Literature DB >> 19528856

Comparison of different strongman events: trunk muscle activation and lumbar spine motion, load, and stiffness.

Stuart M McGill1, Art McDermott, Chad Mj Fenwick.   

Abstract

Strongman events are attracting more interest as training exercises because of their unique demands. Further, strongman competitors sustain specific injuries, particularly to the back. Muscle electromyographic data from various torso and hip muscles, together with kinematic measures, were input to an anatomically detailed model of the torso to estimate back load, low-back stiffness, and hip torque. Events included the farmer's walk, super yoke, Atlas stone lift, suitcase carry, keg walk, tire flip, and log lift. The results document the unique demands of these whole-body events and, in particular, the demands on the back and torso. For example, the very large moments required at the hip for abduction when performing a yoke walk exceed the strength capability of the hip. Here, muscles such as quadratus lumborum made up for the strength deficit by generating frontal plane torque to support the torso/pelvis. In this way, the stiffened torso acts as a source of strength to allow joints with insufficient strength to be buttressed, resulting in successful performance. Timing of muscle activation patterns in events such as the Atlas stone lift demonstrated the need to integrate the hip extensors before the back extensors. Even so, because of the awkward shape of the stone, the protective neutral spine posture was impossible to achieve, resulting in substantial loading on the back that is placed in a weakened posture. Unexpectedly, the super yoke carry resulted in the highest loads on the spine. This was attributed to the weight of the yoke coupled with the massive torso muscle cocontraction, which produced torso stiffness to ensure spine stability together with buttressing the abduction strength insufficiency of the hips. Strongman events clearly challenge the strength of the body linkage, together with the stabilizing system, in a different way than traditional approaches. The carrying events challenged different abilities than the lifting events, suggesting that loaded carrying would enhance traditional lifting-based strength programs. This analysis also documented the technique components of successful, joint-sparing, strongman event strategies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19528856     DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e318198f8f7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Strength Cond Res        ISSN: 1064-8011            Impact factor:   3.775


  6 in total

Review 1.  The Epidemiology of Injuries Across the Weight-Training Sports.

Authors:  Justin W L Keogh; Paul W Winwood
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 11.136

2.  Interday reliability of peak muscular power outputs on an isotonic dynamometer and assessment of active trunk control using the chop and lift tests.

Authors:  Thomas G Palmer; Timothy L Uhl
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2011 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.860

3.  Hip and Trunk Muscle Activity and Mechanics During Walking With and Without Unilateral Weight.

Authors:  Kerri A Graber; Kari L Loverro; Mark Baldwin; Erika Nelson-Wong; Joshua Tanor; Cara L Lewis
Journal:  J Appl Biomech       Date:  2021-05-29       Impact factor: 1.606

4.  The biomechanical characteristics of the strongman atlas stone lift.

Authors:  Benjamin Hindle; Anna Lorimer; Paul Winwood; Daniel Brimm; Justin W L Keogh
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2021-09-01       Impact factor: 2.984

5.  A comparison of two gluteus maximus EMG maximum voluntary isometric contraction positions.

Authors:  Bret Contreras; Andrew D Vigotsky; Brad J Schoenfeld; Chris Beardsley; John Cronin
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2015-09-22       Impact factor: 2.984

Review 6.  The Biomechanics and Applications of Strongman Exercises: a Systematic Review.

Authors:  Benjamin R Hindle; Anna Lorimer; Paul Winwood; Justin W L Keogh
Journal:  Sports Med Open       Date:  2019-12-09
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.