Preparing Raw Strength with CST

[Coach Flanagan]

Preparing Raw Strength with CST

Maintaining optimum fitness is an ongoing process. Just as you want to cycle your exercises appropriately to avoid over compensations, you will inevitably need to reassess your attribute deficiencies and start up a new THP for that attribute. What determines whether a given attribute is lacking though? Does everyone need to be able to perform 100 push ups to be fit? Or squat 3x their bodyweight? Or how about swinging 2 25 lb Clubbells for repetitions? All these goals may be fun to pursue and contribute to something of value, but they are completely irrelevant if these goals don’t apply to you.

Evaluate your task, define the attributes you need for it, define the movement patterns required. Now figure out which of the required movements and attributes are where you are lacking. It’s really that simple. Let’s say you’re a Boxer and you have great wind and can throw lightning fast punches but even with great biomechanics you are not landing much damage. In this case, certainly an attribute deficiency could be strength.

So what's the solution? Does this fighter need to hit the bench and squat rack and just perform grinds until his next fight? Definatly not – completely different types of strength. Could maximum strength exercises be beneficial? Absolutely they could be. Depending on the athlete and his specific challenges, performing some maximum strength grinding movements may be beneficial to teach him how to generate strength. But, after refining his skill of strength, he needs to make that strength speed-specific. In addition, the movements themselves need to become more specific.

A little bit of a colorful analogy: Creating appropriate fitness for a specific task is a lot like creating a meal. You create a list of ingredients you need, check to see what ingredients you already have, go pick up the ones you lack, and prepare it step by step. Let’s say a friend of yours is going to pick up everything you need to prepare a meal. You want to make Chicken Parmesan but have no ingredients. So what if the friend goes to the store and just brings you back 2 pounds of raw chicken? Is that of any service to you? Sure the raw chicken is a necessary component in this particular recipe, but it still needs to be breaded and sautéed in olive oil among other things. Just as raw chicken would be useless in this example, developing raw strength without preparing it into anything of value is also a useless task.

So let’s say for whatever reason that the previously mentioned Boxer needs to develop his slow grinding strength. How do you address this? By following a proper progression using the Training Hierarchy Pyramid. For brevity’s sake, I’m leaving out the top of the pyramid – mental/emotional preparedness in the example below.

GPP – here you address any deficiencies in attributes that are impacting performance. In this case, grinding strength is a deficiency that when addressed will help increase progress in other aspects of the training cycle. You lay your foundation. In this case you are laying the foundation with grinding strength.

SPP – Here you take the strength you developed and make it specific to the required attribute. Since the issue is that you are not hitting hard enough and you already developed your skill of strength generation, you’ll now pressure test those skills and become more explosive. Olympic lifts may have some value here for a limited time for developing the explosive strength, but SPP is also the time to include safety valve exercises for when movement deviates. Movements with a greater range of motion than Olympic lifts will become critical.

A/SSP - Active/Sport Specific Preperation. Here all barbell work in this example should cease completely. In this example, the athlete needs to be stronger in his strikes than previously but he should be able to maintain approximately the same speed as before – otherwise that strength is useless. This phase of training needs to be velocity specific and incorporate the types of sophisticated movements that would be required for the sport. Here you need tools that offer enough freedom to accomplish the movements and velocity required – that may mean bodyweight, bands, Clubbells, or something else entirely.

Strength may be a skill, but in order for it to be of value you need to practice using it with the proper velocity and movements for your activity. Otherwise, it’s just like an empty slab of raw meat on your plate - useless due to lack of preparation.

[Coach Haggard]

Nice article Sean

[cossack2]

I have wondered about the efficacy of SPP for some time now. Given that a muscle is just made of protein and water and it has no “intelligence” of its own I just do not understand how muscle is supposed to “know” you are training it for strength one day and speed in punching two months later. Isn’t it true that muscle can only shrink (atrophy) in size and strength, grow (hypertrophy) in size and strength, or stay the same?

Muscle will grow in strength when it is subjected to progressive resistance exercise. The body compensates for the stress by making the muscles stronger and larger so long as diet is sufficient. The question then becomes what is the best way to stimulate growth. Over the years people have used barbells, DBs, KBs, and of coarse clubs.

I agree that being able to do SPP as you have written would be nice, but I just do not see the evidence that the body works that way. I think any benefits that may be attributed to SPP are simply due to an increase in skill. The first time we try a new sport we use exaggerated motions and quickly tire. As we take some lessons and become more comfortable with the tasks in that activity we use less motion and therefore “feel” stronger.

But then what do I know…I was an accounting major!:) This is a great topic that has interested me for some time.

[JoshR]

I am no expert for sure, but i have done i little bit of research on strength and conditioning. from my understanding it is the cns(central nervous system) not the individual musscles that is responsible for strength, power, and efficiency increases. the size of your muscles really makes no difference. it is just a byproduct of hormonal changes brought on by the cns. also the cns is interrelated with the brain so it would have an inherent 'intelligence' to it. no doubt there is some flaws to my understanding, so take it for what it's worth, lol.

[Ryan Murdock]

I have wondered about the efficacy of SPP for some time now. Given that a muscle is just made of protein and water and it has no “intelligence” of its own I just do not understand how muscle is supposed to “know” you are training it for strength one day and speed in punching two months later. Isn’t it true that muscle can only shrink (atrophy) in size and strength, grow (hypertrophy) in size and strength, or stay the same?

Muscle will grow in strength when it is subjected to progressive resistance exercise. The body compensates for the stress by making the muscles stronger and larger so long as diet is sufficient. The question then becomes what is the best way to stimulate growth. Over the years people have used barbells, DBs, KBs, and of coarse clubs.

I agree that being able to do SPP as you have written would be nice, but I just do not see the evidence that the body works that way. I think any benefits that may be attributed to SPP are simply due to an increase in skill. The first time we try a new sport we use exaggerated motions and quickly tire. As we take some lessons and become more comfortable with the tasks in that activity we use less motion and therefore “feel” stronger.

But then what do I know…I was an accounting major!:) This is a great topic that has interested me for some time.

Mark,

We had that discussion a while back at some length. The only advice I can give you at this point is to try the training and experience the results for yourself. Until then it's all just talk and theory. But i guarantee you that if you choose a specific goal or set of goals and work a cycle that cascades from GPP up through SPP, it will change the way you view training forever.

[Jarlo Ilano]

I am no expert for sure, but i have done i little bit of research on strength and conditioning. from my understanding it is the cns(central nervous system) not the individual musscles that is responsible for strength, power, and efficiency increases. the size of your muscles really makes no difference. it is just a byproduct of hormonal changes brought on by the cns. also the cns is interrelated with the brain so it would have an inherent 'intelligence' to it. no doubt there is some flaws to my understanding, so take it for what it's worth, lol.

You essentially you got it. Its all nervous system.

Central Nervous System, is brain and spinal cord. So in respect to weight training, heavy loads would bring about the hormonal changes you alluded to. Growth hormone, IGF, and all that.

Peripheral Nervous System, are all the nerves that are not brain and spinal cord. The actual "wires" to the muscles. All the "fast twitch, slow twitch" stuff is because of the nerve innervation to those particular muscle fibers. Switch the nerve connection of a "fast twitch" muscle and it will change structure to match what a "slow twitch" muscle looks like.

This is SPP. Nervous system changes based on adaption to specific training regimens.

This "evidence" is not just CST speak. It has been part of neurology knowledge for quite some time.

Any basic physiology text or neuroanatomy text outlines this in detail.

It is the basis not just for sport training, but for all the rehabilitation (and by this I mean recovery from stroke, nerve damage, brain injury) that has been done in the last 60 years or so.

[cossack2]

Coach Murdock:

Yes, I remember our discussion, but I don't think we ever reached a definite conclusion based on physiological proof. Since Coach Flannagan brought this up I thought I would see if he had a different slant on it. This discussion is solely focused on strength.

I am doing my best to use logic and my admittedly limited knowledge of biology. It is important to me that things make sense instead of just being intuitively correct.

[Jarlo Ilano]

Mark,

I think we might have posted at the same time. See my post above.

This is something I learned in undergraduate anatomy/physiology 15 years ago (and its knowledge that is much older than that).

It is the "physiological proof" that is present in any anatomy class taken in any school.

[Ryan Murdock]

Yes, I remember our discussion, but I don't think we ever reached a definite conclusion based on physiological proof.

Mark,

If you revisit that thread you'll see that I posted a number of sources where you can find detailed scientific studies on this area. Coach Ilano has pointed you to even more areas of research.

[Coach Flanagan]

Coaches Murdock and Ilano have everything covered here. I don't need to offer any other arguments.

This article is about making your attributes into YOUR attributes - making them something you can use when you need them. I mentioned strength, as opposed to endurance, because strength seems to be the attribute that people get SISS (Stuck in Simplistic Stupidity) with the most and fail to see how to intelligently integrate their strength building with other vital components of their program.

[flashpoint]

So let's say we have a couple attributes we wanna improve(Like myself and Coach Flanagan were discussing earlier about the fire service). How many would you have at one time during a cycle? Would the others be put in a GPP holding pattern?

For example right now I'm deployed overseas and won't have access to my fire gear for many months. So I'll be having a hard time predicting what will be a weakness(other than the 6000'+ elevation gain ;) ). Do I maintain a general fitness say crossfit style while I also improve my military PT test attributes which is coming up soon?

Just lookig for some insight on how to deal with all the complexities that come with 'random event' athletics(jobs).

Thanks and the article above clears things up a bit.

[cossack2]

Its all nervous system.

I know there is research to show that people with neurological damage can be helped somewhat with certain physical therapy, but you all seem to be saying that there is proof one can enhance and improve athleticism as well.

I appreciate Coach Murdock’s contribution, but I think we left off saying that muscles developed by using exercises that are similar to “fight positions” are somehow superior to standard weight lifting routines. I still just do not believe this to be true. I think that a muscle strengthened by a squat can and will be strong regardless of how that muscle will be used in an athletic event. Strength is strength!

I return to this discussion because I am personally seeing more MMA people finding that these fancy concepts (not necessarily RMAX) are not working in the real world. More guys are returning to traditional power routines for strength and doing things like Crossfit Metcon workouts for cardio. Of coarse this is MY experience in what I see in my state, and what I am reading in places like http://www.mixedmartialarts.com/ etc.

Thanks to all for the input. This is a good discussion.

[shadow]

Whilst a muscle might work in one direction you seem to forget that we are 3-dimensional creatures...

Our bodies operate way more sophisticatedly that this linear training.

Strength is not strength, strength is based upon its application. Because you are strong for one thing does not mean you will be strong for another, it just doesn't work that way otherwise we would see an elite athlete operating across the entire board. The Olympics would be represented by one athlete per country, there would be no need for specialisation!!!

A tennis player doesn't prepare their body for tennis by doing numerous squats, we all know this, that would be just crazy... yet it is what you seem to be implying?

That preparing the body for use in one application somehow presupposes that it will now be perfect for every application???
Can you not see how ludicrous that sounds?

You seem to believe that the body is made up of muscle alone and there is no overlap between skeletal system, connective tissue, nervous system.... that nerve fibres do not grow and respond to stimulus? That the body cannot be trained to move in a more sophisticated manner? That the body cannot acquire strength in extreme ranges of movement?

If this was the case we would never even learn to walk!


I know first hand from my training that this is EXACTLY what happens. I may not be a world class martial artist, but I know it for what it is.

I know that my work with CST has made it that much easier to learn new movement so much quicker, applicable to any new sport I may try (recently exampled with wakeboarding after the CST seminar in Singapore).

Another example was an increase in vertical jump by about 4" just as a side effect of training on increasing the range of mobility in my hips!!

Mark, you on the other hand seem to continuously come back with the same argument... did you ever take Coach Murdocks advice and go through with a 3-month plan to test it for yourself?
If I remember right he offered you pretty much free coaching advice... an opportunity I personally would have jumped on.

I think you will find every person who has been doing CST for long enough knows the truth of what sophisticating ones movement does in terms of athleticism and overall health and well-being.

You are debating with people who have taken the theory and tested it with their own bodies.... rather than reside in mere "logical" exercise.

I suggest you put it to the test yourself as the only way you will ever know one way or the other... I don't think much more in the way of source-citing and personal accounts can help you if your "belief" in the opposite is that strong.
Obviously you want to challenge that belief in yourself otherwise you wouldn't keep coming back with the same line.

[Coach Jones]

Well I wouldn't want want to argue with an MMA athlete when it came down to how to condition properly. I mean, it's not like they have conditioning coaches and skill coaches or anything. They are islands.

The simple truth here is that you believe what you believe. If someone on the internet agrees with you, you take them at their word. When others give you source after source which you can check out for yourself - you just don't believe it. We can't make you believe. All we can do is give you access to sources. Other than that, you are going to have to take the bull by the horns and train...consistantly. In anything.

You have posted about problems you've had in your training. We have tried to answer your questions, but you reply with , "I just don't believe" as you continue to struggle with your conditioning.

Seriously, just pick any method, train it for six weeks and keep a log. See how you progress. The discussion isn't going to explode in a moment of clarity if you're not investigating, reading and comprehending the studies avaliable - especially those that have been around for years and years.

We are glad to help you, but if you believe in another methods superiority...then you should run there and dedicate yourself to that practice.

[Chuck Kechter]

I appreciate Coach Murdock’s contribution, but I think we left off saying that muscles developed by using exercises that are similar to “fight positions” are somehow superior to standard weight lifting routines. I still just do not believe this to be true. I think that a muscle strengthened by a squat can and will be strong regardless of how that muscle will be used in an athletic event. Strength is strength!

Mark,

While "strength" may be "strength," what and how it is used are vastly different animals...

I’m not sure that “fight positions” exercises are more, or less superior to any other exercise… Except of course for context…

In an ideal world, a new fighter (if that’s your focus) would start training with NO physical/emotional impediments – and with a wise coach (or coaching team) he would begin his development at the bottom of the triangle – with GPP exercises and the basis of skill development (think movement centric… IF and Body flow type of stuff for example). These exercises (based on an evaluation by the coaching staff) MIGHT include “traditional” strength based exercises – what you allude to as “standard weightlifting routines.”

Once his GPP skills are built (which may take weeks, month or years – depending on his unique makeup, resources and commitment), then a good coaching staff would sophisticate these exercises and movement palette so that the skills learned would then come closer to the signature attribute base of that particular fight venue (think – boxing has similar but different needs than MMA, or wrestling, or Judo, et cetera)…

As an example a squat or lunge would need to be changed in both pacing as well as depth to match the drive of a penetration step… Does the leg strength developed in the earlier cycle help? Of course. Is it enough to squat (or lunge)? No. If you didn’t somehow bridge your movement from the squat to the penetration step, you’d tear something the first time you performed it “at speed,” if you know what I mean… especially against resistance… And I can guarantee this by the way – this isn’t conjecture… I’ve seen it several times…

This is where SPP comes in… It takes those general movements/attributes and bridges them to (whatever) your activity specific needs are… (Which incidentally is the next stage of the pyramid [Activity Specific Prep – ASP]).

Once this track is developed then the athlete might only occasionally go back to earlier levels (of the pyramid) for further development – of new tools, to address restrictive forces, or deeper access to his attribute base, et cetera…

The problem is nothing is ever “ideal.” An athlete NEVER starts a program (whatever the focus) with a clean slate… And 9.5 times out of 10, short cuts the learning process by bypassing one or more of the levels of the pyramid – mostly because “he” wants “it” RIGHT NOW! Whatever “it” is…

Most of the athletes you see now have done this. And you’ll see them forever going back to lower levels on the pyramid to shore up, or try to fill in holes in their development… Rather than “clean the slate,” (another meaning) and start from scratch. They want the fast track rather then the right one…

I'm sure you've heard or read about boxers who can hit like a truck but can't bench or squat their own body weight...

This is a negative example of what you're asking about...

The boxer (in this example) has done an end run on the stages of development -- in the hopes of getting to the end zone quicker, by bypassing one or more stages in what CST calls the Training Hierarchal Pyramid (THP)...

If the boxer had built up his attribute base in the GPP phase of his training (all other things being the same), then there’s an excellent chance his power output would even be higher… His strength in the clinch greater, et cetera… But by bypassing this area of development, he “excels” IN SPITE of his development rather than because of it…

Does that make sense?

[cossack2]

Shadow:


Whilst a muscle might work in one direction you seem to forget that we are 3-dimensional creatures...

Our bodies operate way more sophisticatedly that this linear training.

Strength is not strength, strength is based upon its application. Because you are strong for one thing does not mean you will be strong for another, it just doesn't work that way otherwise we would see an elite athlete operating across the entire board. The Olympics would be represented by one athlete per country, there would be no need for specialisation!!!


Sure our bodies move in 3 dimensions, but it certainly does not follow that barbells will not suit them for strength training, AND I do not understand why so many people at RMAX consider barbell training to be linear. Squats, deads, and cleans are compound movements in which joints go over their full range of motion.

Do baseball players train by swinging progressively heavier bats to hit homeruns? Do football players train by throwing progressively heavier footballs? No, football players, baseball players, and wrestlers ALL train using weights. They may emphasize some body parts over others but they all lift. Strength earned in the weight room carries over fine to the field….any field, or mat. Trust me on that because I come form a family of jocks!



A tennis player doesn't prepare their body for tennis by doing numerous squats, we all know this, that would be just crazy... yet it is what you seem to be implying?

Stronger legs would only help, but I do know a vary good tennis player that swears by power cleans.



You seem to believe that the body is made up of muscle alone and there is no overlap between skeletal system, connective tissue, nervous system.... that nerve fibres do not grow and respond to stimulus? That the body cannot be trained to move in a more sophisticated manner? That the body cannot acquire strength in extreme ranges of movement?

If this was the case we would never even learn to walk!

I am not sure how you arrived at this conclusion from what I wrote, but the role of progressive resistance training in muscle development is well known. What proof do you offer that training in the way you favor will indeed stimulate connections and neurons more than weights? One must draw a distinction between training for rehab to regain normal function and actually becoming stronger for athletics.



You are debating with people who have taken the theory and tested it with their own bodies.... rather than reside in mere "logical" exercise.

First, logic is important…things have to make sense. Second, with all due respect to Scott and the coaches on this board I just do not see any MMA athletes out there saying they use RMAX or CST. Scott’s attempt with Crane was good, but in the end it did not prove anything. Now in my opinion that fight was ended way too early, but lets see some more MMA guys be coached by Scott. Pat Miletich usese very conventional training methods and he has coached some of the biggest names in MMA. Guys like Arlowski have had their photos taken holding CBs, but does he train regularly with them? I don’t know….I am asking. When you say they have “tested” the training I don’t know what you mean.

I am the first to admit my logic MAY be faulty. I would love to see team RMAX take the next UFC by storm. So, with all due respect, when will it happen?

[Coach Flanagan]

Squats, deads, and cleans are compound movements in which joints go over their full range of motion.

All 3 examples fall under just 2 categories of movement - Heaving and Pitching.

CST addresses all 6 degrees of freedom - Heaving, Pitching, Swaying, Rolling, Yawing, and Surging.


Second, with all due respect to Scott and the coaches on this board I just do not see any MMA athletes out there saying they use RMAX or CST

This is news to me. http://www.mixedmartialarts.com/?go=training.blogDetail&gid=3090&return=go%3Dtraining.blogList%26user%3D130558%26pa ge%3D6

[cossack2]

Coach Jones:

Thanks for your input


When others give you source after source which you can check out for yourself - you just don't believe it. We can't make you believe. All we can do is give you access to sources.

Believe me, I have indeed read many of the sources given, but when I do I am often left thinking the source cited does not accurately support the original contentions made. Of course in religion this is often the case with the Bible so interpretation is key. One of the most often cited sources is Siff, but he certainly never mentions CST or RMAX by name. At least I never saw this.





We are glad to help you, but if you believe in another methods superiority...then you should run there and dedicate yourself to that practice.

I guess I am bordering on offending people here, so I will withdraw. As I have said, I have a good basic knowledge of muscle training using progressive resistance exercise. I was just trying to reconcile what I know to some of the comments made here. I just do not understand why I often see negative comments in regard to barbell training in this forum. CST, KBs, barbells, DBs, sandbags, etc. are all good.

Thanks to all who replied.

[shadow]

Do baseball players train by swinging progressively heavier bats to hit homeruns? Do football players train by throwing progressively heavier footballs? No, football players, baseball players, and wrestlers ALL train using weights. They may emphasize some body parts over others but they all lift. Strength earned in the weight room carries over fine to the field….any field, or mat. Trust me on that because I come form a family of jocks!

Sure they all do, but do they know or have considered any alternative?
In a world where people generally follow the mainstream, alternative even if more valid take time to be accepted.

Maybe there are better tools and training approaches that would skyrocket all of these athlete performance to a new level.

Just because a lot of people do one thing doesn't necessarily make it the correct thing to do.

Club swinging, joint mobility and athletic type yoga all have an incredibly long history of use in ancient cultures which has been documented in Coach Sonnons books and in other places.






I am not sure how you arrived at this conclusion from what I wrote, but the role of progressive resistance training in muscle development is well known. What proof do you offer that training in the way you favor will indeed stimulate connections and neurons more than weights?

I'm not much of a bookworm so I cannot throw a list of quotes and studies or whatever for you.
I tend to be of the approach that if something sounds useful for me I will test it out for myself.

So all I personally have is the proof of my own body.

I tried weight lifting some years ago and found it lacking. Sure it gave me bigger muscles but at the expense of decreased mobility and increasing boredom.

Now through CST I am stronger, leaner and move better than at any other point in my life. I'm not old but the interesting thing is my movement quality is INCREASING ever year rather than decreasing. To me this is the most important of all.




I am the first to admit my logic MAY be faulty. I would love to see team RMAX take the next UFC by storm. So, with all due respect, when will it happen?

Essentially you are saying that you will only be interested once it is accepted in the mainstream. You will follow once big names have said its "ok".

Thats fine and a choice for you.

I just wonder do you train with any element of CST at all? If you give it a serious go you will know for yourself.

[cossack2]

Guys, believe it or not I am in RMAX’s corner. I have been a member when it was ROSS and Scott had hair touching his shoulders. In my personal experience I still see that dominant fighters are usually the big barbell boys. There is one wrestler in my MMA class who can submit seven people in a row and even our instructor has to work hard to beat him. My beliefs about weight training does not mean I do not use and support RMAX.

Weight training and strength matters. Weight training does not always yield injuries so long as proper form is observed. One could easily hurt himself with a CB is he does not abide by the rules. I have and use GTreborn, IF, IOUF, Leg Locks, Saddle, etc. I also do a power routine right from Mark Rippetoe’s books. I am glad to see Rivera uses CBs. Does he use CST exclusively now or is this just on of many things he does? If he is all CST and he wins I will personally go on the underground and point that out.

The ultimate laboratory is the octagon. If CST and other RMAX theories are proven by actual fighters the evidence will be irrefutable. Till then I cringe when I read one of the coaches here write that barbells are not applicable to fighting, “strength is simplistic stupid,” and that weights are overtly and inherently dangerous.

Thanks again to all who contributed to this thread. It is good to get conversation stimulated even if we do not all agree.

[Coach Flanagan]

I'm going to ignore the purposeful misquoting of my article/posts.

Jorge exclusively does CST with me 2x a week and cardio/metcon 2x a week. The fact that Jorge endorses CST is great in that it makes more people aware of CST, but I know first hand that CST is incredible because of the work I am doing with it in my own practice. Just as Damien knows the same from his practice. As Coach Jones knows the same. As well as many other people who took their valuable time to respond to this thread.

Nothing we say - neither speaking intuitively or logically - is going to make a difference. You believe what you want to believe.

It all comes down to this:



We are glad to help you, but if you believe in another methods superiority...then you should run there and dedicate yourself to that practice.

If the method for you isn't CST, thats perfectly fine. If you can't suspend your ingrained belief system to try out the most fundamental concepts of CST, then you're going to sabotage your own potential for results with your practice. If you're telling yourself that SPP is bulls***, then any half-assed attempt at "proving it" is going to be a waste of time.

Pick something, do the work, do it whole heartedly.

[jerry.mobbs]

Shadow:
Sure our bodies move in 3 dimensions, but it certainly does not follow that barbells will not suit them for strength training, AND I do not understand why so many people at RMAX consider barbell training to be linear. Squats, deads, and cleans are compound movements in which joints go over their full range of motion.

I am not sure how you arrived at this conclusion from what I wrote, but the role of progressive resistance training in muscle development is well known. What proof do you offer that training in the way you favor will indeed stimulate connections and neurons more than weights? One must draw a distinction between training for rehab to regain normal function and actually becoming stronger for athletics.


I had a lot of very similar questions, and I am naturally inclined towards your point of view. However, let me try to give you a few example that I think would support CSTs view of things. (If only to see if I understand a bit about CST, so coaches please shoot this down if I misrepresent CST)

Basic barbell training is great for building a good base of strength very quickly. I really don't think anyone would dispute that. But its not the only way, and you need to be aware that you may develop strength in areas or planes of movement that you do not need, and not enough in the areas you do need. So it needs to be done in the context of what you are trying to achieve.

I had the luxury of letting Singapores strongest man try out my set of gymnastics rings for the first time. Now hes easily strong enough to do dips and hold a support position on a set of parallel bars, but he found it a real struggle to keep an upright support, and a skin the cat was very awkward. This does not make him 'weak' in the absolute strength sense, but it does make him 'weak' in the sense of applying his strength in unfamiliar areas.

Its also possible to develop very strong absolute strength without ever touching a barbell. Two very good examples of this are.

1. Ross Enamait. http://www.rossboxing.com/

There's a great thread on his forum where someone suggested he was not developing his full potential because he does not do basic barbell training. To their credit, they actually sent a 500lb weight set to Ross and asked him to try it. Ross then proceeded to deadlift 500lb at a body weight of about 160lb ( I think) and he posted the video on you tube. Not bad for a guy who never touches a barbell.

2. Coach Sommers Training for Gymnasts http://www.dragondoor.com/cgi-bin/articles.pl?rm=mode3&articleid=229

You will very rarely see a gymnast in the weight room, but when you do, they demonstrate very high levels of strength in the raw lifts.

In summary, barbell work can develop raw strength, but it needs to be honed and fine tuned so that it can then be applied to a sport outside of powerlifting. Secondly you can develop enough strength for your sport without ever touching a barbell, which if your sport is very strength dependent like gymnastics will carry over to barbell lifts. This carryover does not really work the other way without the fine tuning.

Hope this helps.



First, logic is important…things have to make sense. Second, with all due respect to Scott and the coaches on this board I just do not see any MMA athletes out there saying they use RMAX or CST. Scott’s attempt with Crane was good, but in the end.................. When you say they have “tested” the training I don’t know what you mean.

I am the first to admit my logic MAY be faulty. I would love to see team RMAX take the next UFC by storm. So, with all due respect, when will it happen?


I think this is a little unfair. Just because there are not a lot of champions 'today' in 'X' sport using system 'Y' to train, does not mean that system 'Y' is not a good training protocol. Only time will tell.

Secondly, I would give everyone the benefit of doubt. A lot of people do use CST as part of their training. If they were getting their asses kicked in their chosen sport, I'm sure they are all smart enough to move onto something else.

I agree with you, I do think it would be useful to be able to see in more detail how sports teams are using CST. But there's a conundrum here, if it was getting them an edge on the sports field, they are hardly likely to want anyone to write about on the the internet ;-)

[JoshR]

In my personal experience I still see that dominant fighters are usually the big barbell boys. There is one wrestler in my MMA class who can submit seven people in a row and even our instructor has to work hard to beat him.

Ok lets look at current top fighters. Fedor? Nope doesn't left heavy. BJ Penn? Nope. Anderson Silva? Sorry he doesn't use heavy weights either. GSP? When he uses weights which is not very much they are very light, mostly used for strength endurance, as part of a circuit. So there's the top 4 P4P fighters in the world, who rely on skill, agility, speed, and conditioning to be the best in the world. Also what sets these fighters apart is their MOBILITY in the ring. They move like no one else. I don't believe these fighters use CST but I believe Coach Sonnon developed CST at least partially from his studies of sport science in Russia, the same knowledge Fedor has used to become the best. Also, you forget that barbell training itself took a long time to become accepted in athletic performance as well, so something like CST is likely to be very slow spreading as well.

[Coach Jones]

I just want to comment on the last couple quotes.

First, In training Alberto Crane Coach Sonnon and I were tasked with increasing his recoverablility and strength endurance. We achieved the goal - In spades! Alberto is a great athlete and he dedicated himself to the training. The results we saw were nothing less than amazing. Neither Coach Sonnon or myself were, in any way, involved in Alberto's skill training He was, unfortunatley, outstruck by a better striker. something I understand he has been working on.

His conditioning was spot on, and that's what we worked on. That was our job.

Next, as far as things that go on in your gym. I can't speak to that. It sounds to me like the big fella is not only lifting the barbells but is a better fighter. Happens. If you go on an 8 week cycle of powerlifting, I would guarantee he will still hand you your lunch money. It aint the weights it's the skill.

Attributes can make up for lack of skill only so much. Throw 50 pounds of fat on Fedor and he'll still be a problem. His opponent better show up lean, mean and loaded with skill.

[cossack2]

Many of you still think I am anti-RMAX. That just isn’t true. I have mentioned that I do IF and GT2 almost every day. My only concern is what I have to do to make myself a better warrior. I do not want to waste my time with things that don’t’ work so I am often healthily skeptical.

This thread has some really good info. For quite some time the RMAX formula was for a coach to write a post where he disparaged barbells, crossfit, etc. and then proceeded to say how CST was far superior. This would then be followed by other posters who contributed plenty of “you are so right coach,” “wow you’re a genius coach,” etc. No one ever disagreed, dissented in any way, or asked clarification questions. It is great that you all get along and are on the same page, but I occasionally have some doubts about the comments I read. It is fine to knock other protocols if yours is truly better, but I always wondered who these “coaches” were coaching that they were so sure about their claims.

I now know that Coach Flanagan is coaching Rivera. If I have his permission I will mention this on the Undergaound sometime. RMAX, and ROSS before that have been around a while. If this stuff works you all deserve to succeed.

I also appreciated Coach Jones's comments on training Crane. After he lost it was all suddenly ignored. I also often wonder what ever happened to Shokability and Arthokinetics. They are no longer offered for sale so I wonder what I am supposed to think about that.

Thanks to all for their patience.

[shadow]

Many of you still think I am anti-RMAX. That just isn’t true. I have mentioned that I do IF and GT2 almost every day. My only concern is what I have to do to make myself a better warrior. I do not want to waste my time with things that don’t’ work so I am often healthily skeptical.


Thats cool Mark and I appreciate that there is nothing wrong with questioning.

The point that everyone else is bringing up is that you are only going to know if this works for you if you try it full on.

If you want to know if Clubbell swinging, metcon circuits and Prasara Yoga are going to help your game you have to drop everything else and try it.

Waiting for the big name fighter who puts RMAX into the mainstream will put you in just the same place as everyone else.
And if thats your choice, then ok.

A while ago Coach Murdock offered to help coach you through a cycle, that was a big chance to really put it to the test.



Again it doesn't matter the names, it matters how it impacts you personally.

Every person here who is an athlete (myself not included, I got into CST for the rehab from my sedentary life) has had to confront themselves with that decision.... do I just dabble or do I jump right in?

I remember discussing this with Coach Steer, a professional ski-coach, and he said initially he was going to mix this with everything else then decided to just jump in and drop everything else giving it a fair go. And here he is several years later, now a Head Coach and the fastest Clubbell swinger currently out there.

Do things half-heartedly and get half-assed results.

You want to know whether it will make you a better warrior, then invest the time and effort to find out!!

[Coach Haggard]

Hi Mark,

You say that your goal is to make yourself a better warrior. Many of the Coaches and Instructors on this forum come from a background in martial arts. I myself discovered CST in an attempt to improve my martial arts performance. I was in Law Enforcement at the time and losing a fight was not an option, so I was constantly seeking things to give me the edge. I had a decent background in conventional weight training, so I know first hand how that approach applies to my performance. After my accident (see the bio page on my website for a picture of my car) my conditioning was totally blown and had to rebuilt from scratch. Like Coach Steer, my original intent was to supplement my existing training with CST. Since I was starting from scratch and going to be off work for awhile, I decided to train using only CST principals in order to determine its effectiveness. I did what everyone here is advising you to do. I put CST to the test. I spent the time and effort in daily personal practice and monitored the results. I was amazed at what I found. Encouraged by the results, I went to an IC seminar and did a couple of private sessions with Coach Jones. Each one of those accelerated my improvement dramatically. When I had recovered enough to begin my martial arts training, my training partners and instructor all noticed a dramatic difference in my attributes and performance.
I think there is a place for conventional weight exercises, but it is a tool in the box that I do not use very often at all anymore. When I do, it is for a specific purpose and to address an issue that I discover during my normal CST practice. Sometimes it is the right tool for the job, but I have found that it does not, by itself, carry over effectively into my martial arts performance. For myself, I have seen greater carry over into my martial arts performance from my practice of the 3 wings of CST than I did from my conventional weight training by a significant margin.

As I said, I come from a law enforcement background. I am a skeptical person myself. By all means question. We want people who think around here. But do not use skepticism or healthy questioning as an excuse for not doing the work. You have heard from a lot of people who have tried this method of training and found that it contributed greatly to their performance in their chosen sport (many are martial artists themselves). Now it comes down to choice. I can assure you, you will not lose anything by trying this training method. You will get out of this system what you put into it. If you only dabble, you will get fewer benefits. If you give it an honest effort and do a dedicated daily practice for a reasonable length of time, I think you will be surprised at what you find. By the way, some of the Coaches here have talked about going back and trying some conventional exercises they had not done in years and finding themselves stronger. You will not lose ground if you give this a shot.

Waiting for CST to be discovered before you try it will just delay your benefits. If you are not comfortable with this protocol right now, find something you are comfortable with and go for it. There is no training system I have found that works if you aren't actually practicing it though :).

As far as Arthrokinetics and Shockability go, if I remember correctly they were put in the vault because FlowFighting®® has evolve since then. The information is still being taught at the seminars in its new form. The problem if I understand it right was this. The drills on the tapes were designed to teach principals, but many people were treating them like techniques and missing the main point behind them. I don't know if there are going to be updated versions released, but I do know that the skills and principals taught in those programs can be found in the FlowFighting®® seminars. (Any Coaches who know more about this, feel free to correct me here :). I was basing this on what I thought I remembered reading when you put them in the vault).

This was a little longer winded than I intended. I hope you will take the suggestions given to you by the people posting here. Ultimately though, only you can do the work and be convinced or not. We can't do the work for you.

Dennis

[Coach Jones]

I support discussion, disagreement and arguement. they can all be productive. I don't see you, Mark, as Anti-RMAX. I see you as skeptical and stubborn as hell. Nothing wrong with that.

But we're not talking about CST. Your statements reflect that it's the very concept of SPP that you don't believe. A concept that is and has been accepted as fact by the overwhelming majority of trainers, coaches and athletes for quite some time. It's not a CST created concept.

It's used by professional athletes, olympic coaches and trainers. It's written about in book after book and study after study. It's applied across the globe by trainers who have never heard of CST or RMAX (though we're working hard to change that).

You've argued against the idea of the S-A-I-D principle. Something that has been around for ages and is referenced in virtually every training methodology out there. Again, in no way is that a uniquely CST principle.

So what we're arguing about is a few commonly accepted and researched training principles - CST or no CST.

This is why people are chiming in with the advice that you need to train it yourself. You sound like someone who is very much a "show me" kind of guy. I can relate to that. When it comes to training, being a better warrior or the like - you have to show yourself. Whatever you choose will either get you results - or you go to something else. Simple as that. When you've done it, you know what works for you.

Best of luck.

[cossack2]

Coach Jones:

You have far more experience than I with coaching, but I have noticed two things about SPP. First, many people do it WAY to early. They need a solid foundation in strength and cardio from GPP before any of that is necessary.

Second, I think that practically most athletes blur the lines of GPP/SPP. They go for it by training as hard as they can and the SPP just happens as they do their sport (rolling in BJJ and wrestling, going rounds in boxing, etc.) Mark Rippetoe and Lon Kilgore both say to train for strength with their barbell protocols and if the athlete needs some cardio he should work in some Metcon on his off days. Mark has an MS and tons of experience and Lon is a Phd.

Ross Enamait of rosstraining.com is incredibly strong and a cardio master. He does not really focus on SPP per se. He just trains like a madman and he has achieved an incredible level of fitness. He is also a boxing coach. Most of the crossfit guys just do the WODS and they are fine.

I just do not think the distinctions you are making are as common as you think. But then maybe your experience is far different than mine because I do not teach or coach in any way. I doubt someone would want to pay good money for what I know.;)

I finally got your boxing book, and it is great. When is the vid coming out?

[shadow]

I don't see you, Mark, as Anti-RMAX. I see you as skeptical and stubborn as hell.

----

When it comes to training, being a better warrior or the like - you have to show yourself.

[Coach Jones]

Now, here I agree with you. Most people do neglect their GPP training. There are also a large number of people who sit in GPP forever and never sophisticate to SPP.

But here's the truly difficult part...

For coaches, talking about training and protocols can be difficult because your speaking to the greater audience so the most people can benefit. In every case and with every athlete things are dynamic. Different athletes require different things, they have a set amount of time and often your services are engaged for a specific training purpose. Explaining, or trying to explain that reality isn't helpful to the vast majority of people.

Ross is indeed a cardio monster. He also has put out several programs designed specifically for punching power/speed. That would fall into SPP regardless of what term he would use to describe it. It's just semantics really. While I disagree with alot of his methods, that's the game. If we all agreed the whole thing would be boring as hell. Most of the fun comes from applying new and different training protocols that produce greater results with less. That's what we're all after as coaches- Getting better results. Naturally we're not going to agree all the time.



Second, I think that practically most athletes blur the lines of GPP/SPP. They go for it by training as hard as they can and the SPP just happens as they do their sport (rolling in BJJ and wrestling, going rounds in boxing, etc.) Mark Rippetoe and Lon Kilgore both say to train for strength with their barbell protocols and if the athlete needs some cardio he should work in some Metcon on his off days


My opinon on the blurring is that skill training should be predominantly about skill training. I don't want an athlete boxing or rolling as a way of trying to get specific conditioing. I want them singularly focused on improving their skills. Later down the line, they'll put all their skills and attributed together as we move into some mental toughness training, but by and large I want to increase skills with skill training. (SSP)

SPP is about getting more specific and more closely approximating the movements in your sport to get the most out of your training.

The things I pointed out as commonly excepted, are just that. There are absolutely people on the interenet that might disagree. I would tend to say that the people you are quoting do not disagree with those things but have different methods of trying to achieve goals working within them.

I would fall over choking on my own vomit if Ross said that the S-A-I-D principle didn't exist. He just might have a different way of going about working with that principle.

Same with the other guys...


They need a solid foundation in strength and cardio from GPP before any of that is necessary.

I agree but here's the problem. Who are we talking about? What IS a "solid foundation"?

These are the questions we have to ask and the answer is never the same. It changes based on the athlete, the event, and the commodity of time.

Glad you're enjoying the book. The DVD series will be out soon. We'll be finishing up shooting in a few weeks.

[cossack2]

While I disagree with alot of his methods, that's the game.

I know you don’t want to turn this into a coach vs. coach thing but I am curious as to which of his methods you disagree with. This may help me modify my own workouts. I have seen vids of Ross and his abilities on pull-ups, calisthenics, rope jumping, and even weight lifting are just AMAZING. He both looks and performs like a tremendous athlete.



I don't want an athlete boxing or rolling as a way of trying to get specific conditioing.

Maybe my fitness and skills are very poor, but when I roll the experience is indeed a MAJOR workout by default. Many of the guys in class are fit 20-somehings but even they are breathing hard after rolling three to four times. I start to gas out embarrassingly faster. :mad: Are your athletes at a high enough level that they transcend this problem?


I would fall over choking on my own vomit if Ross said that the S-A-I-D principle didn't exist.

I am sure he and others would indeed agree. Typical barbell workouts apply to this too. When one has adapted to the demands of a specific weight one increases the weight and thus grows stronger (as long as proper diet and rest is used).

I am looking forward to your new vid. The yoga stuff is okay, but I would like to see RMAX put out some vids on grappling, ground fighting (what happened with Arthokinetics?), and even street self defense.

[Coach Jones]

I know you don’t want to turn this into a coach vs. coach thing but I am curious as to which of his methods you disagree with. This may help me modify my own workouts. I have seen vids of Ross and he his abilities on pull-ups, calisthenics, rope jumping, and even weight lifting are just AMAZING. He both looks and performs like a tremendous athlete.


I'm sure he wouldn't mind any more than I would. We're supposed to disagree regarding training protocols. It's what makes us different coaches. I don't dispute his athleticism at all, the areas I disagree with fall along the lines of developing power and speed for striking. I don't disagree across the board, he has some great ideas as well. We're just not always on the same page. An upcoming article in the RMAX mag wil cover some of these things.


Maybe my fitness and skills are very poor, but when I roll the experience is indeed a MAJOR workout by default. Many of the guys in class are fit 20-somehings but even they are breathing hard after rolling three to four times. I start to gas out embarrassingly faster. :mad: Are your athletes at a high enough level that they transcend this problem?

A GREAT question! This is something we talk about all the time. It's not a matter of getting past the effort but controlling the tempo to allow for training value beyond conditioning. This is an important point.

If you go into a gym that focuses on heavy and intensive sparring from the get go, the new guy gets exhausted and beaten down. He doesn't get the opportunity for training value. The key is explained in Softwork. The idea of working incrementally rather than always going live or pulling everything back to drill. It's the middle ground where the training value is.

There are absoutely times when you need to go heavy and intense, but they are the excpetion and not the rule. On a regular basis, the practice needs to focus on the skills. When the skills fall apart do to exhaustion the training is compromised.

There will be more RMAX martial and combat sport related videos coming all the time. Stay tuned.