Getting out of the sagittal plane

[PizzaDad]

Im not as smart as you guys. I didn’t even know what a sagital plane was. But my simple man’s take away from this is a supposition that a weak person with a frail untrained body begins to train by moving a barbell in as close to a straight line as possible. Both toward and away from the source of gravity (force against the bar). This is done tepeatedly and over time with increased load that makes the weak person less weak amd less frail. They become stronger. They become more robust. They continue training in the same fashion, increasing the weight on the bar and performing the same movement and becoming more strong. The amount of weight moved is always determined by the amount of strength that they have developed.
Until they cross a threshhold of strength where they are so stronrbg that they will be moving so much weight that they risk injury. But the risk of injury for this stronger person can be mitigated by rotational movements that require the flailing of arms. I dont understand how this makes sense.

[Will Morris]

Im not as smart as you guys. I didn’t even know what a sagital plane was. But my simple man’s take away from this is a supposition that a weak person with a frail untrained body begins to train by moving a barbell in as close to a straight line as possible. Both toward and away from the source of gravity (force against the bar). This is done tepeatedly and over time with increased load that makes the weak person less weak amd less frail. They become stronger. They become more robust. They continue training in the same fashion, increasing the weight on the bar and performing the same movement and becoming more strong. The amount of weight moved is always determined by the amount of strength that they have developed.
Until they cross a threshhold of strength where they are so stronrbg that they will be moving so much weight that they risk injury. But the risk of injury for this stronger person can be mitigated by rotational movements that require the flailing of arms. I dont understand how this makes sense.

You, sir, are awesome. I'm glad you are on this board.

To the original poster, does your analysis suppose all of the movements are uniplanar? That is to say, does your analysis of the lifts suggest all joints, all segments, and by virtue of those, all motion occur in one or, even two, planes?

If you try to look at the complete lift, you will see that there is a lot of sagittal, coronal, and transverse plane movement and resistance of movement in these planes. Just because the bar seems to move in one plane, does not mean that it does. There is a component of all cardinal planes of movement in these lifts.

[jbackos]

Why would anyone want to train the body in a rotational movement pattern when getting generally strong ensures that the body can resist rotational movement while lifting heavy weight? The desire to do this is probably an outgrowth of the school of thought that has athletes swinging weighted bats, clubs, etc. I can speak from experience. During college, I played some intramural softball for two years. The first year was before I began any strength training. The following year, my hitting power increased dramatically as did my rotational speed with the bat. I did no swing practice outside of playing in season. The bottom line is exactly as Rip states - strength is GPP and skill is SPP.

Even in powerlifting, training competitive technique year round will not develop strength as well as training non-competitive variations in the off season (closer stance squat variation, narrow grip bench/press, block/deficit deadlifts). The powerlifter will then transition to competitive technique as a meet approaches. This is nothing new - Fred Hatfield, the original Westside Barbell (California), Ed Coan, Louie Simmons all have this theory in common even allowing for their differences in training execution. Many powerlifters forget to treat powerlifting as a skill sport and train the comp. lifts all year round and many become champions in spite of poor programming.

[Tucker Benjamin]

You, sir, are awesome. I'm glad you are on this board.

To the original poster, does your analysis suppose all of the movements are uniplanar? That is to say, does your analysis of the lifts suggest all joints, all segments, and by virtue of those, all motion occur in one or, even two, planes?

If you try to look at the complete lift, you will see that there is a lot of sagittal, coronal, and transverse plane movement and resistance of movement in these planes. Just because the bar seems to move in one plane, does not mean that it does. There is a component of all cardinal planes of movement in these lifts.

I would not try to suppose that, but simply view them as dominantly in some planes more than others. But the responses on this thread have lead me to believe that the bias toward some planes is actually useful as these are more common movement patterns and the movements in these planes can be loaded the most and therefore get the most adaptation.

[Tucker Benjamin]

Im not as smart as you guys. I didn’t even know what a sagital plane was. But my simple man’s take away from this is a supposition that a weak person with a frail untrained body begins to train by moving a barbell in as close to a straight line as possible. Both toward and away from the source of gravity (force against the bar). This is done tepeatedly and over time with increased load that makes the weak person less weak amd less frail. They become stronger. They become more robust. They continue training in the same fashion, increasing the weight on the bar and performing the same movement and becoming more strong. The amount of weight moved is always determined by the amount of strength that they have developed.
Until they cross a threshhold of strength where they are so stronrbg that they will be moving so much weight that they risk injury. But the risk of injury for this stronger person can be mitigated by rotational movements that require the flailing of arms. I dont understand how this makes sense.

Agreed, however I was not hinting towards flailing bosu ball BS, just seeing if anything can get close to fitting the 4 criteria.

[Bill Hannon]

How does one assume that applying axial and transverse loading to a dynamic three-dimensional structure results in a load path, resultant moment forces, and mechanical work that all occur in a single plane?

[Will Morris]

I would not try to suppose that, but simply view them as dominantly in some planes more than others. But the responses on this thread have lead me to believe that the bias toward some planes is actually useful as these are more common movement patterns and the movements in these planes can be loaded the most and therefore get the most adaptation.

Wow. I'm impressed man. You are spot on.

[Tucker Benjamin]

Wow. I'm impressed man. You are spot on.

The book is what is really spot on, I just had to flesh out my thoughts with some like minded folks.

“The man who asks a question is a fool for a minute, the man who does not ask is a fool for life.”
-Confucius

Sums up my experience

[Pluripotent]

Introducing the press 3.0: the transverse press

gymfuckery™ on Instagram: “Captions this 😂😂😂💀
(🎥 via: youtube/thesportbible)”

Or you could do this:
gymfuckery™ on Instagram: “😳 wtf - - Follow @GymFuckery & @GymFuckeryTV for more Also Check us out on #SnapChat, #FaceBook & #YouTube. - - 🎥 @gymfuckery Send us your…”

[jfsully]

My simpleminded take is that the big lifts follow the evolved function of the body’s own mechanics. We are built to face things and look forward. I suppose you could train yourself to run sideways really fast, but it’s not what our bodies are good at because there’s no advantage to doing that over running faced toward/away from something.