back could mean many things but what we want is stability and that goes hand in hand with mobility.

On the tight hamstring issue. I doubt that dong some hamstring stretches would resolve a butt wink. If this is the issue what you will want are direct mobility drills for hip mobility and ankle mobility.

Honestly, the hamstring thing recently has been turned on it's head and a lot of new things have been learned. But sufficeth to say that unless you have a proffesional doing muscle length testing and other things...mobility training will result in the mobility you need. But hamstrings are tricky. I'll post or link some stuff on that if I get the time..which is questionable.

There are other muscles that are easier to rely on DIY test for...like hip flexors.

The Dan John squat drills will help tremendously.

It's funny because I was going to post a whole thing on goblet/potato sack squats. I really love multi-taskers and those are two of the best multitaskers I know.

But in general what I have found is that it works best to handle mobility and stability somewhat separately at first.

So like the others are saying, for instance, when you squat only go as deep as you can stabilize. Which means the back stays set (the lower spine should not rotate under the hips and at first it would be great if there were minimal to no rotation there at all). So this way you are not comprimising stability (this risking injury) while trying for more mobility.

But the classic way that people advise is to simply try to squat deeper and deeper with the weight. It doesn't work well because something is always giving in.

What I advise is to tackle them separately then integrate them slowly. Which works faster even though it seems slow.

That's a lot of what you see in the Dan John video. Like when he is supporting people or having people lean against his legs he providing outside "stability" and showing them (a lot of them anyway) that they already have more mobility than they thought.

That could always be the case. You cannot go by your range of motion with the bar on because, as I said, mobility and stability are interrelated. Could be you can already do a perfect ass to grass squat without any butt wink, etc..but you can't stabilize it..see?

Anyway..good advice everyone and watch that vid.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
or
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


If you act sanctimonious I will just list out your logical fallacies until you get pissed off and spew blasphemous remarks.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-16-2009, 08:25 AM
Doo Doo is offline
Rank: Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Highland, IN
Posts: 79
Default

I have a copy of Cressey/Robertson's Magnificient Mobility and Robertson/Hartman's Inside-Out DVDs plus a copy of Cressey's Maximum Strength book. Good stuff on deep tissue (foam rolling/tennis ball/medicine ball) and mobility work. I did (and continue to do with some variation) all the tissue and mobility worked recommended by Cressey as part of the Maximum Strength routine I did a few months back. I believe I benefited more from that than any strength gains. It was key in my being able to do A2G squats...without rounding of back.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-23-2009, 03:21 PM
EricT EricT is offline
Rank: Heavyweight
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,314
Default

I found a great article at SBCoaches College by John Pallof that provides a lot of good learning about some of the stuff I was talking about in my post's here.

http://www.sbcoachescollege.com/arti...LearningI.html

This however, I don't get:http://www.sbcoachescollege.com/arti...kRippetoe.html

Coach Boyle states in his article that he find's Rippetoe's support of Crossfit incongruous. So do I. It's hypocritical and contrary to many things Rip has said. But I find Coach Boyle's support of Rippetoe "incongrous". It doesn't really sound like he knows that much about him, but still...

Yeah, simple linear progression is great for a beginner. Wow. It takes GREAT strength coach to come up with that gem. Yayada. There is much more to it than that. Boyle would never advocate ONE cookie cutter for all beginners. Especially for kids. Boyle would also be willing to discuss and DEFEND his views on anything not just shout people down or worse, censor them out unless they were humbly asking for help from the great man.

Linear progression is great. Progressing and loading too quickly for the sake of fast progression is not. After all "progression" is subjective. For some people progression is lifting a heavier bar. For others it is actually getting better and stronger.

A huge problem right now is that people think that good alignment, good movement, protection from injury, etc. is just built in to a handful of exercises like squats and deads.

I would never preach variety for variety's sake but Rip disdains ALL variety right off the batt. Coach Boyle is a big advocate of single leg movements, Rip says they are "worthless" and give a completely ignorant reason why.

I'm afraid Boyle has just embarrased himself with this and it's too bad because he is a great coach and one of my main resources.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-24-2009, 05:09 AM
Doo Doo is offline
Rank: Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Highland, IN
Posts: 79
Default

I agree with EricT with regards to Rippetoe. It is a good illustration that one should gain as much knowledge as possible from a variety of reliable sources. I have found a lot of wisdom in Rippetoe's Starting Strength and a lot (more?) in Cressey's Maximum Strength. As you gain knowledge, you can start to see flaws in some of the thinking of the various authors/coaches and you start to develop a sense of what is right for you.

I didn't see a problem with Rippetoe's poo-pooing of variety. His approach works but it may not be the most beneficial nor good for those working with chronic injuries. So, I ignored that when I started doing a whole lot of variety in Maximum Strength.

Heehee...I didn't think of Rippetoe's involvement with CrossFit being a little bit contrary until now.

BTW, I haven't read any of Coach Boyle's work. I'll start looking for some of it.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-26-2009, 11:03 AM
EricT EricT is offline
Rank: Heavyweight
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,314
Default

I think I've got it.

This is my big problem with the whole Rippetoes fiasco:

It's the K.I.S.S method versus the K.I.R.S method.

Keep it simple stupid versus keep it restrictive stupid. SIMPLE is good. RESTRICTIVE is not.

Restrictive turns you into a motor moron and predisposes you to injury. The KISS philosophy has been brought to the extreme of the KIRS philosopy. That's no good. When you have to spend hours and hours convincing someone it is OK to step out of the box created for them by ONE book..something is VERY wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-28-2009, 07:45 PM
Riddick2112 Riddick2112 is offline
Rank: Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: vermont
Posts: 235
Default

wow the attitude towards Rip has certainly changed a lot in the time i've been away from here!!!! has he gone off the deep end like Mentzer did, you know the "I am right, EVERYONE else is wrong!" type thing?
__________________
Quote:
You're not afraid of the dark are ya?
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-28-2009, 08:06 PM
EricT EricT is offline
Rank: Heavyweight
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,314
Default

Kinda sorta.

I think that what has happened is that he's become so successful as of late with the internet hype (which we all helped fuel) he's had to "reveal" himself, and he's "revealed" himself to be somewhat of a DB.

"I have learned everything I need to know" is NOT a good attitude in a coach.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-29-2009, 05:52 AM
Doo Doo is offline
Rank: Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Highland, IN
Posts: 79
Default

We should move this recent discussion to a "Rippin' on Rip" thread. Not to just put down his ideas or point out his arrogance but at least to point out that there are other valid concepts besides his.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 01-29-2009, 10:59 AM
EricT EricT is offline
Rank: Heavyweight
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,314
Default

So that we can separate the idea of the back injury from the program? I think not. I started out rippin on Rip because of all the injuries I'm seeing. It's all related.
Reply With Quote
Reply

  Bodybuilding.net - Bodybuilding Forum > Main Forums > Training


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes



 



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.