do you agree with Rippetoe on ABS? [articles]

[noflyingcars]

Rip aka strength god published a couple of articles on abs training:


http://startingstrength.com/articles...y_rippetoe.pdf


http://startingstrength.com/articles/abs_rippetoe.pdf

(if you're short of time read only the second)




He says that barbell exercises are all you need to get a strong core. The job of your abs is simply to stabilize the spine, to connect the force from your lower body to your upper body; they act as a chain to make your whole body work as a system.


This makes sense and I'm entirely convinced that if we're talking about abs STRENGTH Rip is absolutely right.


However I'm wondering about SIZE. To elicit hypertrophy on the rectus abdominis are the abs isolation exercises any useful?
Are sits up, crunch, leg raises etc any useful to pack on mass on the abs?

The question comes from my reasoning that if your abs are strong enough to e.g. deadlift 3 plates, doing a sit up or any kind of ab exercise will be useless because your abs will be stimulated nowhere near a decent RM. The weight you can load on the ab exercise is simply too light to have an hypertrophy effect.


Rip explains that with abs exercises you get a pump for the simple fact that the muscle is moving, and you get sore because you work the muscle in a eccentric phase (that is much more prone to cause DOMS rather than isometric contraction). Thus they appear to be working your abs, but I wonder if they are actually getting bigger.




I am all for isolation exercises, but I just can't manage to do a single abs exercise and finding it effective. Crunches (even weighted) seem too easy, sits up on a decline slope hurt my back...



Did anybody here get good abs with only squat/deadlift/press/etc. ?

[Rasputin4]

I don't do any direct ab work, just a bunch of compounds, and I love it. My abs get hit from virtually everything I do. A few years ago I was doing direct weighted ab work and my waistline increased. I'm not exactly pleased about that result because my chest has always lacked mass and I'd like it to look larger by comparison. If bulging abs is what you want, though, then maybe a combination of cardio and direct ab work would be the way to go. Doing compounds plus cardio would be likely be sufficient to make your abs look decent if your bf was lowered enough.

[Engineer_Guy]

Rippetoe does not train bodybuilders.

Beyond the realm of novice strength training take anything he says with a grain of salt.

[chazzy1864]

I agree that to get a strong core, you only need the heavy compounds. Those exercises work just fine in strengthening the core.


However, I do not feel that indirect training alone will net a very good looking stomach. You can get above average abs at best, IMO. For better looking abs, I'd say use direct work.


Actually... that philosophy tends to apply to any muscle. If you want better looking muscles, it is usually best to give them direct training.

[ZoranM]

He says that barbell exercises are all you need to get a strong core.

True. When you are selling a book about barbells.

To elicit hypertrophy on the rectus abdominis are the abs isolation exercises any useful?
Are sits up, crunch, leg raises etc any useful to pack on mass on the abs?

Of course not. All the people in the world who do them are idiots.

The question comes from my reasoning that if your abs are strong enough to e.g. deadlift 3 plates, doing a sit up or any kind of ab exercise will be useless because your abs will be stimulated nowhere near a decent RM. The weight you can load on the ab exercise is simply too light to have an hypertrophy effect.

So are you.

[geoffstgermaine]

The question comes from my reasoning that if your abs are strong enough to e.g. deadlift 3 plates, doing a sit up or any kind of ab exercise will be useless because your abs will be stimulated nowhere near a decent RM. The weight you can load on the ab exercise is simply too light to have an hypertrophy effect.

Where to start... this reasoning doesn't make sense. During a deadlift there is no point at which the abs take anywhere near 100% of the load. Clearly during almost any ab exercise I can think of the % of the load taken by the abs is going to be higher than during a deadlift. This means that even though there may be less weight, the abs may be required to generate more force in order to complete the movement.

The reasoning you're using could be extended to every muscle activated during the deadlift. Since I can move more weight on a bent-over row than a barbell curl does that mean a barbell curl can't elicit hypertrophy because you use less weight?

[lift4sport]

I didn't do a single ab exercise for about 4 months. Did a lot of explosive, olympic, and compound lifts. Dropped my weight by 20lbs and my bodyfat from 18ish% - 10%. Had very visible and defined abs. I feel like holding hundreds of pounds overweight or on your shoulders is a great way to strengthen your core. In fact, I've never seen anybody who can hold hundreds of pounds overhead who DOESN'T have a strong core - it's pretty much required to stabilize that much weight. I find that I get enough ab stimulation from these exercises.

That being said, my abs didn't pop like many fitness models or guys on magazine covers. Was that my goal? No. Did I train for it? Nope. It is very possible to have natural, cut looking abs without doing direct work to them. But there is a limit to how defined they will be without direct work to make each muscle really bulge.