weight lifting program for Tennis

Andrzej Rosa wrote:
> Dnia 2006-12-03 gedaloda RemoveThis @thisguy.com napisa³(a):
>> On Sun, 3 Dec 2006 13:07:44 +0000 (UTC), Andrzej Rosa
>> <bakters RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Dnia 2006-12-03 gedaloda RemoveThis @thisguy.com napisa³(a):
>>>> http://www.lifelineusa.com/products.cfm?categoryid=34&productid=28
>>>
>>> I may be wrong, but it looks like nonsense to me. Best way to spoil
>>> ones technique and slow him down, regardless of increased injury
>>> risk.
>>
>> As you say, you may be wrong.
>>
>> Technique is acquired through practice on the court (or against a
>> backboard) and with guidance from a coach. Technique is not acquired
>> through lifting weights or stretching rubber.
>
> But it can be spoiled by above mentioned. If you do significant
> number of reps of "sport specific" movement, your painstakingly honed
> motor recruitment patterns can get binned.
>
>> Resistive bands and tubing do not slow you down; they can help to
>> increase explosive power as resistance increases as the tubing is
>> stretched.
>
> Slow training against resistance will make you slow. Especially, when
> one trains "sport specific" movement. How fast you can "serve"
> against bands? Much slower than real stuff. And the trainee will
> learn to "muscle" the movement, which is bad news.

That's a neat turn of phrase !!!

[...]

--
Bully
Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't
matter, and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss
 >> Stay informed about: weight lifting program for Tennis 

Andrzej Rosa wrote:
> Dnia 2006-12-03 Curt napisa³(a):
> > Andrzej Rosa wrote:
> >> Dnia 2006-12-03 Curt napisa³(a):
> > [...]
> >
> > re Pete's offering of
> >
> > http://www.nieuwsinfo.nl/images/12003ausopen367.jpg
> >
> >> > I'd say that's at least 90% Mother Nature, Pete. ;o)
> >> > God BLESS Her on her creations, eh?
> >>
> >> If she achieved 90% of her present level, Pete wouldn't
> >> be able to Google her out. She would be nobody among
> >> other nobodies.
> >
> > Is that true, Andrzej?
>
> It is.

I don't believe that's correct. (Doesn't mean it's not, of course, but
there you have it.)

> Try imagining that a 10s sprinter developed only 90% of his
> present level. He becomes roughly 11s sprinter, which is
> nobodyness.

You're comparing apples and oranges, imo and fwiw.

> > http://sportsline.com/tennis/rankings/wta
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serena_Williams
> >
> > She's been a pro tennis player since 1995 (at age 14!) and, although
> > she's ranked 95 currently, from what I see in Wiki, she was ranked 21
> > by the Women's Tennis Association in 1999.
> >
> > The 100 ranked female tennis player? I was "able to Google her out."
> > Likewise, I suspect that Serena, had she only achieved 90% of her
> > accomplishments, would also have been someone Pete would have been able
> > to find with a search engine's help.
>
> It's not possible to guess where on top100 she would end up while being
> able to deliver 90% of what she could.

It's not? Where are the math wizards (or anyone with a calculator)? She
had been ranked 21 and then she dropped to 95 over a period of time.
That's a calculable drop, right? There's a way to represent that
calculable drop as a percent, isn't there?

Likewise, if Serena can achieve X accomplishment with Y amount of skill
then if you take Y and multiply it by 90%, shouldn't you be able to
calculate X as well?

I have a headache now and will stop this course of discussion
immediately.

> I say, she wouldn't be googlable. She would be among
> other ninetypercenters.

Okay.

Still, if Serena was ranked 21 at, say, 99% effort then she'd be where
at 89% effort? She'd fall off the charts? And even if she would, she
was still in the public's eye while she was off the WTA top 100. I
think she dropped to 300 something. But that's looking at it from her
diminishing from a point of peak performance. You presented it as never
having reached where she has with her current ability. Where would she
have been if she had only "achieved 90% of her present level," as you
commented originally?

Perhaps there's not a way to calculate that, however, since you state
it's "not possible to guess where" Serena would be at 90% then I'll use
that as my free pass in saying, yeah, she'd be Googleable.

> > How'd you phrase it? "But I can be wrong. No matter, that's what I
> > think."
> >
> > Regardless, Serena's physique is courtesy of her parents. Boom! I'm
> > guessing she'd look as she looks even if she'd never played tennis,
> > never spoke to a trainer, never did anything but ate and breathed.
>
> I don't believe it. Much.

Okay. I won't argue your ability to believe. Much. ;o)

> > Again, I'm guessing that maybe ten percent of her physique/appearance
> > may've come from her participation in tennis - weight training,
> > supplements, competitions, etc.
>
> Can you imagine Serena as a sprinter? Would she look exactly the same?
> Or as a marathon runner, for that matter. Would she look still the
> same?

Marion Jones was a basketball star before she became a track star. (Or
perhaps she was track then basketball then track. Hmm. My memory!) Has
her physique changed? Serena would never have been a marathoner, imo. A
tall guy will be steered to the basketball court. A guy with a barrel
chest and short arms will be directed to the weight room. Still, there
are countless variables.

Serena could train and then complete a marathon. I'm certain of that.
To answer your question, I'll say she'd slim down as she put in the
necessary miles in preparation, however I doubt very much she'd ever
reach the top competitors in that sport simply because it's not her
bodytype.

And you said sprinter. Do you know Serena's sprint times? ;o)

> > Does she even lift weights? Or did she "just" train (and train and
> > train) on the courts?
>
> I don't know.

Okay then.

> Andrzej Rosa 1127R

--
Curt
 >> Stay informed about: weight lifting program for Tennis 

Dnia 2006-12-03 blakesq napisa³(a):
> What I am actually looking for is a weight lifting program for Tennis.
> Something to help with my serves, forehand, backhand, and movement on
> the court, as well as stamina. I am really hoping for a program,
> stating exercises, and numbers of sets. I make it to the gym about two
> to three times a week, and I play twice a week.

Are you dedicated enough to buy a dumbbell? If yes, we could work
something effective based on assumed fact that you can dedicate 15 min
a day. 15 min a day are better than 30 min every other day, which in
turns is better than an hour every two days.

If you aren't dedicated enough to do that, go to a gym twice a week.
Still, IMHO, best thing you can probably do in a commercial gym is
dumbbell work. Plenty of swings, snatches, cleans, and so on. In case
your gym prohibits overhead lifting (I heard that it happens) you have
the machines. In this case go through a machine circuit with short
rest intervals. Pair pulling movements with pushing movements and go
for density, which means that you try to do a lot of work within the
time you have available. Try to stress yourself, but do not kill
yourself. Go by feel. I won't give you any reps and sets. I tell you
to learn by experience when you go too far.

Consider getting outside on your off days. Do a lot of agility drills.
For example, sprint for 20 steps, fall to the ground and jump up for
20, and that is one rep. Do twenty of this reps. Or find two trees in
a park and run around them. Fast run one way, sharp left turn, fast
run the other way, sharp right turn. That's one rep. Do twenty. Find
a staircase and sprint up, walk down. That's one rep. I think that
you get the idea by now.

Try to do something every day. If you have no time to do something
real, simulate doing something. If you can't even simulate, pretend
that you are simulating doing something. Every day.

--
Andrzej Rosa 1127R
 >> Stay informed about: weight lifting program for Tennis 

Dnia 2006-12-03 Curt napisa³(a):
> Pete wrote:
>> "blakesq" <blakesq RemoveThis @hotmail.com> schreef:
>>
>> > Can some of you tennis players give me a good
>> > weight lifting program to do during the tennis
>> > season? Thanks.
>>
>> Try whatever this particular girl is doing;
>>
>> http://www.nieuwsinfo.nl/images/12003ausopen367.jpg
>>
>> Might work...
>
> I'd say that's at least 90% Mother Nature, Pete. ;o) God BLESS Her on
> her creations, eh?

If she achieved 90% of her present level, Pete wouldn't be able to
Google her out. She would be nobody among other nobodies.

--
Andrzej Rosa 1127R
 >> Stay informed about: weight lifting program for Tennis 

blakesq wrote:
> What I am actually looking for is a weight lifting program for Tennis.
> Something to help with my serves, forehand, backhand, and movement on
> the court, as well as stamina. I am really hoping for a program,
> stating exercises, and numbers of sets. I make it to the gym about
> two to three times a week, and I play twice a week.
>
> Blakesq
>
>
>
> blakesq wrote:
>> Can some of you tennis players give me a good weight lifting program
>> to do during the tennis season? Thanks.
>>
>> Blakesq

You know what would improve your tennis immeasurably? Playing more tennis!

--
Bully
Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't
matter, and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss
 >> Stay informed about: weight lifting program for Tennis 

On Sun, 3 Dec 2006 14:28:58 +0000 (UTC), Andrzej Rosa
<bakters.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Dnia 2006-12-03 gedaloda.DeleteThis@thisguy.com napisa³(a):
>> On Sun, 3 Dec 2006 13:07:44 +0000 (UTC), Andrzej Rosa
>><bakters.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Dnia 2006-12-03 gedaloda.DeleteThis@thisguy.com napisa³(a):
>>>> http://www.lifelineusa.com/products.cfm?categoryid=34&productid=28
>>>
>>>I may be wrong, but it looks like nonsense to me. Best way to spoil
>>>ones technique and slow him down, regardless of increased injury risk.
>>
>> As you say, you may be wrong.
>>
>> Technique is acquired through practice on the court (or against a
>> backboard) and with guidance from a coach. Technique is not acquired
>> through lifting weights or stretching rubber.
>
>But it can be spoiled by above mentioned. If you do significant number
>of reps of "sport specific" movement, your painstakingly honed motor
>recruitment patterns can get binned.

Number of reps, sets, resistance of band(s), direction of movement,
etc. are part of an overall exercise plan that should be individually
tailored to an athlete.

>> Resistive bands and tubing do not slow you down; they can help to
>> increase explosive power as resistance increases as the tubing is
>> stretched.
>
>Slow training against resistance will make you slow. Especially, when
>one trains "sport specific" movement. How fast you can "serve" against
>bands? Much slower than real stuff. And the trainee will learn to
>"muscle" the movement, which is bad news.

OK. Tell all the track athletes and football players to stop using
chutes and sleds and other types of resistance equipment.

The idea is not to match the speed with which one serves, hits
forehands, etc. The idea is to improve general conditioning, balance,
stability, agility, and power and to address the needs of muscles
involved in a particular sport. For example, tennis involves
multidirectional lower-body movements, aggressive trunk rotation, and
large concentric and eccentric stresses to the rotator cuff and
scapular muscles. There are high levels of muscle activity in the
wrist and forearm so training these muscles is needed to prevent elbow
and wrist injury. Training the rotator cuff and upper back muscles
are highly recommended. There are base exercises and sports
simulation exercises which tennis players are using with elastic
resistance tubing.

Someone who lifts heavy weights but does not know how to play tennis
might make the mistake of muscling his/her movements. That would
occur regardless of the specific sport involved. Accomplished tennis
players who understand how to execute shots are benefiting from using
resistance bands and tubing and are not sacrificing the efficiency of
their strokes in the process.


>
>> Elastic resistance training (ERT) is being used for conditioning
>> purposes with tennis players and many other kinds of athletes.
>> So are free weights, bodyweight exercises, jump ropes, etc.
>
>I agree. Equipment means nothing.
>
>> Just as you select the right amount of iron for specific exercises
>> when you lift, you choose the correct thickness of tubing with ERT.
>
>I agree. Equipment is really not important.
>
>> Correct technique and correct amount of resistance help to reduce the
>> risk of injury.
>
>Maybe. Anyway, why slow training of "sport specifics" should help?
Ask the many different types of athletes who use resistance training
in one form or another (tubing, clutes, sleds, etc.).

I don't know what you mean by "slow." Sometimes it's useful to vary
the speed of a resistive movement. This can easily be done with
resistance bands or tubing.
>From what I read, body is really smart when it comes to executing
>complicated patterns and one should really concentrate on honing the
>real stuff as much as it makes sense. Body will also limit the speed
>of limb to the point of safety, which is limited by *antagonist* muscle
>ability to stop it short of injury, so increasing strength of agonist
>muscles may result in slower movements on the playing field.

One of the many benefits of ERT is that, in many cases, it can be used
to improve the balance of opposing muscle forces. Base exercises are
especially useful in this respect. ERT emphasizes using base
exercises as well as exercises that simulate movement patterns
inherent in specific sports
>
>What makes sense to me is training *qualities*, like speed strength for
>example, in general. What makes sense to me, is balancing development
>of muscles all around the body of trainee, to prevent injuries. What
>makes sense to me, is training some specifics of sport performance in a
>way which is safer and more effective, like for example some explosive
>lifts can be treated as a substitute for jumping, but without much
>joint trauma.

Vertical jumping is often trained with rubber bands or tubing.
>
>But I can be wrong. No matter, that's what I think.

There's often no harm in being wrong as long as you're open to the
possibility that you might be wrong. Is it more important to be
correct or to avoid the ignominy of being regarded as someone who
changes his mind?

http://www.lifelineusa.com/articles.cfm?articleid=18

http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,7120,ssssssss6-238-263--9390-1-1...10X16-5

http://www.humankinetics.com/products/showproduct.cfm?isbn=0736037837
 >> Stay informed about: weight lifting program for Tennis 

<gedaloda RemoveThis @thisguy.com> wrote in message
news:5036n21k5fcvmg5k6m04u2a0brhbd0mons@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 3 Dec 2006 14:28:58 +0000 (UTC), Andrzej Rosa
> <bakters RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Dnia 2006-12-03 gedaloda RemoveThis @thisguy.com napisa³(a):
>>> On Sun, 3 Dec 2006 13:07:44 +0000 (UTC), Andrzej Rosa
>>><bakters RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Dnia 2006-12-03 gedaloda RemoveThis @thisguy.com napisa³(a):
>>>>> http://www.lifelineusa.com/products.cfm?categoryid=34&productid=28
>>>>
>>>>I may be wrong, but it looks like nonsense to me. Best way to spoil
>>>>ones technique and slow him down, regardless of increased injury
>>>>risk.
>>>
>>> As you say, you may be wrong.
>>>
>>> Technique is acquired through practice on the court (or against a
>>> backboard) and with guidance from a coach. Technique is not acquired
>>> through lifting weights or stretching rubber.
>>
>>But it can be spoiled by above mentioned. If you do significant
>>number
>>of reps of "sport specific" movement, your painstakingly honed motor
>>recruitment patterns can get binned.
>
> Number of reps, sets, resistance of band(s), direction of movement,
> etc. are part of an overall exercise plan that should be individually
> tailored to an athlete.
>
>>> Resistive bands and tubing do not slow you down; they can help to
>>> increase explosive power as resistance increases as the tubing is
>>> stretched.
>>
>>Slow training against resistance will make you slow. Especially, when
>>one trains "sport specific" movement. How fast you can "serve"
>>against
>>bands? Much slower than real stuff. And the trainee will learn to
>>"muscle" the movement, which is bad news.
>
> OK. Tell all the track athletes and football players to stop using
> chutes and sleds and other types of resistance equipment.
>
> The idea is not to match the speed with which one serves, hits
> forehands, etc. The idea is to improve general conditioning, balance,
> stability, agility, and power and to address the needs of muscles
> involved in a particular sport. For example, tennis involves
> multidirectional lower-body movements, aggressive trunk rotation, and
> large concentric and eccentric stresses to the rotator cuff and
> scapular muscles. There are high levels of muscle activity in the
> wrist and forearm so training these muscles is needed to prevent elbow
> and wrist injury. Training the rotator cuff and upper back muscles
> are highly recommended. There are base exercises and sports
> simulation exercises which tennis players are using with elastic
> resistance tubing.
>
> Someone who lifts heavy weights but does not know how to play tennis
> might make the mistake of muscling his/her movements. That would
> occur regardless of the specific sport involved. Accomplished tennis
> players who understand how to execute shots are benefiting from using
> resistance bands and tubing and are not sacrificing the efficiency of
> their strokes in the process.
>
>
>>
>>> Elastic resistance training (ERT) is being used for conditioning
>>> purposes with tennis players and many other kinds of athletes.
>>> So are free weights, bodyweight exercises, jump ropes, etc.
>>
>>I agree. Equipment means nothing.
>>
>>> Just as you select the right amount of iron for specific exercises
>>> when you lift, you choose the correct thickness of tubing with ERT.
>>
>>I agree. Equipment is really not important.
>>
>>> Correct technique and correct amount of resistance help to reduce
>>> the
>>> risk of injury.
>>
>>Maybe. Anyway, why slow training of "sport specifics" should help?
> Ask the many different types of athletes who use resistance training
> in one form or another (tubing, clutes, sleds, etc.).
>
> I don't know what you mean by "slow." Sometimes it's useful to vary
> the speed of a resistive movement. This can easily be done with
> resistance bands or tubing.
>>From what I read, body is really smart when it comes to executing
>>complicated patterns and one should really concentrate on honing the
>>real stuff as much as it makes sense. Body will also limit the speed
>>of limb to the point of safety, which is limited by *antagonist*
>>muscle
>>ability to stop it short of injury, so increasing strength of agonist
>>muscles may result in slower movements on the playing field.
>
> One of the many benefits of ERT is that, in many cases, it can be used
> to improve the balance of opposing muscle forces. Base exercises are
> especially useful in this respect. ERT emphasizes using base
> exercises as well as exercises that simulate movement patterns
> inherent in specific sports
>>
>>What makes sense to me is training *qualities*, like speed strength
>>for
>>example, in general. What makes sense to me, is balancing development
>>of muscles all around the body of trainee, to prevent injuries. What
>>makes sense to me, is training some specifics of sport performance in
>>a
>>way which is safer and more effective, like for example some explosive
>>lifts can be treated as a substitute for jumping, but without much
>>joint trauma.
>
> Vertical jumping is often trained with rubber bands or tubing.
>>
>>But I can be wrong. No matter, that's what I think.
>
> There's often no harm in being wrong as long as you're open to the
> possibility that you might be wrong. Is it more important to be
> correct or to avoid the ignominy of being regarded as someone who
> changes his mind?
>
> http://www.lifelineusa.com/articles.cfm?articleid=18
>
> http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,7120,ssssssss6-238-263--9390-1-1...10X16-5
>
> http://www.humankinetics.com/products/showproduct.cfm?isbn=0736037837

I think you're quite correct with your point of view, and I tried to
express something similar in my response on this thread. General
improvements in strength and condition are the way to go for most
people, and such practice will _not_ confuse motor patterns as long as
you give strength and conditioning its appropriate place with your
schedule, e.g, spending perhaps 3/4 of available time on sport-specific
practice and using what's left to build strength and conditioning.
Obviously if you're in the weight room almost every day and hit the
tennis court only once a week, you could mess up your tennis groove, but
I don't think anyone is suggesting that sort of schedule.

Sprinting is a good example - most people, me included, get faster when
they train a slow lift like the squat or deadlift when they hadn't
before. Now I agree that there are few things less fun than going out
for a run of any sort right after you DL, but my sprint speed is better
now than at any point in my life, even a few hours after lifting on a DL
day, for a very simple reason - I'm stronger. I am _not_ an elite
sprinter, nor do I have ambitions to enter masters track meets, but I am
a faster sprinter without ever having tried to be one. To repeat: a
general strength and conditioning program makes the best addition to
sport-specific training for most people most of the time, and the
alternative is a carefully designed program by a sport-specific coach
(and not your personal trainer at the gym).

-S-
http://www.kbnj.com
 >> Stay informed about: weight lifting program for Tennis 

<gedaloda RemoveThis @thisguy.com> wrote in message
news:5036n21k5fcvmg5k6m04u2a0brhbd0mons@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 3 Dec 2006 14:28:58 +0000 (UTC), Andrzej Rosa
> <bakters RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Dnia 2006-12-03 gedaloda RemoveThis @thisguy.com napisa³(a):
>>> On Sun, 3 Dec 2006 13:07:44 +0000 (UTC), Andrzej Rosa
>>><bakters RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Dnia 2006-12-03 gedaloda RemoveThis @thisguy.com napisa³(a):
>>>>> http://www.lifelineusa.com/products.cfm?categoryid=34&productid=28
>>>>
>>>>I may be wrong, but it looks like nonsense to me. Best way to spoil
>>>>ones technique and slow him down, regardless of increased injury risk.
>>>
>>> As you say, you may be wrong.
>>>
>>> Technique is acquired through practice on the court (or against a
>>> backboard) and with guidance from a coach. Technique is not acquired
>>> through lifting weights or stretching rubber.
>>
>>But it can be spoiled by above mentioned. If you do significant number
>>of reps of "sport specific" movement, your painstakingly honed motor
>>recruitment patterns can get binned.
>
> Number of reps, sets, resistance of band(s), direction of movement,
> etc. are part of an overall exercise plan that should be individually
> tailored to an athlete.
>
>>> Resistive bands and tubing do not slow you down; they can help to
>>> increase explosive power as resistance increases as the tubing is
>>> stretched.
>>
>>Slow training against resistance will make you slow. Especially, when
>>one trains "sport specific" movement. How fast you can "serve" against
>>bands? Much slower than real stuff. And the trainee will learn to
>>"muscle" the movement, which is bad news.
>
> OK. Tell all the track athletes and football players to stop using
> chutes and sleds and other types of resistance equipment.
>


The bottom line? Using a speed chute does no harm, as long as the overall
quality of training is kept high. However, performance problems may arise if
the chute consistently reduces running speeds during interval training. On
the positive side, speed-chute use is fun and provides an interesting break
from routine training. However, there's still no solid evidence that the
utilization of speed chutes will heighten sprint performances, compared to
conventional training.

'Effects of Speed Chute Training on Sprint Performance,'Medicine and Science
in Sports and Exercise, vol. 26(5), Supplement, p. S 64, 1994


General strength training, esp. antagonistic muscles = good.
Mimicking a high speed, coordinated sports motion (thowing, swinging, etc)
with resistance is an outdated training concept and should be avoided.
 >> Stay informed about: weight lifting program for Tennis 

"blakesq" <blakesq DeleteThis @hotmail.com> schreef:

> Can some of you tennis players give me a good weight lifting program to
> do during the tennis season? Thanks.

Try whatever this particular girl is doing;

http://www.nieuwsinfo.nl/images/12003ausopen367.jpg

Might work...

----
Pete
 >> Stay informed about: weight lifting program for Tennis 

"Andrzej Rosa" <bakters DeleteThis @yahoo.com> schreef:

> Try to do something every day. If you have no time to do something
> real, simulate doing something. If you can't even simulate, pretend
> that you are simulating doing something. Every day.

I do that when i run out of meds....

----
Pete
 >> Stay informed about: weight lifting program for Tennis 

On Sun, 3 Dec 2006 18:47:22 +0100, "Pete" <phoutstra RemoveThis @wanadoo.nl>
wrote:

>"Andrzej Rosa" <bakters RemoveThis @yahoo.com> schreef:
>
>> Try to do something every day. If you have no time to do something
>> real, simulate doing something. If you can't even simulate, pretend
>> that you are simulating doing something. Every day.
>
>I do that when i run out of meds....
>

Increase the stack...

Yes!
 >> Stay informed about: weight lifting program for Tennis 

Andrzej Rosa wrote:
> Dnia 2006-12-04 Curt napisa³(a):
> > Andrzej Rosa wrote:
> >> Dnia 2006-12-03 Curt napisa³(a):
> >> > Andrzej Rosa wrote:
> >> >> Dnia 2006-12-03 Curt napisa³(a):

Nice game of ping pong there, innit?

> >> > [...]
> >> >
> >> > re Pete's offering of
> >> >
> >> > http://www.nieuwsinfo.nl/images/12003ausopen367.jpg
> >> >
> >> >> > I'd say that's at least 90% Mother Nature, Pete. ;o)
> >> >> > God BLESS Her on her creations, eh?
> >> >>
> >> >> If she achieved 90% of her present level, Pete wouldn't
> >> >> be able to Google her out. She would be nobody among
> >> >> other nobodies.
> >> >
> >> > Is that true, Andrzej?
> >>
> >> It is.
> >
> > I don't believe that's correct. (Doesn't mean it's not, of course, but
> > there you have it.)
> >
> >> Try imagining that a 10s sprinter developed only 90% of his
> >> present level. He becomes roughly 11s sprinter, which is
> >> nobodyness.
> >
> > You're comparing apples and oranges, imo and fwiw.
> >
> >> > http://sportsline.com/tennis/rankings/wta
> >> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serena_Williams
> >> >
> >> > She's been a pro tennis player since 1995 (at age 14!) and, although
> >> > she's ranked 95 currently, from what I see in Wiki, she was ranked 21
> >> > by the Women's Tennis Association in 1999.
> >> >
> >> > The 100 ranked female tennis player? I was "able to Google her out."
> >> > Likewise, I suspect that Serena, had she only achieved 90% of her
> >> > accomplishments, would also have been someone Pete would have been able
> >> > to find with a search engine's help.
> >>
> >> It's not possible to guess where on top100 she would end up while being
> >> able to deliver 90% of what she could.
> >
> > It's not? Where are the math wizards (or anyone with a calculator)? She
> > had been ranked 21 and then she dropped to 95 over a period of time.
> > That's a calculable drop, right? There's a way to represent that
> > calculable drop as a percent, isn't there?
> >
> > Likewise, if Serena can achieve X accomplishment with Y amount of skill
> > then if you take Y and multiply it by 90%, shouldn't you be able to
> > calculate X as well?
>
> You seem to assume that an athlete who develops 90% ability will
> receive 90% results.

Perhaps. I believe I asked more questions than I made assumptions,
however.

> I tried to show you how crazy assumption it is, by my sprinter example.
> With high jump, for example, 10% is like 24 cm difference. You are
> out of business by the time your high jump goes down by 24 cm.

Interesting, but aren't there more variables with tennis than there are
with a straight sprint or a high jump?

[...]

> > Still, if Serena was ranked 21 at, say, 99% effort then she'd be where
> > at 89% effort? She'd fall off the charts? And even if she would, she
> > was still in the public's eye while she was off the WTA top 100. I
> > think she dropped to 300 something. But that's looking at it from her
> > diminishing from a point of peak performance. You presented it as never
> > having reached where she has with her current ability. Where would she
> > have been if she had only "achieved 90% of her present level," as you
> > commented originally?
>
> One could find measurable sport,

And so, in your opinion, is tennis measurable sport?

> and see where are people who fall 10% behind an elite levels. The
> more competitive sport we find, the more punishment for small drop
> in performance.

I agree with the sprint and, yes, the high jump examples, but, again,
is tennis a parallel to either of those?

> > Perhaps there's not a way to calculate that,

Is there?

> > however, since you state it's "not possible to guess where"
> > Serena would be at 90% then I'll use that as my free pass
> > in saying, yeah, she'd be Googleable.
>
> Details are not important

They're not, eh? So does that mean I can or cannot use my "not possible
to guess" free pass?

> as long as you got what I meant.

Yes, so far as sprint and high jump, but, again, are those sports
comparable to tennis so far as this discussion is concerned?

> I don't expect you to show scientific calculations of your 90% number too.

How very generous of you. ;o)

> >> > Regardless, Serena's physique is courtesy of her parents. Boom! I'm
> >> > guessing she'd look as she looks even if she'd never played tennis,
> >> > never spoke to a trainer, never did anything but ate and breathed.
> >>
> >> I don't believe it. Much.
> >
> > Okay. I won't argue your ability to believe. Much. ;o)
>
> Makes sense.

yes

> >> > Again, I'm guessing that maybe ten percent of her physique/appearance
> >> > may've come from her participation in tennis - weight training,
> >> > supplements, competitions, etc.
> >>
> >> Can you imagine Serena as a sprinter? Would she look exactly the same?
> >> Or as a marathon runner, for that matter. Would she look still the
> >> same?
> >
> > Marion Jones was a basketball star before she became a track star. (Or
> > perhaps she was track then basketball then track. Hmm. My memory!) Has
> > her physique changed?
>
> I don't know if it changed much. If Pyrros Dimas turned into basketball
> his physique wouldn't change much too, but what does it show?

What? Hey, Andrzej, that's all Greek to me.



(um, ba dump bump, btw)

Dimas, at almost 5'8", and considered the best Greek weightlifter of
all time, is just a leeeetle bit taller than Will Brink, fwiw.

Spud Webb is shorter than Dimas. But as to what does it show? I don't
know.

> > Serena would never have been a marathoner, imo.
>
> Why not?

I do, however, know that there's no current female marathoner (or male
marathoner for that matter) with Selena's physique. Certainly it's a
case of apples and oranges, or, maybe apples and pears.

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=7656162 is the one URL
that popped up from a quick Google search of "body structure and sports
performance" that I believe is applicable to this discussion (or, more
accurately, my point of view).

That document's title is _Body structure, somatotype, maturation and
motor performance of girls in ballet schooling_ and my point, if there
even is one, would be that people often gravitate to sports or
activities that their bodies are generally suited for.

To wit (and to repeat):

> > A tall guy will be steered to the basketball court. A guy with a barrel
> > chest and short arms will be directed to the weight room. Still, there
> > are countless variables.
> >
> > Serena could train and then complete a marathon. I'm certain of that.
> > To answer your question, I'll say she'd slim down as she put in the
> > necessary miles in preparation, however I doubt very much she'd ever
> > reach the top competitors in that sport simply because it's not her
> > bodytype.
>
> Everyone who will go through a marathoner training schedule will
> achieve this bodytype.

What? I believe you are *incredibly* wrong. Frank Shorter compared to
Bill Kazmaier much? You certainly don't believe the reverse is true?
Frank could train until his hands bleed and he'd never "achieve this
bodytype." I'm averse to blanket statements, but I'm leaning toward
uttering ~*EACH AND EVERY TIME YOU SAY THAT THEN YOU ARE WRONG!*~

> Including Serena and Pyrros Dimas. What is questionable

Andrzej, I mean it, I'm >< that close to typing "~*EACH AND EVERY TIME
YOU SAY THAT THEN YOU ARE WRONG!*~"

Please don't test me.

> is if they would be able to get anywhere near the elite level. This
> might not happen, but physique transformation is an easy
> task for a sportsman or sportswoman of proved dedication.

Tell that to Frank Shorter as he attempts to bench 600 pounds.

> > And you said sprinter. Do you know Serena's sprint times? ;o)
>
> No. Are they within 110% of top sprinter times? Quite possibly better
> than that. Still, as a sprinter she wouldn't be mightily successful
> with those times.

Okay, THAT really IS Greek to me.

Which is fine, honestly, as I love ouzo.

> Andrzej Rosa 1127R

All this (this being sports performance, training, elite achievement,
etc.) is rather moot, too, as I believe Pete has little, if any,
interest in tennis but great interest in Serena's physique which leads
me back to God BLESS Mother Nature and her creations!

--
Curt
 >> Stay informed about: weight lifting program for Tennis 

Dnia 2006-12-03 gedaloda.DeleteThis@thisguy.com napisa³(a):
> On Sun, 3 Dec 2006 14:28:58 +0000 (UTC), Andrzej Rosa
><bakters.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Dnia 2006-12-03 gedaloda.DeleteThis@thisguy.com napisa³(a):
>>> On Sun, 3 Dec 2006 13:07:44 +0000 (UTC), Andrzej Rosa
>>><bakters.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> As you say, you may be wrong.
>>>
>>> Technique is acquired through practice on the court (or against a
>>> backboard) and with guidance from a coach. Technique is not acquired
>>> through lifting weights or stretching rubber.
>>
>>But it can be spoiled by above mentioned. If you do significant number
>>of reps of "sport specific" movement, your painstakingly honed motor
>>recruitment patterns can get binned.
>
> Number of reps, sets, resistance of band(s), direction of movement,
> etc. are part of an overall exercise plan that should be individually
> tailored to an athlete.

Oh, once you are into bands so much, let's not forget that tracking
progress with this kind of equipment may turn out to be a challenge.

>>> Resistive bands and tubing do not slow you down; they can help to
>>> increase explosive power as resistance increases as the tubing is
>>> stretched.
>>
>>Slow training against resistance will make you slow. Especially, when
>>one trains "sport specific" movement. How fast you can "serve" against
>>bands? Much slower than real stuff. And the trainee will learn to
>>"muscle" the movement, which is bad news.
>
> OK. Tell all the track athletes and football players to stop using
> chutes and sleds and other types of resistance equipment.

Track athletes do not perform discuss "throws" against bands, last time
I checked. Yes. Let's have a look at what various throwers do. Do
they train a lot of "sport specific" moves with added resistance? Well,
at times they may decide to throw overweight or underweight implement
to fix some technical problem, but the extent of utility of this kind
of training is constantly discussed. Some say that excess of use of
this kind of training will spoil the technique, so it should be used
judiciously.

> The idea is not to match the speed with which one serves, hits
> forehands, etc. The idea is to improve general conditioning, balance,
> stability, agility, and power and to address the needs of muscles
> involved in a particular sport.

Oh, you say *general*. So why not use general tools to address
general needs? Is something wrong with using general stuff to fix
general shortcomings?

> For example, tennis involves
> multidirectional lower-body movements, aggressive trunk rotation, and
> large concentric and eccentric stresses to the rotator cuff and
> scapular muscles. There are high levels of muscle activity in the
> wrist and forearm so training these muscles is needed to prevent elbow
> and wrist injury. Training the rotator cuff and upper back muscles
> are highly recommended.

Unluckily, it doesn't do much for shoulder stability. Heavy overhead
supports, on the other hand, do help.

> There are base exercises and sports
> simulation exercises which tennis players are using with elastic
> resistance tubing.

That's my whole point. Throwers do not simulate throwing when they want
to improve throwing. They do strength and conditioning training geared
at important muscle groups and they throw for real a lot. If they do
something wrong, they throw closer, so they can measure very well if their
training program works or not. Yuri Sedyk did a routine based on front
squats and 400m sprints, for example. He didn't "throw" against a band.

> Someone who lifts heavy weights but does not know how to play tennis
> might make the mistake of muscling his/her movements. That would
> occur regardless of the specific sport involved. Accomplished tennis
> players who understand how to execute shots are benefiting from using
> resistance bands and tubing and are not sacrificing the efficiency of
> their strokes in the process.

Possible. I can imagine that good tennis players will remain good
players even faced with a very stupid S&C program.

>>I agree. Equipment is really not important.
>>
>>> Correct technique and correct amount of resistance help to reduce the
>>> risk of injury.
>>
>>Maybe. Anyway, why slow training of "sport specifics" should help?
>
> Ask the many different types of athletes who use resistance training
> in one form or another (tubing, clutes, sleds, etc.).

I'm not against resistance training. I'm against resistance training
by "mimicking" sport specific moves in the gym. It's better to do
moves different enough that your body will not confuse them on the
playing field.

> I don't know what you mean by "slow." Sometimes it's useful to vary
> the speed of a resistive movement. This can easily be done with
> resistance bands or tubing.

Or many other equipments. Anyway, I remember seeing a video of
training of heavyweight UFC fighter. He did sled drags and tire flips.
No harm in it, from my point of view. They also attached a lot of
bands to his limbs and core and he trained take-downs against all that
resistance and a sparring partner, which struck me as stupid. The idea
was to develop muscular endurance which would allow him to fight longer
at high level of output. Anyway, it didn't worked much. He got winded
while rolling on the mat with the other guy, which might not happened if
instead of playing Spiderman he would train wrestling to the point of
exhaustion. Like Fedor does, for example.

>>From what I read, body is really smart when it comes to executing
>>complicated patterns and one should really concentrate on honing the
>>real stuff as much as it makes sense. Body will also limit the speed
>>of limb to the point of safety, which is limited by *antagonist* muscle
>>ability to stop it short of injury, so increasing strength of agonist
>>muscles may result in slower movements on the playing field.
>
> One of the many benefits of ERT is that, in many cases, it can be used
> to improve the balance of opposing muscle forces.

Like many other training equipments.

> Base exercises are
> especially useful in this respect. ERT emphasizes using base
> exercises as well as exercises that simulate movement patterns
> inherent in specific sports

Which will probably work equally great like playing Spiderman for
take-down training.

>>What makes sense to me is training *qualities*, like speed strength for
>>example, in general. What makes sense to me, is balancing development
>>of muscles all around the body of trainee, to prevent injuries. What
>>makes sense to me, is training some specifics of sport performance in a
>>way which is safer and more effective, like for example some explosive
>>lifts can be treated as a substitute for jumping, but without much
>>joint trauma.
>
> Vertical jumping is often trained with rubber bands or tubing.
>>
>>But I can be wrong. No matter, that's what I think.
>
> There's often no harm in being wrong as long as you're open to the
> possibility that you might be wrong. Is it more important to be
> correct or to avoid the ignominy of being regarded as someone who
> changes his mind?

I never said that band training is useless. It's just a way of
providing resistance. Gravity works too. Anyway, discussing equipment
makes no sense. Equipment starts making sense if one uses it to
develop some quality.

> http://www.lifelineusa.com/articles.cfm?articleid=18
>
> http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,7120,ssssssss6-238-263--9390-1-1...10X16-5
>
> http://www.humankinetics.com/products/showproduct.cfm?isbn=0736037837

Equipment again. What sort of quality will band training develop
better than other kinds of training?

--
Andrzej Rosa 1127R