This is sourced from the Sports Injury Doctor ISSUE 14, 08 NOVEMBER , -http://www.rehabtrainer.com.au - Chris Mallack - has been head of sports med at Bath Rugby and head physio at Queensland Reds Super 14. He presents the Rehab Trainer course in London each year.
I read once that only 5% of the population have the ability to attain a true and visible ‘6 pack’ of muscle in the abdominal core, irrespective of diet and training. I am glad that I am not one of that 5%. I don’t feel the pressure to keep something I don’t have so it then affords me the luxury of a glass or 5 of tasty carbohydrate laden Australian cool climate Shiraz every night.
Attaining the ‘6 pack’ of muscle in the abdominal core is a fine balance between genetics, good nutrition (often the low carbohydrate variety espoused by the bodybuilders and fitness competitors) and good training. But does a ‘6 pack’ guard against the dreaded modern day curse of low back pain.?
Well I would argue that in fact it may, for a whole bunch of reasons.
"‘6 pack’ holders generally don’t use spine threatening machines like the abdominal curl machine. They are the clever ones who perform controlled ‘floor crunches’ and ‘plank’ type exercises. They don’t need or choose to use these gimmick machines."
Firstly, in order to have the much sought after ‘6 pack’, you need extraordinary low body fat levels. Interestingly, one of the biggest predictors of low back pain is in fact obesity. Generally people who carry too much weight place too much stress on their low backs in bending due to the extra leverage that the upper torso places on the spine. Clearly, those with a ‘6 pack’ don’t carry any unnecessary baggage to place stress on their spines.
Furthermore, research shows that in the treatment of chronic low back pain, moderate exercise can sometimes be as effective as countless hours of physiotherapy and chiropractic work. Why? Because when you increase from being sedentary to slightly active, you immediately start to use and recruit dormant muscles particularly the ‘core stabilisers’. One would argue that you could directly measure the inner unit (or inner core) muscles of someone who sports a ‘6 pack’ and chances are the muscles will be reasonably functional. It’s because they use these muscles in all the movement that they do.
Those with a ‘6 pack’ generally also have above levels of flexibility. They are training machines who cover all bases including regular stretching. And what we physio’s know is that if you have flexion based back pain – the type caused or exacerbated by forward bending or prolonged sitting – then by stretching your hamstrings and gluteals your back pain should diminish somewhat.
Lastly, those with a ‘6 pack’ actually train their low back muscles and abdominal muscles. There is a lot of truth in the notion that some ‘abdominal’ training exercises place enormous and dangerous strains and pressures on the discs in the low back. For example, the abdominal curl machine (the one you sit on and have a roller against your chest and you ‘crunch’ to bring the roller to your knees) will place massive compressive pressure on the disc and potentially cause a low back injury. But the ‘6 pack’ holders generally don’t do these exercises. No they are the clever ones who do controlled ‘floor crunches’ and ‘plank’ type exercises. They don’t need or choose to use these gimmick machines.
So does that mean that in order to have a pain free low back you need a ‘6 pack’?. Absolutely not. But by implementing these principles, you may increase your chance of having a functional low back;
1. Lose some weight
2. Move. Do something as simple as walking, or better still walk in a pool.
3. Stretch you hamstrings and glutes
4. Train your abdominals in a smart and sensible manner.
Chris Mallachas been head of sports med at Bath Rugby and head physio at Queensland Reds Super 14. He presents the Rehab Trainer course in London each year
What’s Happened To The Summer 20s?
Not enough Clubs fielding teams, Premier League Clubs with good Under 20 rosters nowhere in sight, cost of participation too high ($2,000 + a team?) and probably the cause of some non participation, why isn't this development activity funded by Capital Football, the Under 17 Summer HPP team thrown in to make up an even number of teams (and do they pay more for that), no medical assistant in attendance at the games and no Canteen for parents / players/supporters! The upside is that the football is getting pretty good to watch and that's the work of the Clubs that are participating. Be good to see the members of the Capital Football Board all out at the Summer 20s in a show of support for our youth players. How's that for a start?
And it's still a dam good Capital Football idea! So why do we have the staggers?
As you know, we are into the second year of the Men's Summer 20s. Capital Football had an inspired moment and set up an off-season competition (at very short notice to Clubs) for clubs that had a population of players Under 20 years of age (that’s every Premier League Club for a start) and would be prepared to continue to play Football in the off-season.
In the first season, we had Canberra FC, Woden Valley FC, Belconnen United and Tuggeranong United answer the call and field teams. It was a terrific start to a damn good idea and made a positive contribution to the continuing development of our players between the ages of 17 to 20 years of age.
The Coaches of the teams in the first Summer 20s were agreed that this was a good thing to do in the off season. Volunteers at a few Clubs. at short notice, saddled up again to make it happen!
Club’s were able to gather their young players in one squad, have them play in company at / around their age group and make valuable assessments of their developing talent for the forthcoming season. The players got to play football and prepared for the forthcoming season. It was a simple formulae, a low maintenance concept that didn’t require a lot of “engineering” to make it happen at the Capital Football end of things. The fly in the ointment, as it were, was that Capital Football could not see it way clear to making this brand new development opportunity, free from charges to Clubs by way of a registration fee.
During the 2010 season many of us looked forward to the second iteration of the Summer 20s. Again, many of us just assumed that Capital Football were further ahead than the previous season, speaking to Clubs as a senior level, well in advance of the close of the normal competition season, to ensure that plans were afoot at Club level to field a team in the Summer 20s. Well, it’s the sort of thing you would do – isn’t it?
Alas, we started the second Summer 20s with four (4) Premier League Clubs and five (5) teams. The PL Clubs this season are Canberra FC, Woden Valley FC, Canberra Olympic and Tuggeranong United. Woden Valley had that many young lads wanting to play the Club simply had to field two teams. That meant a Bye, so Capital Football volunteered its Summer Under 17 HPP squad to field a team each week. So now we have six (6) teams. Belconnen United, who had played so well in the previous season declined to enter a team. As to the rest of the Premier League Clubs – who knows? They should be there!
So why have the Summer 20s been under subscribed by the Premier League Clubs in 2010? Is it because they were not made aware of the competition in time to get themselves organised. Did they simply not have the Coaching and support staff willing to go around again so close to the end of the 2010 competition. Are they running their own off season program and have no available time to play the Summer 20s. Did Capital Football simply not do the leg work well in advance to put this competition together.
And finally, was the cost imposed by Capital Football on each Club for player registration, just too high, particularly at the end of a normal season’s expenses? This last reason is the one that at least one PL Club advises is the reason they declined this time around. Given that you get no change out of $2,000 per team to run a team in the Summer 20s, coupled with the feeling that as this was a genuine “development” opportunity for 17 to 20 year old, part of the high performance regime you might care to say (and a few are doing just that), you can see why this would give cause for alarm. I wonder if the U17 Summer HPP squad is paying an additional fee for the Summer 20s and if so why? The fact that the some Clubs are paying the fee to play should not be construed as agreement by them that they should be charged to participate. It’s a lot of money to find, after all, isn’t Capital Football feeding off it own on this one?
Then there is the canteen at Hawker Enclosed. The damn thing has been closed for the last three games of the Summer 20s and hasn’t that caused some adverse comment for Capital Football. Last year the Clubs did it on roster and did it well. I understand that Capital football were to do it this year, why I don’t know, but it’s failed. Not good enough!
You know, the Summer 20s had earned Capital Football a lot of praise and it worked. Its not a difficult exercise to run. It needed good long term ground work during the year with Clubs to ensure we had as many of the PL Clubs involved as possible. Instead we went backwards. The football is still good, but this initiative has not “developed” and its still a good concept. So disappointing.
And it's still a dam good Capital Football idea! So why do we have the staggers?
As you know, we are into the second year of the Men's Summer 20s. Capital Football had an inspired moment and set up an off-season competition (at very short notice to Clubs) for clubs that had a population of players Under 20 years of age (that’s every Premier League Club for a start) and would be prepared to continue to play Football in the off-season.
In the first season, we had Canberra FC, Woden Valley FC, Belconnen United and Tuggeranong United answer the call and field teams. It was a terrific start to a damn good idea and made a positive contribution to the continuing development of our players between the ages of 17 to 20 years of age.
The Coaches of the teams in the first Summer 20s were agreed that this was a good thing to do in the off season. Volunteers at a few Clubs. at short notice, saddled up again to make it happen!
Club’s were able to gather their young players in one squad, have them play in company at / around their age group and make valuable assessments of their developing talent for the forthcoming season. The players got to play football and prepared for the forthcoming season. It was a simple formulae, a low maintenance concept that didn’t require a lot of “engineering” to make it happen at the Capital Football end of things. The fly in the ointment, as it were, was that Capital Football could not see it way clear to making this brand new development opportunity, free from charges to Clubs by way of a registration fee.
During the 2010 season many of us looked forward to the second iteration of the Summer 20s. Again, many of us just assumed that Capital Football were further ahead than the previous season, speaking to Clubs as a senior level, well in advance of the close of the normal competition season, to ensure that plans were afoot at Club level to field a team in the Summer 20s. Well, it’s the sort of thing you would do – isn’t it?
Alas, we started the second Summer 20s with four (4) Premier League Clubs and five (5) teams. The PL Clubs this season are Canberra FC, Woden Valley FC, Canberra Olympic and Tuggeranong United. Woden Valley had that many young lads wanting to play the Club simply had to field two teams. That meant a Bye, so Capital Football volunteered its Summer Under 17 HPP squad to field a team each week. So now we have six (6) teams. Belconnen United, who had played so well in the previous season declined to enter a team. As to the rest of the Premier League Clubs – who knows? They should be there!
So why have the Summer 20s been under subscribed by the Premier League Clubs in 2010? Is it because they were not made aware of the competition in time to get themselves organised. Did they simply not have the Coaching and support staff willing to go around again so close to the end of the 2010 competition. Are they running their own off season program and have no available time to play the Summer 20s. Did Capital Football simply not do the leg work well in advance to put this competition together.
And finally, was the cost imposed by Capital Football on each Club for player registration, just too high, particularly at the end of a normal season’s expenses? This last reason is the one that at least one PL Club advises is the reason they declined this time around. Given that you get no change out of $2,000 per team to run a team in the Summer 20s, coupled with the feeling that as this was a genuine “development” opportunity for 17 to 20 year old, part of the high performance regime you might care to say (and a few are doing just that), you can see why this would give cause for alarm. I wonder if the U17 Summer HPP squad is paying an additional fee for the Summer 20s and if so why? The fact that the some Clubs are paying the fee to play should not be construed as agreement by them that they should be charged to participate. It’s a lot of money to find, after all, isn’t Capital Football feeding off it own on this one?
Then there is the canteen at Hawker Enclosed. The damn thing has been closed for the last three games of the Summer 20s and hasn’t that caused some adverse comment for Capital Football. Last year the Clubs did it on roster and did it well. I understand that Capital football were to do it this year, why I don’t know, but it’s failed. Not good enough!
You know, the Summer 20s had earned Capital Football a lot of praise and it worked. Its not a difficult exercise to run. It needed good long term ground work during the year with Clubs to ensure we had as many of the PL Clubs involved as possible. Instead we went backwards. The football is still good, but this initiative has not “developed” and its still a good concept. So disappointing.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)