You know the argument that stretching makes you less explosive? So how come all those gymnasts, who are extremely flexible, are also extremely explosive and strong?
You know the argument that stretching makes you less explosive? So how come all those gymnasts, who are extremely flexible, are also extremely explosive and strong?
Interesting question. And I certainly don't know the answer. But gymnasts often have poor running gaits so I don't think anything a gymnast does is necessarily going to help a runner.
Ggggg wrote:
You know the argument that stretching makes you less explosive? So how come all those gymnasts, who are extremely flexible, are also extremely explosive and strong?
Are they though? They use a springboard or a spring floor whenever they need to actually perform an explosive movement.
A lot of gymnastic movements are strength and momentum rather than explosive movements. It's a bit of an illusion.
Ggggg wrote:
You know the argument that stretching makes you less explosive? So how come all those gymnasts, who are extremely flexible, are also extremely explosive and strong?
Mobility and flexibility are two different things. Nether make you "less explosive" Olympic weightlifters, who are some of the most explosive athletes, also have the best mobility and flexibility.
The "argument" is flawed and made by those who lack an understanding of biomechanics. When someone is more mobile, the joint has a greater range of motion, with greater leverages at play.
Ggggg wrote:
You know the argument that stretching makes you less explosive? So how come all those gymnasts, who are extremely flexible, are also extremely explosive and strong?
Great point. The anti-stretching movement has not produced better performances or reduced injuries. If one were to actually look at the trendy "dynamic warm ups" you would see more injuries especially in sports like football where that is the new norm.
Not sure why common sense doesn't prevail with stretching vs. the new pulling and tearing routines also known as "dynamic warm ups"?
Just an anecdotal observation. Having coached some really great athletes in multiple sports I feel the stretching makes you less explosive argument doesn’t hold water for one primary reason. The most explosive athletes I’ve coached were very flexible and required very little in the way of “warming up”. So while professional athletes may not spend all that much time stretching it’s because most of them aren’t that tight. The explosive athletes I coached could get into any stretch further than other athletes and just hold it without any discomfort. If flexibility was inverse to explosiveness, most good athletes would be really tight in theory but in practice it’s the opposite.
I can dunk off a springboard wrote:
Ggggg wrote:
You know the argument that stretching makes you less explosive? So how come all those gymnasts, who are extremely flexible, are also extremely explosive and strong?
Are they though? They use a springboard or a spring floor whenever they need to actually perform an explosive movement.
A lot of gymnastic movements are strength and momentum rather than explosive movements. It's a bit of an illusion.
How about figure skaters? Would they be considered "explosive athletes"? How explosive does a distance runner need to be? Even world class milers are barely running what, 16 mph?
Not sure how this works? wrote:
Great point. The anti-stretching movement has not produced better performances or reduced injuries. If one were to actually look at the trendy "dynamic warm ups" you would see more injuries especially in sports like football where that is the new norm.
Do you have any evidence to support this, or are you just stating a guess as fact?
Hourunner wrote:
Just an anecdotal observation. Having coached some really great athletes in multiple sports I feel the stretching makes you less explosive argument doesn’t hold water for one primary reason. The most explosive athletes I’ve coached were very flexible and required very little in the way of “warming up”. So while professional athletes may not spend all that much time stretching it’s because most of them aren’t that tight. The explosive athletes I coached could get into any stretch further than other athletes and just hold it without any discomfort. If flexibility was inverse to explosiveness, most good athletes would be really tight in theory but in practice it’s the opposite.
Bingo!
They have a lot of upper body strength. Also, explosiveness is more of a function of throwing their entire body weight into a movement, often to be met by a rigid (vault / mat) or semi rigid (uneven bars) object which they deflect off to create even more force. The women are pretty tiny and young so they are naturally more flexible. The guys are more about strength than speed.
is this actually true? wrote:
Not sure how this works? wrote:
Great point. The anti-stretching movement has not produced better performances or reduced injuries. If one were to actually look at the trendy "dynamic warm ups" you would see more injuries especially in sports like football where that is the new norm.
Do you have any evidence to support this, or are you just stating a guess as fact?
I recently saw statistics at a high school coaching association clinic talking about increased concussions, and lower leg injuries in football. I also notice it every weekend watching NCAA and NFL football. Everyone is bigger and stronger, but less flexible and something has to give when there are hard hits, awkward falls, etc.
I also see it at high school athletics when teams begin their warm ups with ballistic movements when the muscles are not properly warmed up...so much contradictory science currently in play!
Ggggg wrote:
You know the argument that stretching makes you less explosive? So how come all those gymnasts, who are extremely flexible, are also extremely explosive and strong?
Perfect example of the logical fallacy of begging the question .
If you start with a false premise then it's impossible to come to a logical conclusion.
Actually, I do NOT know the stretching makes you less explosive argument
Bib #1 wrote:
They have a lot of upper body strength. Also, explosiveness is more of a function of throwing their entire body weight into a movement, often to be met by a rigid (vault / mat) or semi rigid (uneven bars) object which they deflect off to create even more force. The women are pretty tiny and young so they are naturally more flexible. The guys are more about strength than speed.
If you have ever gone to a gymnastics practice, even the youngest kids go through a stretching routine, both boys and girls, and that seems to be a core element of their daily routine.
Lame Fake Name wrote:
Actually, I do NOT know the stretching makes you less explosive argument
Well... then, I bet you haven't heard how important it is to activate your glutes before going for a run either, have you?
I always wonder how much better past athletes would have been had they trained properly, warmed up properly, cross trained properly, and activated their glutes before training and racing?
I'm sure Jim Ryan would have ran 3:41 for the full mile with all these amazing new advancements.
Not sure how this works? wrote:
Ggggg wrote:
You know the argument that stretching makes you less explosive? So how come all those gymnasts, who are extremely flexible, are also extremely explosive and strong?
Great point. The anti-stretching movement has not produced better performances or reduced injuries. If one were to actually look at the trendy "dynamic warm ups" you would see more injuries especially in sports like football where that is the new norm.
Not sure why common sense doesn't prevail with stretching vs. the new pulling and tearing routines also known as "dynamic warm ups"?
Um, yes it has. The WRs are all faster now.
Not sure how this works? wrote:
Bib #1 wrote:
They have a lot of upper body strength. Also, explosiveness is more of a function of throwing their entire body weight into a movement, often to be met by a rigid (vault / mat) or semi rigid (uneven bars) object which they deflect off to create even more force. The women are pretty tiny and young so they are naturally more flexible. The guys are more about strength than speed.
If you have ever gone to a gymnastics practice, even the youngest kids go through a stretching routine, both boys and girls, and that seems to be a core element of their daily routine.
You’re right, I don’t disagree. You wouldn’t want to go from zero to 60 without first warming up the engine and the tires
Lame Fake Name wrote:
Actually, I do NOT know the stretching makes you less explosive argument
It can do that if you never stretch before and start (over) doing it. Just like any other exercise, it is a form of challenge that requires recovery and adaptation. Not only it temporarily reduces explosiveness but also strength, endurance, and even flexibility, until you recover and the rest of your mechanics adapt to the new structure. So, long term it's possible to be both flexible and explosive. But very long. In the same time frame of changing your gait and posture. Not a crash course for one season.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23615481/Lame Fake Name wrote:
Actually, I do NOT know the stretching makes you less explosive argument
Not sure how this works? wrote:
is this actually true? wrote:
Do you have any evidence to support this, or are you just stating a guess as fact?
I recently saw statistics at a high school coaching association clinic talking about increased concussions, and lower leg injuries in football. I also notice it every weekend watching NCAA and NFL football. Everyone is bigger and stronger, but less flexible and something has to give when there are hard hits, awkward falls, etc.
I also see it at high school athletics when teams begin their warm ups with ballistic movements when the muscles are not properly warmed up...so much contradictory science currently in play!
Most of the the concussions and lower leg injuries can be traced to field turf. The majority of muscle injuries in football are caused by a violent collision, muscle imbalances, and nonsensical practice routines.