Low-High Rotary Press

We use these at my gym, but Bret Contreras has just put up a nice video of these - the low-high rotary press.



What do I need for this? You'll need a cable stack and a stiff pole attachment (although you may be able to DIY one with a wooden dowel, some foam covering, and an eye-ring screw).

Why do I want to do these? This is a useful exercise for a couple of reasons - it's got both a pushing and pulling element in one movement, which isn't common. Plus it's rotational. Take a good look though - the lower back isn't rotating, he's rotating at the hips. This forces the abs and lower back to counter the rotational pull (like a Russian twist, full-contact twist, or a Pallof press) as you work through the motion.

I've been meaning to find a good video of these to post, but Mr. Contreras helped me out courtesy of me being a subscriber to his Youttube channel.

Share

Making weight in the US military

I just read an Army Times article (in USA Today) about making weight, in order to make the stay-in-service weight standards, in the US military.

Study: Soldiers use extreme methods to meet military weight rules

In short - soldiers trying to reach the Army weight standards are using liposuction, extreme diets, diet pills, and pre-weigh-in starvation to avoid discharge for failure to meet standards.

What's interesting is that if you don't make weight, they'll "tape" you - use a tape measure calculation to estimate body fat percentage. One soldier who regularly chose that method wrote an article about weight training in the military over on Starting Strength. That article, by the way, not only describes the "tape test" but also the weight/body fat standards in great detail.

These standards - especially the body fat standards - are not crazy. What is, is the fact that soldiers are using such extreme methods to pass the test, that it works, and that getting taped is clearly considered defacto failure even though the body fat standards aren't that high. A 21-27 year old male's max body fat is 22%; a female of the same age has a maximum of 32%. Neither is crazy; they're probably within the range of doable by many of the soldiers not making the strict weight standard. But it's easier to avoid taking that chance and just starving down.

As someone who makes weight for competition, I recognize some of the methods. But it seems crazy . . . do you really want soldiers who make a strict weight standard by starvation? Do you want them to have to? Shouldn't the body fat percentage be the more important standard than weight?

Nonetheless, it's clear that scale weight is still the end-all be-all of the public's and government's standards of health.

Share

New Gentilcore article at T-Nation

Tony Gentilcore of Cressey Performance wrote a new article over on T-Nation (formerly T-Muscle, and formerly T-Nation before that).

This article includes a few things I like to see:

- anti-rotation exercises for your torso muscles. A major (perhaps the major) role for your abs and lower back is preventing unwanted movement. These types of moves address those.

- body saws. A great, great anti-flexion exercise for the torso. Grab a pair of furniture sliders and feel the awful burn of your abs trying to keep you stable. These are a staple of my client's training once they've mastered the basic plank, and if you try them you'll see why.

- single-leg exercises. In this case, step-ups with the weight forward. I actually prefer to do these with a sandbag than with a barbell, but for most of the same reasons he mentions.

- goblet squats. A favorite of Dan John, and a great (and easy!) way to teach proper squat mechanics.

- shoulder stabilization work. Lots of athletes need to work on shoulder stabilization, and while these exercises seem easy and almost pointlessly wimpy, they are not. They help provide a base for improved strength and fitness.

In general Tony Gentilecore writes excellent articles. This one is no exception, and these exercises are well explained, each has a video, and the reasoning behind each one is fully covered. If you have any interest in the above, it's worth the time to read it.

Share

More planks!

There is a new article on my single favorite abdominal stabilization exercise over on Elite FTS - the plank.

Power to the Plank

This article covers the basics - why plank? How do I do it? What's the benefits and how do I make it harder once I'm good at it?

Share

Band-resisted rope climbing

I occasionally train at the same time as this guy, Jay Nerys. His workouts are always incredibly intense and very creative.

Here he is doing a band-resisted rope climb.



Amazing stuff from a really great guy - more than once he's helped me fix my kettlebell form and urged me on when I'm having a rough workout.

Share

Correcting Bad Posture

Eric Cressey has started a new series of posts called "Stretegies for Correcting Bad Posture."

Part I is here and additional parts are on the way.

If you've got a slouch you'd like to correct, start there.

Share

Calories matter, but so do where they come from. Here are a couple of articles that help demonstrate that.

A nice bracketing study was done in Denmark on different macronutrient breakdowns with the same kcal total.

It was written up nicely in Business Week.

Basically, a lower glycemic index - foods that don't spike your blood-sugar level - seems to have a longer-term benefit in terms of keeping lost weight off. This isn't going to be news to Precision Nutrition fans or athletes used to cutting weight. But it's nice to see it starting to get some mainstream coverage.

I can't say I'm a fan or non-fan of Weight Watchers. I've tried to prioritize "healthy food" over "caloric totals" in my own life and in my advice to friends, family, and clients. But it seems like they've begun to move over to a new system that puts emphasis on where the calories come from as well as how many calories you consume.

Time featured this article.
The idea that 100 kcals of fruit or vegetables isn't worth "points" - i.e. has no significant impact on your daily caloric totals - is pretty significant. 100 kcals of cookies isn't the same as 100 kcals of blueberries. The totals still matter, but it seems like WW doesn't want people to cut down their calories by cutting down their nutritious, fibrous, filling fruits and veggies. If that is indeed the case, it's got to be a good thing. Just as long as people don't find a way to count fruit leather as fruit and green candy as veggies, I suppose . . .

Share