An offspring of earlier work, this body weight battle faces fatigue of the HSPU. Think three minutes of rest is rejuvenating? Lungs stop burning and lactic acid settles, but moving personal mass in a vertical fashion results in substantially diminished returns. With only one opportunity each round to produce maximum results, keep moving, stalling or resting ends in early dismissal.
Width of the base is a common question and concern for the HSPU. I find moving my hands wider, reduces range of motion, making the movement easier. However, I’ve heard other athletes proclaim the opposite. So, what’s the standard? Get the job done, head/nose to the deck, elbows to full extension. I could careless about hand placement, the objective: Work.
in my effort today i first measured out 30" just to see how my typical hspu width compared to a recent "standard" i had seen. it turns that the width i'm most comfortable with and have been using for a while now is around 34". i tried the closer width and it felt awkward to say the least. however, towards the end it actually helped due to the amount of fatigue at my normal stance. sort of like going closer or wider when doing high rep pushups. in the end i agree with your conclusion. the width doesn't really matter. comfortable width, locked out at the top, and top of head to the floor at the bottom. that's my standard, that's the place where i get the most work done.
Standards vs. functional completion, another gaping hole in the CF armor. A kipping pull-up demonstrates real world applicability, universal function, by demonstrating the concept of utilizing any benefit possible to complete a task. A common example, if faced with an obstacle, do you run up take hold and perform a strict pull-up to clear it? Or do you use any available means? The latter is certainly more efficient, can be performed faster. Sounds like textbook CF objectives. Then, why implement a hand placement standard? Does that concept not apply to the HSPU? If your hands are too wide, the enemy just won’t count that rep. This crap makes no sense. As you mentioned, different folks succeed with varied techniques. So, let them vary. Standards for absolute ROM are important and should not be sacrificed, but otherwise, get the job done. If that means wide or narrow, short or long, fuchsia or magenta, who cares.
Good observation. Just like pull-ups or push-ups, changing hand position once fatigue sets in will aid with progress. Not sure it would’ve helped a great deal with today’s wod considering the single set criteria. Changing position mid-set (especially on HSPU) breaks momentum and steals energy. However, when coming off the wall is allowed, it can be advantageous.
If standards exist for HSPUs then why not for push ups also? Every structure has an ideal range according to his or her built in levers and pulleys. This is like dictating hand position when doing a shoulder press. It's patently absurd. This is what happens when combining function with sport. Functional in my mind (when referring to surviving in nature or meeting life's demands) means by whatever means necessary. If it's a contentious issue then it's obviously a silly exercise to include in a competition. Sporting competitions have been in existence for a long time. Olympic lifting doesn't experience the same issues nor do other sports because they ironed out the wrinkles and excluded the subjective crap that creates debate. It's all or none but you can't pick and choose what exercises will have some inexplicable standard. Some exercises are better for training while others make the cut for competition. If it can't be clearly defined then it should be left for the garage. Consider the quality of the judge too. Most judges or referees for most sporting events receive training or have a respectable breadth of knowledge. I would love to be able to sign up to judge a professional sporting event but professional sporting events don't work that way. Again, all or nothing.
Interesting thoughts regarding the suitability or not for some movements use in competition. In retrospect (I've been resposnible for a couple of Sectionals/ Regionals now)I think there is a good case to be made for the exclusion of some movements.
That said, without some specification I've seen plenty of examples of movements (esp. HSPU's) gamed into irrelevance. Super wide hand spacing, soft padding for the dome and incomplete lockout results in an upside down twitch or convulsion with a high cycle rate and minimal benefit to an S&C program.
I think the least artificial I've seen was recommended to me by Tucker. Press width measured pre event and marked on the deck. Touch at the bottom, lock out at the top whilst control is maintained.
22/12/7 = 41
ReplyDeleteAn offspring of earlier work, this body weight battle faces fatigue of the HSPU. Think three minutes of rest is rejuvenating? Lungs stop burning and lactic acid settles, but moving personal mass in a vertical fashion results in substantially diminished returns. With only one opportunity each round to produce maximum results, keep moving, stalling or resting ends in early dismissal.
Width of the base is a common question and concern for the HSPU. I find moving my hands wider, reduces range of motion, making the movement easier. However, I’ve heard other athletes proclaim the opposite. So, what’s the standard? Get the job done, head/nose to the deck, elbows to full extension. I could careless about hand placement, the objective: Work.
in my effort today i first measured out 30" just to see how my typical hspu width compared to a recent "standard" i had seen. it turns that the width i'm most comfortable with and have been using for a while now is around 34". i tried the closer width and it felt awkward to say the least. however, towards the end it actually helped due to the amount of fatigue at my normal stance. sort of like going closer or wider when doing high rep pushups. in the end i agree with your conclusion. the width doesn't really matter. comfortable width, locked out at the top, and top of head to the floor at the bottom. that's my standard, that's the place where i get the most work done.
ReplyDeleteStandards vs. functional completion, another gaping hole in the CF armor. A kipping pull-up demonstrates real world applicability, universal function, by demonstrating the concept of utilizing any benefit possible to complete a task. A common example, if faced with an obstacle, do you run up take hold and perform a strict pull-up to clear it? Or do you use any available means? The latter is certainly more efficient, can be performed faster. Sounds like textbook CF objectives. Then, why implement a hand placement standard? Does that concept not apply to the HSPU? If your hands are too wide, the enemy just won’t count that rep. This crap makes no sense. As you mentioned, different folks succeed with varied techniques. So, let them vary. Standards for absolute ROM are important and should not be sacrificed, but otherwise, get the job done. If that means wide or narrow, short or long, fuchsia or magenta, who cares.
ReplyDeleteGood observation. Just like pull-ups or push-ups, changing hand position once fatigue sets in will aid with progress. Not sure it would’ve helped a great deal with today’s wod considering the single set criteria. Changing position mid-set (especially on HSPU) breaks momentum and steals energy. However, when coming off the wall is allowed, it can be advantageous.
If standards exist for HSPUs then why not for push ups also? Every structure has an ideal range according to his or her built in levers and pulleys. This is like dictating hand position when doing a shoulder press. It's patently absurd. This is what happens when combining function with sport. Functional in my mind (when referring to surviving in nature or meeting life's demands) means by whatever means necessary. If it's a contentious issue then it's obviously a silly exercise to include in a competition. Sporting competitions have been in existence for a long time. Olympic lifting doesn't experience the same issues nor do other sports because they ironed out the wrinkles and excluded the subjective crap that creates debate. It's all or none but you can't pick and choose what exercises will have some inexplicable standard. Some exercises are better for training while others make the cut for competition. If it can't be clearly defined then it should be left for the garage. Consider the quality of the judge too. Most judges or referees for most sporting events receive training or have a respectable breadth of knowledge. I would love to be able to sign up to judge a professional sporting event but professional sporting events don't work that way. Again, all or nothing.
ReplyDeleteInteresting thoughts regarding the suitability or not for some movements use in competition. In retrospect (I've been resposnible for a couple of Sectionals/ Regionals now)I think there is a good case to be made for the exclusion of some movements.
ReplyDeleteThat said, without some specification I've seen plenty of examples of movements (esp. HSPU's) gamed into irrelevance. Super wide hand spacing, soft padding for the dome and incomplete lockout results in an upside down twitch or convulsion with a high cycle rate and minimal benefit to an S&C program.
I think the least artificial I've seen was recommended to me by Tucker. Press width measured pre event and marked on the deck. Touch at the bottom, lock out at the top whilst control is maintained.
Cheers, kempie