The GIM Project

Biomechanics is not the end-all be-all. But it can be an important tool in terms of exercise progression and regression in terms of strength and conditioning as well as rehab.

One variable we can manipulate that is going to translate to biomotor and neuromotor abilities in sport is impulse.

In its most basic form, impulse causes a change in momentum.

Take a 12” box drop.

The impulse is going to be the same regardless of a stiff landing or a soft landing.

But the kinematic strategy one adopts will dictate force/time requirements for the task.

Want less force?

Take longer to stop.

Encourage a softer landing.

Want to simulate demands closer to that of sport?

Stop quicker.

Stick the landing.

When we look at early to mid post op scenarios where we are still building up capacity and tissue tolerance, higher symptom irritability, or someone with a younger training age, smaller impulses and softer landings are going to be a better place to start.

When we look at mid to late stages and return to sport scenarios, we are going to start to shift toward sticking the landing and decreasing the time requirements.

In return to sport scenarios and strength and conditioning circles, it’s a common technical model to always encourage a soft landing.

But are we actually setting up athletes for failure?

Most sports don’t happen slowly.

Where time is a limiting factor, the quicker one can get out of a cut, change direction, etc., the better.

Know when and why you would want to implement small versus large impulse scenarios as well as the respective force and time variables that you can manipulate for the given task.

Impulse is king.

Progressive overload.

That is the name of the game.

It can come in many fashions.

Using more weight.

Doing more reps.

Doing more sets.

Doing more volume.

Increasing the speed of the movement (braking forces/reversal strength).

Decreasing the speed of the movement (longer eccentric/isometric/concentric phases).

Using larger ranges of motion.

When we start to stack multiple days, weeks, months, and years of consistent, relentless effort, good things happen.

Choose vengeance.

The elephant in the room.

Spinal movement under load (especially lumbar flexion).

The dogma and beliefs are strong from the camps of those who religiously follow the “research” of Stuart McGill.

The studies he conducted were performed on pig cadaver spines (i.e. dead pigs). Repeatedly flexing the spine near end-range will unequivocally result in mechanical failure of the posterior structures of the spine (stress-strain graph). This is physics.

The results of this study were then extrapolated to humans. THIS is not research, THIS is one person’s opinion. Do not get the two confused.

Living organisms (i.e. living humans) have the ability to adapt. Deliberately allocating stressors to certain structures/tissues in a progressive fashion (progressive overload) will lead to tissue adaptations (Wolff’s Law). There is plenty of research to support this. This is biomechanics and exercise physiology.

The debate is not about whether which one is right or wrong: keeping the spine rigid versus allowing the spine to bend. There are multiple factors to consider. However, a robust spine should have the capacity to be rigid and to bend under load.

Let’s stop fostering fragility and kinesiophobia. That doesn’t do anyone a favor. Plus you look like a fool on social media when you cannot abstract your argument.

Merry Christmas Ya’ll.