# 505 tempo



## goandykid (Nov 19, 2006)

What does is mean to do an exercise at a 505 tempo? Slow, like 5 seconds, up 5 seconds down?


----------



## CowPimp (Nov 19, 2006)

goandykid said:


> What does is mean to do an exercise at a 505 tempo? Slow, like 5 seconds, up 5 seconds down?



Yes.


----------



## goandykid (Nov 19, 2006)

Thanks


----------



## P-funk (Nov 19, 2006)

what it does is make the concentric slow as shit.  I don't like to see an intentionally slow concentric unless it is a re-hab situtation.


----------



## goandykid (Nov 19, 2006)

I was told to use it for my ab workout?

Machine crucnh 3x6-8 505 tempo

not rehab btw


----------



## P-funk (Nov 19, 2006)

machine crunch = silly


----------



## mike456 (Nov 19, 2006)

P-funk said:


> machine crunch = silly



why would a regular crunch be any better? a machine crunch, you can use extra resistance


----------



## P-funk (Nov 20, 2006)

mike456 said:


> why would a regular crunch be any better? a machine crunch, you can use extra resistance



you can't use resistance on a regular crunch?

a machine crunch sucks for the same reason a machine anything sucks.  your body doesn't work like that.


----------



## DOMS (Nov 20, 2006)

P-funk said:


> you can't use resistance on a regular crunch?
> 
> a machine crunch sucks for the same reason a machine anything sucks.  your body doesn't work like that.



No joke.  Doing crunches is supposed to help strengthen your core, but a machine crunch will take a lot of the stabilizers out of the equation.


----------



## Raz (Nov 20, 2006)

P-funk said:


> you can't use resistance on a regular crunch?
> 
> a machine crunch sucks for the same reason a machine anything sucks.  your body doesn't work like that.



For hypertrophy reasons only, I don't think machines have a big disadvantage. Unless it puts the person in a really awkward position.

I myself like alot of machines, I dont use them too much now, but in the past I gained alot from using them. Also, I use the weighted ab machine, I dont see why not, for strength and size. You use added resistance for the rest of your muscles why not the abs? Just add a few stabiltiy exercises as well to help with performance.


----------



## P-funk (Nov 20, 2006)

read the post above yours and you will find your answer.


----------



## Raz (Nov 20, 2006)

P-funk said:


> read the post above yours and you will find your answer.



Was that aimed to me? 

Granted yes, the machine crunch will take out the stabilzing muscles and you will not get a better advantage to athletic performance. However what is going to work better for strength/size? A machine crunch with lots added resistance or 20reps of knee raises or whatever to improve core stagbility... The machine crunch. So do this and the stabilty work.


----------



## P-funk (Nov 20, 2006)

Raz said:


> Was that aimed to me?
> 
> Granted yes, the machine crunch will take out the stabilzing muscles and you will not get a better advantage to athletic performance. However what is going to work better for strength/size? A machine crunch with lots added resistance or 20reps of knee raises or whatever to improve core stagbility... The machine crunch. So do this and the stabilty work.



best for adding strength is to perform gross movements like the squat and deadlift.

Look at specifity of movement.  Who is to ever say that doing an exercise in one plane (crunch is in the sagital plane), in one position (crunch is supine), performed at one speed (in this case 505) is going to transfer over to being effective in anything else?

Are crunches a complete waste of time (even with out the machine)?  What is the main function of the rectus abdominus and external and interal obliques during functional movement anyway?  Provide stability and prevent compensatory movement (and then rotation or even side bending, if we are looking at the obliques).  Is it not often that someones rectus abdominus is already strong, but their oblique are not, creating a pattern of synergistic dominace?  Wouldn't it be smarter to train the obliques if you are looking for strength?


Just throwing it out there.


----------



## Raz (Nov 20, 2006)

Right I understand what your sayin. Good explanation to it thank-you,


----------



## P-funk (Nov 20, 2006)

Raz said:


> Right I understand what your sayin. Good explanation to it thank-you,



I'm not really saying anything.

I am just throwing some questions out there, that we can think about in regard to training (not just with the exercise in question, but with everything).  I am just brain storming out loud.


----------



## mike456 (Nov 20, 2006)

P-funk said:


> you can't use resistance on a regular crunch?
> 
> a machine crunch sucks for the same reason a machine anything sucks.  your body doesn't work like that.



what about cunches with a cable, while standing up? I was thinking of doing those to strengthen my abs


----------



## P-funk (Nov 20, 2006)

mike456 said:


> what about cunches with a cable, while standing up? I was thinking of doing those to strengthen my abs



sounds like a better idea.

I could never get the standing crunches to work for me though.  But, if it feels comfortable for you then you can try to implement it into your program?


----------



## mike456 (Nov 20, 2006)

DOMS said:


> No joke.  Doing crunches is supposed to help strengthen your core, but a machine crunch will take a lot of the stabilizers out of the equation.



Crunches are not an exercise to improve stability, crunches are for traing your trunk flexors wich is useful to some people wich have imbalances such as myself, that's why I thought that a machine crunch is sometimes useful.


----------



## mike456 (Nov 20, 2006)

P-funk said:


> best for adding strength is to perform gross movements like the squat and deadlift.
> 
> Look at specifity of movement.  Who is to ever say that doing an exercise in one plane (crunch is in the sagital plane), in one position (crunch is supine), performed at one speed (in this case 505) is going to transfer over to being effective in anything else?
> 
> ...



but some people need to do crunches to strengthen there core if they have imbalances (like me), so it is useless unless you have an imbalance


----------



## P-funk (Nov 20, 2006)

mike456 said:


> but some people need to do crunches to strengthen there core if they have imbalances (like me), so it is useless unless you have an imbalance



but, how is the machine crunch going to help that?

Like I said, you need to get the muscles to work together.....agonists, antagonists, synergists, stabilizers.  The machine crunch doesn't sync things up....where is the strength being developed?

by your philosphy, I could leg press 1000lbs and then be able to squat it....because I buit strong legs right?  Ah no.  I have not developed the proper muscularture to use this strength in a functional manner.

Why would abdominal training be any different?

See my point?


----------



## mike456 (Nov 20, 2006)

P-funk said:


> but, how is the machine crunch going to help that?
> 
> Like I said, you need to get the muscles to work together.....agonists, antagonists, synergists, stabilizers.  The machine crunch doesn't sync things up....where is the strength being developed?
> 
> ...



I am saying if someone has a postural imbalance such as an anterior pelvic tilt, and lets say the cause is there trunk flexors (abs) are weak, trunk flexion (such as a machine crunch) with resistance will not solve this?

are you saying crunches in general are silly or just machine crunches?


----------



## P-funk (Nov 20, 2006)

mike456 said:


> I am saying if someone has a postural imbalance such as an anterior pelvic tilt, and lets say the cause is there trunk flexors (abs) are weak, trunk flexion (such as a machine crunch) with resistance will not solve this?
> 
> are you saying crunches in general are silly or just machine crunches?



I don't think crunches are entirely silly.  I think machine crunches are entirely silly.

I think that crunches can be used sometimes, for example, in this case, to help increase stiffness in the rectus abdominus.  Also, most people do crunches poorly and use their hip flexors anyway....In that case, the hip flexor activity is going to not solve the problem of anterior pelvic tilt...so what are you really doing?


----------



## mike456 (Nov 20, 2006)

P-funk said:


> I don't think crunches are entirely silly.  I think machine crunches are entirely silly.
> 
> I think that crunches can be used sometimes, for example, in this case, to help increase stiffness in the rectus abdominus.  Also, most people do crunches poorly and use their hip flexors anyway....In that case, the hip flexor activity is going to not solve the problem of anterior pelvic tilt...so what are you really doing?



ok 

when you say poor form activating the hip flexors, are you tallking about people doing sit-ups instead of crunches? If there is only trunk flexion, it won't activate the hip flexors, right?


----------



## P-funk (Nov 20, 2006)

mike456 said:


> ok
> 
> when you say poor form activating the hip flexors, are you tallking about people doing sit-ups instead of crunches? If there is only trunk flexion, it won't activate the hip flexors, right?



right, sit ups.


----------

