Atrainer's BANNED Excercises. Your thoughts?

[HiTMe]

http://www.revised-training.com/banned_exercises.htm

Been doing some reading lately and happen to stumble onto Atrainer's site.

He has a section of banned excercises where he explains the flaws of each excercise.

Some well-known "mass-building" excercies include the bench press, military press, upright row, and straight bar curls.

I'm pretty sure a lot of people incorporate the excercises mentioned above as a major part of their workouts.

Should we be doing them or not?

[rik_q]

I've had good gains from bench, bar curls and military press, so i'm happy to continue using them. He bans those exercises, yet I didn't notice him offering any good alternatives?

Oh, theres lots of 'buy now' links to his training materials, how convenient!

[Ayemelek]

lol he just wants to sell his ****. those exercises are some of the best available. nothing has done more for my arms than straight barbell curls.

[IronAbrams]

Awful lot of absolutes there. First time I've ever heard of overhead presses causing impingement too.

[LungeManiac]

OMG. This guy is so full of it. Bench press, military press, preacher curls, straight bar curls and lunges are some of the most classic exercises in body building. What's next - Dead lifts are banned from power lifting. Geez!

[Sinsate17]

Search for posts he's started - he has a unique replacer for bench press that I find much more effective at building size and strength, not to mention gentler on my RC. His better ab workout is nice too, as well as his "reverse shrug" which isolates the lats.
He is, from what I understand, a large cable advocate. They do have some serious advantages, however. But yes, he wants to sell his stuff. I'm quite sure it's good, however, as his posts here are quite educated.

[Tyciol]

I'm reading all of these, and going to share my thoughts.

Bench Press: The problem is that he does not look critically at the study he references. 'Bench press' is not defined, at least in his review of the study, and may refer only to the close-grip bench press. It does not address the bodybuilding bench press (which may not have been used) which uses the pecs a lot more. It does not describe the width of the grip used on the bar. It does not describe whether muscle-shifting techniques like pulling the bar apart (triceps) or crushing it together (chest) were incorporated by the lifters. This study is incomplete and not extensive enough evidence to dismiss the bench press as a bad exercise for the chest.

Triceps kickback: Criticizing it for being unilateral is stupid. Not only is it possible (just very awkward) to do them with a barbell, but unilateral exercises are very good. You may as well say never to curl the biceps independantly either. He says that resistance is only applied in part of the RoM. This is true. This is not a flaw in the exercise, it's an aspect. It would be wrong to rely on this exercise along for complete triceps stimulation, but that doesn't make it a bad movement. It is very effective for targetting the fibres engaged near full extension of the elbow. He mentions the mistake of lifting with the biceps and using momentum to complete the exercise, this is not a flaw in the exercise, but a mistake which if avoided through not using momentum, is not a problem. 'Can't be performed heavy' is not a legitimate criticism of the movement. The reason for this is due to disadvantageous leveredge, since the bones aren't being moved. This is an aspect of ALL isolation movements compared to compounds. It doesn't make them useless, it just means you have to use more rep variation (build up high, go low on higher weight) compared to higher ones which can be microloaded better for a more consistant rep range in training. Just being heavier does not mean other exercises will provide 'higher resistance'. He does not understand how resistance works. Replicating the range of motion is immaterial, and a wrong criticism. It is not the RoM, but rather the resistance curve applied through the RoM (not to mention the traction of the elbow joint) which is unique about the movement. I'd agree that prioritizing other exercises makes more sense, not due to efficiency however, but utiliarianism, obviously it isn't the 1 you'd pick if you could only do 1, but that is not how exercises are judged.

Lunges: This is firstly inaccurate as while there is assymetrical unilateral emphasis in lunges (and split squats) it is not a true unilateral exercise. The back leg often takes much more than just a stabilization role, and actively targets the knee extensors of that leg (at a very brutal angle, considering the ankle of the shin with the ground) to air the front one in getting back forward (in a back lunge) or in pulling the body back (in a front lunge). So his criticism of that limb recovering is inaccurate. The same criticism could easily be levied at people who lock out at the top of bench presses and squats. Even if you don't totally lock out, the bone alignment still removes a lot of the tension. Really, the only way to maintain maximal tension in a freeweight exercise is to stay isometrically in the bottom of the stretch where the leveredge is the least advantageous. It's just a natural aspect of isotonic movements utilizing RoM, he needs to let it go. He's correct about the loss of tension that can occur, but I see this a lot more often in forward lunges, in back lunges you tend to go slower and more controlled and keep tension in the flexed front leg. That being said, the loss of tension during front lunges is countered by the immense stimulation of muscle as you decellerate once you've planted the front leg. Criticizing a series of 1-rep sets isn't really well founded either, there's nothing really wrong with a loss of tension. Technically this happens with running too (and actually, there's much less continual tension in sprinting compared to lunges which are rather lengthly in tension held in comparison) and that can cause increases in muscle growth and endurance too. Brief losses in tension do allow oxygen to reenter, but it doesn't obscure the fact that you're still exceeding the power capacity of the slow-twitch muscle fibres. They may not go inactive due to hypoxia, but the fast-twitch anaerobic fibres are still used. He's probably right about the limited RoM though, due to instability you probably can't use the RoM with enough weight compared to something like squatting. It's ballistic due to the stepping and having to choose foot placement distracting from ideal performance. Split squats don't have the footstepping problem though since you place your feet in a lunge ahead of time, and would be a good alternative. They still have instability issues but ones people can probably adapt to. The only difference is you can't alternate every rep like with lunges, you'd need different sets, 1 for each leading leg. Not being ideal for max force production doesn't mean you should ban an exercise though. Pistols suffer the same problem due to their instability relative to squats (and even squats, perhaps, compared to smith squats or leg presses) but the instability provides its own kind of stimulation and recruitment and can aid in gaining balance and health.

Preacher curl: He's totally right about the movement, but he misses the point: preacher curls were never meant to be used in a full RoM. They're a special exercise meant to be used with a limited RoM near full elbow extension to work it in a stretched position and target the fibres that engage at that point. Personally I don't really see the obsession had with it. I'm wondering what Atrainer would think of the Bowflex preacher curl attachment with pulley. It pulls from ahead rather than below, and the resistance increases due to the PowerRods so it gets a lot greater near peak contraction of the bicep. Methinks he'd embrace it compared to the freeweight version.

Upright row: I pretty much agree with him here, but while not the best for continual tension, I think this has value in learning to explode with the traps to create momentum, possibly kind of like a clean, so that the excessive momentum they create help the other muscles not work so hard. Also, doing this movement and turning it into a lateral raise at the top would be a possibility for doing heavier eccentrics without a spotter. Some people also do these bent elbow raises, but with hands in front instead of below. Essentially, with the upright row your shoulder is internally rotated, with the bent-elbow lateral raise it is about neutral (external rotation would be with hands above). All 3 are options of a better leveredged concentric precursor to heavy straight-arm eccentric lateral 'raise' (lowering) with dumbbells.

Military press: The observations he makes are legitimate. Still, he ignores that maintaining constant tension doesn't have to be done, and it isn't necessarily ideal. It's just one approach to weightlifting, and allows you to make greater gains using lighter weights since the slower-twitch ones can kick out if the tension is high enough to restrict the blood supply to create a hypoxic environment (not sure if that theory was every verified though, lol). Weightlifting's also done to build bone mass, and bearing a weight using your bone structure should certainly do that. If the pressing is done with a barbell held with a wider-than-shoulder grip, I think even at the top you would need to be engaging the deltoids to keep it there. This is a lot like wide-grips on the lat pulldown/pullup, the arm just simply won't be straight in line with the body, with wide grips it will be out to the side, so there's still levering on the muscle. The impingement stuff could be true, I don't know enough about impingement to judge. I would think using lighter weights with leveredge could cause less compression on joints (and compression causes impingement right?) so that's what he's getting at?

Hyperextension: This isn't really too controversial, considering how Westside and Elite FTS have been hyping the reverse hyper. That being said, even if the reverse is better (the discussion of why is still beyond my understanding, I dunno) I'm thinking there could be value in doing them both intermittantly. Whatever weak link the hyper has, surely focusing on stressing it intermittantly can strengthen it?

Straight bar curl: He answers his own problems with the exercise in noticing that tension is lost at the top because people use improper form by letting the elbows travel forward. It's also not totally bad seeing as how the long head of the biceps can aid the ant delt in bringing the arm up like that. He shouldn't rule out the exercise because he wants max tension at full flexion, he should just do drag curls... they solve that and you get some nice rear delt work in while you're at it. Perhaps if they're the weak link he'd consider that a problem? I'd also be interes in how he'd look at Pavel Tsatsouline's approach to the barbell curl in the end of his 'Power to the People' book performed with a wide grip with elbows kept at the sides achieved through externally rotating the shoulder, I think it would be an interesting critique. I think it provides a leveredge advantage, but to maintain it it actually does require resisted wrist supination since the weight is born on the outside pinky-area of the hand and is in a sense off-balance, being 'forward' which is on the inside of the hand due to the external rotation making 'inside' forward.

I really do like that idea of the triceps rope on the cable curl though, that sounds really cool. You twist the rope around your hand right?

He bans those exercises, yet I didn't notice him offering any good alternatives? Oh, theres lots of 'buy now' links to his training materials, how convenient!

Technically he does supposedly provide alternatives in the materials he tells you to buy

Search for posts he's started - he has a unique replacer for bench press that I find much more effective at building size and strength, not to mention gentler on my RC. His better ab workout is nice too, as well as his "reverse shrug" which isolates the lats.
He is, from what I understand, a large cable advocate. They do have some serious advantages, however. But yes, he wants to sell his stuff. I'm quite sure it's good, however, as his posts here are quite educated.

Has he posted them on these forums? Could you please provide links to them since you have personal experience and are advocating them? This will save every reader from finding them. Otherwise, it's easy to assume they don't exist.

[GoJu]

http://www.revised-training.com/banned_exercises.htm

Been doing some reading lately and happen to stumble onto Atrainer's site.

He has a section of banned excercises where he explains the flaws of each excercise.

Some well-known "mass-building" excercies include the bench press, military press, upright row, and straight bar curls.

I'm pretty sure a lot of people incorporate the excercises mentioned above as a major part of their workouts.

Should we be doing them or not?

the only 2 of those that I think are a real waste of time are kick backs and upright rows, other than that they're all great exercises and someone saying they're a waste of time for everyone is just biased and like someone said before just trying to sell their ****.

[labradarep]

I agree with some of his theories.

Here are some alternatives.

Preacher curl--- A company called Strive makes a plate loaded or selectorized ( weight stack with pin) preacher curl machine that has a c cam that keep tension on the biceps throughout the full range of motion. The Cam allows you to stick to your natural strength curve.

Upright rows ---- Use a rope handle attached to a low cable. This eliminates awkward grip with a straight handle

Bench Press---- Utilize a close grip and keep elbows slightly forward to help avoid "impingement" issues. This grip also activates Clavicular head quite well.

Military Press--- As long as you have no previous shoulder issues(injuries, etc...) this exercise is extremely important in developing strength both in vertcal overhead lifting(pressing) as well as horiuzntal pressing.
(If you want to argue this check out Charles Poliquin's thoughts on this subject. If anyone knows if an exercise is useless it is him)

Lunge--- are very useful. Yes Time under tension is low. Therefore you do more volume.
The suggestion about not letting your knee go past your toes is outdated. If you have no prior issues with your knees you can allow them to go past your toes. (Every time you descend stairs your knees go past your toes).


Tricep Kick backs--- good finishing isolation exercise for bodybuilding purposes. Can also be utilized as a pre-fatigue exercise.

I agree with Tyciol. Unilateral exercises are not useless. Yes they are time consuming and when efficiency is iportant find other better "Bang for your Buck" exercises.

[LungeManiac]

the only 2 of those that I think are a real waste of time are kick backs and upright rows, other than that they're all great exercises and someone saying they're a waste of time for everyone is just biased and like someone said before just trying to sell their ****.

Up-right rows work for some people as do kick backs.

Usually people who say a certain exercise is a waste of time are those exercises that don't work for them.

[LungeManiac]

Lunge--- are very useful. Yes Time under tension is low. Therefore you do more volume.
The suggestion about not letting your knee go past your toes is outdated. If you have no prior issues with your knees you can allow them to go past your toes. (Every time you descend stairs your knees go past your toes).

I've done lunges for years with no knee problems at all. If anything they have strenghted my knees. And yes - I do volume and they are highly effective.

[Dark_MadMax]

Wow criticising lunges,bench and mil press .

bench: Well his criticism is basically about pec stimulation. well he is a bodybuilding monkey so I guess becomeing stronger at the bench is of no cocern to him.

Lunges: "Not enough load", "too much time" .Well it is an accessory exericse and not replacement for squats. It is an excellent single leg exercises and he offers nothing in place of it

Mill .Press. Impingment blah blah blah. Well how else you train your overhead press?

[GoJu]

Wow criticising lunges,bench and mil press .

bench: Well his criticism is basically about pec stimulation. well he is a bodybuilding monkey so I guess becomeing stronger at the bench is of no cocern to him.

Lunges: "Not enough load", "too much time" .Well it is an accessory exericse and not replacement for squats. It is an excellent single leg exercises and he offers nothing in place of it

Mill .Press. Impingment blah blah blah. Well how else you train your overhead press?

criticising bench is a right of a passage if you want to be a bodybuilder on this site though

[Tyciol]

I agree with some of his theories.

Here are some alternatives.

Upright rows ---- Use a rope handle attached to a low cable. This eliminates awkward grip with a straight handle

Bench Press---- Utilize a close grip and keep elbows slightly forward to help avoid "impingement" issues. This grip also activates Clavicular head quite well.

The suggestion about not letting your knee go past your toes is outdated. If you have no prior issues with your knees you can allow them to go past your toes. (Every time you descend stairs your knees go past your toes).

I agree with a lot of what you've said, so I've only quoted some parts that have some problems that need to be addressed. Firstly, that rope thing for the grip in upright rows is great, but I don't think Atrainer listed those wrist strain issues as one of his grievances about the exercise. His problems seem to have more to do with how it works the delts. He probably should have though, so it's good you mentioned it.

He didn't mention any impingement issues in his bench press criticism, he talks about how it doesn't work the pecs enough. Using a closer grip would only exasberate this grievance of his. What I don't understand is why he thinks it should be 'banned' just because it works the triceps and shoulders more primarily than most people think. Isn't it still great for triceps with tension through most of the RoM? Certainly more RoM tension than a kickback.

I think you meant while ascending/climbing stairs. While it's true they also go past toes while descending/going down stairs, at that point it's more like a controlled ballistic, much like running the weight is not on the foot anymore as it flexes, it is in a freefall to be caught by the straightened leg in front of you. There's not much weight on the back leg when the knee goes past the toe while going downstairs. The 'don't let it go past' advise is usually to stop people from doing extreme stuff like hindu squats where the heel is lifted, I always figured.

Lunges: "Not enough load", "too much time" .Well it is an accessory exericse and not replacement for squats. It is an excellent single leg exercises and he offers nothing in place of it

Accessory exercises don't really require replacements since they aren't staples. He said to just do squats instead, so that would be the replacement he intends for them.

[Big Arm Big Pay]

all them exercises i do, just because you dont know how to do them right doesnt mean you should ban them from your workout. I've never head someone not doing military press wtf. Lunges either you cant get that burn in your glutes without doing them

[AHTTG]

criticising bench is a right of a passage if you want to be a bodybuilder on this site though

Repped + sig

[GoJu]

Repped + sig

cool

[TheRighteous]

http://www.revised-training.com/banned_exercises.htm

Been doing some reading lately and happen to stumble onto Atrainer's site.

He has a section of banned excercises where he explains the flaws of each excercise.

Some well-known "mass-building" excercies include the bench press, military press, upright row, and straight bar curls.

I'm pretty sure a lot of people incorporate the excercises mentioned above as a major part of their workouts.

Should we be doing them or not?

I have received great results from all of those exercises, so I think I'll keep doing what I'm doing.

[HiTMe]

Has anyone actually bought any of this training books that show you the alternatives to those banned excercises? There has to be at least 1 person that bought and used his material with some comments on how effective they were.

[Tyciol]

Yeah they've got to be out there somewhere. Btw I really like torrenting software, but it should only be used for things which are free.

[baybora]

any idiot with 30 dollars can make a website, so I would take the "banned exercise" list with a grain of salt

[Eclectic1]

Here's Atrainer's explanation of his exercises for the chest

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=624814

[Clean]

criticising bench is a right of a passage if you want to be a bodybuilder on this site though

No, the bench press is actually one of the most overrated exercises there is and is one that I agree is not needed. I didn't build my chest with benchpress, I built it with dumbbell presses and dumbell incline presses. I think that Incline barbell bench is really good and that decline is probably good too, but flat barbell bench doesn't give you a squeeze or develop any good mass in your pecs. Dumbbells and Flys are what builds the most mass and seperation.

[Dominik]

criticising bench is a right of a passage if you want to be a bodybuilder on this site though

I've got another one for you:

You only earn the right to pimp bench as the greatest chest exercise when you've got a chest bigger than Zac Efron's.

[GoJu]

see what I mean.

when did I ever say bench was the best chest exercise ever?

[Dominik]

see what I mean.

when did I ever say bench was the best chest exercise ever?

You made a comment which wasn't directed at anyone in particular. Expect me to do the same.

In case you missed it, there was a thread recently about whether bench was "necessary." Most argued that it wasn't, but a few said it was the best chest exercise and was basically non-negotiable. It's funny how smaller guys with pancakes for pecs can be so confident in their beliefs when there are quite a few people on this site along with pro bodybuilders who don't bench but have excellent chest development. Go figure.

[GoJu]

You made a comment which wasn't directed at anyone in particular. Expect me to do the same.

In case you missed it, there was a thread recently about whether bench was "necessary." Most argued that it wasn't, but a few said it was the best chest exercise and was basically non-negotiable. It's funny how smaller guys with pancakes for pecs can be so confident in their beliefs when there are quite a few people on this site along with pro bodybuilders who don't bench but have excellent chest development. Go figure.

I don't care about chest development....or at least I put it at second to my strength; I think for the most part the ones who are confident in their benching are the ones who are trying to get better at it, but every other person is telling them not to bench, it's pretty rediculous if you ask me.

for size I think pretty much anything works (compound or iso); but there are a great deal of people who's goal is to get the kind of strength guys like DiamondDelts, or Hola Bola, or you have; even though most of you will tell us not to.

[Dominik]

I don't care about chest development....or at least I put it at second to my strength; I think for the most part the ones who are confident in their benching are the ones who are trying to get better at it, but every other person is telling them not to bench, it's pretty rediculous if you ask me.

for size I think pretty much anything works (compound or iso); but there are a great deal of people who's goal is to get the kind of strength guys like DiamondDelts, or Hola Bola, or you have; even though most of you will tell us not to.

Nothing wrong with that. I've never criticized anyone here for only caring about strength, even if I personally wouldn't want to be strong without the size to show for it.

Fact is a lot of people seem to be forgetting there's a forum dedicated to powerlifting here (not to mention a lot of other sites) while this forum is obviously focused on bodybuilding, and the site is called Bodybuilding.com. Notice the regulars you mentioned aren't trolling the powerlifting forum stirring **** up about being small, or fat, etc. Yet the opposite happens here all the time.

[spirit3530]

I don't care about chest development....or at least I put it at second to my strength; I think for the most part the ones who are confident in their benching are the ones who are trying to get better at it, but every other person is telling them not to bench, it's pretty rediculous if you ask me.

for size I think pretty much anything works (compound or iso); but there are a great deal of people who's goal is to get the kind of strength guys like DiamondDelts, or Hola Bola, or you have; even though most of you will tell us not to.

back to your old tricks again eh GOJU. yet you don't have a strength trainer type avatar.


Mixed messages ftw.

[GoJu]

back to your old tricks again eh GOJU. yet you don't have a strength trainer type avatar.


Mixed messages ftw.

nor do a number of the guys in the PL forum....