I must confess I was just recently converted into using isometric protocols first for my training sessions and later for athletes. I do know ISOs exist from a stone age but I was somehow reluctant to use them as I didn’t want to look like Charles Atlas from the early 20th century.
Must admit I used to think ISO’s don’t have a place in this modern time! How wrong was I. Ronnie Coleman would say: “Yeah baby”.
Recently I posted about my training on social media and I got a few questions about it. So here it is in more detail.
I am known as a numbers coach and trying to be based on science. But I admit, I rose up through “bro-science” and I don’t think that is all that bad. Let me explain “bro-science”: somebody is performing one type of athletic training, let’s just say lifting in a gym, and he is doing a workout that is known just to him. At, the end of some period, he got some positive results out of it (No shit, it happens) and he claims that this is THE workout, and he is the special one among all the others.
and what science has to say about this…?
Continuing from my previous article on Unstable Surface Training (UST) (Click for Part 1 of this series) with practical applications as myself serving as test subject. In this second part, I have looked towards what science has to say on this controversial topic at hand!
Citius, Altius, Fortius is an Olympic motto that mean faster, higher, stronger. There is hidden meaning of why and how to train. We should strive for getting stronger, faster and jump higher to get better.
