Core Muscles

2»

Replies

  • rybo
    rybo Posts: 5,424 Member
    psuLemon wrote: »
    elskeleton wrote: »
    Anybody know any good core exercises I can do alone without equipment? I wanna be able to do something On The Spot.

    Compound exercises are great for the core, but require equipment.

    I like to do bodyweight crunches (knees bent at 90-degree angle and elbows to knees, focus on breathing and holding a tight core), bodyweight scissor crunches, hanging leg raises or knee ups are amazing as well. Planks and oblique planks rock.

    If you have a small dumbbell or kettlebell (I like to use 20-25 lbs.) you can do weighted double crunches (lay flat out - arms extended - and bend knees to a 90-degree angle at the same time you pull the weight up in a crunch motion) and v-ups (lay flat out, arms extended again, and pull legs up - keeping them straight - while also lifting the weight to your toes). Tons of other weighted stuff you can do using the cable machine at the gym too!

    No, they really aren't.. while there is a little core engagement, they are mediocre at best.

    That's MFP blasphemy!
    But nice to see someone reputable say it.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,373 MFP Moderator
    rybo wrote: »
    psuLemon wrote: »
    elskeleton wrote: »
    Anybody know any good core exercises I can do alone without equipment? I wanna be able to do something On The Spot.

    Compound exercises are great for the core, but require equipment.

    I like to do bodyweight crunches (knees bent at 90-degree angle and elbows to knees, focus on breathing and holding a tight core), bodyweight scissor crunches, hanging leg raises or knee ups are amazing as well. Planks and oblique planks rock.

    If you have a small dumbbell or kettlebell (I like to use 20-25 lbs.) you can do weighted double crunches (lay flat out - arms extended - and bend knees to a 90-degree angle at the same time you pull the weight up in a crunch motion) and v-ups (lay flat out, arms extended again, and pull legs up - keeping them straight - while also lifting the weight to your toes). Tons of other weighted stuff you can do using the cable machine at the gym too!

    No, they really aren't.. while there is a little core engagement, they are mediocre at best.

    That's MFP blasphemy!
    But nice to see someone reputable say it.

    I wasn't trying to be mean but doing compound moves is the equivalent of doing a bro split... It "works" but its just not as effective as doing core moves.
  • peaceout_aly
    peaceout_aly Posts: 2,018 Member
    psuLemon wrote: »
    rybo wrote: »
    psuLemon wrote: »
    elskeleton wrote: »
    Anybody know any good core exercises I can do alone without equipment? I wanna be able to do something On The Spot.

    Compound exercises are great for the core, but require equipment.

    I like to do bodyweight crunches (knees bent at 90-degree angle and elbows to knees, focus on breathing and holding a tight core), bodyweight scissor crunches, hanging leg raises or knee ups are amazing as well. Planks and oblique planks rock.

    If you have a small dumbbell or kettlebell (I like to use 20-25 lbs.) you can do weighted double crunches (lay flat out - arms extended - and bend knees to a 90-degree angle at the same time you pull the weight up in a crunch motion) and v-ups (lay flat out, arms extended again, and pull legs up - keeping them straight - while also lifting the weight to your toes). Tons of other weighted stuff you can do using the cable machine at the gym too!

    No, they really aren't.. while there is a little core engagement, they are mediocre at best.

    That's MFP blasphemy!
    But nice to see someone reputable say it.

    I wasn't trying to be mean but doing compound moves is the equivalent of doing a bro split... It "works" but its just not as effective as doing core moves.

    Oh for sure. Nothing compares to weighted ab routines like cable crunches, etc. I'm just saying when I originally started seeing abs (after doing large amounts of bodyweight core routines) it was after significantly increasing my DL and squat. Different for everyone, I guess.
  • sardelsa
    sardelsa Posts: 9,812 Member
    psuLemon wrote: »
    rybo wrote: »
    psuLemon wrote: »
    elskeleton wrote: »
    Anybody know any good core exercises I can do alone without equipment? I wanna be able to do something On The Spot.

    Compound exercises are great for the core, but require equipment.

    I like to do bodyweight crunches (knees bent at 90-degree angle and elbows to knees, focus on breathing and holding a tight core), bodyweight scissor crunches, hanging leg raises or knee ups are amazing as well. Planks and oblique planks rock.

    If you have a small dumbbell or kettlebell (I like to use 20-25 lbs.) you can do weighted double crunches (lay flat out - arms extended - and bend knees to a 90-degree angle at the same time you pull the weight up in a crunch motion) and v-ups (lay flat out, arms extended again, and pull legs up - keeping them straight - while also lifting the weight to your toes). Tons of other weighted stuff you can do using the cable machine at the gym too!

    No, they really aren't.. while there is a little core engagement, they are mediocre at best.

    That's MFP blasphemy!
    But nice to see someone reputable say it.

    I wasn't trying to be mean but doing compound moves is the equivalent of doing a bro split... It "works" but its just not as effective as doing core moves.

    Yea I rarely do core work during a bulk. And my lack of ab development shows when I cut. While I've built some abs it is pretty much the bare minimum amount from the compound lifts.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,373 MFP Moderator
    psuLemon wrote: »
    rybo wrote: »
    psuLemon wrote: »
    elskeleton wrote: »
    Anybody know any good core exercises I can do alone without equipment? I wanna be able to do something On The Spot.

    Compound exercises are great for the core, but require equipment.

    I like to do bodyweight crunches (knees bent at 90-degree angle and elbows to knees, focus on breathing and holding a tight core), bodyweight scissor crunches, hanging leg raises or knee ups are amazing as well. Planks and oblique planks rock.

    If you have a small dumbbell or kettlebell (I like to use 20-25 lbs.) you can do weighted double crunches (lay flat out - arms extended - and bend knees to a 90-degree angle at the same time you pull the weight up in a crunch motion) and v-ups (lay flat out, arms extended again, and pull legs up - keeping them straight - while also lifting the weight to your toes). Tons of other weighted stuff you can do using the cable machine at the gym too!

    No, they really aren't.. while there is a little core engagement, they are mediocre at best.

    That's MFP blasphemy!
    But nice to see someone reputable say it.

    I wasn't trying to be mean but doing compound moves is the equivalent of doing a bro split... It "works" but its just not as effective as doing core moves.

    Oh for sure. Nothing compares to weighted ab routines like cable crunches, etc. I'm just saying when I originally started seeing abs (after doing large amounts of bodyweight core routines) it was after significantly increasing my DL and squat. Different for everyone, I guess.

    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.
  • sgt1372
    sgt1372 Posts: 3,971 Member
    edited June 2018
    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.
  • Davidsdottir
    Davidsdottir Posts: 1,285 Member
    I tried the ab roller at my gym once. I fell flat on my face.
  • LiftHeavyThings27105
    LiftHeavyThings27105 Posts: 2,086 Member
    My abs became much stronger from bracing for squats and deadlifts. But....I dont doubt, generally speaking, that a proper abs regime would be all the difference in the world. And...we will find out soon. About to add abs to the training session.....w/o squats or deadlifts (need to avoid for a bit).
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,373 MFP Moderator
    edited June 2018
    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.
  • jseams1234
    jseams1234 Posts: 1,216 Member
    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
  • 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: 38,373 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.