A biomechanical analysis of the farmers walk, and comparison with the deadlift and unloaded walk

This study compared the biomechanical characteristics of the farmers walk, deadlift and unloaded walk. Six experienced male strongman athletes performed farmers' walks and deadlifts at 70% of their 1RM deadlift. Significant differences (p < 0.05) were apparent at knees passing with the farmers lift demonstrating greater trunk extension, thigh angle, knee flexion and ankle dorsiflexion. Significantly greater mean vertical and anterior forces were observed in the farmers lift than deadlift. The farmers walk demonstrated significantly greater peak forces and stride rates and significantly shorter stride lengths, ground contact times, and swing times than unloaded walk. Significantly greater dorsiflexion, knee flexion, thigh angle, and significantly lesser trunk angle at foot strike were also observed in the farmers walk. The farmers lift may be an effective lifting alternative to the deadlift, to generating more anterior-propulsive and vertical force with less stress to the lumbar spine due to the more vertical trunk position

Tapering practices of strongman athletes: Test-retest reliability study

BACKGROUND: Little is currently known about the tapering practices of strongman athletes. We have developed an Internet-based comprehensive self-report questionnaire examining the training and tapering practices of strongman athletes. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to document the test-retest reliability of questions associated with the Internet-based comprehensive self-report questionnaire on the tapering practices of strongman athletes. The information will provide insight on the reliability and usefulness of the online questionnaire for use with strongman athletes. METHODS: Invitations to complete an Internet questionnaire were sent via Facebook Messenger to identified strongman athletes. The survey consisted of four main areas of inquiry, including demographics and background information, training practices, tapering, and tapering practices. Of the 454 athletes that completed the survey over the 8-week period, 130 athletes responded on Facebook Messenger indicating that they intended to complete, or had completed, the survey. These participants were asked if they could complete the online questionnaire a second time for a test-retest reliability analysis. Sixty-four athletes (mean age 33.3 years, standard deviation [SD] 7.7; mean height 178.2 cm, SD 11.0; mean body mass 103.7 kg, SD 24.8) accepted this invitation and completed the survey for the second time after a minimum 7-day period from the date of their first completion. Agreement between athlete responses was measured using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and kappa statistics. Confidence intervals (at 95%) were reported for all measures and significance was set at P<.05. RESULTS: Test-retest reliability for demographic and training practices items were significant (P<.001) and showed excellent (ICC range=.84 to .98) and fair to almost perfect agreement (κ range=.37-.85). Moderate to excellent agreements (ICC range=.56-.84; P<.01) were observed for all tapering practice measures except for the number of days athletes started their usual taper before a strongman competition (ICC=.30). When the number of days were categorized with additional analyses, moderate reliability was observed (κ=.43; <.001). Fair to substantial agreement was observed for the majority of tapering practices measures (κrange=.38-.73; P<.001) except for how training frequency (κ=.26) and the percentage and type of resistance training performed, which changed in the taper (κ=.20). Good to excellent agreement (ICC=.62-.93; P<.05) was observed for items relating to strongman events and traditional exercises performed during the taper. Only the time at which the Farmer's Walk was last performed before competition showed poor reliability (ICC=.27). CONCLUSIONS: We have developed a low cost, self-reported, online retrospective questionnaire, which provided stable and reliable answers for most of the demographic, training, and tapering practice questions. The results of this study support the inferences drawn from the Tapering Practices of Strongman Athletes Stud

A biomechanical analysis of the heavy sprint-style sled pull and comparison with the back squat

This study compared the biomechanical characteristics of the heavy sprint-style sled pull and squat. Six experienced male strongman athletes performed sled pulls and squats at 70% of their 1RM squat. Significant kinematic and kinetic differences were observed between the sled pull start and squat at the start of the concentric phase and at maximum knee extension. The first stride of the heavy sled pull demonstrated significantly (

Sprint-Specific Training in Youth: Backward Running vs. Forward Running Training on Speed and Power Measures in Adolescent Male Athletes

This study compared the effects of 2 sprint-specific training programs against the natural development of speed, power, and stiffness in a group of adolescent male athletes. Forty-three male adolescents (aged 13–15 years) were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 training groups; backward running training (BRT = 26), or forward running training (FRT = 17). A physical education class (n = 24) of similar age constituted a control (CON) group. Both training groups performed running sessions matched for distance and intensity biweekly for 8 weeks. Parametric and magnitude-based inferences were used to analyze within group (pre-post measures) and between group (gain scores) for 10-m, 10- to 20-m, and 20-m sprint times, vertical countermovement jump (CMJ) height, and vertical leg stiffness. Both running groups significantly improved (p ≤ 0.05) in all performance tests from pre-training to post-training, with effect sizes ranging from −1.25 to 0.63. When the groups were compared, the BRT and FRT groups improved significantly (p ≤ 0.01) on all sprint performances and stiffness relative to the CON group. The BRT group demonstrated favorable effects for 10-m and 20-m sprint performances (effect size [ES] = −0.47 and −0.26, respectively) and CMJ height (ES = 0.51) compared with the FRT group. These results demonstrate that forward and backward sprint-specific training programs enhance speed and power measures more than natural development in adolescent male athletes. Furthermore, the greater training responses in sprint performance and CMJ ability indicate that BRT is a useful tool for improving concentric strength and power and may be classified as a sprint-specific training method

Strongman implements training: applications for strength and conditioning practice

In recent years, the use of strongman training modalities for performance enhancement have become popular in strength and conditioning practice. While advocates of strongman training have suggested strongman implement training is more specific than other forms of strength training and may help ‘bridge’ the gap between gymnasium-based strength training and functional performance, little information exists in the scientific literature as to the risks and benefits of strongman implement training. This thesis sought to investigate the possible injury risks and benefits of strongman implement training in strength and conditioning practice. In study one, a survey was used to determine how strength and conditioning coaches utilised strongman training implements in their strength and conditioning practice. It was found that eighty-eight percent (n = 193) of coaches used strongman implements in the training of their athletes, with sleds, ropes, kettlebells, tyres, sandbags and farmers walk bars ranked as the top six implements used. Anaerobic/metabolic conditioning, explosive strength/power and muscle endurance were the three main physiological reasons for strongman implement use. Study two was undertaken to determine the injury epidemiology of strongman athletes. Eighty two percent of strongman athletes reported injuries (1.6 ±1.5 training injuries/lifter/y, 0.4 ±0.7 competition injuries/lifter/y, 5.5 ±6.5 training injuries/1000 hr training) with the highest reported areas of injury being lower back (24%), shoulder (21%), bicep (11%) and knee (11%). The most common type of injuries was strains and tears of muscle (38%) and tendon (23%). An interesting finding from this study was that although 54% of injuries resulted from traditional training, strongman athletes were 1.9 times more likely to sustain injury when performing strongman implement training when exposure to the type of training was considered. Studies three, four and five compared the biomechanical characteristics of three strongman exercises (farmers walk, heavy sprint style sled pull and log lift) with three traditional exercises (deadlift, squat and clean and jerk), respectively. These studies gave insight into the potential stresses associated with strongman training implements and the likely chronic adaptations associated with training with these implements. The kinetic data presented on the strongman and traditional exercises provided the necessary information to help accurately equate loading in the final training study. The final study presented in this thesis compared the effects of seven weeks of strongman resistance training versus traditional resistance training. Thirty experienced resistance-trained rugby players were assessed for body composition, strength, power, speed and change of direction (COD) measures. The main findings were that all performance measures improved with training (0.2% to 7.0%) in both the strongman and traditional training groups, however no significant between-group differences were observed in functional performance measures after 7-weeks of resistance training. Between group differences indicated small positive effects in muscle mass and acceleration performance and large improvements in 1RM bent over row strength associated with strongman compared to traditional training. Small to moderate positive changes in 1RM squat and deadlift strength, horizontal jump, COD turning ability and sled push performance were associated with traditional compared to strongman training. These results suggest that strongman and traditional training approaches may elicit similar responses over short-term training periods. This thesis provides insight into strongman implement training and its potential applications for strength and conditioning practice. The studies presented in this thesis provide the first evidence of how strength and conditioning coaches utilise strongman implements in practice and the injury epidemiology associated with strongman implement training. The biomechanical studies provide insight into the acute stresses associated with strongman implement training and the likely long-term chronic adaptations associated with these implements. The training study provides the first empirical evidence of the chronic effects of strongman resistance training on body composition, strength, power, and speed measures. Strength and conditioning coaches can use the data from this thesis as a possible source of new ideas to diversify and improve their training practices. The data can be used to help guide programming, which can be used to help maximise the transfer of training to sport performance and therefore improve training efficiency

The epidemiology of injuries across the weight-training sports

Background: Weight-training sports, including weightlifting, powerlifting, bodybuilding, strongman, Highland Games, and CrossFit, are weight-training sports that have separate divisions for males and females of a variety of ages, competitive standards, and bodyweight classes. These sports may be considered dangerous because of the heavy loads commonly used in training and competition. Objectives: Our objective was to systematically review the injury epidemiology of these weight-training sports, and, where possible, gain some insight into whether this may be affected by age, sex, competitive standard, and bodyweight class. Methods: We performed an electronic search using PubMed, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, and Embase for injury epidemiology studies involving competitive athletes in these weight-training sports. Eligible studies included peer-reviewed journal articles only, with no limit placed on date or language of publication. We assessed the risk of bias in all studies using an adaption of the musculoskeletal injury review method. Results: Only five of the 20 eligible studies had a risk of bias score ≥75 %, meaning the risk of bias in these five studies was considered low. While 14 of the studies had sample sizes >100 participants, only four studies utilized a prospective design. Bodybuilding had the lowest injury rates (0.12–0.7 injuries per lifter per year; 0.24–1 injury per 1000 h), with strongman (4.5–6.1 injuries per 1000 h) and Highland Games (7.5 injuries per 1000 h) reporting the highest rates. The shoulder, lower back, knee, elbow, and wrist/hand were generally the most commonly injured anatomical locations; strains, tendinitis, and sprains were the most common injury type. Very few significant differences in any of the injury outcomes were observed as a function of age, sex, competitive standard, or bodyweight class. Conclusion: While the majority of the research we reviewed utilized retrospective designs, the weight-training sports appear to have relatively low rates of injury compared with common team sports. Future weight-training sport injury epidemiology research needs to be improved, particularly in terms of the use of prospective designs, diagnosis of injury, and changes in risk exposure

A BIOMECHANICAL COMPARISON BETWEEN STRONGMAN EVENTS AND TECHNICALLY SIMILAR TRADITIONAL WEIGHT TRAINING EXERCISES: A NARRATIVE REVIEW

A literature search was conducted to identify studies comparing biomechanical parameters of strongman events and technically similar traditional weight training exercises. While many similarities were identified, the farmers walk may result in reduced stress placed on the lumbar spine due to the more vertical trunk than when performing the deadlift under identical loading conditions, the heavy sled pull may be used to better develop anterior force production than the back squat, and the log lift may be used to better develop forceful hip extension during a triple extension movement than the clean and jerk. The identification of biomechanical similarities and differences between strongman and traditional weight training exercises may be used by strength and conditioning coaches to better prescribe exercises suited to an individual athletes’ conditioning requirements

The biomechanical characteristics of the strongman atlas stone lift

BACKGROUND: The atlas stone lift is a popular strongman exercise where athletes are required to pick up a large, spherical, concrete stone and pass it over a bar or place it on to a ledge. The aim of this study was to use ecologically realistic training loads and set formats to (1) establish the preliminary biomechanical characteristics of athletes performing the atlas stone lift; (2) identify any biomechanical differences between male and female athletes performing the atlas stone lift; and (3) determine temporal and kinematic differences between repetitions of a set of atlas stones of incremental mass. METHODS: Kinematic measures of hip, knee and ankle joint angle, and temporal measures of phase and repetition duration were collected whilst 20 experienced strongman athletes (female: n = 8, male: n = 12) performed three sets of four stone lifts of incremental mass (up to 85% one repetition maximum) over a fixed-height bar. RESULTS: The atlas stone lift was categorised in to five phases: the recovery, initial grip, first pull, lap and second pull phase. The atlas stone lift could be biomechanically characterised by maximal hip and moderate knee flexion and ankle dorsiflexion at the beginning of the first pull; moderate hip and knee flexion and moderate ankle plantarflexion at the beginning of the lap phase; moderate hip and maximal knee flexion and ankle dorsiflexion at the beginning of the second pull phase; and maximal hip, knee extension and ankle plantarflexion at lift completion. When compared with male athletes, female athletes most notably exhibited: greater hip flexion at the beginning of the first pull, lap and second pull phase and at lift completion; and a shorter second pull phase duration. Independent of sex, first pull and lap phase hip and ankle range of motion (ROM) were generally smaller in repetition one than the final three repetitions, while phase and total repetition duration increased throughout the set. Two-way interactions between sex and repetition were identified. Male athletes displayed smaller hip ROM during the second pull phase of the first three repetitions when compared with the final repetition and smaller hip extension at lift completion during the first two repetitions when compared with the final two repetitions. Female athletes did not display these between-repetition differences. CONCLUSIONS: Some of the between-sex biomechanical differences observed were suggested to be the result of between-sex anthropometric differences. Between-repetition differences observed may be attributed to the increase in stone mass and acute fatigue. The biomechanical characteristics of the atlas stone lift shared similarities with the previously researched Romanian deadlift and front squat. Strongman athletes, coaches and strength and conditioning coaches are recommended to take advantage of these similarities to achieve greater training adaptations and thus performance in the atlas stone lift and its similar movements