|
Post by BigBruvOfEnglandUK on Mar 18, 2024 6:09:21 GMT
Nice work, let us know how it goes. After dabbling with partials for a while I am convinced of their value, so I incorporate them alongside full reps. Maybe stretch position partials are best, but only if they suit your body, if they don't, well whatever works. I've read and noticed that there's a lot of front delt involvement in the bottom position of the pushup. Front delts is not something I want to put much emphasis on so I don't want to go any lower than I already do anyway. With the chins I've only been going up to about half way and I don't lower all the way down because my shoulder doesn't like it.
|
|
pierinifitness
Caneguru
I do burpees, then I drink slurpees
Posts: 2,717
|
Post by pierinifitness on Mar 19, 2024 19:09:29 GMT
My limited experience is that partial reps are good for a muscle erection that goes flaccid quickly compared to isometric contractions at maximum effort or heavy lifting for low reps and full range.
|
|
|
Post by gruntbrain on Mar 19, 2024 19:22:42 GMT
Anyone with stability/alignment issues may want to stick with partials until those issues are resolved.
|
|
|
Post by ilya on Mar 19, 2024 20:10:31 GMT
One thing I've noticed from watching a lot of fitness content on youtube is that often the REALLY big guys do partials instead of obsessing over having a full range of motion.
|
|
stuke
Caneguru
Posts: 905
|
Post by stuke on Mar 19, 2024 21:17:13 GMT
My limited experience is that partial reps are good for a muscle erection that goes flaccid quickly compared to isometric contractions at maximum effort or heavy lifting for low reps and full range. Erm...had to read that twice. For me, a good, decent, heavy full range set to virtual failure takes care of loading the muscle and a good stretch etc, leaving me free to do multiple partial rep sets at whatevee range I want. An example from my workout this evening, chin ups, (after 1 set warm up), bodyweight plus 18.5kg x 6, then 3 sets of wide pull ups, mid to top of movement sort of range, around 6 to 8 'reps' each set. Then 1 arm dumbbell rows, 1 work set of 10 with 27kg dumbbell, good, full range, controlled reps. Followed by inverted rows, mid range 2 sets of 10-12. So nothing set in stone but bloody hell, it took it out of me!
|
|
stuke
Caneguru
Posts: 905
|
Post by stuke on Mar 19, 2024 21:21:31 GMT
I was musing earlier about full range, just an idea, but perhaps full range take more out of the body, general recovery I mean. Maybe the stretched, joints at the uncomfortable end of thei range under substantial load warrants more time to recover, in which case partials around the middle of the range could allow for more frequency.
|
|
|
Post by mr potatohead on Mar 19, 2024 21:36:20 GMT
I was musing earlier about full range, just an idea, but perhaps full range take more out of the body, general recovery I mean. Maybe the stretched, joints at the uncomfortable end of thei range under substantial load warrants more time to recover, in which case partials around the middle of the range could allow for more frequency. It may also be be that full ROM offers positions in the range where the load is quite light, so partials keep the tension turned on throughout the time of the exercise - TUT.
|
|
brothersteve
Caneguru
He ain't heavy, he's my brother
Posts: 2,245
|
Post by brothersteve on Mar 20, 2024 14:00:19 GMT
I was musing earlier about full range, just an idea, but perhaps full range take more out of the body, general recovery I mean. Maybe the stretched, joints at the uncomfortable end of thei range under substantial load warrants more time to recover, in which case partials around the middle of the range could allow for more frequency. It may also be be that full ROM offers positions in the range where the load is quite light, so partials keep the tension turned on throughout the time of the exercise - TUT. Yes, I believe the same. Said another way....I think the reason bodybuilders use limited range reps is to keep tension in the place they felt it most conducive to where they wanted the growth. The Nautilus folks made their machines to allegedly/supposedly have that tension throughout the full rep range for greater development but that never seemed to happen.
|
|
|
Post by mr potatohead on Mar 20, 2024 14:03:44 GMT
It may also be be that full ROM offers positions in the range where the load is quite light, so partials keep the tension turned on throughout the time of the exercise - TUT. Yes, I believe the same. Said another way.... I think the reason bodybuilders use limited range reps is to keep tension in the place they felt it most conducive to where they wanted the growth. The Nautilus folks made their machines to allegedly/supposedly have that tension throughout the full rep range for greater development but that never seemed to happen. Yes, well said, brothersteve.
|
|
brothersteve
Caneguru
He ain't heavy, he's my brother
Posts: 2,245
|
Post by brothersteve on Mar 20, 2024 20:47:53 GMT
Check out Tyson's partial reps....I bet they contribute to the functional strength that will beat the snot out of Jake Paul.
|
|
moxohol
Caneguru
Biohacker
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Posts: 3,328
|
Post by moxohol on Mar 21, 2024 7:17:06 GMT
What was once old is now considered new. I don't want to come across as a know-it-all snob, UNLIKE some I people know here, but partial reps are old news.
Bill Starr was a prominent trainer during the 1960s, who famously advocated isometric partial reps for weight training with outstanding results. However, he did not promote partial reps as a standalone exercise or with only a power rack during that time period. Starr's approach involved incorporating partial reps as part of a broader strength training routine that included various exercises and techniques to enhance overall strength and fitness which included calisthenics. This was all happening during the 1960s.
|
|
|
Post by BigBruvOfEnglandUK on Mar 21, 2024 9:46:44 GMT
It's not considered new at all.
|
|
moxohol
Caneguru
Biohacker
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Posts: 3,328
|
Post by moxohol on Mar 21, 2024 10:41:30 GMT
It's so old my grandma farts dust.
|
|
|
Post by Walpole on Mar 21, 2024 15:59:14 GMT
Check out Tyson's partial reps....I bet they contribute to the functional strength that will beat the snot out of Jake Paul. During the medicine ball slams, it appears that he is wearing an EMS device on his shoulders. I would think the video was sped up during the sparring, but I know it probably wasn't, which is why you never piss-off a mentally unstable but extremely skilled fighter. Regarding Tyson beating the snot out of Paul, I agree with you; however, I would wager on Paul because I'm usually wrong when it comes to sports.
|
|
stuke
Caneguru
Posts: 905
|
Post by stuke on Mar 21, 2024 20:06:38 GMT
What was once old is now considered new. I don't want to come across as a know-it-all snob, UNLIKE some I people know here, but partial reps are old news. Bill Starr was a prominent trainer during the 1960s, who famously advocated isometric partial reps for weight training with outstanding results. However, he did not promote partial reps as a standalone exercise or with only a power rack during that time period. Starr's approach involved incorporating partial reps as part of a broader strength training routine that included various exercises and techniques to enhance overall strength and fitness which included calisthenics. This was all happening during the 1960s. Well of course they are! Nobody is claiming otherwise (I don't think), but we talk about things that interest us, what kind of training we are doing etc. If you don't watch it, mox I might have to give karlson a call.
|
|