PDA

View Full Version : lazy man's S&C



sphericalcat
-25th August 2012, 10:57
Been thinking about this for a while. There is a great deal of talk about what is right and wrong S&C. The usual answers involve some sort of exercises, probably a gym, a qualified trainer... In other words: do what the best do. Of course the best live in a rather different world to the majority of fencers out there. They have higher levels of commitment, more supervised training time, more qualified input in general, are more likely to judge their needs accurately, be able to tell good advice from bad, have a background level of muscular-skeletal stability to take high-load 'beastings' without injury, and so on.

There needs to be some sort of 'lite' S&C for people nearer the bottom end. In no particular order, the requirements are:

1. Cheap and fun (so people will stick with it!).

2. Symmetrical.

3. Whole-body but 'leggy'.

4. Dynamic (emphasis on things like explosive power, balance, flexibility, perception of space...).

BUT

5. Low to moderate impact.

6. Easily adjustable loads (with no social pressure to outdo the beafiest guy in the gym!)

7. Reasonably low injury (at recreational level).

Basically, what I'm after is combinations of two or three activities I can recommend to people. But they have to 'go well' with fencing - i.e. clearly benefit performance and decrease chances of injury. What I've got on my list so far is

Climbing

Roller/ice skating

Break/Kossak dancing - this isn't really low impact, but the footwork tends to be quite elastic, so the impact is relatively well managed. Probably the most fun way to do plyomeytrics.

Space hoppers!

What are people's thoughts?

Cyranna's Father
-25th August 2012, 11:53
I have rediscovered cycling recently - not the 100s of miles club stuff but just using it for shopping trips & local things.

Doing an average of 10 miles per day (village shop is 3.5 miles away, nearest town is about 8, nearest big town 14) has toned and firmed up bits in a remarkable way in just a couple of months.

Boy keeps fit on a combination of rugby, judo & fencing all of which require core strength, good footwork, balance & bursts of speed (no accident those choices) so those are some fun & sociable sports that might be tried.

J4G
-25th August 2012, 12:04
Swimming is a good one

I've recently rediscovered basketball too, get a few mates together and play for a few hours a week and you'll see what it does for you

Cyranna's Father
-25th August 2012, 12:24
I forgot climbing - great workout if you go to these climbing wall places and spend some time there

Rudd
-25th August 2012, 12:26
A doorway chinup bar 10
A skipping rope 3
A secondhand set of adjustable dumbbells $30
A yoga mat 8
A space that is the length of the yoga mat and twice the width,

Twe days a week a circuit of
Squats
Pushups
Pullups
Situps
Skipping
Footwork
etc.

Very reps, weights etc over time.
Youtube is your friend.

30 minutes total including warmup and stretch at the end. Fulfills all the requirements, fun being relative.

S&C should reduce the risk of injuries. I've known lots of fencers who picked up more injuries doing yoga, playing basketball or rollerblading that they ever did from fencing.

sphericalcat
-25th August 2012, 13:07
A doorway chinup bar 10
A skipping rope 3
A secondhand set of adjustable dumbbells $30
A yoga mat 8
A space that is the length of the yoga mat and twice the width,

Twe days a week a circuit of
Squats
Pushups
Pullups
Situps
Skipping
Footwork
etc.

Very reps, weights etc over time.
Youtube is your friend.

30 minutes total including warmup and stretch at the end. Fulfills all the requirements, fun being relative.

S&C should reduce the risk of injuries. I've known lots of fencers who picked up more injuries doing yoga, playing basketball or rollerblading that they ever did from fencing.

Rudd,

This is actually the sort of thing I am not a big fan of - at least not in the context of fencing.

1. This kind of work-out will make you look good in the bedroom. But it won't necessarily make you a better fencer. Most of the exercises are aimed at working isolated muscle groups, and, unless you really know your stuff, they may well be the wrong ones. You may end up carrying a lot more weight with little or no tangible benefit.

2. It is quite hard to gauge loads and quite easy to do yourself a mischief. So not really suitable for children.

3. For most people fun has to involve either some element of problem solving or changing conditions. Body-building can be fun, but it is very much an acquired taste.

What I do like - for myself (I am 36, male and relatively clued up) - is kettlebells. You kill a lot of birds with one stone: wide variety of muscles, explosive, good cardio - and cheap. However, a lot of the same problems remain: easy to injure yourself with bad technique or overambitious loads, easy to bulk up too much in the wrong places, kind of repetitive...

sphericalcat
-25th August 2012, 14:03
Basketball is brilliant. When time and facilities are there, I use 15-30 minutes basketball as the warm-up (followed by stretches, footwork, plyometrics...).

Cycling also good, because it is so easy to work it into your daily routine. The downside is that it works quite a restricted set of muscles.

Judo and rugby I don't like. First of all they are, even at low level, quite high injury - especially rugby. And they are nasty injuries, the sort that, as a fencer, take you out circulation for a few weeks. Also, they tend to give you a lot of upper body bulk, which is not ideal for fencing.

The best martial arts to couple with fencing are, imo, the bouncy, kicking/punching ones like karate or wushu, not grappling ones. They are tactically quite similar to fencing - all about getting in and out of striking distance, so the physical demands are quite similar + the training format often incorporates excellent, tried and tested conditioning schemes. One caveat though: what I find as a coach is that kids with a martial arts background often progress very quickly to begin with and then hit a brick wall. The problem is that they very quickly catch onto the obvious similarities between fencing and whatever it is they already know, but struggle to appreciate a lot of fine difference.

TomA
-25th August 2012, 16:02
Rudd,

This is actually the sort of thing I am not a big fan of - at least not in the context of fencing.

1. This kind of work-out will make you look good in the bedroom. But it won't necessarily make you a better fencer. Most of the exercises are aimed at working isolated muscle groups, and, unless you really know your stuff, they may well be the wrong ones. You may end up carrying a lot more weight with little or no tangible benefit. Most of the exercises Rudd listed work several muscle groups in tandem. Bodyweight exercises will definitely not bulk you up. Dumb bells unless you really try are not going to make you big.

Resistance training (weights) will not turn you into a bodybuilder unless that is your specific aim. Try talking to some of the genuine meatheads in the gym about the lengths they have to go to in order to acquire that amount of muscle. It involves a lot of chicken, raw egg whites, protein shakes and BIG loads. A pair of dumbbells and a yoga mat in your bedroom are not going to lead to that by accident.

I'd add as well that a *small* amount of bulk is not a bad thing in a fencer. That most reliable of resources, Wikipedia, points out that 'An individual's physical strength is determined by two factors; the cross-sectional area of muscle fibers recruited to generate force and the intensity of the recruitment'. Physical strength is necessary to generate speed for fencing.




2. It is quite hard to gauge loads and quite easy to do yourself a mischief. So not really suitable for children.
Maybe with a 20 kg bar and several plates. Not with a pair of 10kg dumbbells in your bedroom.



3. For most people fun has to involve either some element of problem solving or changing conditions. Body-building can be fun, but it is very much an acquired taste.Again, there is a difference between resistance training and bodybuilding. As for being an acquired taste, working out releases seretonin, dopamine, testosterone and adrenaline (based on conversations with sports science undergrads, so citations probably needed). It's like sex, chocolate and alcohol all rolled into one. Mmmm.



What I do like - for myself (I am 36, male and relatively clued up) - is kettlebells. You kill a lot of birds with one stone: wide variety of muscles, explosive, good cardio - and cheap. +1

sphericalcat
-26th August 2012, 21:27
Tom,

Again, you are coming at this from a perspective of a fit young guy. There are a great many people in the community who don't fall into this category. It is not difficult to do yourself damage with two 10kg dumbbells. To give you an obvious example, there is a host of variations of dumbbell flys and rows which, for most people, are plenty dangerous with 10kg in each hand. For the record what the top coaches I've asked and the coaching literature I've come across generally recommend for fencing, so far as dumbbells go, is lots of fast reps with very light weights. Traditional resistance training comes into it in quite specific ways for serious athletes.

What Rudd describes is basically an old fashioned PE lesson. What this sort of thing mostly achieves is to build bulk and aerobic fitness - which is ideal if you want if your school leavers to go into national service where they'll spend a lot of time doing assault courses and running long distances with lots of stuff on their back. In fencing the requirements are completely different: Fencing mostly consists of short bursts of anaerobic activity. The loads are light - the weapons weigh next to nothing. There is a premium on speed over raw power, so activation trumps bulk. There is also a real premium on all the brain stuff: reaction times, spatial perception, fine coordination, balance, decision making abilities... So, basically, what you want is lots of gamy plyometric stuff with intermittent bursts of explosive activity.

There is a distinction between bodybuilding as a serious pursuit (Arnie), which is quite rare, and as a general mentality (Tim Ferris), which is extremely common. I suppose, a better way to call such people would be exercise enthusiasts. For them gym is an end in itself - they like to look and feel 'sporty'. Nothing wrong with that, but my point is that their priorities are different. Looking and feeling sporty won't automatically make you fence better.

TomA
-26th August 2012, 23:06
It is not difficult to do yourself damage with two 10kg dumbbells.Yup, dropping one on your little toe hurts like a mother as I found out the hard way (sorry, couldn't resist).



To give you an obvious example, there is a host of variations of dumbbell flys and rows which, for most people, are plenty dangerous with 10kg in each hand.When I was taught how to do flies and rows, having never really done any resistance training before, it was with 10kg in each hand (well, 20kg across both for rows because it was just with the bar) because it was deemed a 'safe' weight - about 12% average male bodyweight, not something you could really do yourself damage with according to the guys working at the gym (who are not, for the record, just the local meatheads, it's a proper gym at a good sports uni and they know their stuff). The obvious exception is if there's a pre-existing injury, but if that is the case any kind of exercise, including fencing, could be dangerous unless you take proper advice.

For the record I am a particularly skinny specimen and not really what you'd call 'fit', and certainly wasn't when I joined the gym by any stretch of the imagination.


For the record what the top coaches I've asked and the coaching literature I've come across generally recommend for fencing, so far as dumbbells go, is lots of fast reps with very light weights. Traditional resistance training comes into it in quite specific ways for serious athletes.I've heard this a lot as well. I've also heard the same coaches say fencers need to be fast. I think we can agree on this as you've said it as well.

S+C coaches however, say that high reps, low weight builds muscular endurance and type 1 (slow twitch) muscles fibres, medium reps promote hypertrophy (muscular growth, not really great for fencing, agreed) and low reps promotes strength and power gain. Now you've said


There is a premium on speed over raw power, so activation trumps bulk.This is where I think you actually contradict yourself. Physics tells us that speed is power over force, so increase the power and you have more speed. This applies to human motion as much as anything else.


There is also a real premium on all the brain stuff: reaction times, spatial perception, fine coordination, balance, decision making abilities... The best thing for reaction times, spatial perception, coordination and decision-making for fencing is probably fencing, as they are all stimulus-dependent, therefore you need a stimulus that looks like a fencer (hence the reason for individual lessons). What we know as 'balance' is mostly the product of our sense of balance (derived from the other senses and not really trainable as if it works, it works) and the core muscles. Which are actually worked pretty hard and in the right direction by resistance training. Of course you could substitute lots of other activities - my personal favourite is trampolining during the holidays.


So, basically, what you want is lots of gamy plyometric stuff with intermittent bursts of explosive activity. Plyometric exercises send a lot of force through the body, which you need good all-round strength in order to stabilise, or else you risk injury (far more likely than the dumb bells). In any meaningful sense they're a pretty advanced exercise and not something I'd recommend as 'lazy S+C', certainly not without (oh the irony) a decent background of strength training.

If you read back through this forum you can read S+C Guy (Rhys Ingram)'s posts on this. He explains it far better than me (probably because it's his job and he knows what he's doing). Even if you think his posts are intended for advanced fencers the science and principles behind them are solid.

Red
-27th August 2012, 10:30
Just to expand on what Tom has written a little. I'm an ex-physicist and a reasonably effective fencing coach.

Power is everything. Fencing skills get trained by turning up to fencing sessions and working on them there with a good coach.

Power = Force x velocity
Force = mass x acceleration

So,

Power = mass x acceleration x velocity

If you train for power...
You will be able to move your weapon (always a fixed mass) faster and with greater acceleration.
You will be able to move yourself (maybe mass will increase a little with the training - but a greater proportion of that mass is muscle so the benefits outweigh the small mass gain) faster and with greater acceleration. You will be able to change direction faster and more easily. You will be able to vary speed and rhythm to a greater degree.

I'm not an S&C coach, so I'm not terribly sure on how you'd go about training for power in your bedroom.

Plyometric exercises need a reasonable level on strength and power...

Foilling Around
-27th August 2012, 12:41
A word of caution here.

Everything written here so far is about force production. That is fine, but if you throw all that force onto ankles, knees and cores which have not been trianed to take it, and with poor technique, you will be invalided out of the sport in no time.

Force reduction is just as, if not more important. Exercises to promote ankle and knee stability are vital and the recruiting of the glutes, which not only produce power but stabilise the whole leg, will all help.

Like Red, I am not an S&C coach, but rather a decent fencing coach who is learning fast thanks to the input of a number of great S&C professionals who are taking fencing very seriously.

Rudd
-27th August 2012, 14:49
What Rudd describes is basically an old fashioned PE lesson.

You asked for something that was cheap and simple. I would argue that your suggestions for basketball etc. are also very similar to "an old fashioned PE lesson."
You also asked for suggestions for something the average fencers could do and could benefit from.



There is a premium on speed over raw power, so activation trumps bulk.

How do you train speed?
How trainable is speed?
How specific is speed?

What is power? Let use what Red has given us.
Power = Force x velocity. Lets turn that into S&C concepts

Power= strength x speed

Strength is very trainable and is general.
Increasing strength increase power.
Strength training is also one of the safest activity, with lower injury rates that a lot of sports including basketball and martial arts :)
Increasing strength improves both force production and force reduction WHEN combined with the appropriate skill training.

I'm not saying basketball is bad for conditioning. I've played plenty of warmup games. What I'm saying is that it does not replace a simple resistance training almost any fencer could engage in.
Bulk is more a function of diet than anything else. The myth of the musclebound athlete has been long debunked.
A fencer does not have to be strong in an absolute sense. Fencers are not strength athletes. But they need to be strong in relative terms, strong enough to stay injury free, strong enough to compensate for the asymmetric nature of the sport.

In the club where I currently train S&C is integrated in the training off all the fencers, young cadets and up. Said training is carried out with traditional weight training, kettlebells, body weight exercises etc. The fencers also skip and run for conditioning and engage in lots of flexibility, mobility work as well as restorative work with foramrollers. The do most of this work under their own supervision after and initial introduction. Based on results it seems to work. :)

sphericalcat
-27th August 2012, 22:35
...I was taught how to do flies and rows... it's a proper gym at a good sports uni and they know their stuff.

Case in point: the reason it's safe is only because you were taught to do it safely. Yes, all exercise has its risks, but the risks in traditional resistance training are worse than in most, because the forces are high and the movements are artificial. Unlike a lot of other types of exercise, resistance training requires a good deal of qualified input early on. Without it it's not safe.

In the US, weight training injuries have been going up in virtually every age group apart from 19-24. The absolute increase and the total number are worst among the 13-18s.

http://osumc.multimedianewsroom.tv/newmedia/mcp/osunch/2010/apr10/weight/1-Documents/Research.pdf

And this is only 'catastrophic' injuries resulting in A&E visits. There are other risks to do with long term cumulative damage or deformity.


...high reps, low weight builds muscular endurance and type 1 (slow twitch) muscles fibres...

In fencing, raw speed comes mostly from the legs. Hand speed is more to do with relaxation and good technique than muscle (slightly less true in sabre). You don't have to deliver knock-out blows, so raw power in the arms is not a big requirement; endurance is, because it forestalls flight of technique. Depending on how you do your fast reps, they may also have a plyometric element to them which does give you extra speed without necessarily increasing.


...speed is power over force, so increase the power and you have more speed. This applies to human motion as much as anything else.

No, because muscle is not a Hooke's Law spring. Muscle has viscosity. There is a limit to how fast individual muscle fibres can contract and relax. Past a certain point, spreading the load across more of them will not give you more speed (but it will allow you to lift progressively greater weights). This is why you will never outrun a racing car, no matter how big your legs are.


Plyometric exercises send a lot of force through the body...

Depends what you mean by 'a lot'. Certainly if you go by the original definition, where 'shock' loads were considered an absolute requirement... The basic idea, as I understand it, is to quickly stretch out the muscle to near maximum extension and immediately 'bounce' into an explosive movement. Near maximum extension, muscle fibres are capable of delivering the most power, and stretch receptors are at their most effective, so it's easier to get a well synchronised contraction in response to the 'shock'.

My understanding is that you can vary plyometric loads, same as you can vary any other kinds of loads - shallower bounce, fewer reps... The key part is that the bounce has to be instantaneous and explosive. Within this context, plenty of activities include plyometric actions: a running slam-dunk or a fast step-lunge to give you two examples, a fast change of direction in tig... At a rather more extreme end:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qP8pnIUefI4 :D


What we know as 'balance' is mostly the product of our sense of balance (derived from the other senses and not really trainable as if it works, it works) and the core muscles.

At a sensory level, which is what I was mostly talking about, balance is a product of proprioception and vestibular function. Proprioception is basically sensory feedback from the various bits of your body. Vestibular function is to do with processing of information from your inner ear, which specifically deals with your sense of 'uprightness'. Proprioception can be trained - ask any physio. Apparently, vestibular function can be too.

Other brain stuff... fwoof... it's too late to get into that.

TomA
-28th August 2012, 00:07
Case in point: the reason it's safe is only because you were taught to do it safely.You're taking parts of my post out of context to suit your argument. The reason it was safe (as it was put to me by the qualified professional) is because a 20kg load is not a lot for an adult male.


Yes, all exercise has its risks, but the risks in traditional resistance training are worse than in mostI believe this has been shown statistically false, both in terms of frequency and severity of injury.






In the US, weight training injuries have been going up in virtually every age group apart from 19-24But not from a pair of 10kg dumbbells. Interestingly your document that you link to cites increased participation as a driving force in the increased number of injuries - this would be the same with any other activity that you care to mention. More participants = more opportunities for injuries = more injuries.





In fencing, raw speed comes mostly from the legs.It comes from whichever part of the body you happen to be moving, surely?



Hand speed is more to do with relaxation and good technique than muscleSimply not true. Extension comes from the muscles in the arm. If these can fire more quickly then the extension will be faster.

Strength is also important for any kind of action on the blade, particularly at epee where you have to maintain control it and retain that control as you riposte. Simply relying on the opposition of forte to foible does not cut it any more in a bout with an opponent who is strong and mobile.



endurance is, because it forestalls flight of technique. This just isn't how type I fibres work. The effect of a high concentration of these fibres will be seen in activities which are constant over the course of 2-3 hours, like a marathon. A fencing match is about 10 minutes max of actual exercise. If the hand feels fatigued it's probably to do with a relative lack of strength or over-gripping the handle.




Depending on how you do your fast reps, they may also have a plyometric element to them which does give you extra speed without necessarily increasing.I'm struggling to envisage how this would work but I wouldn't recommend it. High reps induce fatigue, plyometrics with fatigued muscles are a bad idea.



No, because muscle is not a Hooke's Law spring. Muscle has viscosity. There is a limit to how fast individual muscle fibres can contract and relax. Yes, but it's not going to be reached by any major muscle group using a pair of 10kg dumbbells. Willis' 160(?)kg back squat might be hitting it.




Depends what you mean by 'a lot'. I mean anything that would produce a meaningful increase of speed in a fencer.


a running slam-dunk or a fast step-lunge to give you two examples, a fast change of direction in tig...All of which send a large amount of force through the joints which have to be stabilised properly (note that most intermediate fencers don't/can't stabilise their lunges properly at all and thus risk injury). Ironically you're suggesting exercises that are far more risky in terms of forces involved on the joints if done badly than even a poorly executed 10kg one-arm row.




At a sensory level, which is what I was mostly talking about, balance is a product of proprioception and vestibular function. Proprioception is basically sensory feedback from the various bits of your body. Vestibular function is to do with processing of information from your inner ear, which specifically deals with your sense of 'uprightness'. Proprioception can be trained - ask any physio..Physios being the people who deal with it when it's not working properly. Like I said, if it's working, it's working. If it's not then sure there's stuff you can do to make it better. The majority of people have normally functioning proprioceptive and vestibular systems.

I'm not really expecting to convince you to be honest - you're free to believe what you want and you're clearly fairly set in your ideas. However I think some myth-busting about the methods and dangers of resistance training for the benefit of people reading is a useful thing.

sphericalcat
-28th August 2012, 13:46
Strength training is also one of the safest activity, with lower injury rates that a lot of sports including basketball and martial arts :)

This is true, but...

Firstly, in martial arts at least,injury rates among beginners tend to be very low. Injuries tend to come with faster movement, greater body mass, and greater willingness to take risks. The highest risk group for major and multiple injuries are people aged over 18 with 3+ years experience.

(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1725005/pdf/v039p00029.pdf)

With resistance training, things don't work the same way. Resistance implies high forces. High forces are intrinsically dangerous - broadly speaking, the more clueless you are, the more likely you are to do something daft.

Secondly, the risks and the associated types of injury are very different. In most games and kicking/punching martial arts the main risks are to do with hitting, being hit, and missed footing. In resistance training (as well as in grappling martial arts and rugby) the big risks are connected not to impact but to persistent torque. What mostly makes it onto the injury statistics are the 'catastrophic' loss of control injuries resulting in hospital visits and immediate loss of training time. What is far more difficult to keep track of are the bad patterns of wear and lopsided development which affect your likelihood of getting 'catastrophic' trauma while doing something else.


In the club where I currently train S&C is integrated in the training off all the fencers, young cadets and up. ... They do most of this work under their own supervision after an initial introduction.

...and, probably with a bit of informal input here and there from coaches and other athletes. Right?

What you describe works well when you have ample training time, adequate facilities, and coaches who know how to deliver S&C programs. If you are lucky enough to get adequate S&C as part of your regular training (the way it should be), problem solved!


Power = Force x velocity. Lets turn that into S&C concepts

Power= strength x speed

Nope. First of all, the physics equivalent of what we think of as strength in everyday life (the ability to do a lot of work in a short time) is power, not force. Secondly, we are not interested in speed - we are interested in acceleration. There easiest way of looking at the physics is this:

Power is the rate at which you can work, i.e. the energy you can deliver within a set time (t).

P=E/t

Let's assume that all this energy is going into moving something (i.e your efficiency is 100%). Kinetic energy, the energy possessed by a moving body, depends on the mass (m) and speed (v) of that body

E=(mv^2)/2

So, we can say that power is the energy it takes to accelerate a set mass from stationary to some particular speed within a given time. At a fixed power output, if your mass is big, the acceleration will be small, and, if the mass is small, the acceleration will be big. That's pretty much it... Except for no real-world macroscopic system is ever 100% efficient.

Part of the energy you put in always goes into overcoming friction and other 'external' constraints (like action of antagonistic muscles). Generally, these constraints become harder to overcome, the harder you push, because, by driving a system harder, you put it under greater stresses which make it less efficient. There are fundamental constraints on what is actually doable - there are limits to how fast things can happen (for example, how fast an individual muscle fibre can contract). If you attempt to drive the system past this limit, all your extra power will be dissipated as heat and wear. If you want to get maximum useful work out of the system, it must function as efficiently as possible, otherwise its peak performance will be hampered by 'stray' forces and heat. Consequently, in the real macroscopic world, there is usually a limit to how much raw power is actually useful. Getting optimum output is usually about restricting raw input power and maximising efficiency. Which is where you get into things like technique and firing times.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=151025634960547 :)

Rudd
-28th August 2012, 13:55
I understand you don't like strength training although you do seem to be willfully misunderstanding the variety of way a strength training program can be implemented.

You also seem to be misrepresenting the risk. I have experienced far worse injuries fencing that I ever have experienced or seen in a weights room.

Do you really believe basketball or cossack dancing in any way replaces a S&C program, however basic? As a adjunct yes, as a replacement no.

Do you really believe plyometrics are safer or easier for a young fencer or an unconditioned adult to learn?

n_freebody
-28th August 2012, 15:29
No, because muscle is not a Hooke's Law spring. Muscle has viscosity. There is a limit to how fast individual muscle fibres can contract and relax.


Amen to that, the human body is vastly complex not a point mass. It frustrates me when people incorrectly apply oversimplified versions of the laws of physics.

But this is beside the point. This is a lower level than you guys have been arguing but here is what I do to be fit to fence:

Fencing - training whenever I can get it from my local clubs including regular lessons
Swimming - good, low impact and cheap
Gym - in an average session I do a mixture of CV, interval training and light weights on varing machines
yoga - at home if my muscles feel too tired to do anything else
Dancing - I do Ceroc, its a hell of a lot of fun and does wonders for your CV fitness and helps your mental fitness as well and can speed up thought processes. I also think more people should know
how to dance properly and for all you macho men out there, its more macho than you think.
Circuit training - may not be possible if you dont have a gym which run sessions like this but I would highly recommend them

Sounds like a lot but you can pick and choose what ones you do and how much you do each week. I find that the variety in the things I do keeps things interesting and gives good general fitness and that in turn will improve your fencing (even if you arent targeting specific excersices related to fencing). One thing I will say is I have a membership to a University based gym which helps a lot and keeps cost down. If cost is an issue then i suppose its a case of doing your own cv stuff outside and talking to someone who knows what they are doing and planning your own circuit.

Doing it this way will not make you an elite international fencer but for the fencer on the clapam omnibus it could help (certainly has with me).

sphericalcat
-28th August 2012, 16:42
You're taking parts of my post out of context to suit your argument. The reason it was safe (as it was put to me by the qualified professional) is because a 20kg load is not a lot for an adult male.

I'm not taking it out of context - I just don't agree with it. Put simply, it's a lot more weight than most people deal with in their daily lives. You were trained to handle it safely, as were the people who taught you.


... your document that you link to cites increased participation as a driving force in the increased number of injuries - this would be the same with any other activity that you care to mention. More participants = more opportunities for injuries = more injuries.

True. What is more interesting is the distribution of number and type of injuries across different age groups. My point is, increased participation is not necessarily a good thing. Maybe I'll change my mind, if you convince me that the absolute numbers don't reflect the relative chances of getting injured. Show me that there are more participants in the 13-18 group than any other.


It comes from whichever part of the body you happen to be moving, surely?

No. Your body is made up of interconnected masses, and momentum can be transferred from one part to another.


Extension comes from the muscles in the arm. If these can fire more quickly then the extension will be faster.

Not that simple. Muscles come in antagonistic pairs. The harder you push one, the more interference you get from the other.


Strength is also important for any kind of action on the blade, particularly at epee where you have to maintain control it and retain that control as you riposte.

I don't have the data, but my experience is that the sabreurs are usually the beefy ones, followed by foilists. In epee you do still, even at top level, get the gangly (Piasecki) and even the slightly podgy (Kelsey). It's mostly to do with the amplitude of arm movements, not with point control or actions on the blade. Not to say that strength does not come into point control - it does, but it's mostly in the wrist, and the demands are very specific to fencing - I've tried a few different resistance exercises down the years, and none of them seem to do much; the best way to build specifically wrist strength and specifically for for fencing is lots of lunge pad practice (again, kills a lot of birds with one stone).


This just isn't how type I fibres work. The effect of a high concentration of these fibres will be seen in activities which are constant over the course of 2-3 hours, like a marathon.

Fair point. So presumably building either strength or endurance isn't the point of the exercise.


I'm struggling to envisage how this would work but I wouldn't recommend it. High reps induce fatigue, plyometrics with fatigued muscles are a bad idea.

It would work like most light kettlebell exercise do.


Yes, but it's not going to be reached by any major muscle group using a pair of 10kg dumbbells. Willis' 160(?)kg back squat might be hitting it.

I'm not sure I understand. You reach top speed when you have plenty of capacity and little resistance, not the other way round. ...?


All of which send a large amount of force through the joints which have to be stabilised properly (note that most intermediate fencers don't/can't stabilise their lunges properly at all and thus risk injury). Ironically you're suggesting exercises that are far more risky in terms of forces involved on the joints if done badly than even a poorly executed 10kg one-arm row.

:D I think we have different definitions of 'intermediate'...

I see your point. My issue with it is this: there is a difference in the nature of the forces (and consequently the nature of the injuries). The human body has evolved to cope with impact forces associated with running and jumping pretty much from the point we learnt to walk. It hasn't evolved to cope with repeated application of significant sustained torque, especially not before the joints are fully mature.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprioception#Training

Red
-28th August 2012, 17:29
Nope. First of all, the physics equivalent of what we think of as strength in everyday life (the ability to do a lot of work in a short time) is power, not force. Secondly, we are not interested in speed - we are interested in acceleration. There easiest way of looking at the physics is this:

Power is the rate at which you can work, i.e. the energy you can deliver within a set time (t).

P=E/t

Let's assume that all this energy is going into moving something (i.e your efficiency is 100%). Kinetic energy, the energy possessed by a moving body, depends on the mass (m) and speed (v) of that body

E=(mv^2)/2

So, we can say that power is the energy it takes to accelerate a set mass from stationary to some particular speed within a given time. At a fixed power output, if your mass is big, the acceleration will be small, and, if the mass is small, the acceleration will be big. That's pretty much it... Except for no real-world macroscopic system is ever 100% efficient.


Ok... You appear to be badly misinterpreting things here.
The forces developed move more than just the muscle, they move the whole fencer. The mass gain for the whole fencer isn't going to counteract the increased power.
This should be obvious, otherwise I would be able to run as fast as Usain Bolt or jump as far as Greg Rutherford. I don't come close, so clearly something in their training (in disciplines quite reliant on power) makes them better at this than me.

sphericalcat
-28th August 2012, 17:43
I understand you don't like strength training although you do seem to be willfully misunderstanding the variety of way a strength training program can be implemented.

You also seem to be misrepresenting the risk. I have experienced far worse injuries fencing that I ever have experienced or seen in a weights room.

Do you really believe basketball or cossack dancing in any way replaces a S&C program, however basic? As a adjunct yes, as a replacement no.

Do you really believe plyometrics are safer or easier for a young fencer or an unconditioned adult to learn?

It's not that I don't like it. I don't like it in this specific context. There are requirements specific to fencing. If you simply tell people to go away and do it, there is a good chance what the resistance work will deliver little or no tangible benefit. What happens with more experienced athletes is a different kettle of fish. They are more aware of the capabilities of their body and the demands of the sport, they get more input from other athletes and coaches, and they also have different performance criteria. In this context, resistance training is a necessary part of training.

How you choose to represent the risks is a separate issue. I think there's been enough said about it.

Do I believe that basketball and Cossack dancing can replace an S&C program? No, I don't. But I do believe that things like this can provide a massively useful background, so you can use actual training time much more productively. Also, keep in mind, that the level we are talking about, there may well be no S&C program as such.

Do I believe that plyometrics are safe for everybody? Not if you use the original 'shock' definition. A lighter form with an adequate warm-up is, in my opinion, ok for most healthy children (the body mass is significantly lower) but not for many unconditioned adults.

sphericalcat
-28th August 2012, 20:25
The forces developed move more than just the muscle, they move the whole fencer.

ok...


The mass gain for the whole fencer isn't going to counteract the increased power.
This should be obvious, otherwise I would be able to run as fast as Usain Bolt or jump as far as Greg Rutherford. I don't come close, so clearly something in their training (in disciplines quite reliant on power) makes them better at this than me.

Sorry, I'm not sure I follow the argument...

I would guess, that the main thing Usain Bolt has over most people is running technique. He could beat me at my absolute best, and probably you also, without breaking sweat - it's not about 'that little bit extra'. If it was about raw exertion, they'd all be getting beaten hands down by powerlifters.

TomA
-28th August 2012, 20:56
I'm not taking it out of context - I just don't agree with it. Put simply, it's a lot more weight than most people deal with in their daily lives. You were trained to handle it safely, as were the people who taught you. I wasn't when I started. No special training, just 'here, pick this up'.

Putting 10kg in the context of 'daily life' a human toddler weighs more than 10kg. So does a wooden chair. So does the weekly shop. You don't need specialist training to pick those up.




True. What is more interesting is the distribution of number and type of injuries across different age groups. My point is, increased participation is not necessarily a good thing. Maybe I'll change my mind, if you convince me that the absolute numbers don't reflect the relative chances of getting injured. Show me that there are more participants in the 13-18 group than any other.You're the one attempting to make the point that there has been an increase in injuries in the 13-18 age group. The onus of proof is on you to prove that the increase is disproportionate to the increase in participation.




No. Your body is made up of interconnected masses, and momentum can be transferred from one part to another.Fencing depends on being able to move parts of your body independently, eg being able to control the upper body separately to the lower body. In that context relying on transferring momentum from one part to another (which can only occur with a strong core anyway) is not necessarily a good thing.




Not that simple. Muscles come in antagonistic pairs. The harder you push one, the more interference you get from the other.At the extremes of extension and contraction. Not at the other.




I don't have the data, but my experience is that the sabreurs are usually the beefy ones, followed by foilists. In epee you do still, even at top level, get the gangly (Piasecki) and even the slightly podgy (Kelsey).But they're all still strong. Again you are confusing bulk with strength and power. They are not the same.



It's mostly to do with the amplitude of arm movements, not with point control or actions on the blade. Not to say that strength does not come into point control - it does, but it's mostly in the wrist, and the demands are very specific to fencing - I've tried a few different resistance exercises down the years, and none of them seem to do much; the best way to build specifically wrist strength and specifically for for fencing is lots of lunge pad practice (again, kills a lot of birds with one stone).First of all the wrist itself can only be trained for stability, not strength, as it mostly ligaments and tendons. The muscles which are attached are located further up in the forearm.




Fair point. So presumably building either strength or endurance isn't the point of the exercise.Building strength isn't, building endurance is. Resistance training doesn't work by doing the same duration of exercise as your chosen activity but with extra weight. Suggesting it does represents a fundamental misunderstanding of how muscle fibres are recruited.




It would work like most light kettlebell exercise do.Most kettlebell exercises aren't plyometric.




I'm not sure I understand. You reach top speed when you have plenty of capacity and little resistance, not the other way round. ...?That's during performance. We're talking about training for that. Training doesn't necessarily mimic performance blow for blow.




:D I think we have different definitions of 'intermediate'...For Men's Epee I'd definitely class anyone who hasn't been in the senior top 20 or junior top 10 in the UK as intermediate. Myself included.



I see your point. My issue with it is this: there is a difference in the nature of the forces (and consequently the nature of the injuries). The human body has evolved to cope with impact forces associated with running and jumping pretty much from the point we learnt to walk. It hasn't evolved to cope with repeated application of significant sustained torque, especially not before the joints are fully mature.I'll let wiki speak on this one as the article's actually quite well referenced.

'Plyometrics have been shown to have benefits for reducing lower-extremity injuries in team sports while combined with other neuromuscular training (i.e. strength training, balance training, and stretching). Plyometric exercises involve an increased risk of injury due to the large forces generated during training and performance, and should only be performed by well-conditioned individuals who are under supervision. Good levels of physical strength, flexibility, and proprioception should be achieved before commencement of plyometric training.
The specified minimum strength requirement varies depending on where the information is sourced and the intensity of the plyometrics to be performed. Chu (1998) recommends that a participant be able to perform 5 repetitions of the squat exercise at 60% of his bodyweight before doing plyometrics. Core body (trunk) strength is also important.'


I would guess, that the main thing Usain Bolt has over most people is running technique. He could beat me at my absolute best, and probably you also, without breaking sweat - it's not about 'that little bit extra'. If it was about raw exertion, they'd all be getting beaten hands down by powerlifters. The guys at MIT have an explanation: http://www.businessinsider.com/science-explains-why-usain-bolt-is-so-darn-fast-2012-8

Note the emphasis placed on Bolt's requirement for strength and therefore the time he spends working in the gym with weights.

Red
-28th August 2012, 21:02
Even if my running technique was better than Bolt's, he would still be able to run faster than me as I cannot generate the same power that he can.

Athletes who need their legs to generate power in any sport will have big quads.
They will accelerate, stop and change direction faster, kick harder, jump higher and land better than people with small quads. Technique is part of it, power is the rest. Big muscles don't necessarily make you slow.

Foilling Around
-28th August 2012, 21:14
Come back S&C Guy, all is forgiven.

sphericalcat
-28th August 2012, 23:27
Even if my running technique was better than Bolt's, he would still be able to run faster than me as I cannot generate the same power that he can.

True, but if your running technique was that good, you'd be an elite sprinter. What makes Bolt different from other top sprinters is a very different (and much more interesting) question than what makes him different from the likes of you and me. In that context, it could well be that he is just stronger and taller than the rest...


Athletes who need their legs to generate power in any sport will have big quads.
They will accelerate, stop and change direction faster, kick harder, jump higher and land better than people with small quads. Technique is part of it, power is the rest. Big muscles don't necessarily make you slow.

True, but there are limits. There will be a limit to the amount of useful work an 'ideal' human body can deliver within a given situation. Usain Bolt will never outrun a fighter jet. This limit will almost certainly be different at high load and low acceleration to what it is at low load and high acceleration. Highest possible speed on track almost certainly won't correspond to strongest possible legs in World's Strongest Man terms.

sphericalcat
-29th August 2012, 10:34
Putting 10kg in the context of 'daily life' a human toddler weighs more than 10kg. So does a wooden chair. So does the weekly shop. You don't need specialist training to pick those up.

Load usually spread across two arms when picked up, certainly when held up for any period of time. 20kg is a six year old child.


You're the one attempting to make the point that there has been an increase in injuries in the 13-18 age group. The onus of proof is on you to prove that the increase is disproportionate to the increase in participation.

That's not actually my argument. My argument is that the number of injuries in u18s is, probably, disproportionate to participation.

age cat no. of injuries/year of life
13-18 ~42200
18-24 ~33400
25-34 ~25200
35-44 ~14500
45-54 ~6300

Plotted against average age, the biggest drop-off is between 13-18 (average 15.5) and 18-24 (average 21.5). This is surprising, because you'd expect participation in the intervening period to stay relatively steady, possibly even go up. The distribution of injuries is also markedly different in u18s than in any of the adult groups (a far higher proportion of soft tissue injuries), which suggests that there is more to the numbers than just a simple function of total participant numbers.

This is actually one of my two key points: I am not convinced that unsupervised resistance training, particularly involving free weights, is a good idea for people whose joints haven't fully matured. Supervised it can be a very good idea, depending on who's supervising. Unfortunately, this is very much the sort of thing that people tend to do unsupervised.

My other key point is that, in the specific context of predominantly recreational fencing, it just isn't that useful and can actually be something of a hindrance. In my experience, relatively inexperienced fencers who do lots of upper body work easily tense up and try to 'power through' on every action. Since this initially intimidates many of their peers, they often get entrenched in this very tactically lopsided style. In practice, upper body strength is rarely a significant limiting factor at this level (core and legs often are). Unfortunately, if you simply tell people to go away and do some resistance work, they'll mostly do the kind of thing that makes you look good in the mirror, i.e. arms, chest and abs. If, on the other hand, you tell them to go climbing, they'll end up with significantly improved upper body strength, as well as legs, core, proprioception, spatial planning etc... Would the same thing be appropriate for a serious competitor? No.


Fencing depends on being able to move parts of your body independently, eg being able to control the upper body separately to the lower body. In that context relying on transferring momentum from one part to another (which can only occur with a strong core anyway) is not necessarily a good thing.

I don't think you understand how the physics work. The simplest example of transfer of momentum in action is the movement of the back arm on the lunge. You leave part of your mass behind, the rest of you speeds up.


At the extremes of extension and contraction. Not at the other.

Which is where you generally want maximum acceleration/deceleration in fencing.


But they're all still strong. Again you are confusing bulk with strength and power. They are not the same.

They are all stronger than an average human being. The question is what their relationship is to each other and to actual strength athletes. Does an average epeeists (small actions, tight point control, blade contact frequent in some styles) have stronger arms than an average sabreur (big actions, less point control, little blade contact)? Does either have stronger arms (or legs) than a weightlifter?


First of all the wrist itself can only be trained for stability, not strength, as it mostly ligaments and tendons. The muscles which are attached are located further up in the forearm.

Do you disagree with what I actually said - that the best way to train those specific muscles is lungepad paractice?


Building strength isn't, building endurance is. Resistance training doesn't work by doing the same duration of exercise as your chosen activity but with extra weight. Suggesting it does represents a fundamental misunderstanding of how muscle fibres are recruited.

I wasn't suggesting that. I am genuinely curious what the purpose of the exercise (specifically lots of fast dumbbell reps with light weights) is.


Most kettlebell exercises aren't plyometric.

What do you define as plyometric, and how do you think the training effect works? Again, genuinely curious.


That's during performance. We're talking about training for that. Training doesn't necessarily mimic performance blow for blow.

I was talking about performance. Here's my original point: in the context of explosive speed with zero loads (or close enough), there is a limit to how many fibres you can usefully mobilise. Mobilising more fibres past that point will not make you any faster.


For Men's Epee I'd definitely class anyone who hasn't been in the senior top 20 or junior top 10 in the UK as intermediate. Myself included.

So are you seriously saying that the majority of fencers ranked, say 20-50 (for any weapon) cannot lunge technically well enough to 'cut it'? I'm curious what your parameters are.


I'll let wiki speak on this one as the article's actually quite well referenced.

'Plyometrics have been shown to have benefits for reducing lower-extremity injuries in team sports while combined with other neuromuscular training (i.e. strength training, balance training, and stretching). Plyometric exercises involve an increased risk of injury due to the large forces generated during training and performance, and should only be performed by well-conditioned individuals who are under supervision. Good levels of physical strength, flexibility, and proprioception should be achieved before commencement of plyometric training.
The specified minimum strength requirement varies depending on where the information is sourced and the intensity of the plyometrics to be performed. Chu (1998) recommends that a participant be able to perform 5 repetitions of the squat exercise at 60% of his bodyweight before doing plyometrics. Core body (trunk) strength is also important.'

Ok, fair enough. My contention is that a significantly lighter version of the same thing will still produce at least some of the training benefits. Like I said, explain to me how you define plyometric, how you think the training effect works, and we can figure out whether I'm right or wrong.

AELLA
-29th August 2012, 17:31
Does SpericalCat continue to make a noise when there is obviously nobody who cares anymore..?

I don't wish to sound controversial, obviously I am, but I don't wish to sound it...

Pav, Obviously you are able to use the internet...
You are 'an intelligent man'
Do you really expect that you can start a conversation with Cossack dancing and then disrespect people for saying things like running, swimming, and fencing.

If you want to learn about exercise for beginners please use the following link
http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=exercise+for+beginners

Happy reading

sphericalcat
-29th August 2012, 19:00
Does SpericalCat continue to make a noise when there is obviously nobody who cares anymore..?

I don't wish to sound controversial, obviously I am, but I don't wish to sound it...

Pav, Obviously you are able to use the internet...
You are 'an intelligent man'
Do you really expect that you can start a conversation with Cossack dancing and then disrespect people for saying things like running, swimming, and fencing.

If you want to learn about exercise for beginners please use the following link
http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=exercise+for+beginners

Happy reading

Neat trick, but it doesn't really answer my question... :D

I don't disrespect people for suggesting anything they like, whether I see it as appropriate, given the original question, is another matter. What gets on my nerves is all the cod science.

Rudd
-30th August 2012, 14:05
Table 1. Injury Rates Per 1000 Athlete Exposures for 15 Collegiate Sports (Modified from Hootman et al)
School Child Soccer 6.20
UK Rugby 1.92
South African Rugby 0.70
UK Basketball 1.03
USA Basketball 0.03
USA Athletics 0.57
UK Athletics 0.26
USA Football 0.10
Weight Training 0.0035
Weightlifting (Clean & Jerk, Snatch) 0.0017

Agricola
-4th September 2012, 08:06
Have you ever tried rowing? A rowing machine is a low impact method of working over 80% of your muscles and you can train for endurance and explosive power.

Lazy man's S&C? I'm not sure such a thing really exists. If you're intent on doing the absoloute minnimum to get in shape you're still going to have to put a decent amount of effort in on a regular basis and engage in a disciplined diet, more so as you get older.

The facts are that laying on a couch, drinking beer and eating sweets, only raising your leg once in a while to expel bodily vapours is OK up until about the age of 24 - 25. Then one morning you wake up, jump out of bed, your stomach muscles wave a little white flag and all of a sudden .... you're a fat bastard!

Hzuiel
-4th September 2012, 22:01
Lazy man's S&C? I'm not sure such a thing really exists. If you're intent on doing the absoloute minnimum to get in shape you're still going to have to put a decent amount of effort in on a regular basis and engage in a disciplined diet, more so as you get older.

I'm glad i'm not the only one thinking this the whole time i've been reading this crazy debate. There is no lazy man's s&c. If you're intent on doing the absolute minimum to get in shape, you'll be in the absolute minimum shape, and receive the absolute minimum benefits.

There are some things that need to be said.

Playing a sport will not train you to play a different sport, nor is it a substitute for targetted s&c. Your overall fitness might benefit from playing basketball, but basketball isn't in and of itself going to make you a better fencer, nor is it going to be more benefical than a specific routine for improving your body with the demands of fencing involved. I don't see there's any need to say anything further because this is absolute.

No conditioning routine should ever pose a serious risk to your well being because....you are the one in charge of it. DUUUHHHH, you set your own pace and level based on your knowledge of your own fitness and possibly a doctor's input, especially if you have been recovering from ailment or injury. The very fact that this is even being argued is beyond my comprehension. The number 10kg is being thrown around but who said anything about 10kg to start with? I believe initially adjustable dumbell was mentioned. Do you know what weight i started with on dumbells to make sure my muscles strengthened gradually without risk of injury? 2.5 kg. Any training regiment can be started at whatever level you desire, and stop whenever you feel like it. If you want to just condition a tad you can. If you want to condition a lot you can. If you're concerned about doing an exercise wrong and harming yourself there are plenty of experts around who can be consulted. You could go to a gym and pay for just a consultation with a physical trainer, tell them your needs and have them assess your fitness level and they can give you exercises that will help you as well as showing you the safe way to do them.

Following my prior point is the other side of it, there's no reason you shouldn't be conditioning. It's immensely stupid to engage in a sport like fencing without conditioning. You make so many all body movements that put pressure on your knees, ankles, hips, back, shoulder, wrist and elbow that it only makes sense to strengthen all the mucles involved, as well as properly warm and stretch before fencing. Similarly your overall fitness level, and cardiovascular conditioning come into play because after half an hour, if you aren't in good shape you'll no longer be competing at your skill level because of fatigue. The safety benefits of conditioning absolutely can't be overstated. Stronger muscles support your skeleton better, and make soft tissue injuries far far less likely. Warming up and stretching also play a huge part in reducing your chance of injuries. Making sure to target as many muscles as possible is also important because having one weak muscles surrounded by stronger muscles is actually a recipe for disaster. The stronger muscles can actually wrench and tear a smaller muscles if a suddent movement during a sport results in a transfer of control from one muscle to another. For instance if you raise your arms up from your sides as high as they will go, there are several muscles in your shoulder that are used, and not all at the same time. One muscle raises the arm so far, then the other takes over. If you only do one type of shoulder exercise, one of those muscles can be weak.

Power from stronger muscles absolutely increases speed and mobility. Why do you think players from every sport do targeted weight training and try to increase their lean body mass while decreasing body fat? Less dead weight and more strength gives them more ability to do the sport. There are some catches as regards fencing. A bigger mass can present a larger target, so there is a limit on how much muscle you want to gain. Also objects in motion tend to stay in motion, so while the extra mass of more muscles helps in ways, it can make changing directions, even for a really powerful guy more difficult. So there is a balance to muscle training for something like fencing or dancing or gymnastics etc etc. If you want to see an example of a good balance, look at an NFL wide receiver. They have to be fast in an all out sprint, yet able to change direction quickly to avoid tacklers. They need good balance and both upper and lower body strength, they need to be able to jump and they need a lot of hand eye coordination.

Harryscott
-5th October 2012, 13:10
Been thinking about this for a while. There is a great deal of talk about what is right and wrong S&C. The usual answers involve some sort of exercises, probably a gym, a qualified trainer... In other words: do what the best do. Of course the best live in a rather different world to the majority of fencers out there. They have higher levels of commitment, more supervised training time, more qualified input in general, are more likely to judge their needs accurately, be able to tell good advice from bad, have a background level of muscular-skeletal stability to take high-load 'beastings' without injury, and so on.

There needs to be some sort of 'lite' S&C for people nearer the bottom end. In no particular order, the requirements are:

1. Cheap and fun (so people will stick with it!).

2. Symmetrical.

3. Whole-body but 'leggy'.

4. Dynamic (emphasis on things like explosive power, balance, flexibility, perception of space...).

BUT

5. Low to moderate impact.

6. Easily adjustable loads (with no social pressure to outdo the beafiest guy in the gym!)

7. Reasonably low injury (at recreational level).

Basically, what I'm after is combinations of two or three activities I can recommend to people. But they have to 'go well' with fencing - i.e. clearly benefit performance and decrease chances of injury. What I've got on my list so far is

Climbing

Roller/ice skating

Break/Kossak dancing - this isn't really low impact, but the footwork tends to be quite elastic, so the impact is relatively well managed. Probably the most fun way to do plyomeytrics.

Space hoppers!

What are people's thoughts?

I'm pretty lazy and have never been able to stick to an ordered fitness regime, but I have managed to stay pretty fit. Up until quite recently, I simply mountain-biked once a week and climbed seven flights of stairs twice a day. Pretty unchallenging if you don't mind not being a super-athlete. Works for a slob like me!
I haven't found anything yet to counter the asymmetrical effects of fencing on my upper back, though. Any ideas?

Devante
-12th February 2013, 04:52
Boy keeps fit on a mixture of football, modern martial arts & walls all of which require primary durability, good research, stability & jolts of rate (no incident those choices) so those are some fun & friendly activities that might be tried.

Fencing is Fun Scotland
-3rd August 2014, 14:42
...
yoga - at home if my muscles feel too tired to do anything else
Dancing - I do Ceroc, its a hell of a lot of fun and does wonders for your CV fitness and helps your mental fitness as well and can speed up thought processes. I also think more people should know
how to dance properly and for all you macho men out there, its more macho than you think.
...

There's a traditional saying (little known now) : Never teach fencing to a man who can't dance.

Most folk dancing, for example, Highland Country Dancing, Irish dance, Cossack dance, are actually descendants of stylised forms of conditioning and training for hand to hand combat.

I'd like to add : Wii Fit.

The use of the weight scales to tell you if you're executing (e.g. yoga) techniques correctly is helpful, and the automatic recording of progress in reps, etc, gives an effective series of stretch targets.

I'd just like to remind everyone that this thread is targetting at training regimes for the social, recreational and local-competition fencer.

coach carson
-8th August 2014, 08:14
Lazy man's S&C? I'm not sure such a thing really exists. !

The dog in this video is showing all lazy men how it's done.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yeHHsM3-5I

Gav
-13th August 2014, 17:26
The dog in this video is showing all lazy men how it's done.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yeHHsM3-5I

Pity his owner is such a "douchebag".