Printable View
;D. Your views
.Whats your take on them. I remember in the 60s when I was introduced to them, and thinking well if the Russians are doing this shit it must be good. Them being good supposedly in the Sports Sciences it must be the Bollocks. Today I think it is Bollocks .
Hey Scrap
I can't imagine ending the training sessions in our boxing club without the groundwork that we do, which I guess includes plyometrics. Exercises like Burpees, Pike Jumps, Tuck Jumps, Star Jumps and all that other good stuff. The boxers all moan, but as they say, the only time to worry about a boxer is when they're not moaning!
I tend to mix them up to give some variety, as opposed to just slamming through ton-ups. For example, I'll sort out 3 x 3 minute rounds. In each round, we'll fit in 6 exercises (30 seconds per exercise). In round one I'll select exercises that work legs and chest, in round two it will be stomachs and chest and in round three it is legs and stomachs. The majority of plyometrics relate to the legs, but some chest ones can be worked in as well (remember John Conteh doing clap press-ups on TV to promote one of his fights!).
It's all good Scrap, I'll register a big vote for groundwork, including plyometrics.
Good question mate.
Fran
Fran I dont class those as Plyometrics, I agree with you. Im talking Heavy Shock Plyos, the 3ft depth drops that sort of thing.
I've read that shock plyometrics should only be implemented in the latter stages of a program. I wouldn't want to risk injury so close to a fight.
I've personally had great success with plyo's, doing them even for a month I noticed a significant difference in my vertical leap and power off the mark.
Recently I've been looking at plyo's a lot, due to my changing needs (no longer boxing, but for afl). They can be extremely benefitial, but only a few golden rules...
1) You must be fresh, you do them at the start of training and no more than 2-3 times a week, a day of rest in between. If you do them at the end of training, you run the risk of injury and gain not nearly as much benefit.
2) You must be decently conditioned already, there's not much point doing plyo's unless you already have a good base strength already. It can be a good idea to strengthen the legs first. Although a lot of boxers do a lot of burpees/squats/tuck jumps already, which should be adequate.
3) Don't overdo it, plyo's are comparable to sprint training. The efforts should be short, sharp and at max effort. People who are starting off are suggested to do about 60 "touches" max per session.
Why the change of mind scrap?
Salty, experience of other ways of doing things. Do a lot of work with people who have injurys through impact. 90% of the time. Newtons Law and the Eyes are the problem. Privately I work with a lot of Footballers, who when all else fails they get sent to me it appears, its usualy the Uni that send them or a freind of a freind. Now most of the time its Plyos where the problem has occured or to much impact. Its interesting when they go back, and are tested there Fitness levels have improved by 10% to 15%. Anyway theres qiute a bit of Testing going on at the moment all interesting stuff.
I can say for a few years while boxing i was doing plyos and as a kid for TKD i did plyo's but now i dont really do them and dont get me wrong im not very clued up about how they effect the body but i just dont think they work for me maybe coz of my bodytype? for the first 2 years of boxing i did plyos and honestly didnt notice any extra speed or strength in those 2 years, but through this later year i have stopped the plyo's worked on balance and i can say im not the slowest of fighters now, i believe the key to speed is balance sure i still thinkl physically your muscles used for any sport may get a little stronger and faster while you partake in that sport, but im starting to believe the key to speed and explosivness is proper technique and good balance. im very interested in where this topic is going because ive been debating wether to start up plyo's again as im told i have a fight in june or so this fellow says but im starting to wonder if hes just messing me about. its all going a bit pear shaped but i figured my first fight would, anyway back to the point what do you think is the key to speed and power scrap?
Hopefully you will be getting an understanding of it later this week ;D
I cant wait scrap lol, can anyone else claim similair experience to me on this one? like i said after 2 years of doing plyo's vs 1 week of learning good technique i say technique wins out for speed and power, after those 2 years the tiny gains in speed or power i did make (if any) seemed like nothing compared to a tiny adjustment in technique which instantly added more speed and power without changing my body physically at all. what do others think plos have done for them personally? good, bad, nothing?
Most definitely mate, plyo's are like the icing on the cake and not the flour used to make it. Also what exercises were you doing?Quote:
Originally Posted by WayneFlint
Heres smething to think about, spelling in my case ;D. What causes a reaction fastest the Sting or the Tickle.
I Cant really say, the reaction to a tickle or sting which would be quickest? i dont know i dont even know if those reactions could be measured lol, enlighten us scrap are you saying somthing like controlling those types of reflexes and applying it to a movement would be a faster way of movement? because the eyes arent involved? or have i just been reading it over and over in my head till ive made a connection up in my mind that doesnt really exsist? lol
Its about analyization of the senses, the qiuckest reply. I would say its the Tickle that the subconcoius respondes to,for speed. You have to pick the spots where the receptors abound.
Thanks for your time again yesterday m8 it was good to just talk about things after training, im starting to understand the more we train and chat when i go home and think about what where doing and how it effects the body, like you said the human body really is the greatest machine we have, im starting to realise more and more the basic old fasioned plyometrics have been a waste of time, my foot speed last night and this morning is proof ;D, its pure genious that mechanism you use for movement scrap how many hours a day could you spend on that without over training? every step without it on feels like a wasted step now haha , all i can say about a lot of training boxers and boxing trainers are doing is that they are training the half of their body that completes things but isnt the area they should be looking at for consistent overall improvement, come to think of it this can be seen in every sport i think not just boxing.
It helped me out quite a bit playing football. I am a firm believer in plyometrics for Speed and Explosive power, but the issue is they don't do much for stamina. If you pair plyometrics with a solid stamina regimine you're going to be in great ATHLETIC shape which of course differs from just being "in shape" or "ripped".Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrap
I think plyometrics is the only thing that can increase punching power and not adversley affect handspeed or form. Actually I think by doing plyometrics you increase your handspeed as well, I know it got me off the line harder and faster in football.
Before I did plyometric workouts with the University of North Carolina (at the Speed and Explosive Power Camp) I had about a 5.0 40 yard dash, bench pressed 240-250 as a max, power cleaned about 200-220 as a max, and after my regimine changed I ran a 4.7 40, benched close to 300 pounds (before seperating my shoulder playing football), and power cleaned 285 or so. I whole heartedly buy into plyometrics, but if you're doing boxing you need to add in some stamina workouts as well.
Maybe they are more effective for some bodys than for others like many exercises can be, but in my experience i dont think they do a great deal for me perhaps because of my body type. i just think there are better ways to develop the fast twitch fibres which my body responds to much better, ive always liked a more scientific approach to training since i was lifting weights a few years ago and was always interested in hearing new theorys on better ways to stimulate the muscles more completely, the muscle fibre is like a chain each ''link'' in turn will contract when it recieves the message depending on what position the muscle is what determines how many fibres and how many links in the stimulated fibre will hear that message and contract depending on the position of the muscle not all links in the stimulated fibre will hear the message, if you can put the muscle in the favourable position where most recruitment (clearer messages are sent)can be gained then more ''links'' in the fibres will contract, i would consider it a much more complete stimulation for the fast twitch fibres, which then brings me back to what i said in an earlier post technique and how good technique can out do muscle development in my opinion of it all however it does not mean muscle development should be ignored as both are what contributes to the final explosiveness of the muscle, hope im not giving too much away scrap :-X