what do you think?
|
Closed Thread
Results 1 to 30 of 52
Thread: weight training vs calisthenics
-
01-10-2012, 04:02 PM #1
weight training vs calisthenics
-
01-10-2012, 04:14 PM #2
-
01-10-2012, 04:16 PM #3
-
01-10-2012, 04:25 PM #4
-
-
01-10-2012, 04:32 PM #5
- Join Date: May 2011
- Location: New Zealand
- Age: 30
- Posts: 15,278
- Rep Power: 54803
For what? It depends on your goals. If you're going for size, its all about breaking down muscle fibers in the body through the appropriate methods and resting and eating so the muscle recovers and overcompensates. Can you do this with calisthenics? To a degree, yes. But there are several issues:
-When you add weight to calisthenics, are they still calisthenics? If so then its not a problem in this regard. Otherwise you'll eventually find you're doing these bodyweight exercises for more reps than what's optimal for growth. You can't just keep adding reps forever and expect it to work as well as increasing the weight used over time. The other problem is:
-Lack of exercises. So there's pull ups, push ups, dips, hand stand push ups etc, but what about parts of the body like the legs? Bodyweight squats won't cut it, and one legged squats won't work for long. There's also very few isolation exercises that one can do with calisthenics. Sure, compounds are more important but its pointless pretending that isolation exercises don't play a part in building a good physique.
If you want to get good at calisthenics, then obviously you'll want to train using calisthenics.'People are gonna remember me as a god forever... Like-like-like Troy, like Chiles heel, I'm a god forever I'll be remembered for thousands of years to come' - Jason Genova
Texas Method Mod: http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=171537443&p=1444534723&viewfull=1#post1444534723
-
01-10-2012, 04:56 PM #6
Both
-
01-10-2012, 05:22 PM #7
Versus is too black and white....
A combination of both can give you great results.
-
01-10-2012, 06:36 PM #8
- Join Date: Aug 2005
- Location: District Of Columbia, United States
- Posts: 26,327
- Rep Power: 35175
After some time, resistance WILL be required to advance.
Bodybuilding is 60% training and 50% diet. Yes that adds up to 110%, because that's what you should be giving it. Change the inside, and the physique will follow.
-
-
01-10-2012, 06:38 PM #9
Here's what I think. Both are important. In terms of athletic ability, calisthenics would probably be more superior than lifting heavy weights. If you want to be a competitive bodybuilder, including both techniques will lead to the best all around gains. In terms of bodybuilding as a lifestyle (non competitive) the two most important factors are eating the right amount of calories and putting stress on your muscles. It doesn't matter if you weight lift or do calisthenics. As long as you are putting stress on your muscles, constantly increasing that stress, and eating enough, you will increase muscle mass and therefore build your body, hence bodybuilding. There are definitely better ways of doing it but these are the fundamentals.
-
01-10-2012, 08:21 PM #10
If bigger, faster, stronger is the goal, then this is not true.
Also, what do you mean "in terms of athletic ability"? Do you mean "in preparation for a sport"?
I might be totally off-base here, but I don't think competitive bb'ers are too much into jumping jacks.
Also...
-
01-10-2012, 08:21 PM #11
-
01-10-2012, 08:47 PM #12
"ath·lete
n.
A person possessing the natural or acquired traits, such as STRENGH, AGILITY, AND ENDURANCE, that are necessary for physical exercise or sports, especially those performed in competitive contexts."
That is the definition of athlete from dictionary.com.
What I mean by athletic ability is the ability to contain all of those aspects (being an all around good athlete). Lifting weights is great. I'm not downing it. I know that most, if not all, sports involve weight training, but for those of us who may be pressed for time and want to either do one or the other, I would lean towards calisthenics being a better choice to prepare someone for a large variety of sports.
I was leaning more towards pushups, dips, and pullups rather than jumping jacks, although, jumping jacks make a great warm up for even the professional. That said, I would still consider weighted pullups, dips, and pushups to be calisthenics.
-
-
01-10-2012, 08:52 PM #13
-
01-10-2012, 09:04 PM #14
I'm just talking about people in general.
Calisthenics are better for real life application and tend to be safer. Why do you think the military focuses mainly on them?
Calisthenics are "Gymnastic exercises to achieve bodily fitness and grace of movement."
Calisthenics are calisthenics no matter how much weight you have on you. Wouldn't wearing a weighted vest while doing pullups be the same as a heavy person doing pullups? Either way, the definition describes it as a movement. I don't think adding weight changes that.
-
01-10-2012, 09:04 PM #15
-
01-10-2012, 09:05 PM #16
To make it clear. I love lifting weights and I think they are great.
I just think calisthenics have their advantages, as does weight lifting in certain situations.
-
-
01-10-2012, 09:06 PM #17
-
01-10-2012, 09:21 PM #18
-
01-10-2012, 09:26 PM #19
How are they better for "real life application"?
How are they safer?
No, it wouldn't. Adding a weight vest increases resistance.
Resistance training =/= calisthenics
Adding weight does change it.
Bodyweight squats = calisthenics
Squats with a barbell on your back =/= calisthenics
nomsayin'?
-
01-10-2012, 09:31 PM #20
- Join Date: May 2011
- Location: New Zealand
- Age: 30
- Posts: 15,278
- Rep Power: 54803
Real life application for what? You're talking out your ass about nothing specific. I feel like you're about to use the word 'Functional strength' any second now. Functional for what? What's wrong with the functionality you get from heavy squats, deadlifts, bench press, press, etc, (granted, pull ups are one of the best upper back exercises but like anything you will need to add weight eventually to continue getting stronger)? Is it somehow inferior to the strength you gain from push ups, dips and jumping jacks?
Calisthenics may or may not be better at preparing athletes for some sports, (obviously excluding bodybuilding, power lifting and oly lifting). How about some examples, followed by some sources?
Adding weight does in fact change that. I don't think anything else needs to be said here.'People are gonna remember me as a god forever... Like-like-like Troy, like Chiles heel, I'm a god forever I'll be remembered for thousands of years to come' - Jason Genova
Texas Method Mod: http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=171537443&p=1444534723&viewfull=1#post1444534723
-
-
01-10-2012, 09:47 PM #21
it is important able to move your own body weight from any angle with ease, that's what calisthenics does for you.
How are they safer? I don't know the physics behind it but I know that they are easier on the joints and more natural movements making it less likely to injure yourself.
I see what you're saying but I would still consider weighted pullups calisthenics. For sake of further argument lets just say that weighted pull ups are not calisthenics. It still doesn't change my statement that body builders use some calisthenics
-
01-10-2012, 09:52 PM #22
-
01-10-2012, 10:02 PM #23
I think you are misinterpreting what I am saying. Let me just clear it up.
I think that a equal mix of weights and calisthenics its most beneficial. I think that for gaining strength and muscle mass, heavy compound lifts are most important. I also think that for over all physical health calisthenics are more important. Are they better? No. it all depends on your goal.
For examples of sports, weights are better for bodybuilding and power lifting, like you said. Calisthenics are more beneficial for boxing, mma, tennis, basket ball, soccer, etc. sports where you need to be more agile and have a larger variety of athletic abilities use more calisthenics.
Above all that, I strongly support using both calisthenics and weights as part of your routine for any sport.. If time and money allow it, that is.
-
01-10-2012, 10:05 PM #24
-
-
01-10-2012, 10:07 PM #25
It seems like you're a good dude, but all this thread is basically saying is, "Lift some weights, do some conditioning, eat right."
To which any and all replies should be, "Yeah."
Nothing groundbreaking or controversial going on in here.
Also, doing general calisthenics isn't going to do much for making you better at a sport. "Functional training" and "sport specific exercises" are phrases that don't mean dick.
There is a strength coach whose stuff I read a lot of, and he had a good line about training for a sport:
"Get stronger in the weightroom, and get more skilled on the court/field/pitch"
And yes, there are several calesthenics-type exercises (box jumps come to mind) that will help you get bigger, faster and stronger. It's just the "vs." part in your OP that doesn't need to be there that has derailed this thread.Last edited by Lencho; 01-10-2012 at 10:13 PM.
-
01-10-2012, 10:13 PM #26
-
01-10-2012, 10:43 PM #27
-
01-10-2012, 10:58 PM #28
-
-
01-10-2012, 11:02 PM #29
- Join Date: Jun 2008
- Location: New York, United States
- Posts: 17,177
- Rep Power: 30409
That's a load of crap recovery is not dependent on the amount of resistance... recovery time is influenced by many factors
as for "safety precautions, and the ability to play the sport for a longer part of your life"
I don't even understand what you're trying to say therewho says love has to be soft and gentle ?
-
01-10-2012, 11:39 PM #30
- Join Date: May 2011
- Location: New Zealand
- Age: 30
- Posts: 15,278
- Rep Power: 54803
I'm pretty sure that's not what you originally said but I'll let it slide. I agree with you on the notion that a combination of calisthenics and weights is best, (but in a way, calisthenics is a form of weight lifting-I'll ignore this for the sake of easier communication).
What I don't get is how calisthenics make you more agile, as well as putting you in better physical health. Are you referring to the open chain-close chain argument, where basically the notion is (eg)that chin ups are better than lat pull downs and dips are better than decline bench press because your body, (rather than the bar/s you're pushing or pulling against), moves with the movement?
The only context where I can imagine it could easily be argued that calisthenics are superior to weight training that would be the case is gymnastics, where the sport basically consists of a display of bodyweight movements and holds, (even though the athletes use a combination).'People are gonna remember me as a god forever... Like-like-like Troy, like Chiles heel, I'm a god forever I'll be remembered for thousands of years to come' - Jason Genova
Texas Method Mod: http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=171537443&p=1444534723&viewfull=1#post1444534723
Similar Threads
-
calisthenics vs. weights
By jonnymontag in forum Teen BodybuildingReplies: 21Last Post: 05-14-2011, 06:59 PM -
Strength Training vs. Mile Run
By mmmsquats in forum ExercisesReplies: 20Last Post: 08-25-2009, 05:30 PM
Bookmarks