Good Strength Training for Abs (without crunches) ?
Options
Replies
-
Well you skipped the "people pulling on their spines" bit. that's usually where I see the most damage- but there is quite a lot of research that shows the low back risk as well.
http://www.peaksportsandspinept.com/articles/whysitupsareabadidea.cfm
I take what live strong says usually with a grain of salt- but there are usually worth while nuggets in there
http://www.livestrong.com/article/483473-are-situps-crunches-bad-for-the-spine/
specifically this partBecause you flex your back during a situp, you place a tremendous amount of stress on the vertebrae in your spine. In a study reported in June 1995 in "Clinical Biomechanics," Stuart McGill tested the effects of situps on the spines of 12 young men. The study found that both bent and straight leg situps placed over 3,000 N of force, or roughly 674 lbs., on the lower spine. This strain can eventually lead to bulging or herniated discs, compressed vertebrae and nerve damage.
This one actaully lists some alternatives
http://ruggedfellowsguide.com/10-alternatives-crunches-situps/
I'd say the reason why it's inheiriently bad- vs a say a squat which CAN be done badly (and often is) is for the same reasons- just worse....
B/c so often you see an extremely curved spine- hands wrapped around the head pulling- and their banging back and forth- or lunging with momentum.
Considering there are significantly other ways to work your core in a more life applicable manner- it's not really that hard to just do away with them- most people do sit ups wrong- and I'd say crunches are just asking for an effed up back.This is not really a bad thing, since most people have really weak hip flexors and could really use some training for those muscles as well. It is of course not a very good ab exercise if you do that, but I wouldn't condemn it quite as quickly as is the trend these days.
do leg raises or L sits- way safer- and promote more growth in other places as well.
and isn't a hip flexor a tendon?0 -
Well you skipped the "people pulling on their spines" bit. that's usually where I see the most damage- but there is quite a lot of research that shows the low back risk as well.
http://www.peaksportsandspinept.com/articles/whysitupsareabadidea.cfm
I take what live strong says usually with a grain of salt- but there are usually worth while nuggets in there
http://www.livestrong.com/article/483473-are-situps-crunches-bad-for-the-spine/
specifically this partBecause you flex your back during a situp, you place a tremendous amount of stress on the vertebrae in your spine. In a study reported in June 1995 in "Clinical Biomechanics," Stuart McGill tested the effects of situps on the spines of 12 young men. The study found that both bent and straight leg situps placed over 3,000 N of force, or roughly 674 lbs., on the lower spine. This strain can eventually lead to bulging or herniated discs, compressed vertebrae and nerve damage.
This one actaully lists some alternatives
http://ruggedfellowsguide.com/10-alternatives-crunches-situps/
I'd say the reason why it's inheiriently bad- vs a say a squat which CAN be done badly (and often is) is for the same reasons- just worse....
B/c so often you see an extremely curved spine- hands wrapped around the head pulling- and their banging back and forth- or lunging with momentum.
Considering there are significantly other ways to work your core in a more life applicable manner- it's not really that hard to just do away with them- most people do sit ups wrong- and I'd say crunches are just asking for an effed up back.This is not really a bad thing, since most people have really weak hip flexors and could really use some training for those muscles as well. It is of course not a very good ab exercise if you do that, but I wouldn't condemn it quite as quickly as is the trend these days.
do leg raises or L sits- way safer- and promote more growth in other places as well.
and isn't a hip flexor a tendon?
Sorry I did move pass the "curved spine" part of the sentence. I didnt see that as a bad thing all by itself as that is what it supposed to do. You added a lot more information though so thank you. I will look over the articles you linked.
Here is a pretty good article on it as well.
http://www.t-nation.com/training/to-crunch-or-not-to-crunch
http://journals.lww.com/nsca-scj/Fulltext/2011/08000/To_Crunch_or_Not_to_Crunch__An_Evidence_Based.2.aspx#
ETA: I dont think there is an actual part called hip flexor. The iliacus and the psoas major/minor are the muscles used for the motion.0 -
a spine is supposed to curve- so that isn't inherently bad- I think it's that stress from the pulling at the top - you can see people strain with that- and also the fact people tend to do so many of them- so the repetitive nature.
I mean- I've done them- I do modified- flat back type sit up ups- so it's not like it's the worst thing evvvvverrrr- but I do think the risk/return ratio isn't worth it.0 -
Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Ugh... people should do a little more than DL's and Squat's. Prescribing those 2 exercises on this site is like doctors prescribing anti-biotics.
that's not really fair.
I never even heard of deadlifting til I had been active on this site's forums for about 2 months.
I'll continue to mention the basics so new people that still think that crunches and curls are basics can be saved from a lot of wasted effort
Not that isolation exercises won't work but it's much more practical to get core work in WHILE doing other lifts too. So the suggestion to use all free weight type exercises is a much better choice. Even then, a standing overhead press will work the core more than the sitting version. This is why I've moved to doing standing OHP now. My numbers have went down probably because my core isn't caught up with my shoulder strength0 -
oh damn that ohp, doubly if you have shoulder mo issues.
0 -
Anecdata, but I have a grumpy lower back and crunches exacerbate it. And they are hard on my neck as well and just very uncomfortable (not in a good way).0
-
Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »Ugh... people should do a little more than DL's and Squat's. Prescribing those 2 exercises on this site is like doctors prescribing anti-biotics.
that's not really fair.
I never even heard of deadlifting til I had been active on this site's forums for about 2 months.
I'll continue to mention the basics so new people that still think that crunches and curls are basics can be saved from a lot of wasted effort
That's fine that you learned something new on this site, but they are not the end-all-be-all to training and it is almost always the go-to answer; just look at this thread. Some folks may need more or less core training than others, but core training is important. Squats hit your core but you need to do a little other core work for overall strength and stabilization; this will also help reduce injuries.
The OP asked for ab work and you prescribed squats and deadlifts. No?No one here said they were.This is not really a bad thing, since most people have really weak hip flexors and could really use some training for those muscles as well. It is of course not a very good ab exercise if you do that, but I wouldn't condemn it quite as quickly as is the trend these days.
There are other ways to improve hip flexor strength without risking injury to your lumbar spine. Jo quoted Dr. McGill who is widely considered an expert on the spine and training to reduce spinal injuries, everybody should definitely read his work because it's rather enlightening.
Question to those that think squats & deadlifts are the only thing you need to build core. Have you ever failed a squat to where you bailed on it? If so, where do you think you failed in it? Core strength has been linked to improvement and failure in things like the squat, vertical jump, & bench press.
0 -
Anecdata, but I have a grumpy lower back and crunches exacerbate it. And they are hard on my neck as well and just very uncomfortable (not in a good way).
Yeah Im not saying to do them or not do them. I was just curious about the very strong stance against them.
Sit-ups work hip flexors is a common reason they suck for abs. But then L sits and hanging leg raises get recommended. Im pretty sure those are hip flexor dominant also. JoRocka pointed out they are better because they dont have an added risk that a sit-up might have. That makes sense to me but then the reason wasnt because it was a hip flexor but because it had an injury risk from loaded spinal flexion.
I like knowing what a muscles function is and then trying to work it in that path through its range of motion. Isometric is great but is there a benefit to resistance in the fully contracted position also? I dont know, thats why I was asking.0 -
Kettlebell exercises are good for the core. Planks, superman, pike ups, mountain climbers, pilates.0
-
Reverse crunches. Back and head on the floor, legs raised at a right angle and lift bum off the floor. You can hold onto something with your arms over your head if you wish to held get your bum higher off the floor.0
-
mustgetmuscles1 wrote: »Anecdata, but I have a grumpy lower back and crunches exacerbate it. And they are hard on my neck as well and just very uncomfortable (not in a good way).
Yeah Im not saying to do them or not do them. I was just curious about the very strong stance against them.
Sit-ups work hip flexors is a common reason they suck for abs. But then L sits and hanging leg raises get recommended. Im pretty sure those are hip flexor dominant also. JoRocka pointed out they are better because they dont have an added risk that a sit-up might have. That makes sense to me but then the reason wasnt because it was a hip flexor but because it had an injury risk from loaded spinal flexion.
I like knowing what a muscles function is and then trying to work it in that path through its range of motion. Isometric is great but is there a benefit to resistance in the fully contracted position also? I dont know, thats why I was asking.
You are correct on the hip flexors with hanging leg raises and L-sits- it's one reason I have bad L sits.... BUT. That being said- I find I'm still using significantly more ab in BOTH those exercises along with the hip flexors- vs a sit up where I can hip flexor my way through practically the whole thing- and the reduced back risk.
Trade offs are made everywhere.0 -
mustgetmuscles1 wrote: »Anecdata, but I have a grumpy lower back and crunches exacerbate it. And they are hard on my neck as well and just very uncomfortable (not in a good way).
Yeah Im not saying to do them or not do them. I was just curious about the very strong stance against them.
Sit-ups work hip flexors is a common reason they suck for abs. But then L sits and hanging leg raises get recommended. Im pretty sure those are hip flexor dominant also. JoRocka pointed out they are better because they dont have an added risk that a sit-up might have. That makes sense to me but then the reason wasnt because it was a hip flexor but because it had an injury risk from loaded spinal flexion.
I like knowing what a muscles function is and then trying to work it in that path through its range of motion. Isometric is great but is there a benefit to resistance in the fully contracted position also? I dont know, thats why I was asking.
You are correct on the hip flexors with hanging leg raises and L-sits- it's one reason I have bad L sits.... BUT. That being said- I find I'm still using significantly more ab in BOTH those exercises along with the hip flexors- vs a sit up where I can hip flexor my way through practically the whole thing- and the reduced back risk.
Trade offs are made everywhere.
That makes sense. From the added leverage of long legs the resistance should be greater than using the upper body from the other end. Even if the motion is similar.0 -
Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »
The OP asked for ab work and you prescribed squats and deadlifts. No?No one here said they were.
You seem to have a hangup about squats and deadlifts, since you're not criticizing anyone else for their suggestions of any of the other activities. Cherimoose said they were central to strength programs -- which they are -- not that they are the be-all, end-all of core work, nor that they are the only things out there for that task. Just like no one else is implying that the one or two things they suggested are the be-all, end-all of core training.
For the OP -- don't forget that the abs you can see with sufficiently low body fat aren't the only part of the core. So don't forget exercises that work the rest of the muscles in the core area.
Check out wood choppers and heel touches.0 -
mustgetmuscles1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »The best thing you can do for your core is compound lifting movements. Beyond that I do plank variations, cable chops (I prefer kneeling), swiss ball jacknives, and hanging leg raises.
Sit-ups and crunches are just about the worst thing you could do and the only reason to do them really is if you have to PT qual for armed forces/law enforcement/emergency responder, etc.
I do a lot of Oly stuff so my core is pretty engaged throughout my primary workout...so I focus on that first and foremost. If I have time and I'm not completely shot to *kitten*, I throw in some extra core work. I also do plank variations pretty much daily...usually how I start my day off.
I hear this a lot. What is the reason that crunches and sit ups get such a bad reputation?
If I do a full crunch, I feel it in my C7 area pretty bad...it seems there are two camps, ones who think that all of the spinal flexion is bad and the other which doesn't so much think so. I fall into the first category I guess, mostly from personal experience.
When I was in the military we just did gazillions of sit-ups and crunches and by experience I can say that all of the other core stuff I do now seems to be far more beneficial and I don't have any pain.
0 -
Dragonwolf wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »
The OP asked for ab work and you prescribed squats and deadlifts. No?No one here said they were.
You seem to have a hangup about squats and deadlifts, since you're not criticizing anyone else for their suggestions of any of the other activities. Cherimoose said they were central to strength programs -- which they are -- not that they are the be-all, end-all of core work, nor that they are the only things out there for that task. Just like no one else is implying that the one or two things they suggested are the be-all, end-all of core training.
For the OP -- don't forget that the abs you can see with sufficiently low body fat aren't the only part of the core. So don't forget exercises that work the rest of the muscles in the core area.
Check out wood choppers and heel touches.
he doesn't have a hang up about it- he just thinks that squats and dead lifts are not the only answer for ab exercises.
For many people- developing their compound base lifts will get them a lot further than 100 sit ups.
BUT- that doesn't mean we can just blow off ab exercises. I'm a firm believer in compounds- but I still (under great protest) do ab work. Much like under great duress I do cardio.0 -
Dragonwolf wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »
The OP asked for ab work and you prescribed squats and deadlifts. No?No one here said they were.
You seem to have a hangup about squats and deadlifts, since you're not criticizing anyone else for their suggestions of any of the other activities. Cherimoose said they were central to strength programs -- which they are -- not that they are the be-all, end-all of core work, nor that they are the only things out there for that task. Just like no one else is implying that the one or two things they suggested are the be-all, end-all of core training.
For the OP -- don't forget that the abs you can see with sufficiently low body fat aren't the only part of the core. So don't forget exercises that work the rest of the muscles in the core area.
Check out wood choppers and heel touches.
I have a 400lb squat and I think they are the single best exercise that can be done for functional strength and athletic performance. Squats are essential to a maximal strength plans but there are many forms of strength training and the squat and deadlift are not essential to all. To be honest, that's not even true of maximal strength programs because it depends on what your goals are. However, with that being said they are not appropriate for everybody to start training with on Day 1, although obviously many people can. The majority of people can be progressed into the squat eventually with an improvement in their mobility, strength of core musculature, and strengthening of antagonist muscles. Additionally and although they do require recruitment of Core musculature, some (not a ton) additional core work is required to further improve core strength. Core strength is very important in walking and just being able to move throughout one's everyday activities and squatting does not fix all of it. My thoughts on core training have nothing to do with 6-pack abs either; it's basically for the purpose of not hurting one's self in the gym, on the field, or just bending over to pick-up your kids.0 -
Dragonwolf wrote: »Sam_I_Am77 wrote: »
The OP asked for ab work and you prescribed squats and deadlifts. No?No one here said they were.
You seem to have a hangup about squats and deadlifts, since you're not criticizing anyone else for their suggestions of any of the other activities. Cherimoose said they were central to strength programs -- which they are -- not that they are the be-all, end-all of core work, nor that they are the only things out there for that task. Just like no one else is implying that the one or two things they suggested are the be-all, end-all of core training.
For the OP -- don't forget that the abs you can see with sufficiently low body fat aren't the only part of the core. So don't forget exercises that work the rest of the muscles in the core area.
Check out wood choppers and heel touches.
Ya this is why I recommend the Awkward Airplane (apologies for not putting this in the original reply) - when I do it I feel that "girdle" tightening all the way around my core - front, sides and back. I haven't found a move that feels anything like it.
0 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »mustgetmuscles1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »The best thing you can do for your core is compound lifting movements. Beyond that I do plank variations, cable chops (I prefer kneeling), swiss ball jacknives, and hanging leg raises.
Sit-ups and crunches are just about the worst thing you could do and the only reason to do them really is if you have to PT qual for armed forces/law enforcement/emergency responder, etc.
I do a lot of Oly stuff so my core is pretty engaged throughout my primary workout...so I focus on that first and foremost. If I have time and I'm not completely shot to *kitten*, I throw in some extra core work. I also do plank variations pretty much daily...usually how I start my day off.
I hear this a lot. What is the reason that crunches and sit ups get such a bad reputation?
If I do a full crunch, I feel it in my C7 area pretty bad...it seems there are two camps, ones who think that all of the spinal flexion is bad and the other which doesn't so much think so. I fall into the first category I guess, mostly from personal experience.
When I was in the military we just did gazillions of sit-ups and crunches and by experience I can say that all of the other core stuff I do now seems to be far more beneficial and I don't have any pain.
That makes sense. Sit-ups and crunches are some of those exercises that people seem to take to an extreme number of reps.
I think it would be different if people were doing 3 sets of 10 reps and progressively loading a few times per week than someone doing 50-100+ in one set over and over everyday. I would think any exercise would eventually wear you down doing that though.
0 -
I do roll-outs and get sore almost every time. I dont feel any strain in my neck but it does require strong upper body. Also I use the good old stability/fitness ball alot, and use it with a 10 pound weight behind my head. Planks, yes! Reverse crunch with power (shooting the legs up to the sky then bringing them parallel to the floor (like in 6 inches)0
-
do leg raises or L sits- way safer- and promote more growth in other places as well.
and isn't a hip flexor a tendon?
Sure, or mountain climbers, cable from kicks or whatnot. I'm not saying that sit-ups are a marvellous exercise, I'm just saying that it isn't bad because it mostly stresses the hip flexors.
"Hip flexor" is usually used as a collective term for describing the muscles connecting the pelvis/spine to the thighs. Just like the term "rotator cuff" describes the myriad of small muscles and tendons in your shoulder.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 400 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 990 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions