is this a good exercise?
how well do they work your hams?
how well do they work the lower back?
what other muscle groups do they work?
how many of u use them?
are they worth including in a routine?
"Discipline is never an end itself, only a means to an end." - Robert Fripp
i just do back extensions
hope that helps
I don't think they are worth putting in your routine. I think the only exercise you need for your lower back is stiff legged deadlifts. Good mornings don't even work your hamstrings too much.
Good mornings are stricktly for lower back and that's why I'm comparing them to s.l.d.l's.
Darcy, sldl are not stricly for the lower back, as a mather of fact they are mostly used for the hamstrings
I agree w/ frankster as they work hams hard w/ proper form but the lower back is certainly involved as a major assist or stablizer
Of course sldl's are primarily done for hamstrings. What I mean is that I think sldl's are better for the lower back than normal deadlifts. Just the lower back.
SLDL's work the lower back more than conventional dead's, and goodmorning's work the lower back more than SLDL's.
The answer is YES. If you want a big squat and/or deadlift, goodmorning's will definitely help.
I didn't really like good m's when i did em, my back just felt like it was in a really vulnerable position (for muscle failure and back injury)
I don't know try em and see what they feel like Franky. They do have a greater range of motion (backwise).
ive used them both, darcy, thanks
But the fact remains that conventionnal deads are better for lower back development... i'd say the ROM is about the same and with conventional, you can use more weight while hitting you hams less ( while they still work a great deal) by bending your knees
I'm real big on lower back support.
So I do deadlifts and weighted hyperextensions. I like to do back on the same day as abs. Makes me feel real good all around that area.
Stiffs use a greater range of motion for the lower back than do standard deadlifts. The fact that the back is required to move through a greater ROM and is still being highly stressed makes them a better exercise for the lower back. Not a better OVERALL exercise, but a better exercise for the lower back. Good mornings work the hamstring muscles as stabilizers only, so they essentially isolate the lower back. The problem with this whole conversation is that the lower back gets stressed to some extent in almost all movements, and heavily stressed in squats, deads, rows, bench presses (for some people), overhead presses, and other movements. The lower back is in no need of excess work for most people. If you squat, your lower back is getting sufficient stimulation. If you squat and deadlift, it is getting sufficient bordering on overstimulation. If you squat, deadlift, and perform stiffs and or good mornings, then you are definitely overtraining your lower back. So, you probably don't need to worry about the efficacy for the lower back of stiffs vs. good mornings.
I disagree, if we could use as much weight for the sldls as the normal deads, maybe the ROM would make it a better lower back exercise, but decause of the difference in weight, and the fact that sldls done correctly work more the hams than lower back, i have to stick to my point and say that conventional deads are better for the lower back.
You may stick to your point, but it is wrong. Think about it for a second. Why can you use more weight in the standard deadlift? It is because more muscles are involved. Your quads do quite a bit of work in the standard deadlift. You also are performing the movement with a more upright back, allowing the lower back to be less involved, and thus be less limiting. Your quads, hams, glutes, and lower back all work in unison during the standard deadlift (major muscles--i am not counting the forearms, traps, delts). During a stiff, it is the hams, glutes, and lower back. The lower back is more strongly involved as a limiting factor because you do not use as great a ROM. Partial movements, no matter how heavy, do not train a muscle as well as full range movements.
hmmm, so using your logic, would that mean that bench pressing is a less effective exercise for the chest than the fly? im not flaming you, just trying to uderstand your way of thinking here
Don't mess with the best or you'll lose like the rest!!!!
This is what these forums are for, debating things, not have one person who we all listne to. If that were the case, we wouldnt have the option ''reply''
i believe that the chest fly or pec deck IS a better exercise for the chest. not a better overall exercise but it isolates the chest to a much greater extent.Originally posted by Frankster
that mean that bench pressing is a less effective exercise for the chest than the fly?
Last edited by mds_79; 03-28-2001 at 09:40 PM.
"Discipline is never an end itself, only a means to an end." - Robert Fripp
If you squat, deadlift, and perform stiffs and or good mornings, then you are definitely overtraining your lower back. So, you probably don't need to worry about the efficacy for the lower back of stiffs vs. good mornings.
Tell that to Louie Simmions and Dave Tate and all the people they train.
They seem to be able to produce some descent squatters among other things with all that work you mentioned in the above statement.
Maki Fit Blog
At Large: Optimize Your Body | Dynamic Conditioning |
My articles on Wannabebig
"Soli Deo Gloria"
"Test all things; hold fast what is good.": 1 Thessalonians 5:21
"I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do--this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.
So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God's law; but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? Thanks be to God--through Jesus Christ our Lord!"
"Judo is not about strength. Yet in the learning curve, all Judokas get strong. Only with time do you learn where to apply that strength."
The Art of Judo
MAc, do you think those guys might take steroids? Hmmmmm, could be! Do you think those guys might be genetic superiors who have a much better than average ability to recover? Hmmmmmmm, could be! That is a poor argument. Nuff said.
Frankster, I don't mind if you don't agree with me. Yes, I do think that a fly or crossover is a better exercise for the pectoralis. Actually, assuming your anatomy permits them, I think the pec-dek is the best exercise for the pecs. You inadvertently hit the nail on the head with your question. The pec-dek is a superior exercise for the PECS, not overall. The bench is a superior overall exercise because it trains not only the pecs, but the tris, delts, and even the lats to a certain extent. It is more efficient at training the upper body. Get it?
I'm not going to argue that some or most of the guy's a Westside take steroids, but if you took the time to review their periodization training you would see that they don't work the same lift over and over again. This is presicely the way the try to avoid overtraining. There are a number of articles that you should read before making unreinforced remarks.
Do you know how often they train deadlifts?
Frankster, do you just want to argue for the sake of arguing.
Yes, flies isolate the chest A LOT more than benchpress, and Yes, SLDL isolate the lower back more than Conventional or Sumo deadlifts. I don't see how hard that was. Your obviously not a kinesiologist