Cst and strength standards?

[chris hansen]

A common strength standard I see given to athletes is to work up to a 2.5x bodyweight squat or deadlift. The idea is that your posterior chain will be strong enough for whatever you do.

I was just wondering what the cst position is on this? Does cst have any general strength recommendations for athletes?

Thanks

[Scott Sonnon]

Chris,

They're listed in the CST requirements based upon the health-first fitness definition we have promoted for the past decade:

1. unrestricted circles with the 16 major joint complexes a la Intu-Flow
2. 14 rounds in 14 minutes of level 3 Flowfit at a breath level of "flow" (exhale through compression)
3. 100 reps of double swipes with 15lbs Clubbells, 100/100 alternating mills, and 50/50 hammer swings in 30 minutes.

[chris hansen]

Chris,

They're listed in the CST requirements based upon the health-first fitness definition we have promoted for the past decade:

1. unrestricted circles with the 16 major joint complexes a la Intu-Flow®
2. 14 rounds in 14 minutes of level 3 FlowFit®® at a breath level of "flow" (exhale through compression)
3. 100 reps of double swipes with 15lbs Clubbells, 100/100 alternating mills, and 50/50 hammer swings in 30 minutes.

Oh, right. I kind of wondered if that was it.

For someone who plays football or hockey or some sport where high levels of strength are helpful, is there a specific way you would test posterior chain strength or whatever types of strength the athlete needs?

[HereBeADragon]

its not so much a matter of general tests as personal needs. Do you feel you have a weakness in your posterior chain strength?

[hermanchauw]

A common strength standard I see given to athletes is to work up to a 2.5x bodyweight squat or deadlift.
I can't do this to save my life.:D

[Scott Sonnon]

Oh, right. I kind of wondered if that was it.

For someone who plays football or hockey or some sport where high levels of strength are helpful, is there a specific way you would test posterior chain strength or whatever types of strength the athlete needs?

Chris, you obviously mean something specific by "high levels of strength." It is your definition that you're importing into your question. I say that not in an accusatory manner, but rather from a dialectic perspective.

[chris hansen]

Chris, you obviously mean something specific by "high levels of strength." It is your definition that you're importing into your question. I say that not in an accusatory manner, but rather from a dialectic perspective.
Thanks for replying.

I've been looking at material from different strength coaches and how they train athletes from football, basketball, hockey, and the different high school and college sports. They all spend a certain amount of time in the weight room to build strength and a common standard, depending on who you talk to, seems to be to squat or deadlift 2-3 times your bodyweight and bench press a certain amount, or at least be working toward that goal.

I agree with hermanchauw that squatting 2.5x bodyweight seems like a tall order to me but there seems to be enough people who do it for it to be a recommendation.

I was just wondering what the cst position is on this and how you would do it differently if you're training a room full of high school or college athletes.

[Scott Sonnon]

Chris,

That is what I suspected. I already gave you that answer.

You're using the term "strength" with a specific definition - whether you're able to articulate that definition or not. You may be looking at "different strength coaches" but it sounds like they're all of one brand.

There are various definitions (doctrines), which create a variety of approaches (strategies), which in turn create a range of methods (programs) and tools (techniques). If you only see one doctrine, you will only look for and see those strategies, tactics and techniques.

For our purposes, the "benchmark" of posterior chain "strength" is the swipe.

[chris hansen]

Chris,

That is what I suspected. I already gave you that answer.

You're using the term "strength" with a specific definition - whether you're able to articulate that definition or not. You may be looking at "different strength coaches" but it sounds like they're all of one brand.

There are various definitions (doctrines), which create a variety of approaches (strategies), which in turn create a range of methods (programs) and tools (techniques). If you only see one doctrine, you will only look for and see those strategies, tactics and techniques.

For our purposes, the "benchmark" of posterior chain "strength" is the swipe.

Thanks for explaining that a little more. I get the impression that there's more to it than I realize. I find the subject interesting but you're right, most of the athletic trainers I learn about seem to have the same basic paradigm.

[Scott Sonnon]

Chris,

There is no such thing as objective general strength. It is a convincing set of lies promoted by those who have their belief system mass accepted.

But the buzzkill for both the strength-n-conditioning and fitness industries is the physiological law that gGeneral strength" and worse "general fitness" do not exist.

SAID - Specific Adaptation to Imposed Demands - is absolute. You cannot have "general strength." You cannot even have "posterior chain" strength. You can only be strong or weak in a specific movement.

CST considers the body as a whole (un-isolatable) unit.
CST favors tractional, compound, multi-degree (vs. compressive, isolated, short-range) movement.
CST adopts a health-first definition of "strength" (vs. defining it by the #lbs in a particular lift regardless of injured and immobile lack of ability to express that "strength" in real-world function).

So, the "movements" CST uses as a barometer of "strength" obviously align with those doctrinal beliefs and strategic approaches.

My answers do not satisfy your initial question because my answers come from a different paradigm than the beliefs which created the question. Got to shift the paradigm, brother. You've been around long enough to be able to do it, if you really want to change your condition.

[chris hansen]

SAID - Specific Adaptation to Imposed Demands - is absolute.


Since you mention that, I feel compelled to share this.

I was asking in the powerlifting community one time about improving vertical jump and they insisted that the best thing to do is squat. I mentioned the SAID principle and asked if you don't get better at jumping by jumping. They told me that was a misunderstanding of the SAID principle and you don't get better at jumping by jumping, you get better at jumping by squatting.

This didn't seem right to me so I looked at some of the research and every study that included it found that you do indeed get better at jumping by jumping. Generally the studies found that combining some form of jumping with some form of strength training seems to offer the biggest improvements.

[Scott Sonnon]

Since you mention that, I feel compelled to share this.

I was asking in the powerlifting community one time about improving vertical jump and they insisted that the best thing to do is squat. I mentioned the SAID principle and asked if you don't get better at jumping by jumping. They told me that was a misunderstanding of the SAID principle and you don't get better at jumping by jumping, you get better at jumping by squatting.

This didn't seem right to me so I looked at some of the research and every study that included it found that you do indeed get better at jumping by jumping. Generally the studies found that combining some form of jumping with some form of strength training seems to offer the biggest improvements.

There is no misunderstanding.

SQUAT TRAINING DOES NOT IMPROVE VERTICAL JUMPING

Weiss, L., Fry, A., Wood, L., & Melton, C. (1998). Comparative effects of deep versus shallow periodized squat training by novice lifters. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 30(5), Supplement abstract 942.
Ss (M = 10; F = 8) completed periodized machine-based heavy-resistance training to determine if manipulating range of motion would have an effect on strength and power adaptations. Three groups were formed: a) deep squats that required the tops of the thighs to be parallel to the floor, b) shallow squats that were half the depth of the deep squats, and c) controls that did not participate in strength or power training. Training occurred three times per week for eight weeks.
Two forms of vertical jump were not improved by either form of training. The deep squat group was the only group to improve 1 RM shallow-squat strength.
It was concluded that training protocols were specific in their effects. Deep squats appear to elicit the best improvements for both shallow and deep squatting performance. Machine-based, periodized squat training does not enhance velocity-controlled squatting force and power or vertical jumping performance.
Implication. Machine trained squats do not transfer effects to other forms of performance. Strength gains are particularly specific.


CONVENTIONAL STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING PROGRAMS DO NOT IMPROVE DYNAMIC PERFORMANCES IN FOOTBALL PLAYERS

Miller, T. A., White, E. D., Kinley, K. A., Clark, M. J., & Congleton, J. J. (1999). Changes in performance following long-term resistance training in division 1A collegiate football players. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 31(5), Supplement abstract 1467.
This study analyzed performance changes in the squat, 20-yard shuttle run, 40-yard dash, bench press, vertical jump, and power clean in collegiate football players who had experienced a long-term, periodized strength and conditioning program at Texas A&M University. Players from 1993-1998 (N = 261) were tested twice per year. Ss were assigned to groups based on playing position: 1) defensive backs, running backs, and wide receivers; 2) kickers linebackers, tight ends, quarterbacks, and specialists; and 3) linemen. Relationships between performance changes and training time, body fat, and bodyweight were determined.
Body fat had a significant negative association with performance in all six activities for all groups. Neither training time nor bodyweight was related to 20-yard shuttle running or the 40-yard dash but both were related positively to the bench press and power clean. Bodyweight was significantly related to squatting performance. Results in the bench press, power clean, squat, 20-yard shuttle run, and 40-yard dash were consistent across all groups. For vertical jump, time showed a slight positive association only for group 1. Body weight had a positive effect on all three groups, being strongest in group 1 and weaker for the other two groups.
A strength and conditioning program was related to performance changes in strength and conditioning activities. However, there was little to no association between program training and the dynamic performance activities of vertical jumping, 20-yard shuttle run, and 40-yard dash, they being activities that could be transferred to game situations.
Implication. Strength and conditioning programs for football players make them better strength and conditioning trainers. There is little evidence of transfer of training effects to dynamic performances that are likely to be more associated with football playing performance. Increased body fat appears to hinder performances.

In both machine-based and free-weight heavy squatting, there was little to no transferability to jumping performance.

[chris hansen]

Wow, thanks for posting that.

I've seen a couple of studies that found jumping squats help your jump, I suppose because it's a lot like jumping.

I was doing clockwork squats for a while, trying to come up fast so the Clubbell pops up off my shoulder, and my legs started to feel a lot springier. I'm not sure why I stopped, I should start doing them again.

Thanks for taking the time with my questions. I appreciate it.

[Scott Sonnon]

Just because heavy squats don't transfer to vertical jumps, does not mean that performance cannot be enhanced through physical training. There is a science and art to it. Take a look at my TACFIT videos on my blog. They'll start to give you an idea of what a CST Coach can offer you. You've been around for a long time. It's about time you started to get seriously focused on reaping the results you deserve.

[HereBeADragon]

Coach Sonnon is absolutely right. CST is such an incredible system I do not believe there is a skill or goal that cannot be reached with its use. More difficult to learn than many systems but much more rewarding for the effort. Heck I've been banging around this place longer than most anyone else and I'm only just figuring it out. :) Course once I think I have it down Sonnon goes and turns me on my head again ;)

[Coach Jones]

Asking a powerlifter about improving your vertical leap is like asking your butcher how to do brain surgery. They both cut things but the degree of precision and result differ a bit.

Powerlifters are great at what they do. Jumping is not one of those things nor are the myriad of performance enhancing type trainings that are outside of that particular skill set.

What people still fail to realize is that is is much more going on with training than a simple matter of "getting stronger".

Everything you do is a skill - absolutely everything.

Skill develops through repetition, strength develops according to SAID and efficient training theory and application.

My advice would be to get with a CST coach, tell them your goals and follow their instruction. After a cycle of training evaluate your progress and I guarantee you will be happy with the result.

Like Coach says, "there's a science to it".;)