Core Muscles

2»

Replies

  • LiftHeavyThings27105
    LiftHeavyThings27105 Posts: 2,086 Member
    I tried the ab roller at my gym once. I fell flat on my face.

    Ha! I would pay GOOD money to see that. Just means that you are human (shoot....did I say that out loud?)
  • LiftHeavyThings27105
    LiftHeavyThings27105 Posts: 2,086 Member
    jseams1234 wrote: »
    I've never done direct core work and my abs show at a shocking high BF percentage. Frankly, it probably keeps me from cutting down to a truly "lean" level. I'm like, "...well, I got abs - might as well start stuffing my face again..." :)

    ... but then again - maybe I'm just rationalizing because of my unreasonable hatred for direct ab work. lol

    Dude, I am going to start on abs. I have a regime in mind.....I am 51 and have always been in AMAZING shape (well, except for a five or six year period) but have NEVER had a six-pack. That is going to change. Diet and gym work are the order of the day.

    And, I betcha that if you made the choice to work on it then you would kill it! I am.......photos to prove it (but, not today.....would not want to do that to the MFP world!!!LOL!).

    Give me two or three months.....putting it out there. Again! Get ready, MFP world. Six pack is in the making!
  • LiftHeavyThings27105
    LiftHeavyThings27105 Posts: 2,086 Member
    psuLemon wrote: »
    sgt1372 wrote: »
    psuLemon wrote: »
    [Its really a discussion of optimal vs minimal.. you get core engagement with compound lifts but its far from optimal. So if one wants to buils their core and maximize growth, both compound lifts and direct ab training will yield the best results.

    For your results, we would also have to consider prior history of direct ab work, type of work and more. So i am not saying it can't be done, i am saying its less than optimal.

    I'm another who developed a,strong core and a definition just doing heavy compound lifting w/o doing any ab specific exercises and I do not consider that approach sub-optimal.

    Actually, considering that no additional time or effort was required to achieve this result, "jusy" doing compound lifts is the most efficient and optimal way to accomplish it even though the results were "only" an indirect benefit of such lifting. While I probably could increase my ab strength by doing hanging leg lifts other such exercises, why bother?

    I don't think such exercises would enhance muscular definition as well as just losing more BF would and I'm not a gymnast or competitive lifter, where such ab strength would actually be required, so it's really unnecessary for me but if your goals require it you certainly could increase your core strength by doing ab specific exercises but I wouldn't consider the result "optimal" but rather " beyond optimal" just like dropping your BF below 5% for a BB competition would be.

    I am glad it worked for you, but emg data suggest that compound lifts activate the core minimally. So while anecdotal evidence is ok and some individuals may see results from it, it just isn't supported by actual data as being efficient. And who is to say that your results wouldn't be better if you did do ab work.

    If you had a choice would you rather have 20% engagement or 90% engagement? If your goal was to get a bigger butt would you tell someone to just squat or do specific moves directed at the butt? The point is, if ones goal is to build a core, than including direct core work is more optimal than just big lifts. That is supported by emg data. And direct core work, if done correctly, can be done in 10 minutes.

    Eta: I don't object to the approach of just compound lifts if one's goals arent focused on a stronger core. But if a core is around a specific thing (chest, butt, legs, etc.. ) is in poor fashion to recommend a minimalistic approach.

    Agreed! So, to the "bootie" thing - squats or hip thrusters? Goal is a big ole juicy bootie (not said in a disrespectful way, ladies).....hip thrusters every day of the week, and twice on Sunday, right? No question there....no hesitation there. Hip Thursters for the win!

    As stated, squats and deadlifts (specifically, the bracing for each) really improved my overall core. But....
  • sardelsa
    sardelsa Posts: 9,812 Member
    psuLemon wrote: »
    sgt1372 wrote: »
    psuLemon wrote: »
    [Its really a discussion of optimal vs minimal.. you get core engagement with compound lifts but its far from optimal. So if one wants to buils their core and maximize growth, both compound lifts and direct ab training will yield the best results.

    For your results, we would also have to consider prior history of direct ab work, type of work and more. So i am not saying it can't be done, i am saying its less than optimal.

    I'm another who developed a,strong core and a definition just doing heavy compound lifting w/o doing any ab specific exercises and I do not consider that approach sub-optimal.

    Actually, considering that no additional time or effort was required to achieve this result, "jusy" doing compound lifts is the most efficient and optimal way to accomplish it even though the results were "only" an indirect benefit of such lifting. While I probably could increase my ab strength by doing hanging leg lifts other such exercises, why bother?

    I don't think such exercises would enhance muscular definition as well as just losing more BF would and I'm not a gymnast or competitive lifter, where such ab strength would actually be required, so it's really unnecessary for me but if your goals require it you certainly could increase your core strength by doing ab specific exercises but I wouldn't consider the result "optimal" but rather " beyond optimal" just like dropping your BF below 5% for a BB competition would be.

    I am glad it worked for you, but emg data suggest that compound lifts activate the core minimally. So while anecdotal evidence is ok and some individuals may see results from it, it just isn't supported by actual data as being efficient. And who is to say that your results wouldn't be better if you did do ab work.

    If you had a choice would you rather have 20% engagement or 90% engagement? If your goal was to get a bigger butt would you tell someone to just squat or do specific moves directed at the butt? The point is, if ones goal is to build a core, than including direct core work is more optimal than just big lifts. That is supported by emg data. And direct core work, if done correctly, can be done in 10 minutes.

    Eta: I don't object to the approach of just compound lifts if one's goals arent focused on a stronger core. But if a core is around a specific thing (chest, butt, legs, etc.. ) is in poor fashion to recommend a minimalistic approach.

    Agreed! So, to the "bootie" thing - squats or hip thrusters? Goal is a big ole juicy bootie (not said in a disrespectful way, ladies).....hip thrusters every day of the week, and twice on Sunday, right? No question there....no hesitation there. Hip Thursters for the win!

    As stated, squats and deadlifts (specifically, the bracing for each) really improved my overall core. But....

    I don't think it has to be one or the other, I would definitely incorporate both to fully develop the glutes for a well rounded physique. You basically want to cover all the angles or vectors... vertical (ex. squats, deadlifts), horizontal (ex. hip thrusts, glute bridges), lateral/rotary/combination (abductions, band walks, kickbacks etc) .

    While I do focus mostly on hip thrusts and bridges, doing a variety of exercises has definitely helped me to develop my glutes.
  • JDMac82
    JDMac82 Posts: 3,192 Member
    Situps, Crunches, Rowers, Supine Bike, Hanging Knee/Leg Tucks, Planks, Mountain Climbers, V Ups, Seated Knee Tucks (center and each side), Crunch / Sit Up with twist to each side(go slow, protect the back) Iso metric hold of the upper body in a 1/4, 1/2, 3/4 crunch/sit up, Negative situp / crunches body up, then slowly lower, quick up, repeat. Standing Knees to Elbows, Straight leg Toe Kick to straight arm Finger tips, Pretend your chopping wood, center/left/right, flutter kicks, heel clicks, heel scissors. To name a few off the top of my head.
  • LiftHeavyThings27105
    LiftHeavyThings27105 Posts: 2,086 Member
    sardelsa wrote: »
    psuLemon wrote: »
    sgt1372 wrote: »
    psuLemon wrote: »
    [Its really a discussion of optimal vs minimal.. you get core engagement with compound lifts but its far from optimal. So if one wants to buils their core and maximize growth, both compound lifts and direct ab training will yield the best results.

    For your results, we would also have to consider prior history of direct ab work, type of work and more. So i am not saying it can't be done, i am saying its less than optimal.

    I'm another who developed a,strong core and a definition just doing heavy compound lifting w/o doing any ab specific exercises and I do not consider that approach sub-optimal.

    Actually, considering that no additional time or effort was required to achieve this result, "jusy" doing compound lifts is the most efficient and optimal way to accomplish it even though the results were "only" an indirect benefit of such lifting. While I probably could increase my ab strength by doing hanging leg lifts other such exercises, why bother?

    I don't think such exercises would enhance muscular definition as well as just losing more BF would and I'm not a gymnast or competitive lifter, where such ab strength would actually be required, so it's really unnecessary for me but if your goals require it you certainly could increase your core strength by doing ab specific exercises but I wouldn't consider the result "optimal" but rather " beyond optimal" just like dropping your BF below 5% for a BB competition would be.

    I am glad it worked for you, but emg data suggest that compound lifts activate the core minimally. So while anecdotal evidence is ok and some individuals may see results from it, it just isn't supported by actual data as being efficient. And who is to say that your results wouldn't be better if you did do ab work.

    If you had a choice would you rather have 20% engagement or 90% engagement? If your goal was to get a bigger butt would you tell someone to just squat or do specific moves directed at the butt? The point is, if ones goal is to build a core, than including direct core work is more optimal than just big lifts. That is supported by emg data. And direct core work, if done correctly, can be done in 10 minutes.

    Eta: I don't object to the approach of just compound lifts if one's goals arent focused on a stronger core. But if a core is around a specific thing (chest, butt, legs, etc.. ) is in poor fashion to recommend a minimalistic approach.

    Agreed! So, to the "bootie" thing - squats or hip thrusters? Goal is a big ole juicy bootie (not said in a disrespectful way, ladies).....hip thrusters every day of the week, and twice on Sunday, right? No question there....no hesitation there. Hip Thursters for the win!

    As stated, squats and deadlifts (specifically, the bracing for each) really improved my overall core. But....

    I don't think it has to be one or the other, I would definitely incorporate both to fully develop the glutes for a well rounded physique. You basically want to cover all the angles or vectors... vertical (ex. squats, deadlifts), horizontal (ex. hip thrusts, glute bridges), lateral/rotary/combination (abductions, band walks, kickbacks etc) .

    While I do focus mostly on hip thrusts and bridges, doing a variety of exercises has definitely helped me to develop my glutes.

    100% agree.....I might not have made the context of that statment clear.....it was "do one general thing (squats) or one focused thing (hip thrusters, for example)"? Specifically from psuLemon's "20% engagement or 90% engagement" comment.

    You def want to hit muscles from different angles [and, including in that from their natural angle (which is not the technically correct term....but hopefully y'all understand what I mean)]. The Glutes are three main muscles....we want to hit all three as effeciently as possible.

    But, thank you for bringing attention to that comment - I definitely do not want people to misunderstand that. :-)
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,427 MFP Moderator
    edited June 2018
    sardelsa wrote: »
    psuLemon wrote: »
    sgt1372 wrote: »
    psuLemon wrote: »
    [Its really a discussion of optimal vs minimal.. you get core engagement with compound lifts but its far from optimal. So if one wants to buils their core and maximize growth, both compound lifts and direct ab training will yield the best results.

    For your results, we would also have to consider prior history of direct ab work, type of work and more. So i am not saying it can't be done, i am saying its less than optimal.

    I'm another who developed a,strong core and a definition just doing heavy compound lifting w/o doing any ab specific exercises and I do not consider that approach sub-optimal.

    Actually, considering that no additional time or effort was required to achieve this result, "jusy" doing compound lifts is the most efficient and optimal way to accomplish it even though the results were "only" an indirect benefit of such lifting. While I probably could increase my ab strength by doing hanging leg lifts other such exercises, why bother?

    I don't think such exercises would enhance muscular definition as well as just losing more BF would and I'm not a gymnast or competitive lifter, where such ab strength would actually be required, so it's really unnecessary for me but if your goals require it you certainly could increase your core strength by doing ab specific exercises but I wouldn't consider the result "optimal" but rather " beyond optimal" just like dropping your BF below 5% for a BB competition would be.

    I am glad it worked for you, but emg data suggest that compound lifts activate the core minimally. So while anecdotal evidence is ok and some individuals may see results from it, it just isn't supported by actual data as being efficient. And who is to say that your results wouldn't be better if you did do ab work.

    If you had a choice would you rather have 20% engagement or 90% engagement? If your goal was to get a bigger butt would you tell someone to just squat or do specific moves directed at the butt? The point is, if ones goal is to build a core, than including direct core work is more optimal than just big lifts. That is supported by emg data. And direct core work, if done correctly, can be done in 10 minutes.

    Eta: I don't object to the approach of just compound lifts if one's goals arent focused on a stronger core. But if a core is around a specific thing (chest, butt, legs, etc.. ) is in poor fashion to recommend a minimalistic approach.

    Agreed! So, to the "bootie" thing - squats or hip thrusters? Goal is a big ole juicy bootie (not said in a disrespectful way, ladies).....hip thrusters every day of the week, and twice on Sunday, right? No question there....no hesitation there. Hip Thursters for the win!

    As stated, squats and deadlifts (specifically, the bracing for each) really improved my overall core. But....

    I don't think it has to be one or the other, I would definitely incorporate both to fully develop the glutes for a well rounded physique. You basically want to cover all the angles or vectors... vertical (ex. squats, deadlifts), horizontal (ex. hip thrusts, glute bridges), lateral/rotary/combination (abductions, band walks, kickbacks etc) .

    While I do focus mostly on hip thrusts and bridges, doing a variety of exercises has definitely helped me to develop my glutes.

    100% agree.....I might not have made the context of that statment clear.....it was "do one general thing (squats) or one focused thing (hip thrusters, for example)"? Specifically from psuLemon's "20% engagement or 90% engagement" comment.

    You def want to hit muscles from different angles [and, including in that from their natural angle (which is not the technically correct term....but hopefully y'all understand what I mean)]. The Glutes are three main muscles....we want to hit all three as effeciently as possible.

    But, thank you for bringing attention to that comment - I definitely do not want people to misunderstand that. :-)

    It was more of an additive thing. While low bar squat has greater engagement of the glutes as compared to high bar, its still not as effective as hip thrust. By combing the moves you will help maximize growth potential. Just like doing compound lifts with focused/directed ab training would do for ab development.

    Its not an either or thing.. its a combined thing.