Adarq.org
Performance Area => Article & Video Discussion => Topic started by: JackW on November 15, 2010, 04:09:12 pm
-
Here was an interesting article from the sometimes good, sometimes bad T-Nation earlier this week that I enjoyed.
http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/most_recent/unilateral_movements_make_you_weak
Arguing that the Split squat is a single leg exercise is and always has been rubbish, but also his argument is pretty absolutist in comparing pistols etc versus barbell squats.
I would also argue that getting strong on certain single leg exercises such as step ups and walking lunges (especially UPHILL walking lunges - but that does require a hill and the ability to carry your really heavy shit to a hill, and in some cases, a portable pair of squat stands to get some decent weight to walk up hill with onto the bar - unless you ar ehappe to clean it off the ground...but I digress) are extremely beneficial for running and jumping athletes, who were admittedly not really mentioned in the article.
Also, I have had back trouble recently and have not been able to squat or deadlift (ironically I was installing a new, very expensive, power rack into my gym when I injured myself - I haven't squatted on it at all :pissed:) and have been doing nothing but dumbell lunges and weighted step ups for about 6 weeks now. It will be interestign to see how much my squat has dropped off when I get back to it (and I am expecting a drop off - ass the author of the article noted - for weighted exercises the transfer doesn't necessarily go the other way).
-
Here was an interesting article from the sometimes good, sometimes bad T-Nation earlier this week that I enjoyed.
http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/most_recent/unilateral_movements_make_you_weak
Arguing that the Split squat is a single leg exercise is and always has been rubbish, but also his argument is pretty absolutist in comparing pistols etc versus barbell squats.
why is it rubbish? it's unilateral in the sense that only one leg is performing hip extension.. so even though there's two legs "on something" (one on ground, one on bench), they both have very different roles, the majority of movement comes from one limb.. i see your point though.. and ya, unilaterals/stepups would be considered far more unilateral.. weighted pistols etc, i'm not a fan.
I would also argue that getting strong on certain single leg exercises such as step ups and walking lunges (especially UPHILL walking lunges - but that does require a hill and the ability to carry your really heavy shit to a hill, and in some cases, a portable pair of squat stands to get some decent weight to walk up hill with onto the bar - unless you ar ehappe to clean it off the ground...but I digress) are extremely beneficial for running and jumping athletes, who were admittedly not really mentioned in the article.
it's a powerlifter/olylifter/bodybuilding vibe article, so, from a performance standpoint it does a disservice. Getting strong on bilateral movements is very important for athletes, you can recruit far more mass in each rep, cause significantly more fatigue/supercompensation, etc. Because the weight can be so much more (eventually), it really helps you tap more into the 'innate reserves', or the potential motor activity that is hidden/protected except in the most life threatening cases.. You can't achieve that using weighted pistols. You can achieve it to a point on unilaterals, but heavy bilateral training is far more effective, and shock/real plyos/BIG ADA can even be more effective.
You don't get scared/elevated HR/super aroused mentally before doing pistols, you do however achieve that before unilateral lunges, and even more so before heavy squatting.. that is a VERY important factor regarding tapping into protected motor potential.
Also, I have had back trouble recently and have not been able to squat or deadlift (ironically I was installing a new, very expensive, power rack into my gym when I injured myself - I haven't squatted on it at all :pissed:) and have been doing nothing but dumbell lunges and weighted step ups for about 6 weeks now. It will be interestign to see how much my squat has dropped off when I get back to it (and I am expecting a drop off - ass the author of the article noted - for weighted exercises the transfer doesn't necessarily go the other way).
damn that sucks man..
it'll still have transfer.. regardless, if you gain strength/mass unilaterally, it will transfer, it's just that squat/lunge is such a different movement that of course it won't transfer perfectly, that's why the article bugs me, of course you're going to have to re-learn the squat a bit, but of course it will transfer... For example, if you weren't hurt, and focused on doing some massive unilaterals, barbell walking lunge, barbell bss, barbell stepup, and you did this for 12 weeks, comparing a pre-test squat 1RM vs post-test, there'd be no doubt that post-test squat would be way higher.
But overall the article is ok.
peace man, thanks for teh post!
-
I actually like the article and it's pretty much dead on.
The amount of stress and activation you get from heavy bilaterals is so much better for strength, and the amount of balance and learning how to tighten up and put effort through a single limb is great with unilaterals, but they should be used as assistance in my book (hence I train like that). I just don't think unilaterals can produce a good strength stimulus because of stabilization issues. And yes, a stable body can produce more strength, which doesn't mean you should use a leg press against a squat either (with the squat being more unstable than a leg press, but there is a whole different argument why you shouldn't use a leg press that is not limited to balance).
-
it'll still have transfer.. regardless, if you gain strength/mass unilaterally, it will transfer, it's just that squat/lunge is such a different movement that of course it won't transfer perfectly, that's why the article bugs me, of course you're going to have to re-learn the squat a bit, but of course it will transfer... For example, if you weren't hurt, and focused on doing some massive unilaterals, barbell walking lunge, barbell bss, barbell stepup, and you did this for 12 weeks, comparing a pre-test squat 1RM vs post-test, there'd be no doubt that post-test squat would be way higher.
Not doubting your experience or knowledge, but I find that pretty hard to believe. In my opinion you could be happy to squat the same weight after 12 weeks of unilaterals - very happy - but certainly you would not squat more than before except the case that you were pretty untrained in the squat before. You can take a rank novice, measure what he squats on day 1 and then let him ride the bicycle for 12 weeks a lot and measure his squat after and it might have increased. But that does not mean that cycling does have a big transfer to squatting for anyone but a relatively untrained individual (untrained in the squat that is).
-
it'll still have transfer.. regardless, if you gain strength/mass unilaterally, it will transfer, it's just that squat/lunge is such a different movement that of course it won't transfer perfectly, that's why the article bugs me, of course you're going to have to re-learn the squat a bit, but of course it will transfer... For example, if you weren't hurt, and focused on doing some massive unilaterals, barbell walking lunge, barbell bss, barbell stepup, and you did this for 12 weeks, comparing a pre-test squat 1RM vs post-test, there'd be no doubt that post-test squat would be way higher.
Not doubting your experience or knowledge, but I find that pretty hard to believe. In my opinion you could be happy to squat the same weight after 12 weeks of unilaterals - very happy - but certainly you would not squat more than before except the case that you were pretty untrained in the squat before. You can take a rank novice, measure what he squats on day 1 and then let him ride the bicycle for 12 weeks a lot and measure his squat after and it might have increased. But that does not mean that cycling does have a big transfer to squatting for anyone but a relatively untrained individual (untrained in the squat that is).
you're using a bicycle analogy, when we're talking about heavy barbell unilateral training?
<-- confused
so, say you have an intermediate lifter who is experienced with all lifts in question, you pre-test squat, then hit barbell walking lunges, barbell bss, barbell stepup hard for 12 weeks, with significant increases on each lift, say 30% increases on each lift, you don't think he would get much transfer to squat? if not, why? you're still learning to activate more mu's, activate the fastest mu's, achieving hypertrophy, improving strength in other things that matter like core etc, improving strength/hypertrophy in all muscle groups related to squat, reducing inhibitory mechanisms, improving things like neural drive, increasing strength/composition of other biological structures such as bone/tendon, improving intermuscular coordination that is somewhat similar to squatting, etc... EDIT: plus you still have very heavy barbells on your back.
riding a bike doesn't do any of that, so i don't get the comparison?
peace
-
I actually believe that unless my back injury takes a loooong time to recover from whatever drop off I will experience will probably come back pretty quickly.
Raptor I agree with most of the article too, but it wasn't written for running and jumping athletes so much. If all I wanted to do was get big and strong I wouldn't do much in the way of unilaterals either.
Still, as with anything training related, there are no real absolute's. There are pro's and a con's for nearly everything.
Jack
-
Well he didn't said "ditch the unilaterals all together". I think that article is more aimed at "functional guy X" who swears by the unilateral. That's why I said I agree... do your heavy stuff first and go unilateral second. Squat + Lunge. Squat + One-leg deadlift. Deadlift + BSS. Etc.
-
you're using a bicycle analogy, when we're talking about heavy barbell unilateral training?
<-- confused
My point with that analogy was that transfer depends on the level of the lifter and that very untrained people will have a lot of carryover from unilaterals to squats - just like they will have a lot of carryover from pretty much any hard physical activity, probably even from riding a bicycle.
so, say you have an intermediate lifter who is experienced with all lifts in question, you pre-test squat, then hit barbell walking lunges, barbell bss, barbell stepup hard for 12 weeks, with significant increases on each lift, say 30% increases on each lift, you don't think he would get much transfer to squat? if not, why? you're still learning to activate more mu's, activate the fastest mu's, achieving hypertrophy, improving strength in other things that matter like core etc, improving strength/hypertrophy in all muscle groups related to squat, reducing inhibitory mechanisms, improving things like neural drive, increasing strength/composition of other biological structures such as bone/tendon, improving intermuscular coordination that is somewhat similar to squatting, etc... EDIT: plus you still have very heavy barbells on your back.
There are holes in that argumentation, for example that we are starting from the assumption, that an intermediate lifter can gain 30% on say his 1rm lunges weight from training with unilaterals alone which I can imagine will be hard for an already reasonably strong person.
But even if he can, without at least maintaining coordination and specific strength for the squat, I don't think the unilaterals will have direct carryover. I could imagine that with several weeks of training the squat again, that it would progress rather well since some of the mentioned adaptations might have taken place, but honestly, I don't even think this rate of unusually fast progress (for an intermediate that is) would last for long. I think you are overestimating the potential regarding the adaptation from training with unilaterals exclusively - at least for intermediate trainees - and underestimating the importance of maintaining squat efficiency and specificity of the loads that will be handled with that. Since you mention core strength especially - I do in fact think that strength in the trunk musculature would suffer quite a bit and that suddenly testing a squat max after weeks of unilaterals will hit the athlete quite unprepared.
Of course, I am speculating here. Maybe you can convince me to make a point and try unilaterals exclusively for 4 weeks with a pre and post test of squat 1 rm. But right now I am pretty convinced that this is a horrible idea.
-
Well he didn't said "ditch the unilaterals all together". I think that article is more aimed at "functional guy X" who swears by the unilateral. That's why I said I agree... do your heavy stuff first and go unilateral second. Squat + Lunge. Squat + One-leg deadlift. Deadlift + BSS. Etc.
i agree that unilaterals for the most part should be kept to assistance, but still, you could have sessions which focus primarily on them.. they can be effective for strength/power in singles or in sets of 3 each leg, or for hypertrophy in sets of 5-8 each leg.
for example, say you have a session which focuses on heavy squatting one day (+ assistance) and heavy unilaterals another day (to not burn yourself out squatting). if your squat is pretty high, that could be very effective, especially for people who ascribe to the very low frequency squatting ideology.
pc
-
you're using a bicycle analogy, when we're talking about heavy barbell unilateral training?
<-- confused
My point with that analogy was that transfer depends on the level of the lifter and that very untrained people will have a lot of carryover from unilaterals to squats - just like they will have a lot of carryover from pretty much any hard physical activity, probably even from riding a bicycle.
so, say you have an intermediate lifter who is experienced with all lifts in question, you pre-test squat, then hit barbell walking lunges, barbell bss, barbell stepup hard for 12 weeks, with significant increases on each lift, say 30% increases on each lift, you don't think he would get much transfer to squat? if not, why? you're still learning to activate more mu's, activate the fastest mu's, achieving hypertrophy, improving strength in other things that matter like core etc, improving strength/hypertrophy in all muscle groups related to squat, reducing inhibitory mechanisms, improving things like neural drive, increasing strength/composition of other biological structures such as bone/tendon, improving intermuscular coordination that is somewhat similar to squatting, etc... EDIT: plus you still have very heavy barbells on your back.
There are holes in that argumentation, for example that we are starting from the assumption, that an intermediate lifter can gain 30% on say his 1rm lunges weight from training with unilaterals alone which I can imagine will be hard for an already reasonably strong person.
But even if he can, without at least maintaining coordination and specific strength for the squat, I don't think the unilaterals will have direct carryover. I could imagine that with several weeks of training the squat again, that it would progress rather well since some of the mentioned adaptations might have taken place, but honestly, I don't even think this rate of unusually fast progress (for an intermediate that is) would last for long. I think you are overestimating the potential regarding the adaptation from training with unilaterals exclusively - at least for intermediate trainees - and underestimating the importance of maintaining squat efficiency and specificity of the loads that will be handled with that. Since you mention core strength especially - I do in fact think that strength in the trunk musculature would suffer quite a bit and that suddenly testing a squat max after weeks of unilaterals will hit the athlete quite unprepared.
my point is that unilaterals exclusively, when done with barbells, with the focus of progressive overload & max intensity, will not lead in as much strength loss as one would think. shit i have to go hah dunk .
Of course, I am speculating here. Maybe you can convince me to make a point and try unilaterals exclusively for 4 weeks with a pre and post test of squat 1 rm. But right now I am pretty convinced that this is a horrible idea.
do two tests, pre/post testing after 4 weeks lunges, and pre/post testing after 4 weeks of bicycle.
that an intermediate lifter can gain 30% on say his 1rm lunges weight from training with unilaterals alone which I can imagine will be hard for an already reasonably strong person.
?? then how does a reasonably strong person increase squat 30%? how else would you improve your unilaterals, other than unilaterals alone? it's just progressive overload and of course an intermediate lifter could improve their 1RM lunge 30% by using unilaterals alone.
peace
-
The article is a shot at Mike Boyle
-
Well he didn't said "ditch the unilaterals all together". I think that article is more aimed at "functional guy X" who swears by the unilateral. That's why I said I agree... do your heavy stuff first and go unilateral second. Squat + Lunge. Squat + One-leg deadlift. Deadlift + BSS. Etc.
i agree that unilaterals for the most part should be kept to assistance, but still, you could have sessions which focus primarily on them.. they can be effective for strength/power in singles or in sets of 3 each leg, or for hypertrophy in sets of 5-8 each leg.
for example, say you have a session which focuses on heavy squatting one day (+ assistance) and heavy unilaterals another day (to not burn yourself out squatting). if your squat is pretty high, that could be very effective, especially for people who ascribe to the very low frequency squatting ideology.
pc
Oh yeah absolutely. And if you go with very heavy step-ups, that can have a very good potentiating effect I suppose.
-
do two tests, pre/post testing after 4 weeks lunges, and pre/post testing after 4 weeks of bicycle.
I am not a rank novice, so riding a bicycle will do nothing for me. But the point is taken, lunges will preserve max strength in the squat better. But I thought the argument rang that gains will transfer to the squat....
then how does a reasonably strong person increase squat 30%? how else would you improve your unilaterals, other than unilaterals alone? it's just progressive overload and of course an intermediate lifter could improve their 1RM lunge 30% by using unilaterals alone.
peace
An intermediate lifter might be able to increase their squat by 30%. But it will usually take them several months, maybe even a year if one gets stuck every now and then and if circumstances are not that perfect all the time, which they are usually not. You were talking about a 30% increase in 12 weeks in a unilateral exercise. Exercises where lower weights are handled are also exercises with less potential for growth and those will therefore progress slower. That makes the scenario even more unrealistic. The most sensible way to increase ones strength in say the lunge would in my opinion be to do squats and lunges and progress both at the same time, at a rather slow pace - with smaller steps in the lunge than in the squat. The lunge would profit somewhat well from the squat, but the other way round probably not so much. I do think that doing unilaterals exclusively would yield inferior results for an intermediate.
-
This shit is apples and oranges.
Why not just do both and reap the benefits they provide?
If you're an athlete(that involves running), and you want to only do bilateral work, it will catch up to you.
IMO, there's no point attacking a single 'method' b/c of what it lacks. No single 'method' is all inclusive to get you strong, powerful, fast, and ripped, etc. Use each 'method' what it's meant for.
Comparing lunges and squats is retarded. You can do max effort squats, but why the fuck would you do max effort lunges?
If you have 2 lower body days a week, one day do bilateral movements, the other day do unilateral. WOW that was hard to think up.
T-nation btw, has been on a rapid decline in article quality. Go surf thru the archives if you want to find something useful.
On another note, imo, training articles/information has been beaten to death. I would like to see recovery be the new 'it-girl' trend in strength training articles/media. It's easy to beat the shit out of yourself in the gym, but if you're not recovering in time then you're just spinning your wheels. More recovery=more progress.
-
This shit is apples and oranges.
Why not just do both and reap the benefits they provide?
If you're an athlete(that involves running), and you want to only do bilateral work, it will catch up to you.
IMO, there's no point attacking a single 'method' b/c of what it lacks. No single 'method' is all inclusive to get you strong, powerful, fast, and ripped, etc. Use each 'method' what it's meant for.
Comparing lunges and squats is retarded. You can do max effort squats, but why the fuck would you do max effort lunges?
This.
-
This shit is apples and oranges.
Why not just do both and reap the benefits they provide?
If you're an athlete(that involves running), and you want to only do bilateral work, it will catch up to you.
IMO, there's no point attacking a single 'method' b/c of what it lacks. No single 'method' is all inclusive to get you strong, powerful, fast, and ripped, etc. Use each 'method' what it's meant for.
Comparing lunges and squats is retarded. You can do max effort squats, but why the fuck would you do max effort lunges?
If you have 2 lower body days a week, one day do bilateral movements, the other day do unilateral. WOW that was hard to think up.
T-nation btw, has been on a rapid decline in article quality. Go surf thru the archives if you want to find something useful.
On another note, imo, training articles/information has been beaten to death. I would like to see recovery be the new 'it-girl' trend in strength training articles/media. It's easy to beat the shit out of yourself in the gym, but if you're not recovering in time then you're just spinning your wheels. More recovery=more progress.
Sure you can do both, but that was not the point of discussion between adarq and me. It was also not the point of the article to proclaim the uselessness of unilateral exercises for running athletes, but rather for athletes that powerlift, olympic lift or do bodybuilding.
Your comment is apples, the rest of the discussion was oranges.
-
You can always do both, for those athletes you mentioned, single leg work wouldn't be the emphasis of their training.
Single leg work balances your legs out better than bilateral work.
With that said, I will step out of this mental masturbation circle jerk.
-
You can always do both, for those athletes you mentioned, single leg work wouldn't be the emphasis of their training.
Single leg work balances your legs out better than bilateral work.
With that said, I will step out of this mental masturbation circle jerk.
Please post evidence or provide logic reasoning for why unilaterals should balance out the legs more than correctly performed - which means balanced - bilateral exercises. And please explain why a powerlifter should do unilateral work when everything he does in his sport is bilateral in nature and will usually require a coordinated, well-balanced effort of both his left and right body side.
And don't just say "you can always do both", because only an idiot would bring forward such an argument, since it means that he does not understand that everything that is useless is in fact also detrimental because it means that valuable training time as well as physical resources are wasted which could otherwise be used for productive things that actually do something to help ones progress. And I don't think that you are an idiot, so please let us discuss this in an intelligent manner.
-
One of the reason I like unilaterals is because you can work depending on your weak limb. If you can lunge 90 kg for 5 reps with your right leg and 90 kg for 10 reps with your left leg, then you can limit your left leg training to the right leg RM. So they both get the same amount of training.
In a squat, you'd probably load more the left leg in this situation and continue with the imbalance (sure, doing the same amount of reps and doing a bilateral exercise will also help balance things out in the end). But I just feel like more focus can be applied with an unilateral exercise, there's also a bit less stability so the core works harder etc.
It really just depends on what you're trying to improve on, I guess. So for athletics, unilateral work "must" be done because I feel it really helps and is more specific to human movement. For powerlifting etc, I don't really feel it "must" be done because it doesn't have any specificity to that.
-
One of the reason I like unilaterals is because you can work depending on your weak limb. If you can lunge 90 kg for 5 reps with your right leg and 90 kg for 10 reps with your left leg, then you can limit your left leg training to the right leg RM. So they both get the same amount of training.
In a squat, you'd probably load more the left leg in this situation and continue with the imbalance (sure, doing the same amount of reps and doing a bilateral exercise will also help balance things out in the end). But I just feel like more focus can be applied with an unilateral exercise, there's also a bit less stability so the core works harder etc.
If you have severe strength imbalances that show in your squat, you need to use less weight. Some people have the problem of using one side differently in the squat than another and this can usually be dealt with if you are aware of it. Take weight of the bar and concentrate on perfect, symmetrical form. A unilateral exercise might help with the awareness, but the possibility of compensation is not ruled out by that - you still need to be very aware of your form.
I disagree about the core working harder. My core works harder in a 5 rm squat and works less in a 5 rm lunge due to the differences in weight being used.
It really just depends on what you're trying to improve on, I guess. So for athletics, unilateral work "must" be done because I feel it really helps and is more specific to human movement. For powerlifting etc, I don't really feel it "must" be done because it doesn't have any specificity to that.
I agree with that. Although I wouldn't use them for beginners.
-
Yeah well I think if you use common sense, and if your common sense is good, you're going to be fine, either using the unilaterals or not.
-
steven-miller's next project is to get really really fast by doing nothing but double-legged bounds. :P
-
good post
This shit is apples and oranges.
Why not just do both and reap the benefits they provide?
If you're an athlete(that involves running), and you want to only do bilateral work, it will catch up to you.
IMO, there's no point attacking a single 'method' b/c of what it lacks. No single 'method' is all inclusive to get you strong, powerful, fast, and ripped, etc. Use each 'method' what it's meant for.
Comparing lunges and squats is retarded. You can do max effort squats, but why the fuck would you do max effort lunges?
max effort lunges are fine, so are max effort stepups.. in experienced lifters, max effort compound lifts of any sort are fine.. it doesn't mean you have to go 1RM on the lifts, max effort is between 1 and 3 reps. it doesn't mean you have to goto failure either, you could stay shy of failure by doing singles etc. The same reasons someone would incorporate ME squat, are the same reasons someone would incorporate ME lunge, for example, a high jump athlete looking to use MSEM pre-competition could use lunge or stepup instead of squat, or you could just be trying to improve 1RM lunge/stepup for other performance improvement reasons in general.
If you have 2 lower body days a week, one day do bilateral movements, the other day do unilateral. WOW that was hard to think up.
T-nation btw, has been on a rapid decline in article quality. Go surf thru the archives if you want to find something useful.
wut, u don't like I,BB??? what's wrong with u.
On another note, imo, training articles/information has been beaten to death. I would like to see recovery be the new 'it-girl' trend in strength training articles/media. It's easy to beat the shit out of yourself in the gym, but if you're not recovering in time then you're just spinning your wheels. More recovery=more progress.
true, i agree, but i would more like to see proper journals of athletes making considerable gains/achievements, exactly what they do, nutritional/training/recovery/etc.
we see a bunch of regurgitated bullshit every day, i'd like to see the sculpting of whatever-level-athlete to elite performance.
peace
-
You can always do both, for those athletes you mentioned, single leg work wouldn't be the emphasis of their training.
Single leg work balances your legs out better than bilateral work.
With that said, I will step out of this mental masturbation circle jerk.
Please post evidence or provide logic reasoning for why unilaterals should balance out the legs more than correctly performed - which means balanced - bilateral exercises. And please explain why a powerlifter should do unilateral work when everything he does in his sport is bilateral in nature and will usually require a coordinated, well-balanced effort of both his left and right body side.
And don't just say "you can always do both", because only an idiot would bring forward such an argument, since it means that he does not understand that everything that is useless is in fact also detrimental because it means that valuable training time as well as physical resources are wasted which could otherwise be used for productive things that actually do something to help ones progress. And I don't think that you are an idiot, so please let us discuss this in an intelligent manner.
that stuff is going to be a bitch to find on google scholar, but regardless, most athletes (performance or strength) have a dominant and non-dominant limb for kicking/throwing etc.. this does effect bilateral movements.. unilateral strength work can definitely help to improve these imbalances, but i would imagine not completely improve them. There will always be a dominant/non-dominant limb, and this does effect force production, so bilaterally you're going to see some significant results there.
steven-miller, do you have any idea how high you jump off your right leg vs left leg?
here's two quick studies, unilateral/bilateral is a bitch to search..
Determination of Functional Strength Imbalance of the Lower Extremities
Abstract
The purposes of this study were (a) to determine whether a significant strength imbalance existed between the left and right or dominant (D) and nondominant (ND) legs and (b) to investigate possible correlations among various unilateral and bilateral closed kinetic chain tests, including a field test, and traditional isokinetic dynamometry used to determine strength imbalance. Fourteen Division I collegiate women softball players (20.2 +/- 1.4 years) volunteered to undergo measures of average peak torque for isokinetic flexion and extension at 60[degrees][middle dot]s-1 and 240[degrees][middle dot]s-1; in addition, measures of peak and average force of each leg during parallel back squat, 2-legged vertical jump, and single-leg vertical jump and performance in a 5-hop test were examined. Significant differences of between 4.2% and 16.0% were evident for all measures except for average force during single-leg vertical jump between the D and ND limbs, thus revealing a significant strength imbalance. The 5-hop test revealed a significant difference between D and ND limbs and showed a moderate correlation with more sophisticated laboratory tests, suggesting a potential use as a field test for the identification of strength imbalance. The results of this study indicate that a significant strength imbalance can exist even in collegiate level athletes, and future research should be conducted to determine how detrimental these imbalances could be in terms of peak performance for athletes, as well as the implications for injury risk.
Contralateral effects of unilateral strength training: evidence and possible mechanisms
If exercises are performed to increase muscle strength on one side of the body, voluntary strength can increase on the contralateral side. This effect, termed the contralateral strength training effect, is usually measured in homologous muscles. Although known for over a century, most studies have not been designed well enough to show a definitive transfer of strength that could not be explained by factors such as familiarity with the testing. However, an updated meta-analysis of 16 properly controlled studies (range 15–48 training sessions) shows that the size of the contralateral strength training effect is ~8% of initial strength or about half the increase in strength of the trained side. This estimate is similar to results of a large, randomized controlled study of training for the elbow flexors (contralateral effect of 7% initial strength or one-quarter of the effect on the trained side). This is likely to reflect increased motoneuron output rather than muscular adaptations, although most methods are insufficiently sensitive to detect small muscle contributions. Two classes of central mechanism are identified. One involves a "spillover" to the control system for the contralateral limb, and the other involves adaptations in the control system for the trained limb that can be accessed by the untrained limb. Cortical, subcortical and spinal levels are all likely to be involved in the "transfer," and none can be excluded with current data. Although the size of the effect is small and may not be clinically significant, study of the phenomenon provides insight into neural mechanisms associated with exercise and training.
edit: so, a powerlifter should incorporate some kind of unilateral training as assistance to help improve the deficit between non-dominant and dominant limbs.. this will be easier with lower body, ie using lunges/stepups/bss.. for upper body, single arm db press or single arm snatch, single arm curl, & single arm row would probably be the most beneficial. Kroc, for example, is a huge fan of unilateral lifting, he's a powerlifter, you can catch him doing insane 1-arm db rows with like 225 & high rep log walking lunges.
peace
-
One of the reason I like unilaterals is because you can work depending on your weak limb. If you can lunge 90 kg for 5 reps with your right leg and 90 kg for 10 reps with your left leg, then you can limit your left leg training to the right leg RM. So they both get the same amount of training.
In a squat, you'd probably load more the left leg in this situation and continue with the imbalance (sure, doing the same amount of reps and doing a bilateral exercise will also help balance things out in the end). But I just feel like more focus can be applied with an unilateral exercise, there's also a bit less stability so the core works harder etc.
If you have severe strength imbalances that show in your squat, you need to use less weight. Some people have the problem of using one side differently in the squat than another and this can usually be dealt with if you are aware of it. Take weight of the bar and concentrate on perfect, symmetrical form. A unilateral exercise might help with the awareness, but the possibility of compensation is not ruled out by that - you still need to be very aware of your form.
I disagree about the core working harder. My core works harder in a 5 rm squat and works less in a 5 rm lunge due to the differences in weight being used.
what is your 5RM lunge/5RM squat, for example, when you trained that way?
for example, when I was doing 225 lb barbell walking lunges for singles, the max was probably around 235, and my half squat was 315 x 1, at 165.. the walking lunge singles were extremely intense.
It really just depends on what you're trying to improve on, I guess. So for athletics, unilateral work "must" be done because I feel it really helps and is more specific to human movement. For powerlifting etc, I don't really feel it "must" be done because it doesn't have any specificity to that.
I agree with that. Although I wouldn't use them for beginners.
why wouldn't you use unilaterals for beginners? or did i misunderstand.
and is this for performance, or just strength athletes?
peace
-
steven-miller's next project is to get really really fast by doing nothing but double-legged bounds. :P
lol
when it comes performance that involves highly single leg efforts, ie single leg jumpers and sprinters, bilateral only training can REALLY screw that up.
i mean we've all seen it, the SL jumper who gets into lifting, focuses primarily on squatting, then becomes a double leg jumper.
pc
-
steven-miller's next project is to get really really fast by doing nothing but double-legged bounds. :P
lol
when it comes performance that involves highly single leg efforts, ie single leg jumpers and sprinters, bilateral only training can REALLY screw that up.
i mean we've all seen it, the SL jumper who gets into lifting, focuses primarily on squatting, then becomes a double leg jumper.
pc
Interesting you should say that Andrew. I agree with what you are saying but have no scientific evidence other than my own experiences. Last summer I focused on running a lot of hill sprints and doing walking lunges as my primary leg training as it was easier on my knees. I found that as a result when I did any max effort jumping my body naturally wanted to do single leg jumps even though I don't do any specific jump training any more (just weights and hill sprints).
Now several years ago when I trained exclusively for vertical I did a lot more squatting and trap bar deadlifting, as well as box jumps with a weight vest and back then I was a two foot jumper.
Whoever said T-Nation has declined is right. They still have a few good articles here and there though, this one was worth the read I thought.
Good topic for the mental masturbators.
-
steven-miller's next project is to get really really fast by doing nothing but double-legged bounds. :P
lol
when it comes performance that involves highly single leg efforts, ie single leg jumpers and sprinters, bilateral only training can REALLY screw that up.
i mean we've all seen it, the SL jumper who gets into lifting, focuses primarily on squatting, then becomes a double leg jumper.
pc
Interesting you should say that Andrew. I agree with what you are saying but have no scientific evidence other than my own experiences. Last summer I focused on running a lot of hill sprints and doing walking lunges as my primary leg training as it was easier on my knees. I found that as a result when I did any max effort jumping my body naturally wanted to do single leg jumps even though I don't do any specific jump training any more (just weights and hill sprints).
it is my opinion that, people with a naturally larger bilateral deficit, will tend to naturally want to be a single leg jumper.. As you train bilaterally, this deficit decreases and eventually becomes nullified, creating then a unilateral deficit.. So, by training bilaterally solely (and being a single leg jumper), it's going to cause more inhibition for unilateral athletic movements and less inhibition for bilateral athletic movements, because heavy bilateral training (without unilateral) causes large adaptations towards improving/utilizing this new found strength/motor programming etc. People who perform very poorly on unilaterals vs bilaterals are most often than not, going to want to jump double leg. People with a naturally lower bilateral deficit seem to be more "strength dominant", while people with a large bilateral deficit tend to be more of the reactive type.
so, a focus on unilateral-only training, will create a bigger bilateral deficit, which gives you that "sensation" of wanting to jump single leg.. I know the sensation, it's just, in your mind, everything is telling you to launch off one leg.. this happened when I was doing those very high rep bodyweight walking lunges for 1 month, the 800 total shit hah.. But ya, I had urges to jump single leg, every jump session, eventually I even tried dunks.. Shortly after stopping that lunge experiment due to dangerous conditions performing them (heh), i don't get those urges anymore.. I have 0 urge to jump single leg..
Now several years ago when I trained exclusively for vertical I did a lot more squatting and trap bar deadlifting, as well as box jumps with a weight vest and back then I was a two foot jumper.
Whoever said T-Nation has declined is right. They still have a few good articles here and there though, this one was worth the read I thought.
Good topic for the mental masturbators.
we are all masturbating mentally, thanks to you.
-
Please post evidence or provide logic reasoning for why unilaterals should balance out the legs more than correctly performed - which means balanced - bilateral exercises.
During a squat for example, the outer quad(vastus lateralis) is recruited more than the inner quad(VMO). This will eventually lead to an imbalance, which if ignored can result in the knee 'caving in' b/c of the lack of strength of the VMO which may lead to injury. This is also why the VMO is heavily rehabbed in ACL injuries, to prevent further injury and 'caving in' of the knee. This is coming from experience.
And please explain why a powerlifter should do unilateral work when everything he does in his sport is bilateral in nature and will usually require a coordinated, well-balanced effort of both his left and right body side.
Injury prevention/Muscle Balance/Recovery/Variety/Wanting to have a longer, healthier career as a powerlifter.
Also as Andrew has pointed out, eveyone has a dominant limb and that limb shall stay dominant, so it's a good idea to keep the race a close one.
And don't just say "you can always do both", because only an idiot would bring forward such an argument,....And I don't think that you are an idiot,
You are contradicting yourself here. I say you can because you can. Don't put yourself in a box.
since it means that he does not understand that everything that is useless is in fact also detrimental because it means that valuable training time as well as physical resources are wasted which could otherwise be used for productive things that actually do something to help ones progress.
I'm sure you didn't assume this but not alot of energy/time has to be given towards single leg work for powerlifters, bodybuilders or olympic lifters. You wouldn't have to dedicate a whole session to single leg movements, just enough to further progress, strengthen weak links and to stay healthy.
-
During a squat for example, the outer quad(vastus lateralis) is recruited more than the inner quad(VMO). This will eventually lead to an imbalance, which if ignored can result in the knee 'caving in' b/c of the lack of strength of the VMO which may lead to injury. This is also why the VMO is heavily rehabbed in ACL injuries, to prevent further injury and 'caving in' of the knee. This is coming from experience.
wow i always thought the knee caving in = internal rotation of the femur which happen be because of tilted pelvis (which could suggests weak glutes and abs), or weak just glutes/hams....corrected by hip extension exercises focusing on keepping the knees in line with the hips/ankles, coupled with glute activation
-
If you ask me, I never understood bilateral stuff for dynamics... it just feels natural to jump off one leg because you walk and move unilaterally. A one leg jump is just an exaggerated "step". When you walk you don't bounce on two legs like birds.
-
wow i always thought the knee caving in = internal rotation of the femur which happen be because of tilted pelvis (which could suggests weak glutes and abs), or weak just glutes/hams....corrected by hip extension exercises focusing on keepping the knees in line with the hips/ankles, coupled with glute activation
Now imagine when both of these 'abnormalities' are present.
-
Lots of writing going on, good stuff.
About the dominant vs. non-dominant sides and unilaterals (@adarq, mattyg35 and others): I actually addressed this before and I still don’t understand why unilateral exercises are going to help with those imbalances better. My interpretation: If one has such an “inbalance” and trains with bilateral exercises correctly, meaning symmetrically, the weaker side is going to have more of a training effect than the stronger side. Thus the inbalances, if they exist to a large enough degree, will even out without having to use unilateral exercises.
what is your 5RM lunge/5RM squat, for example, when you trained that way?
for example, when I was doing 225 lb barbell walking lunges for singles, the max was probably around 235, and my half squat was 315 x 1, at 165.. the walking lunge singles were extremely intense.
I did a variation of the forward lunge, where I make a step forward and drop into the lunge position and then do an explosive concentric with the forward leg to get into the starting position directly. I did those recently with 225 lbs for 3 sets of 10 reps (alternating legs) after my squats, 3 rm must have been between 402 and 408 lbs for the squat on this day (unusual training time). That was my third lunge session, so it might not have been a true 5 rm in the sense that coordination can still improve and I started out rather conservatively (198 lbs for mentioned reps/sets two training days before). But they were hard enough to get a sense of the trunk activation and IMO it does not compare to a heavy set of 5 in the squat.
why wouldn't you use unilaterals for beginners? or did i misunderstand.
and is this for performance, or just strength athletes?
I would not use them for beginners, because they have a rather small need for specificity and the squat can increase strength faster. I would use the unilaterals later, as soon as there is a need for more specificity for example in a sprinter, single leg jumper or shot putter or even a bilateral jumper (the bilateral jump as performed by volleyball players is unilateral in the sense that the eccentric forces are absorbed to the largest extend by the planting leg). I would guess that this time is at the beginning of the intermediate stage or the late novice stage, but I don’t really have enough experience or observation to say that for sure. But the need for specificity increasing with training age is a general observation that relates to the problem at hand. So I would not have a rank novice do lunges for that reason.
During a squat for example, the outer quad(vastus lateralis) is recruited more than the inner quad(VMO). This will eventually lead to an imbalance, which if ignored can result in the knee 'caving in' b/c of the lack of strength of the VMO which may lead to injury. This is also why the VMO is heavily rehabbed in ACL injuries, to prevent further injury and 'caving in' of the knee. This is coming from experience.
wow i always thought the knee caving in = internal rotation of the femur which happen be because of tilted pelvis (which could suggests weak glutes and abs), or weak just glutes/hams....corrected by hip extension exercises focusing on keepping the knees in line with the hips/ankles, coupled with glute activation
My knees came in during the squat a lot at the beginning. I fixed this by taking weight off the bar, correcting the mistake and work up from there. I got a lot stronger and did not have this problem anymore. No unilaterals needed. Whatever is the cause for this problem (Mark Rippetoe argues that it is actually week adductors), it went away by performing bilateral work correctly.
Everything else really has already been addressed.
-
steven-miller, do you have any idea how high you jump off your right leg vs left leg?
Nearly missed that one.... I actually have no idea but I don't think that I would do very well, partially because I haven't needed the movement so far and probably never will in my sport - unless I decide to switch to track and field ^^.
-
wow i always thought the knee caving in = internal rotation of the femur which happen be because of tilted pelvis (which could suggests weak glutes and abs), or weak just glutes/hams....corrected by hip extension exercises focusing on keepping the knees in line with the hips/ankles, coupled with glute activation
Now imagine when both of these 'abnormalities' are present.
my point was: VMO strength doesnt have much to do with the knee caving in. it's more a matter of femur rotation, or ankle pronation...and afaik VMO doesnt affect any of those
-
If you ask me, I never understood bilateral stuff for dynamics... it just feels natural to jump off one leg because you walk and move unilaterally. A one leg jump is just an exaggerated "step". When you walk you don't bounce on two legs like birds.
(http://images2.memegenerator.net/notsureifserious/ImageMacro/3708466/Not-sure-if-serious.jpg)
-
You better believe I am. I never could understand, at least in my body&skin, how in the world I'd choose to jump off two feet if I was trying to get as high as I could. Unless it's a standing jump for a rebound or something, a one-leg jump is so much more superior.
-
During a squat for example, the outer quad(vastus lateralis) is recruited more than the inner quad(VMO). This will eventually lead to an imbalance, which if ignored can result in the knee 'caving in' b/c of the lack of strength of the VMO which may lead to injury. This is also why the VMO is heavily rehabbed in ACL injuries, to prevent further injury and 'caving in' of the knee. This is coming from experience.
wow i always thought the knee caving in = internal rotation of the femur which happen be because of tilted pelvis (which could suggests weak glutes and abs), or weak just glutes/hams....corrected by hip extension exercises focusing on keepping the knees in line with the hips/ankles, coupled with glute activation
usually glute med not firing, you see that in overly addicted bilateral strength athletes.. ie squat/leg press addicted.
vmo can become alot weaker than VL, unilaterals/sprinting/jumping really help to keep it firing properly.
-
yea, but its always debatable weather its just a firing or strength issue..or both...
surprisingly if you do regular hip extension exercises (in which the glute med shouldnt contribute alot), the caving in still dissappears.
-
When I first started doing low bar squats, the first thing I have witnessed was GREAT vastus medialis recruitment. That only happened in that first session and never happened again. I have no idea what this means.
-
When I first started doing low bar squats, the first thing I have witnessed was GREAT vastus medialis recruitment. That only happened in that first session and never happened again. I have no idea what this means.
quads are strong, vmo is probably adapted.. doubt it's a firing issue.. the quads usually aren't the weak link in a parallel/below parallel squat so, you're not going to get vmo/quad soreness much at all as you progress, they will pretty much always be one step ahead of the hams/glutes.
pc
-
Well they might, but why only in the 1st ever session and NEVER EVER after? Maybe just because I laid off some time away from any strength train, so soreness will be regardless the "first time" in quite a while you squat again. But whatever, the VMO was so much stimulated... while the vastus lateralis barely had any soreness.
-
Well they might, but why only in the 1st ever session and NEVER EVER after? Maybe just because I laid off some time away from any strength train, so soreness will be regardless the "first time" in quite a while you squat again. But whatever, the VMO was so much stimulated... while the vastus lateralis barely had any soreness.
Because you're more stable in the movement and they're not having to work as hard...
-
? What doesn't have to work as harder? The lateralis?
-
? What doesn't have to work as harder? The lateralis?
vmo doesn't.. tychver is probably saying, patella-femoral stability isn't as important with bilateral squatting, so, vmo being the main patella stabilizer, doesn't have to work as hard.
pc
-
? What doesn't have to work as harder? The lateralis?
vmo doesn't.. tychver is probably saying, patella-femoral stability isn't as important with bilateral squatting, so, vmo being the main patella stabilizer, doesn't have to work as hard.
pc
So... what does this have to do with my low bar squatting? (http://www.pure-dedication.com/forum/Smileys/blah/rolleyes.gif)
-
? What doesn't have to work as harder? The lateralis?
vmo doesn't.. tychver is probably saying, patella-femoral stability isn't as important with bilateral squatting, so, vmo being the main patella stabilizer, doesn't have to work as hard.
pc
So... what does this have to do with my low bar squatting? (http://www.pure-dedication.com/forum/Smileys/blah/rolleyes.gif)
it got worked hard first session, but adapted quickly.
-
That'd be really strange, I can't buy that.