Pilates--longer, leaner muscles?
Find a Conversation
Pilates--longer, leaner muscles?
| Wed, 02-02-2005 - 12:29pm |
I have heard this so many times that Pilates will help make your muscles longer and leaner.
| Wed, 02-02-2005 - 12:29pm |
Pages
Pilates. Dr. Mel Siff, Olympic lifter, author of Supertraining, and strength authority, says it much better than I can. Here is an extensive post that he made to the weights-2 email list on the subject of Pilates. Well worth reading! In summary, he writes, "… I was unable to find any quality research which supports the claims of Pilates or shows its superiority over other well-structured multifaceted varied systems of conditioning. All claims to its excellence are based upon comparison with limited bodybuilding regimes and anecdotal testimonials by clients who have had little exposure to the wide world of modern strength science." Moreover, "in every single case where Pilates is compared with other forms of conditioning, it is measured against typical bodybuilding training and never against scientific strength training that has been used for many years in Russia and Europe to produce the world's greatest athletes in many shapes and sizes, all depending on the specific needs of their sports." I've seen the prices that trainers in my city charge for Pilates sessions. For the price of a single session, you could have a month's gym membership and some nice protein shakes. Update: a reader from Brazil wrote me to say that down there, Pilates is promoted as sort of a modified form of yoga, which is essentially what it is. She also said that sessions were very reasonably priced. So I must make a clear distinction: Pilates as it is promoted in North America, as an overpriced alternative to and substitute for strength training, is crap. Pilates literature here goes on about how strength training builds "short, bulky muscles" while Pilates builds "long, lean muscles", which is physiologically impossible (see Page Two of the crap list for more explanation). However, Pilates as a moderately priced, general fitness protocol for improving flexibility, balance, and body awareness is fine.
You can change the shape of your muscle depending on how you train it. Pilates, for example, promotes its product (at least in North America) by claiming that it builds "longer, leaner muscles" as opposed to "shorter bulky muscles". When you read bodybuilding magazines they'll tell you that to get a certain muscle shape you need to do a certain exercise. The truth, as usual, is not quite as exciting or complicated. Muscles are attached to bones by connective tissue, which are called tendons. There's more to the anatomy than that, but this simple explanation will work for now. Anyway, people vary individually in terms of where their muscle attaches to the bone, and how long their muscle bellies are. So you could have long attachments and short muscle bellies, attachments which are higher or lower on the bone, etc. These things are genetically determined, and don't change unless you rip the tendon off the bone, then surgically re-attach it. You can make your muscles bigger or smaller, but you can't change their genetically determined shape or length.
from http://stumptuous.com/weights.html
Thanks--that does explain a lot.
You can't change the length of the actual muscle, but you can change how long it "looks". It is true that your muscle will always be the same length, but how you train it will determine how big it will get and where it will set when you flex, which is what gives it a short look or a long look. Bicepts are a good example. If I do curls from 45 degrees to the top and back down to 45 degrees I am only strengthening the top part of the muscle. If I am lifting heavy, the top part of the muscle will get bigger. When I flex, I am only going to have a small ball at the top of my arm. However, if I do the curl from bottom to top (full range) I am going to develope the entire muscle. When I flex the entire bicept will bulge. Now, if I lift with light weight the muscle will appear smaller--hence leaner.
Make sense?
Paula
Probably the best place to get started on learning about the science of strength training and Soviet methods is Zatsiorsky's Science and Practice of Strength Training:
http://www.humankinetics.com/products/showproduct.cfm?isbn=0873224744
Amazon carries it, but their catalog seems to be down. This is an accessible book and is of great value to anyone looking to anyone who's familiar with exercise and weight training.
The next place to go would be Mel Siff's work. He's the guy quoted in the rant about Pilates. His book, Supertraining, is one of the definitive texts on strength training, including Russian methods, in the West; I'm reading it now and it's pretty technical, I think he expects more of a background than I have, but it's still full of valuable information, just ridiculously dense. I can, however, highly recommend his book Facts and Fallacies of Fitness to everyone. It's a very straightforward, readable book that puts a lot of fitness conventional wisdom and "common sense" to the test.
There is also the archive of the Supertraining mailing list at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/supertraining/ There's all kinds of great stuff in there, it's a great place to browse if your bored or have nothing to do at work.
Nick
I thought about that ('rights') regarding Mindful Movement.
Power yoga (ashtanga, usually) works all of the body - both strength and flexibility work - and often gets your heart pumping. Your awareness must encompass what every part of you is doing/feeling - right to the tips of your fingers & toes.
i disagree with you, pilates is intended to increase flexibility as well as build core strength and other goals. see http://www.pilates-studio.com/docs/method/methwhat.htm
also, i have never heard of connection between yoga and pilates before - pilates was designed to be an exercise program for rehabilitating injured dancers or perhaps injured athletes in general.
also, the principals behind yoga and pilates are different, so if pilates WAS based in part on yoga, Joe Pilates clearly took significant liberties with the principals of yoga when adapting them to pilates.... one obvious difference is that in pilates the "normal stance" is heels together, toes slightly apart, weight slightly shifted over the toes. this is not something that i have ever seen in yoga. a normal yoga stance is feet parallel hip width apart, weight evenly distributed over the four corners of the feet.
Pages