Mile27 wrote:
Dynamic three dimensional movements that load the core eccentrically and performed in a vertical position are far more effective because they train the core specifically for what happens when we run.
EXAMPLES?
Mile27 wrote:
Dynamic three dimensional movements that load the core eccentrically and performed in a vertical position are far more effective because they train the core specifically for what happens when we run.
EXAMPLES?
yup.... wrote:
Except for the coaches that consistently recruit high 18-19min 5k grils that have no form and turns them to 16-17min runners with beautiful strides.. obviously did nothing
This couldn't have anything to do with the average HS girl runner does 30mpw maybe six months per year (at most) and more than double that year-round in college.
Nah. Must be all that core work. Couldn't be the RUNNING.
I have been a bit quiet lately but here's my 2ct:
- if you want to be a better runner, sprint more
- if you want to get bigger abs, sprint more
See this article and you will understand:
http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/ask-the-ripped-dude-how-do-i-get-3d-abs.html
Xfitguy_the_real_one_1 wrote:
I have been a bit quiet lately but here's my 2ct:
- if you want to be a better runner, sprint more
- if you want to get bigger abs, sprint more
See this article and you will understand:
http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/ask-the-ripped-dude-how-do-i-get-3d-abs.html
Yes but what if you don't want to get faster and only want to work on your core instead?
It is important to have good core stability not good core strength (abs). The exercises to work these two different things have some overlap but not much. Planks, med ball, crunches, etc just going to make your abs look good but not really awhole lot else
absurd wrote:
It is important to have good core stability not good core strength (abs). The exercises to work these two different things have some overlap but not much. Planks, med ball, crunches, etc just going to make your abs look good but not really awhole lot else
Yeah that's why you should incorporate crossfit style sprint repeat as reference in the article in my previous post.
Haile does core workouts every day (Google it).
Has anyone tried squats on a stability board or medicine ball pushups?
rupp-certified saladbar wrote:
Mile27 wrote:Dynamic three dimensional movements that load the core eccentrically and performed in a vertical position are far more effective because they train the core specifically for what happens when we run.
EXAMPLES?
Examples??? Yes, send us a link with some examples.
What I would look at is John Cook's training which includes core and other auxilary exercises for his runners.
Results:
Flanagan- bronze 2008
Rowbury- bronze 2010
Manzano- silver 2012
That's a pretty good record.
As other people have mentioned, Schumacher and Salazar also have their runners doing core, as does practically every other top coach in the US.
If the question is to do core instead of running, then the answer is no. Running is obviously the primary way to get better at running. But if the question is core in addition to running, then the answer is yes. There's good reason to think it helps, and little reason to think it hurts.
And many Kenyans do core exercises.
Pointing to "core" as the source of success makes about as much sense as pointing to "running" or "lifting" - as in, Schumacher's athletes all run, so the secret to training is just to run. You need to do it within some kind of intelligent, planned system.
Does anyone have the PDF of Cook's core/drills? I think it was floating around here at some point.
I've been asked for examples , so have a look here
http://www.mile27.com.au/category/trainingthecore/
Plenty of info and videos of some exercises.
In terms of whether squats are beneficial - There would be some carry over strength but this could be vastly increased by progressing the squats and using the strength gained squatting to carry over into running.
Eg squats - lunges - jump lunges - jumping - hopping - bounding drills - running.
If you skip out the connections that show the brain how you can take the strength gained in squats to running then the benefits of squats are minimal.
For everyone that says that some elite athlete does planks and it hasn't hurt them , that's not an argument for planks. They may have done better if they hadn't done planks. Unless you can show me an example of an athlete who has changed nothing else in their training except for planks then it's not an argument. Studies have done just that and come up with nothing.
"Core" training is a fad. There is nothing behind it except superstition.
fisky wrote:
rupp-certified saladbar wrote:EXAMPLES?
Examples??? Yes, send us a link with some examples.
Yes, please do.
Examples here http://www.mile27.com.au/category/trainingthecore/
Mile27 wrote:
Examples here
http://www.mile27.com.au/category/trainingthecore/
Excellent, and is basically what we were doing 30 years ago. I would add changing the position of the feet after each set.
Mile27 wrote:
Examples here
http://www.mile27.com.au/category/trainingthecore/
Fantastic! If you have any more can you post them?
You are best off finding a core workout that works for you. It will help prevent injury which, in my opinion is even more important that gaining seconds.
I believe triathletes and runners who believe that everything besides running is a waste of time will pay for their attitude as running and aging breaks down their body.
Online there is a video of Salazar and Rupp doing core training that is tailored to Galen's so clearly they don't think it's a waste of time.
In my opinion, if a runner tells you core or any other strengthening exercise programs is pointless that runner is either too lazy to do the extra work or hasn't learned his lesson yet.
So-called "core" workouts are generally useless. The manner in which they are typically performed is irresponsible and creates a needless risk of injury. As for appearance, the muscularity of the torso is mostly determined by genetic factors and is influenced only minimally by training. The recent obsession with "core" training among runners demonstrates how ignorant, irrational and gullible they are as a groups; most of you f*cks will believe ANYTHING that becomes popular, no matter how stupid and unscientific it may be. The modern concept of "core" training came from marketers in the mainstream fitness industry who promoted "functional" training gimmicks like bosu balls and wobble boards for use by the masses. You jogging idiots lapped it right up, and hysterically, some of you think that doing "core" makes you some kind of enlightened fitness elitist. No, it makes you the dumbest of the dumb.
it does matter wrote:
How is core useless? Your upper torso needs support when you contact the ground. If your core is not able to stabilize the upper body, you will be forced to use additional energy to remain balanced.
Some people might overdo the training of their abs, but a functional core is a must for proper running mechanics.
Check out some of Vern Gambettta's suggestions for balance and postural alignment as it pertains to core training.
There are plenty of elite and world class runners that never did a situp in their entire career...it is overrated..there is no way to show that it makes you a better runner or even keeps you healthy...I have seen guys ripped that never lifted a day in their lives--simply ran 100 plus miles a week...