bodyweighted excercises

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Jul, 16 2005 @ 12:36 AM
link   
so i wonder if anyone here is going to try to do body weighted exercises for a month or more, that is where u don’t use weights but your own body to train.

just incase your thinking about it let me tell u the benefits of . unlike using weights that can injure u, your body is like a tool and can be used t o train it ( that sounded weird) but anyway some benefits of doing them are increased muscular endurance, strength without the addition of huge massive muscles, u still get a good body and it does look good, flexibility, and i can guarantee there will be no muscle cramping..

if u don’t believe me just think of what boxers do, they don’t touch weights they only use there body, that’s why they can last those rounds

And there is also a site www.mattfurey.com...

Here u can find information on allot of exercises and if u need any just post and i can give u a routine. or some exercises that can get u into shape for high school sport or just for being a good athlete








posted on Jul, 16 2005 @ 12:38 AM
link   
also did u no that the army uses these kind of excercises, think about that, we use them in wrestling and in mma.



posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 04:35 PM
link   
Yes that is all we use in Muay Thai. We try to avoid weights and such since they tend to bulk me up. Since you are in MMA you know how much work it takes to keep weight.



posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 06:19 PM
link   
While bodyweight exercises are good for a newbie, or when weights aren't available, weight training is still superior for strength and muscle mass. The old belief for many athletes such as boxers was that lifting would make you "musclebound" and therefore you would lose speed for muscle. This is wrong, and these days almost all serious athletes train with weights for increased performance. And weights do strengthen tendons, ligaments, increase flexibility (unless you are trying to seriously bulk up, and add mass that can restrict your movements). You can lift weights and gain lots of strength without adding mass if that is your goal...it mainly depends on what you eat.

That said, probably the best exercises using bodyweight only, are chin-ups, dips, and one-leg squats. Between these 3 exercises, you basically get a full body workout. Do each one for a few sets, 2 days a week, and you will notice it. But after some time of doing these, you will probably want to add weight...



posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by ned316
also did u no that the army uses these kind of excercises, think about that, we use them in wrestling and in mma.


The army doesn't train you for strength...they train for endurance. Any time you can perform an exercise for more than 12-15 reps, you are training the muscle fibers for endurance and not strength. So if you just do a bunch of push-ups, you won't really gain any strength, unless you start off only being able to do a few of them. When I started "working out" I would just do push-ups and crunches, which was a terrible routine, but I didn't really know any better at the time. I think I was able to do around 75 push-ups, but I was still really weak, probably couldn't even bench 100 pounds at the time. Since lifting though, a dramatic strength/power increase is noticeable.



posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 09:01 PM
link   
ok well that is true, but the army trains almost every day especially the new recrutes, and not only that but what do u think when u do high sets of pushups and hindu squats, u gain muscular endurence and yes u do gain strength, i mean how do u think boxers stay in the ring for like ten rounds befor being knocked out. and also if u ever watched pridefc thats like mma sport and like most of the fighters use bodyweight excercises to stay fit and fast, there is a exception i mean mark kurr was like the strongest fighter ever and he used weights so weights are all good, but i still prefer bodyweight excercises.

ok it is good to go into like a cycle of doin like weight liftin for like 5 months then bodyweight excercises for tlike 5 months and just doin that.


just listen to mike

www.bodybuilding.com...



posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by ned316
i mean how do u think boxers stay in the ring for like ten rounds befor being knocked out. and also if u ever watched pridefc thats like mma sport and like most of the fighters use bodyweight excercises to stay fit and fast, there is a exception i mean mark kurr was like the strongest fighter ever and he used weights so weights are all good, but i still prefer bodyweight excercises.


Most boxers and fighters lift weights...bodyweight exercises are a part of the routine, but most strength and muscle size comes from lifting weights. And staying in the ring for ten rounds is because of cardiovascular endurance, which is why boxers run miles and miles to stay in good cardio shape. Bodyweight exercises have their part, but if you want serious strength gains, you need to go beyond that and lift heavy weights.



posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shoktek
Most boxers and fighters lift weights...bodyweight exercises are a part of the routine, but most strength and muscle size comes from lifting weights. And staying in the ring for ten rounds is because of cardiovascular endurance, which is why boxers run miles and miles to stay in good cardio shape. Bodyweight exercises have their part, but if you want serious strength gains, you need to go beyond that and lift heavy weights.


I have to respectfully disagree. There is a place for weights in a fighter’s regimen, but it is not as important as you think. A fighter’s technique, flexibility and speed are far more important. Weights have little to no effect on these abilities.
I do not know a single fighter who uses weights more than once or twice a week. I will tell you that every one of us use bodyweight exercise everyday.
Weights are good for increasing your brute strength and are awesome for adding bulk. But I have no desire to increase bulk. I have to balance adding strength with maintaining my weight. I think it is a matter of perspective.

From your posts I take it that you lift often and that is great. But your undue focus on weights is typical of someone who has not trained. Heck the fist six months you are discouraged from throwing real strength in any strikes of kicks. The reasoning is simple; you have to develop muscle memory. It does not matter if you are very strong. A sloppy strike or kick causes your muscles to work against themselves and there by decreases your power.

Give you a personal example. My father and I train together. He is 6’ and weighs 240+lbs. I am 6’2” and weight 190+lbs. While I have never seen 300lbs on a bench, he works with almost 400lbs. Even with obvious differences between us; I strike and kick as hard if not harder than he does. Why? Because my speed and technique are better. To be fair I am younger and if we could ever focus on his technique and muscle memory he would be vicious. Of course it is far easier to lift than to learn the proper techniques involved in striking and kicking.

If someone wants to bulk up by all means use weights. If you want to learn how to fight, avoid it for at least a year and focus on your technique and use bodyweight exercises. Get a trainer then slowly add it in to your regimen.


[edit on 20-7-2005 by Imperium Americana]



posted on Jul, 21 2005 @ 12:02 AM
link   
yes, u see bodyweight excercises actually help your body in gaining flexibility.

Imperium Americana i can see u have alot of knowledge about muscle memory and training. My cousin and i have been interested in this stuff since we were kids, i reacenty got the bas rutten tech. video dealing withground and above ground tech. for fighting. if your interested u can just google it and find it and order or download it. its good because he uses mui tai tech and other tackticsfor self defence, but mostly its just for mma.

its a great video full of info...



posted on Jul, 21 2005 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Imperium Americana
I have to respectfully disagree. There is a place for weights in a fighter’s regimen, but it is not as important as you think. A fighter’s technique, flexibility and speed are far more important. Weights have little to no effect on these abilities.
I do not know a single fighter who uses weights more than once or twice a week. I will tell you that every one of us use bodyweight exercise everyday.
Weights are good for increasing your brute strength and are awesome for adding bulk. But I have no desire to increase bulk. I have to balance adding strength with maintaining my weight. I think it is a matter of perspective.

From your posts I take it that you lift often and that is great. But your undue focus on weights is typical of someone who has not trained. Heck the fist six months you are discouraged from throwing real strength in any strikes of kicks. The reasoning is simple; you have to develop muscle memory. It does not matter if you are very strong. A sloppy strike or kick causes your muscles to work against themselves and there by decreases your power.

Give you a personal example. My father and I train together. He is 6’ and weighs 240+lbs. I am 6’2” and weight 190+lbs. While I have never seen 300lbs on a bench, he works with almost 400lbs. Even with obvious differences between us; I strike and kick as hard if not harder than he does. Why? Because my speed and technique are better. To be fair I am younger and if we could ever focus on his technique and muscle memory he would be vicious. Of course it is far easier to lift than to learn the proper techniques involved in striking and kicking.


Haha...you make it sound like I tried to say that lifting will make someone a good fighter/boxer. And that of course is not true, yes, technique and conditioning determine whether or not you are succesful in any sport. But as for the purpose of adding actual strength, weight training is far superior to bodyweight exercises.



posted on Jul, 21 2005 @ 09:05 AM
link   
Look at Holyfield and Tyson...two of the best boxers from a few years ago. Both got the extra strength/power/size edge by lifting heavy weights. Holyfield was in his prime, and stronger than ever, after he started a good weight training program.

And gaining weight does give you a harder punch, as long as you don't lose any speed because of it. Force=Mass*Acceleration....provided that two boxers punch at the same speed, the one who can put more weight behind it will have a harder punch. Lifting on its own doesn't just make you huge...you have to eat a lot for that to happen. But it will add strength no matter what, and you can add explosive power with different exercises.



posted on Jul, 21 2005 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shoktek
Look at Holyfield and Tyson...two of the best boxers from a few years ago. Both got the extra strength/power/size edge by lifting heavy weights. Holyfield was in his prime, and stronger than ever, after he started a good weight training program.

And gaining weight does give you a harder punch, as long as you don't lose any speed because of it. Force=Mass*Acceleration....provided that two boxers punch at the same speed, the one who can put more weight behind it will have a harder punch. Lifting on its own doesn't just make you huge...you have to eat a lot for that to happen. But it will add strength no matter what, and you can add explosive power with different exercises.


No lifting does not make you huge, but it will add some bulk. At 190-195lbs I can cut weight down to 185 and thus compete in the cruiser weight class. Since I am already over my weight class and due to my lean frame, I can not cut weight as well as a Endomorph. This is why I only work with weight on Fridays and Sundays. Mondays is my day off. I am training Tuesday-Saturday.
I will agree that weight increases strength, but it is iso-strength. The best work out is to use bodyweight and add in free weight. Using machines hurt you since there is no fine muscle control. But hey that is just my $.02.

I was more responding to you comment that most fighters use weights. That is just not true. The reason is that there is so much more to fighting, other than strength, that are harder to master. It really is not even up to the fighter. I do not set up my workouts, my trainer does.

Using Holyfield and Tyson are not applicable since were at the top of their class. Once you get that high up, you are using everything to help you win. Even if we factor in your examples, remember that they worked out 6-8 hours a day. During those 6-8 hours they would work with weight maybe and hour and a half. That leaves a gross majority of their time working on speed, techniques and flexibility.

To be fair, I do use weights. But I use bodyweight exercises everyday far more frequently. And you are right about the going rounds. I work on stamina by timed heavy bag work and running 4-6miles every day; not by bodyweight exercises.


[edit on 21-7-2005 by Imperium Americana]



posted on Jul, 21 2005 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Imperium Americana
The best work out is to use bodyweight and add in free weight. Using machines hurt you since there is no fine muscle control. But hey that is just my $.02.


Well, of course...machines are worthless, the real benefits from lifting are when you do power lifts or olympic lifts. And to say that lifting affects speed is just not true either. College and pro football players are some of the most quick and agile athletes out there, and they all spend lots of time lifting hard in the gym....those players can bench, squat, and deadlift several hundred pounds, and it only helps their explosive power and speed.



posted on Jul, 21 2005 @ 11:18 AM
link   
Another good example of lifting applying to sports, is developing core strength. Core strength meaning your abdomen and lower back muscles, which support your entire upper body. Lots of people will do hundreds of sit-ups or crunches, thinking they are training their abs, when in reality you aren't doing anything to improve core strength. Exercises like these do not develop functional core strength at all. The only way to really train these muscles is by lifting or supporting heavy weights, such as by doing deadlifts or squats. These exercises improve your core strength a LOT, just by making them work harder to keep your upperbody upright and in position with extra weight. And having good core strength is one of the most important things in any sport where you have body contact.



posted on Jul, 21 2005 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shoktek
Another good example of lifting applying to sports, is developing core strength. Core strength meaning your abdomen and lower back muscles, which support your entire upper body. Lots of people will do hundreds of sit-ups or crunches, thinking they are training their abs, when in reality you aren't doing anything to improve core strength. Exercises like these do not develop functional core strength at all. The only way to really train these muscles is by lifting or supporting heavy weights, such as by doing deadlifts or squats. These exercises improve your core strength a LOT, just by making them work harder to keep your upperbody upright and in position with extra weight. And having good core strength is one of the most important things in any sport where you have body contact.


It is obvious that you lift, and as I have said before, that is great; but to throw out all body weight exercises, like saying crunches do not help core strength at all, is simply ridiculous. I am not in the "All you need is body weight" camp, but there are some legit reason why (in some cases) body weight is superior to lifting.

As far as core strength is concerned, body weight will strengthen your muscles fine...to a point. We start out with crunches and supermans and such but we progress from there. A good medicine ball will do wonders. To be fair that is a form of weight so you may discount it.

When it comes to body weight, the trick is to continual up the ante for your muscles. And be sure that exercise is done correctly. Like a strike or a kick, may people get sloppy when they are tired. It is better to do less reps correctly. Also one must example is that we start doing traditional sit-ups. We then progress to a 45 degree incline bench. Now we are doing hanging crunched while being hit in the stomach with a kick pad. A couple of guys had seen us doing these and wanted to try them. They were quite muscular and had been working out lifting for years. Best of the three was only able to do 5. I can do 30 per set.

I think the point of all this is that if you want to be truly fit, you must do both. We can disagree with what should be done more, but we should both agree that anything Ned316 does is better than nothing.



posted on Jul, 21 2005 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Yea, both have their benefits, and also, you have to just use whatever works best for you...but I still stand where I say that for strength/power/muscle applications, free weights (or adding weight to a bodyweight exercise) is superior.

Bodyweight exercises, imo, are better for training power...you can do explosive push-ups where you bring your hands up and clap on each rep for a more explosive punch...you can do explosive squats to train for power on the start of a sprint. And chin-ups and dips are two of the best exercises you can do in any workout, although I like to add weight when I do them...but, to each his own.



posted on Jul, 23 2005 @ 07:43 PM
link   
Personally, I like a combination of both bodyweight and weight-training exercises. Bodyweight exercises can build strength superior to weights if done correctly. Doing regular pushups and situps builds more endurance. But try doing lots of one-arm pushups, or one-arm dive-bomber pushups, or one-arm handstand pushups, or planche pushups. Try lever pullups. Try pistols (full one-legged squats). Try gymnastic ring training. Do handstand pushups on gymnastic rings, do the iron cross, do lever pullups with rings, do planches on rings, do lots of muscle-ups on rings. Do the hanging leg raise, which requires real abdominal strength. Also, do bridging.

A workout regimen consisting of the above, combined with exercises such as the deadlift (lower back strength) as there really aren't any good bodyweight exercises for developing lower-back strength, and barbell squats, and hamstring curls, and you will mold a physique stronger than most anything anyone develops through pure weight training. You will actually have a physique of unparalled strength, and you will be able to do movements that most people didn't even know the human body is capable of doing.

Pumping lots of one-arm dive-bomber pushups requires some real strength. Or try one-arm pullups. That takes some real strength as well. Planche pushups in a gym will havep eople staring in disbelief.

Another form of weight training that is excellent is kettle-bell training, but training with kettle bells requires different lifts than with dumbells and barbells.

Training with dumbells and barbells, you have to distinguish from pure bodybuilding movements and strength-building movements. If you do the benchpress, barbell squats, deadlifts, clean and press, military press, etc....you won't get all chisiled up as you aren't training to shape your muscles, but you will gain a lot of strength.

Oh yes, and acrobatics and HANDSTANDS and walking on the hands, they are great.



posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 04:02 PM
link   
wow i cant emagen that kind of strength, i no Planche pushups are hard, i think there is only one guy i no that does them and thats bboy junior hes a brake dancer.

do u do these i mean thry seem hard, i couldnt be able to stabalize myself when doing divebomber one hand . i mean that is hard how do u do it

just a thought bbut have u read the naked worrior by pavel.

man that guy is a beast


[edit on 25-7-2005 by ned316]



posted on Jul, 29 2005 @ 11:43 AM
link   
Pavel's "Naked Warrior" is okay I think, but definitely NOT worth the $40 asking price for that kind of stuff. Most of the stuff he tells about in it one could learn off the internet, but even stuff you can't, the book is still far too thin for that kind of money, in my opinion. If it was $20, I'd buy it or if I had a steady incom, I'd buy it regardless, just for the sake of having it, but right now I am broke : (





new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join