Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Rounded Back DLing, Brett Contreas - Not as bad as it's made out?

  • 11-06-2012 04:21PM
    #1
    Raven_Melody
    Closed Accounts Posts: 117 ✭✭


    '''Most people are stronger when rounding their back during deadlifts. This is natural and shouldn't be thought of as "dysfunctional."

    Just after reading through this article by Brett Contreas and it was certainly an interesting read.

    Obviously correct form should always be adhered to where possible; but what if you had been DLing the same way for years and competed with a rounded back that whole time - would it really be worth dropping the weight back and maybe not competing for a year in order to relearn your technique? I know personally that it's hard to shake bad habits in this regard. I'd be really interested to hear any opinions on his viewpoint!


Comments

  • #2
    Hanley
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 21,981 ✭✭✭✭Hanley


    F*cking moronic. He spends the majority of the time talking about thoracic flexion and only briefly touches on it to describe it.

    I read the entire thing waiting for a reference to it, and eventually got there when talking about KK. And then he starts sh*tting on about %'s of tolerable lumbar flexion? Give me a f*cking break. What a complete pile of sh*te.

    Typical t-nation sh*te.

    ....yes it's after annoying me.


  • #3
    Raven_Melody
    Closed Accounts Posts: 117 ✭✭Raven_Melody


    Hanley wrote: »
    F*cking moronic. He spends the majority of the time talking about thoracic flexion and only briefly touches on it to describe it.

    I read the entire thing waiting for a reference to it, and eventually got there when talking about KK. And then he starts sh*tting on about %'s of tolerable lumbar flexion? Give me a f*cking break. What a complete pile of sh*te.

    Typical t-nation sh*te.

    ....yes it's after annoying me.
    Well, that answers that! :)


  • #4
    Hanley
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 21,981 ✭✭✭✭Hanley


    ...I should probably jump in and say that it's likely a CHANGE in back flexion during a lift is more dangerous than setting up flexed and flexing further as you move. But I'd still just try to be smart and sensible about it and pull with a neutral spine. I struggle to see any REAL benefit from pulling round backed.

    And then there's the whole issue of how impossible it becomes to lock out circa max weights with a rounded lumbar spine because your glutes are taken out of the movement.


  • #5
    Raven_Melody
    Closed Accounts Posts: 117 ✭✭Raven_Melody


    Hanley wrote: »
    ...I should probably jump in and say that it's likely a CHANGE in back flexion during a lift is more dangerous than setting up flexed and flexing further as you move. But I'd still just try to be smart and sensible about it and pull with a neutral spine. I struggle to see any REAL benefit from pulling round backed.

    And then there's the whole issue of how impossible it becomes to lock out circa max weights with a rounded lumbar spine because your glutes are taken out of the movement.

    What I took from it (in laymans terms:)), was that he was saying to concentrate on keeping the neutral spine for as long as possible, but that it was essentially 'okay' to round the back when going for a max if it will make a substantial difference to the weight. The way I was looking at it was, if you were competing and lifting 200kg with a neutral spine but knew you could pull 250kg rounded...would you really say 'no, it's dangerous' and just go for the lower weight? i.e. is it really THAT dangerous in terms of it only happening in terms of near max/max lift attempts?


  • #6
    deadlybuzzman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,874 ✭✭✭deadlybuzzman


    someone else will probably know the name of who Im talking about but I remember seeing a video in here ages back of a russian lifter that deadlifted massive weight with a really rounded back, and now his backs banjaxed


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Raven_Melody
    Closed Accounts Posts: 117 ✭✭Raven_Melody


    Not advocating it at all, and tbh I'm not v.clued up on it, but much as he comes across as a bit of a tosser I wanted to see if there was any logic behind the theory. Realistically almost everyone compromises form for numbers at some stage, it might not be clever but it's pretty common :/


  • #8
    Hanley
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 21,981 ✭✭✭✭Hanley


    Raven_Melody wrote: »
    Not advocating it at all, and tbh I'm not v.clued up on it, but much as he comes across as a bit of a tosser I wanted to see if there was any logic behind the theory. Realistically almost everyone compromises form for numbers at some stage, it might not be clever but it's pretty common :/

    Sounds a lot like you just want an excuse to compromise for
    ;)

    And as for people compensating when testing - its mostly a trait of lower tier lifters tbh. You won't see it with the top guys because it's just not efficient. Which is probably the best reason not to emulate the guys compromising form.

    ...that and it's dangerous.
    deadlybuzzman wrote: »
    someone else will probably know the name of who Im talking about but I remember seeing a video in here ages back of a russian lifter that deadlifted massive weight with a really rounded back, and now his backs banjaxed

    konstantin konstantinov. And it was his upper back which he rounds, which is better as the thoracic disks tolerate flexion, extension and torque better. And it's also why that articles annoying me because it doesn't really make the distinction.


  • #9
    Raven_Melody
    Closed Accounts Posts: 117 ✭✭Raven_Melody



    Sounds a lot like you just want an excuse to compromise for
    ;)
    Yup! :D


Advertisement
Advertisement