Belt on OH press

[gzt]

I my years of exp I feel it's more of a hindrance but that's just my opinion. I mean pull 200kg without a belt and pull it with a belt, which is easier? Obviously with the belt. It takes a lot of the pressure off the lower back and therefore allows you to pull easier. Better yet, compare it with front squats. Try front squatting 140kg without a belt and than with and again see which is easier? Now these lifts aren't OH Presses and I realize that but in my experience the belt compensates.

Why is it so much more impressive when you see a big number being lifted without a belt than with a belt on?

Yeah, but then it becomes "which is more impressive, lifting a big weight without a belt or a BIGGER WEIGHT with a belt?" and "which of the two has a better training effect?" The answer about the better training effect depends on what exactly you're after and the question about impressiveness depends on your aesthetic ideology. Since I clean without a belt, I do front squats, I guess with 140, without a belt to get stronger for the clean recovery, but 150 with a belt just to have stronger legs in general without worrying about the weak link and to make the 140 unbelted even easier...

[Dwayne_KONG_Wint]

What do you think happens when pressure is taken off part of the posterior chain (lower back) when pulling a weight? It makes pulling the weight easier.

This makes absolutely no sense. You are thinking in terms of "feel" instead of biomechanics/physics. Pressure is a measure of force over an area.

Like hat said, the belt allows the lifter to increase IAP. How is this? the belt helps the internal surface area of the lower torso to remain unchanged as dynamic forces increase during the movement. The belt assists by helping increasing the contraction of the positional muscles of the torso.

This action is similar to looking down on a squat. By looking down the cervical spine in a neutral position which encourages a neutral position downstream in the lower back. Likewise, the belt increases contraction in the local musculature which encourages increased contraction of musculature upstream and downstream in areas that are tied in.

The outcome of better positional contraction is more efficient force transfer from the ground to the bar. Sure it seems "easier" but what it amounts to is better efficiency which always "feels" easier. Just like it "feels" easier to reach depth with your knees out on a squat, or it "feels" easier when the bar path is over the middle of the foot.

Just because something "feels" harder does not mean it is better. Efficient is better all day everyday.

[Dwayne_KONG_Wint]

Finally, the goal of lifting is not to impress. It is to get STRONGER. If I can get stronger in better efficient positions which are biomechanically sound, then that's the route I'm going to go in my quest to get STRONGER. Fuck impressing people.

[LudwigVan]

You impress me, Kong.

[MikeC1]

*Ludwig fucking Kong*

[BrotherIron]

This makes absolutely no sense. You are thinking in terms of "feel" instead of biomechanics/physics. Pressure is a measure of force over an area.

Like hat said, the belt allows the lifter to increase IAP. How is this? the belt helps the internal surface area of the lower torso to remain unchanged as dynamic forces increase during the movement. The belt assists by helping increasing the contraction of the positional muscles of the torso.

This action is similar to looking down on a squat. By looking down the cervical spine in a neutral position which encourages a neutral position downstream in the lower back. Likewise, the belt increases contraction in the local musculature which encourages increased contraction of musculature upstream and downstream in areas that are tied in.

The outcome of better positional contraction is more efficient force transfer from the ground to the bar. Sure it seems "easier" but what it amounts to is better efficiency which always "feels" easier. Just like it "feels" easier to reach depth with your knees out on a squat, or it "feels" easier when the bar path is over the middle of the foot.

Just because something "feels" harder does not mean it is better. Efficient is better all day everyday.

Why not just use the Valsava Maneuver for AIP?

That's an interesting point but I still keep the belt in the bag for the most part. I have noticed significant increases b/c I decided to put the belt back in the bag, and I def don't lift to impress anyone. You have to remember where I lift. We have world class PLers, a few nat level SM, and Oly lifters at the world level so we all just lift as much as we can and push each other.

[Dwayne_KONG_Wint]

Because the Valsalva Maneuver plus the belt creates more IAP than the valsalva maneuver alone. More IAP equals a stiffer spine. A stiffer spine means better transmission of force to the bar.

BI, I see where you are coming from and it is all good to get stronger without the belt. It is not unfathomable that one can get stronger without a belt. That's how it was done before belts were invented. The body will adapt to the imposed demands on it, belt or no belt.

However, the anti-belt argument, or calling it a "hindrance", seems more to be a statement out of sentiment than out of reason....and we should try to keep feelings out of this.

[hatmanii]

However, the anti-belt argument, or calling it a "hindrance", seems more to be a statement out of sentiment than out of reason....and we should try to keep feelings out of this.

This.

-Hat