Is Static Constraction the same as Isometrics??

[kenpopaul]

Hi All,

Just been reading a Pete Sisco ebook about Static Contraction, Am i right in saying it's more or less Isometrics??

I know it's using very heavy weights, moving it to your strongest range then holding it for as long as possible. Isn't this the same principle as doing Isometrics??

Many people say they've got great results using Static Contractions (I know Tony Robbins raves about it too).

Basically it's the same thing with Isometrics as they're done against an immovable object. Except we do iso's at 3 ranges (beginning, middle and end).

Am I right in the comparison??

- Kenpopaul

[gruntbrain]

Steve Justa mentions such training in the isometric chapter in his book

[tom]

Except we do iso's at 3 ranges (beginning, middle and end).

That's the difference that makes it different. And there is no weight involved. The three ranges (among an infinity), means you are training your weak angles, too. Static contraction only trains the strongest angles.

I used static contraction successfully as a warm up to lifting heavy weights. For example, supporting 500 pounds will make benching 300 feel light to the body. However, I did not use static contraction as a strength building tool. And that is all weight talk, and static contraction is a weightlifting protocol.

So yes, isos can be at the strongest angles, too, but that is only one of an infinity of angles you can use.

Tom

[gruntbrain]

BTW, Steve Justa & others who perform "weighted isometrics" use multi-postioned lockouts; some use even more than 3.

[John Peterson]

Hey Friends,

We have covered this before. But it seems to be something that comes up every so often so let me offer my insights. In my research into Isometric Contraction dating back back sixty years when Isometrics were starting to become the rage of the strength training community it was understood that Isometric Contraction would help weight lifters get past 'sticking points' in any given lift by allowing the lifter to apply intense Isometric Contraction specifically at the point of 'Least Strength', in other words at their sticking point that prevented them from lifting further. This technique was literally the polar opposite to what is advocated by "static contraction". Take for instance, the great Paul Anderson. He literally had barbells hanging by chains that he would then lift and hold at his sticking point as long as possible until he developed the strength to get past it, which he often did. In his time Anderson truly was "The World's Strongest Man" at 5'9" and 360 pounds.

This is the problem with static contraction as I see it. If a person takes the heaviest weight possible and holds it at the position of greatest strength and only that position, over a period of time he creates a far greater disparity between his point of greatest weakness and his point of greatest strength within any given range of motion. Comparatively speaking the disparity grows because one is creating even greater strength where one is already strong while doing nothing to enhance strength at the weak point. This technique will create a tremendous strength imbalance over time. And also make an athlete far more vulnerable to injury.

This is why Professor James Baley who invented the Isometric Power Belt was so adamant about developing full range strength. Professor Baley flat out stated that he had seen THE POSITIVE results delivered using the Isometric Power Belt for 25 minutes that would require more than two hours with the use of weights. BUT with weights you have the very real risk and probability of spinal compression and and over stress injuries to joints, tendons and ligaments.None of which is even remotely associated with the Isometric Power Belt. Bottom line: Coach Baley invented the Isometric Power Belt as the safest way to achieve Super Human Strength. You can literally go all out and at the end of any contraction at any angle there is nothing to fall back on you or injure you. And you have the distinct advantage of being able to use the Isometric Power Belt virtually any time and anyplace.

So is 'Static Contraction' a valuable technique? Not unless you want to hold heavy weights at your position of greatest strength but that's about it. If you want full range strength and development get yourself an Isometric Power Belt for all gain and no pain strength building.

---John Peterson

[tom]

use multi-postioned lockouts; some use even more than 3.

So, not so much lock-outs as holds . . . didn't know that.

Tom

[kenpopaul]

Some great insights from you all. Very interesting!!

I'm getting really into Isometrics at the moment since seeing good results from some of my physio iso exercises. I think I need to read IPR again and start adding much more iso's to my training.

This is the problem with static contraction as I see it. If a person takes the heaviest weight possible and holds it at the position of greatest strength and only that position, over a period of time he creates a far greater disparity between his point of greatest weakness and his point of greatest strength within any given range of motion. Comparatively speaking the disparity grows because one is creating even greater strength where one is already strong while doing nothing to enhance strength at the weak point. This technique will create a tremendous strength imbalance over time. And also make an athlete far more vulnerable to injury.

-- Very interesting points here John!! something I didn't really think about and so damaging in the long term!! Makes me wonder how so called 'Experts' overlook things like this. It could literally damage a persons body beyong repair (As with Weight training long term in general).

Need to get myself an Iso Power Belt. Next thing on my list I think.

- Kenpopaul

[gruntbrain]

As with a Power Rack, JP's PB can facilitate multi-postioned "weighted isometrics" - lockout a bar( even an empty one) against an anchored PB. Our weightlifting friends will enjoy using the PB as a "portable Power Rack"

[sillypup]

the iso power belt is also great for traction of the neck. just make sure you wrap it around the back of the neck and not the actual neck. hehe..

static contraction is just incomplete because they only focus on one hold position, kenpopaul. the isometric principles are sound. just delivering the application with weights at one angle isn't safe. also it seems to be a macho system in that it focus on who can hold the most weight without regard to function. its' like a contest of who can hold the most weight in the weight lifting field. I think the author took isometric principles of max tension and relabel it static contraction to get a niche and just focus on one hold position.

I suggest sticking with john's presentation of isometrics as it's complete and safe and you get results.

[gruntbrain]

Take a walk on the wild side by trying a static contraction with a lying leg raise. It'll be a CORE challenge but don't do it if you've got a bad back