Everyone covered it already but that sounds like goofy advice.
Everyone covered it already but that sounds like goofy advice.
Semper Gumby, Always Flexible
I'd agree that adding tension is not ideal or desirable. And that does seem to be what's being advocated, at least in the MSW article.
I guess a point I'd like to clarify is that an orientation with the shoulder blades depressed and retracted is actually a more muscularly relaxed and athletic position than the typical shrugged shoulders, head forward, elbows out 'timmy tuck' thing that is so common.
I just wanna ensure we're all not talking past one another.
This what I enjoy about this place, meaningful discussion. So you would say the orientation vs. the tension is key? This is what I have observed. This may be a case of the words "as if" or "like" get misinterpreted. Do this as if you were pulling a rope /like you are pinching a nerf ball. Meaning / interpretation / applicationOriginally Posted by taadski
Taking a break from social media.
Me too. And yeah, I think so. Although I will point out shooting is fundamentally fraught with the contradiction between 'relaxation' and 'tension'. It's easy to get diverted too far down one path and have to return to the other to find balance.
As a teacher or coach, one is always on the lookout for means of conveying new sensations with words/concepts/exercises. And there's always going to be some accessory 'tension' (new sensation?) associated with asking folks to try new things. I suspect Jeff's analogies are likely with this intent, as he's quite an accomplished shooter.
I agree, and additionally, these "balances" are individual experiences. I shoot with CCT125US in person. I'm about twice his weight. How does that effect recoil mitigation? I run a fairly loose grip, he uses a "wringing" tension grip. A friend of ours uses a "crush" grip. It's really hard to find these balances not just as the right amount of tension, or where it is applied from, but specifically how is it applied by an individual's specific body type.
These things are important to read and take to the range and test, but at the end of the day, it is an individual journey that can be influenced, but not taught.
There's no dichotomy. For the most part in sports you want to be loose so you can move fast, but tight at critical moments for precise application of force. What happens is you pulse on a full-body contraction to initiate a powerful movement like a punch or golf swing, then relax through the movement for speed of motion, then contract again at the critical moment to apply the maximum controlled force when the club impacts the ball or the punch lands. Per Stuart McGill and co.:
McGill, S.M., Chaimberg, J., Frost, D., Fenwick, C. (2010) The double peak: How elite MMA fighters develop speed and strike force. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 24(2): 348-357.
Most people learn to do this naturally, but that doesn't mean it can't be improved with training.There are more than a few ideas about how to achieve this improvement, though.
McGill, a spine biomechanics researcher, seems to suggest training the full body contract/relax pulse rather than inserting it consciously into your movements. For example (vid might not be safe for work as it involves a fat, shirtless powerlifter):
https://youtube.com/watch?v=sPxbYHh3caQ
Kelly Starrett, a sports DPT, on the other hand suggests as much as possible actively practicing a brace position involving abdominal contraction and external rotation of the hips and shoulders. Demonstrated here:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=uN642Z99TbA
This varies slightly from McGill's brace position, which involves depressing the shoulders rather than externally rotating the hips and shoulders, though he seems to only suggest it for weightroom movements. Demonstrated here:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=h3n8z1wy_SQ
And wrestlers and martial artists have done the "shake it loose" thing between bouts just about forever.
Isn't that, by definition, a dichotomy?
Seriously though…
Starrett's Youtube channel and his books are personal favorites. And I'm familiar with some of McGill's work but I had to go digging to re-read this abstract. How are you suggesting the Double Peak contraction concept applies to shooting?
It's more the idea that you can be loose when you need to be loose and tight when you need to be tight, even within a single movement, and that it might be worth practicing tightening in general or quickly tightening and relaxing in general. For exact applications to shooting, I think it'd be better to hook some GMs up to an EMG machine rather than to speculate.Isn't that, by definition, a dichotomy?
Seriously though…
Starrett's Youtube channel and his books are personal favorites. And I'm familiar with some of McGill's work but I had to go digging to re-read this abstract. How are you suggesting the Double Peak contraction concept applies to shooting?
Crossfit strikes again. He's trying to take stuff he learned at a Level 1 weekend seminar and apply it to shooting.
That's where this came from.
No. I never was interested in Crossfit. Even back in 2004 when I first encountered it the cult mentality was too off-putting and the way it was cribbed from wrestling conditioning too obvious. I like golf and my uncle is a pro golfer, which is where I picked this up originally. However, it seems to be a general principle in athletics. I'm sure Google Scholar can provide less-accessible sources if you prefer that level of discussion.
Reply With Quote
