Re: Rotational training and the movement of the feet, hips and back

[Guest guest]

>

> Hi,

>

> There seems to be a lot of disagreement with the role of the bodies

> movement in rotational movements [...]

One problem is that frequently people do not further disaggregate the

*type* of rotation nor whether the sport calls for rotational mobility

or stability (or both).

For example, I can think of quite a basic distinction: the ability to

produce rotational force in the torso versus the ability to hold the

torso stable while it rotates. In the first case I am thinking of

something like a twist, where the ribcage/shoulders turn away from the

pelvis. This would be useful to train in athletes such as BJJ-ers, who

may twist from the waist to execute a sweep such as an upa --

essentially this begins as a kind of twisting situp, which the hip

extension then follows.

In the second case I am thinking of something like a boxer, who

initiates a punch with the torso turning as a block, and the initial

rotational drive coming from the hips. The shoulders/ribcage and

pelvis stay relatively aligned at first. Another example would be a

runner who needs to keep the torso/pelvis stable during unilateral

movements (stepping a leg forward, driving an arm forward), or a

swimmer who needs to keep from excessively flopping side to side in

the water.

This crude division can be further subdivided -- for example stability

emerges from dynamic coordination of a shifting body, requiring a

complex pattern of motor recruitment that may differ appreciably in

degree and order or firing. Even if the torso is held generally stable

it may be more efficient for an athlete to turn side to side a bit, or

it may be more appropriate to keep the body as fixed as possible.

Again, one must begin with a nuanced understanding of what demands

occur.

And this rudimentary 2-part distinction is also only for twists

imagined as side to side -- in sport there are also other directional

demands that occur, e.g. a twist as part of a throw, chop or golf

swing can also involve a diagonal pattern as the arms move downwards

or upwards.

Thus movement is complex and various types of rotation can occur

together (e.g. stability demands can be followed by force production

demands -- a " torso block " twist can be followed by a twist from the

waist) but it would be helpful to begin with an understanding of what

demands are actually required.

If we're using the basic 2-part scheme above, in my experience people

need the second type more often, and training the first type

inappropriately can often result in low back pain. McGill's research,

for example, showed that the seated twist was one of the worst

movements for exacerbating LBP. Additionally poor lumbopelvic control

during motion (one component of which might be considered rotational

stability) is correlated with LBP.

Krista -Dixon

Toronto, ON

kristascottdixon@...

[Guest guest]

It is dependent on the sport and the position played by the athlete in that

sport.

Garrison, CSCS*D

Mesa, AZ

Mesa Community College

=============================

To: Supertraining@...: ben_richens@...: Fri, 11 Jan

2008 11:17:35 +0000Subject: Rotational training and the movement

of the feet, hips and back

Hi,There seems to be a lot of disagreement with the role of the bodies movement

in rotational movements e.g. woodchops, standing rows, standing presses etc..

for carryover to sports performance by various coaches some recommend no foot

rotation with hip rotation, while some want more movement through the torso,

others recommend keeping the torso stable. What are peoples views regarding the

best contribution in rotational movement from the bodies joints? While this will

differ according to the exercise and some other variables I just wanted to get

some points of view on the matter.Ben RichensImperial CollegeLondon, UK

============================

[Guest guest]

Interesting point. I was wondering if it would be easier to distinguish

the movement in terms of the kinetic chain and force. In the second type

of movement skill is derived by maximizing instantaneous velocity near

the end of the movement. In a boxer, as in your example, you are trying

to maximize instantaneous velocity (since the mass of the fist/arm/glove

is constant in terms of force) at the point of contact. So a skilled

kinetic chain applies force starting from the ground (umm - normally a

punch would start with ground force and then go to the hips, even a

quick one off a block, I think) and proceeds through to elbow extension.

The point is you are maximizing force or rate of force production (in

the case of the boxer) would be more accurate, since it also has to be

quick enough to land.

In the case of the stability rotation instantaneous velocity is less an

issue and overcoming strength is more an issue. You have to have enough

speed to get body position, it is true, but it is still more overcoming

the resistance offered by the opponent. Far more an absolute strength

issue than a velocity issue.

So rotational movements become quite easily applied to the Supertraining

model developed by Dr. Siff, if this mindset is developed. Within a base

of appropriate motor skills, work rotational movements for some balance

of speed, strength and endurance. It really isn't rocket science.

In my opinion doing a twisting movement while locking the lower body (as

in seated twists) is an inappropriate motor pattern for most sports and

activities. You could do it as a warm-up, but I don't see the point of

adding intensity to that movement.

Krista -Dixon wrote:

> On Jan 11, 2008 6:17 AM, ben_richens <ben_richens@...

> <mailto:ben_richens%40yahoo.co.uk>> wrote:

> >

> > Hi,

> >

> > There seems to be a lot of disagreement with the role of the bodies

> > movement in rotational movements [...]

>

> One problem is that frequently people do not further disaggregate the

> *type* of rotation nor whether the sport calls for rotational mobility

> or stability (or both).

>

> For example, I can think of quite a basic distinction: the ability to

> produce rotational force in the torso versus the ability to hold the

> torso stable while it rotates. In the first case I am thinking of

> something like a twist, where the ribcage/shoulders turn away from the

> pelvis. This would be useful to train in athletes such as BJJ-ers, who

> may twist from the waist to execute a sweep such as an upa --

> essentially this begins as a kind of twisting situp, which the hip

> extension then follows.

>

> In the second case I am thinking of something like a boxer, who

> initiates a punch with the torso turning as a block, and the initial

> rotational drive coming from the hips. The shoulders/ribcage and

> pelvis stay relatively aligned at first. Another example would be a

> runner who needs to keep the torso/pelvis stable during unilateral

> movements (stepping a leg forward, driving an arm forward), or a

> swimmer who needs to keep from excessively flopping side to side in

> the water.

>

> This crude division can be further subdivided -- for example stability

> emerges from dynamic coordination of a shifting body, requiring a

> complex pattern of motor recruitment that may differ appreciably in

> degree and order or firing. Even if the torso is held generally stable

> it may be more efficient for an athlete to turn side to side a bit, or

> it may be more appropriate to keep the body as fixed as possible.

> Again, one must begin with a nuanced understanding of what demands

> occur.

>

> And this rudimentary 2-part distinction is also only for twists

> imagined as side to side -- in sport there are also other directional

> demands that occur, e.g. a twist as part of a throw, chop or golf

> swing can also involve a diagonal pattern as the arms move downwards

> or upwards.

>

> Thus movement is complex and various types of rotation can occur

> together (e.g. stability demands can be followed by force production

> demands -- a " torso block " twist can be followed by a twist from the

> waist) but it would be helpful to begin with an understanding of what

> demands are actually required.

>

> If we're using the basic 2-part scheme above, in my experience people

> need the second type more often, and training the first type

> inappropriately can often result in low back pain. McGill's research,

> for example, showed that the seated twist was one of the worst

> movements for exacerbating LBP. Additionally poor lumbopelvic control

> during motion (one component of which might be considered rotational

> stability) is correlated with LBP.

>

> Krista -Dixon

> Toronto, ON

> kristascottdixon@... <mailto:kristascottdixon%40gmail.com>

>

> .

>

>

--

Hobman

Saskatoon, CANADA