Mr. Kurz opinion about these articles:

Use this forum for sports and martial arts training topics that don't relate specifically to any of the other forums.

Mr. Kurz opinion about these articles:

Postby Castilho » Jun 01, 2005 23:42

Mr. Kurz,

I´m from Brazil, so excuse my english. I´ll try to be "understandable" :)

I read some amount of material about your studies over flexibility, and i really agree with almost everything you wrote, very logical insights. I did´t have the chance to bought one of your books yeat, but i´ll definitelly try to do that this month (i hope... short of cash, poor country...)

Your focus in the neural part of flexibility training really sounds logical to me. But here in Brazil, in the books published here, the amout of participation of the connective tissues and adaptations in these structures are claimed to represent a big role in the development of flexibility. A lot of authors here put emphasys in this point.

I found this article: http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:icRhUfFbkbEJ:www.scielo.br/pdf/rbme/v10n6/en_a02v10n6.pdf+constant+or+increasing+velocity.+Med+Sci+Sports+Exerc+2002%3B34:667-72.&hl=pt-BR&client=firefox-a

It´s wrote by some relevant researchers in physiology at (or is... i never know) Brazil. One of them was my professor in the graduation. I really want to hear your opinion about this article, specially about these points:

"The duration time seems to provide important physiological changes such as the remodeling of elastin and collagen molecules. These changes may be associated with alterations on the muscle-tendon units and fascia, caused by the increase on the tissueselasticity through hysteresis."

"The neural effects initially provide an increase on the range of motion before the actuation of the reflex system with the later participation of the spindles and the autogenic and reciprocal inhibitory actions caused isometric contractions that occurred during the length increase process and tension generation during stretching. However, these effects, initially important, seem not to produce significant results when compared with the hypothesis of reduction of the mechanical strengths. This reduction seems to occur due to changes on the viscoelastic properties of the soft and conjunctive tissues under constant stress during flexibility training."

Thank you very much for your attention, and hope to acquire your book "Stretching Scientifically" in a near (really near) future! And again, please all excuse me for my terrible english (i´ll try to improve this).

If you can send me any kind of theorical reference, i´ll really glad! I´m really motivated about your point of view and i´m "going back" to reading about flexibility.

P.S. I´m taekwondo 1º dan instructor and physical educator.
Last edited by Castilho on Jun 02, 2005 21:03, edited 2 times in total.
Ernesto de Castilho
Castilho
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Jun 01, 2005 19:41
Location: Brazil

Postby Castilho » Jun 02, 2005 19:39

I read other article, wrote by Dr. Estélio Dantas (renomed specialist about flexibility in Brazil) saying:

"A tensão isométrica provocada pela insistência estática a que se submete o músculo, atua sobre o Órgão Tendinoso de Golgi, provocando um relaxamento da musculatura agonista, acarretando que o fator limitante do movimento seja, normalmente, a articulação. Por ser esta estrutura que suporta a força que se está realizando, ela tende a se adaptar, aumentando a extensibilidade de seus tecidos moles e diminuindo, desta forma, sua estabilidade. O fenômeno exposto torna contra indicado o Método Passivo para o treinamento da flexibilidade das articulações sujeitas a choques nos desportos de contato. (McNAIR & STANLEY,1996)."

http://www.personaltraining.com.br/flexibilidade.html

A free translation to english (my bad english):

"The isometric tension provoked by the static insistence that the
muscle is submited, acts on the Golgi Tendon Organs, provoking a relaxation of the
agonist muscles, causing that the limitante factor of the movement is,
normally, the joint. For being this structure that supports the force that if
is carrying through, it tends if to adapt, increasing the extensibility of its
soft tissues and diminishing, this way, its stability. The displayed
phenomenon becomes against indicated the Passive Method for the
training of the flexibility of the joints expose to shocks in the contact
sports. (McNAIR & STANLEY, 1996)."

This statement refers to the passive method of stretching.

While i cannot have your book in hands, i really wants to hear some comments about these statements. My mind is really "doing splits" :)

Thanks again and please excuse me for so many doubts you surelly already explain in your book (i wish to have a bookstore selling it near my house). I can assure docents and friends in my university are wanting to kill me too, i´m bothering everyone i can with a lot of questions :)

I´ll promisse: it´s the last post asking for advice before i have your book in hands.

Other people, please fell free to comment these statements too - the techinical issues, not my inconvenience, please :).
Ernesto de Castilho
Castilho
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Jun 01, 2005 19:41
Location: Brazil

Re: Mr. Kurz opinion about these articles:

Postby Thomas Kurz » Jun 04, 2005 18:31

Castilho wrote:I read some amount of material about your studies over flexibility, and i really agree with almost everything you wrote, very logical insights. I did´t have the chance to bought one of your books yeat, but i´ll definitelly try to do that this month (i hope... short of cash, poor country...)

Your focus in the neural part of flexibility training really sounds logical to me. But here in Brazil, in the books published here, the amout of participation of the connective tissues and adaptations in these structures are claimed to represent a big role in the development of flexibility. A lot of authors here put emphasys in this point.

I found this article: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rbme/v10n6/en_a02v10n6.pdf .

It´s wrote by some relevant researchers in physiology at (or is... i never know) Brazil. One of them was my professor in the graduation. I really want to hear your opinion about this article, specially about these points:

"The duration time seems to provide important physiological changes such as the remodeling of elastin and collagen molecules. These changes may be associated with alterations on the muscle-tendon units and fascia, caused by the increase on the tissueselasticity through hysteresis."

"The neural effects initially provide an increase on the range of motion before the actuation of the reflex system with the later participation of the spindles and the autogenic and reciprocal inhibitory actions caused isometric contractions that occurred during the length increase process and tension generation during stretching. However, these effects, initially important, seem not to produce significant results when compared with the hypothesis of reduction of the mechanical strengths. This reduction seems to occur due to changes on the viscoelastic properties of the soft and conjunctive tissues under constant stress during flexibility training."


I have read the article by Viveiros and others and it shows that:

a) with static passive stretching (relaxed stretching) gains in the range of motion in the shoulder joint disappeared after 24 hours;

b) the greater range of motion was achieved during stretching, the more was lost during subsequent 24 hours rest (see point a);

c) in the short-term three sets of stretches were more effective than one, for example, 3 x 10 sec were more effective than 1 x 60 sec, 3 x 60 sec were more effective than 1 x 120 sec.

Practical conclusions a rationally thinking instructor might draw from this article could be that either one has to do these relaxed stretches more often than 24 hours apart or that it would be better to use more effective stretches than those relaxed used in this research, and that three sets of shorter stretches are generally more effective than one longer stretch.

Authors' conclusion, that increases in the range of motion are due more likely to changes in the fibrous connective tissue and its weakening, may apply to relaxed stretches of shoulder flexors but not necessarily to other kinds of stretches and other muscle groups. Do you think that weakened muscles can support two people (me and the woman) in a side split between chairs? For the likely explanation see articles by Fridén and others, and by Saxton and Donnelly, which I quote in Stretching Scientifically.

I wrote on the issue of active muscle tension (neural factor) versus passive tension (mainly the connective tissue factor) in stretching on pages 112-114 and 120-124 in Stretching Scientifically.

Here I quote my conclusion from page 114:

“For practical purposes, as long as you feel your muscles contract in response to a stretch, it means that relaxing the muscles can improve your stretch and that you should concern yourself more with nervous regulation of your muscles' tension and less with your muscles' connective tissue.”

Now, a general conclusion on sundry experts, authorities, researchers, etc.

While I was plodding through this poorly translated article (Viveiros et al. 2004]), with its misinterpretation of at least one article they quoted (Bandy et al. 1997), the lack of explanation of peculiarities of the shoulder joint versus, say, knee or hip joints, and the lack of clear conclusions for practice, the thought struck me: Why do I bother? Can these researchers do what I can do? Can they do what my customers can do? And then I recalled that I had already written something that applies to this situation.

Here is what I have written in the subchapter “Other Stretching Methods” in the chapter “Questions and Answers on Stretching” of Stretching Scientifically:

“For me to pay attention to any expert's claims, I need to see results that are better than those achieved by people who use my book, Stretching Scientifically, or my video, Secrets of Stretching. To see what I mean, look at some of the people who have used my method and took the trouble of photographing themselves and mailing me their photos, which are on our web site at http://www.stadion.com/testimonial.html .”

If an explanation doesn't agree with facts it is the explanation that is wrong.
Last edited by Thomas Kurz on Jun 05, 2005 06:11, edited 1 time in total.
Thomas Kurz
Madrej glowie dosc dwie slowie
Thomas Kurz
Site Admin
 
Posts: 440
Joined: Dec 03, 2003 08:04

Postby Castilho » Jun 05, 2005 01:30

More than satisfatory, a great answer to confirm my point of view about the logical fundaments that leads your method, Mr. Kurz.

This frase resumes the point that makes me "break" a lot of these "paradigms" i heard in my life: "For practical purposes, as long as you feel your muscles contract in response to a stretch, it means that relaxing the muscles can improve your stretch and that you should concern yourself more with nervous regulation of your muscles' tension and less with your muscles' connective tissue."

Mr. Kurz, i didn´t read your book yeat (will order monday :)), but i´m already your fan ;)

Thank you very much to take some important amount of your precious time to clarify some of my doubts (really, not doubts, just to confirm what i already think is logical). Maybe, this post can help some other person with the same concerns.

And again, excuse my bad english!
Ernesto de Castilho
Castilho
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Jun 01, 2005 19:41
Location: Brazil


Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron