On Movements and Exercises

This article is an excerpt from our Capacity manual, available in our shop

Exercise selection is a means of limitation. Movements — squat, snatch, burpee, etc. — are simply patterns, codes, prompts to constrain and focus on particular muscle groups, and sometimes shortcuts to achieve deified standards.

The marketing tells us that standards increase quality but synonyms for standardize are normalize and homogenize which suggest that standards reduce quality to the average. Movement standards, i.e. range-of-motion and loading aid the worst to improve while simultaneously disincentivizing the best from improving upon. The average human being moves poorly (and it will only get worse in the future) so who sets the standard? Compare the ROM for shoulders, hips, and ankles of the US general population to the top 10% of physically fit humans and you might well be convinced that these are two different species: one immobile, shaped by a lifetime of sedentary existence, sitting in chairs, cars, and couches, and the other shaped by movement and attention. Movement standards compel us to copy someone else but we use training to better ourselves, to be better than average … hopefully. This intent should drive us to investigate which exercises and movement patterns will allow us to accomplish our objectives. Are they what the average person does to be average or are they useful to us, as individuals who seek higher performance?

The patterns of reductive, artificial, named exercises should elicit a specific response from the body. As coordination, mobility, and strength decline the intended stress of a particular movement may shift to another area and cause a negative response. A standing press should stress the shoulder muscles but weakness and poor mechanics often shift load to the back, which, when paired with other movements, unintentionally localizes and increases stress. The squat should primarily tax the legs, hips, and feet, but for most people, it affects the low back. Next time you are in the gym take inventory: ask yourself whether you move in harmony with the intention of the exercise.

“Do I load my shoulders when I put the weight overhead? Or support the load with my back due to limited shoulder mobility or strength?”

If your position and focal point of the stress aren’t aligned with the intention then change the movement or improve its quality until it does. With movement, as with everything, ask better questions.

What should I spend my energy on?

What is the purpose of the movement?

What is the tissue I affect in a given range?

Should I squat below parallel? If so, how far?

Until my hamstrings touch my calves?

That would indeed be the end of the range but it is rarely advised and certainly not sold “because not everyone can,” and that is exactly the point — why take advice, direction, or standards for someone who cannot do from someone who cannot do? Why would you?

If the movement is done to improve performance in a particular sport, the ranges of motion and loading should be intuitive, and the diminishing returns well understood. Where it can help, enforce strict standards, and pay attention to when or why you miss or lose the standard due to fatigue.

We used to say, “train for full range but/and also train the cheat,” because touching the chest to the floor when doing push-ups develops strength, flexibility, and integrity but some institutions ask only for a 90-degree bend at the elbow when testing push-ups. The same goes for the pull-up: moving the whole head above the bar develops strength through the whole range but again, some institutional tests demand only that the chin touch the underside of the bar. These days, while we still require the chest to touch the floor during a burpee, our rationale to “peel” off the ground from that position is to make the limitation cardiovascular. If we required a strict push-up in each rep the limiting factor would be localized muscular fatigue. For the squat, we allow that, “hip crease below the knee” is good enough because it can take years for people to learn to squat correctly (improve dorsiflexion or spine extension or both) and few will spend that time and energy. In that relaxation of standards, we relegated ourselves to being “average”; to some, a standard is a safety net, and to others, a fishing net.

Modern strength and conditioning industrialists would have us think that the goal is to get good at an exercise and that the movement (pattern) is an effective expression of fitness. To prove the assertion they administer tests. If you pass, the “tester” may applaud, even though the test proves only that repeating a pattern makes you better at repeating the pattern of that exercise — the Law of Specificity. Imagine a linguist teaching English to a parrot, thinking he created a genius.

There are no “bad” or “good” movements, only appropriate and less appropriate exercises relative to the objective. Our tissue is either prepared for the stress we expose it to (trained) or not. Take responsibility for your intent and consider what each exercise or movement is for, how it is done, who it is for, thus whether it is appropriate.

Is the exercise I want to do related to how I want to move?

Is the way I want to move related to how I want to feel?

Does this exercise degenerate or injure my body?

Does learning this exercise lead to other meaningful inquiry?

Does proficiency with one movement affect ability with others?

What can the tissues tolerate?

What am I willing to pay?

Nothing is free. Everything costs something. And everyone pays.

We name and use a lot of exercises. All have standards, but many are inappropriate for the general population. All exercises are modifiable or replaceable. While no exercise is magic, some are considered demonic by those who associate them with chronic or acute injuries. Generally, poor exercises are so because the player has made poor choices; most trainees have underprepared tissue and over-inflated confidence.

I love to snatch a barbell. Light, fast, heavy, fatigued, I can and do use almost all variations. My shoulders are strong through the whole range of motion, I have positive shin flexion, great ankle integrity, and I have spent ten years studying the movement intently. I know only 5-6 other players that can say the same. Everyone else is on a “development road” for the snatch, which means most will never do it in a high-intensity context because their tissue is inappropriately developed. Virtually all players should contextualize all exercises and movements in this way.

Instead of thinking about exercises you want to do, think about attributes that the “pattern” offers. Consider how that pattern might transfer to your sport or your interest. We think of movements on a spectrum:

From big to small

From slow to explosive

From internal (bodyweight) to external (loaded)

The more joints involved and the further your body moves through space, the “bigger” the movement. The faster this happens, the more “explosive” the movement.

All exercises that are “recommended” in our program can be modified to fit your current ability by simply matching the intent; big, small, slow, fast, loaded or not. If possible, fix whatever problem makes exercises difficult. If not, modify them. Under no circumstances do we recommend you continue any movement that causes pain ...

... except the existential sort.