Full range.....fact or fallacy?

[vinylgroover]

Guys, i changed the way i worked my calves recently and have experienced excellent results.

The change amounts to using partial reps or strongest range reps if you like and the results have been very encouraging. I don't break parralel on any exercise, and isntead focus on the contraction at the top. For years i have been working calves in a full range of motion with no results.

If it works for calves, can it work for other bodyparts. I have not read extensively on the theory of strongest range reps. Does anyone else here believe in the effectiveness of strongest range reps as opposed to working a muscle through it's full range of motion?

 

[Zander1983]

Rocking calf raises work great for me. Barbell on your back, standing flat on the ground with your feet relatively close together, you push off the balls of your feet and - like you've been doing - focus on the contraction at the top of the movement. Reverse the movement, but rock back onto your heels as your toes lift off the ground towards you.

 

[casualbb]

I don't think partial-range stuff is really all that helpful except in breaking through sticking points in compound motions.

Scientific fact: eccentric motions cause muscle damage and stimulate growth. Logically, the more you limit the range of motion, the less eccentric you get.

Now, obviously you don't need to work a muscle through its entire anatomical range. The standard barbell bench press maybe hits only 1/2 of the pectoral range. It really isn't so black and white an issue, but do try to do all your stuff full-range. Going partial isn't going to help much.

-casualbb

 

[vinylgroover]

I don't think partial-range stuff is really all that helpful except in breaking through sticking points in compound motions.

Scientific fact: eccentric motions cause muscle damage and stimulate growth. Logically, the more you limit the range of motion, the less eccentric you get.

Now, obviously you don't need to work a muscle through its entire anatomical range. The standard barbell bench press maybe hits only 1/2 of the pectoral range. It really isn't so black and white an issue, but do try to do all your stuff full-range. Going partial isn't going to help much.

-casualbb

It helped my calves. I honestly got nowhere doing full range for calves. I suddenly change to partials and within weeks i'm getting growth......i didn't change anything else in my routine other than going from full-range to partials. I have been doing this for 2 months now and still getting growth.

Is that just a coincidence?

 

[casualbb]

Do you do stretch partials, or partials near the contracted state?

-casualbb

 

[vinylgroover]

Do you do stretch partials, or partials near the contracted state?

-casualbb

i'll bring my feet back so that they are parralel with the platform, no lower.....so stretch partials i guess.

 

[casualbb]

That would make sense then. The calves are not unique in how they work as muscles, but they are unique in that, among the body's muscle systems, they are never allows to decondition. Unless wheelchair-bound, every human is up walking every day, making their calves tough, resistant to growth (The Repeated Bout effect, if anyone remembers).

On the HST-boards others have noticed this: when they restrict the range of their calf presses or calf raises and raise the weight correspondingly, they can usually sustain growth. You are totally correct! I would, however, hesitate to apply this restricted range to any other exercise except possibly shrugs. The calves are also unique in that the motion they facilitate, the toe press, allows the body to use the most possible weight when the muscle is in a stretched position. Most other motions, squatting, pressing, curling (not pulling, though) can sustain the most weight when the constituent muscles are in the contracted position. This excessive stretch as well as the correspondingly high weights used in a limited-range calf press can be helpful in stimulating new growth.

So why not apply it to pulling stuff too? Well, those are complex compound movements. In working only the last few stretch inches many muscles will have been neglected.

Good job on getting your calves to grow, btw. A lot of people have trouble with that

-casualbb

 

[Tarheel]

For bodybuilding, I think a longer range of motion is often better.

But for powerlifting, its often good to work your sticking points (shorter range of motion, using suspended GMs, board presses, rack pulls, etc.)

 

[JOKER47]

For years i have been working calves in a full range of motion with no results.

That was the problem.

A change was way overdue from the sounds of it.


Joker

 

[coolcolj]

calves have like 3-4 inch rom -

tha extra inch won't make that much of a diffeence, but see those chicken leg dudes that do quarter squats with 405+lbs?.....

amen

 

[BlkWS6]

See I always thought that a full stretch in calf training was crucial to development. My logic may be incorrect here, but one would assume that your calves are conditioned to the flat position (parallel) and the up on the toes position due to walking every day (granted we all walk differentely) Therefore, by going through a full range of motion where your heel dips down lower then your toes would expose the calves to a range of motion that they are not familiar with (unless you spend a lot of time in sand or something) which may lead to growth. At any given step that partial range (foot parallel to ground and up on the toes) is supporting ones entire bodyweight, I would assume that specific range of motion would be very difficult to stimulate properly due to an existing high degree of conditioning. Case in point, I see tons of guys in the gym I workout at with rather poor calf development who load on a TON of weight and only perform that partial top range of motion. I would like to hear some more thoughts on this. Im not doubting your progress at all vinyl but I have always believed in a really full range of motion for calves, and I would like to hear more thoughts about this.

 

[vinylgroover]

Casual BB - what you say makes alot of sense.

Blk - I've always thought that too.....i have always emphasised a full range of motion on every exercise.....up until now.

What happened was, i asked this personal trainer at our gym for some calf tips (he is a former bodybuilder). He told me to jump on the standing calf machine and to do some reps. I did that and he immediately pulled me up. He said try this........he pushed my feet closer together (about 3 inches apart) and told me to only bring my heels back to parallel with the platform and then explode back up and get a peak contraction at the top, hold for 1-2 seconds and back down. I swear it's working. I use that on all my calf exercises.

Prior to that i always brought my heels back as far down as they could go, emphasising the full stretch.....for years it did nothing.

Give it a try. Even the first set i did, i really noticed a difference in how my calves 'felt'.

 

[gonelifting]

Casual BB - what you say makes alot of sense.

Blk - I've always thought that too.....i have always emphasised a full range of motion on every exercise.....up until now.

What happened was, i asked this personal trainer at our gym for some calf tips (he is a former bodybuilder). He told me to jump on the standing calf machine and to do some reps. I did that and he immediately pulled me up. He said try this........he pushed my feet closer together (about 3 inches apart) and told me to only bring my heels back to parallel with the platform and then explode back up and get a peak contraction at the top, hold for 1-2 seconds and back down. I swear it's working. I use that on all my calf exercises.

Prior to that i always brought my heels back as far down as they could go, emphasising the full stretch.....for years it did nothing.

Give it a try. Even the first set i did, i really noticed a difference in how my calves 'felt'.

If nothing else changed then I`m confused, but if you added weight to your calf raises then I can see that working. Adding weight will do some "damage". growth.
I would assume that if you shortened the range then you can lift more. correct?

 

[Baoh]

calves have like 3-4 inch rom -

tha extra inch won't make that much of a diffeence, but see those chicken leg dudes that do quarter squats with 405+lbs?.....

amen

Actually, because of that miniscule range of motion, it would mean that each inch was even MORE valuable. Suppose it's a 4-inch ROM and you truncate it to 3 inches. That's a 25% reduction. However, this can be made up for by increasing load.

Vinylgroover needed change, and therein lies the muscular goodness.

 

[vinylgroover]

If nothing else changed then I`m confused, but if you added weight to your calf raises then I can see that working. Adding weight will do some "damage". growth.
I would assume that if you shortened the range then you can lift more. correct?

Nothing else.....same exercises, same rep range, same sets. I could just put it down to simply 'change', but when i was changing exercises, reps, sets etc when i was using a full range nothing was happening..

Yes you can lift more. The thing i notice is i feel a deeper soreness in the belly of the calf than i ever did when i was using a more extended range of motion.

 

[collegiateLifter]

my calves have a hell of a lot more than 4'' of ROM

 

[Markus Riedel]

I have read somewhere in the HST (hypertrophy specific training)forum that the stretch during the eccentric phase is very important in the aspect of tearing muscle fibers apart.

"Mechanical lines of tension" One should never sacrifice ROM for heavier loads. In general excercises that have a great stretch in the bottom position should be favoured. For instance shrugs, incline curls, chins, wide grip chest dips....

 

[Thaibox]

Good thread VG

I don't think I can articulate this very well but I'll try. There's different schools of thought here, each with very sound arguments. I know of very successful and knowledgable lifters who advocate a limited range of motion for many lifts based on a theory of limiting the relaxation property of full stretch or even contraction(I know it doesn't really make sense they way I say it). Also, like it was said, you can use more weight.

On the other hand, there are obviously a great number more people that follow the conventional training theory of full range based upon many well known arguments.

For strength training, and power specific lifts, partials and short range movements are done in an attempt to strengthen a sticking point, so you would think this would translate into muscle stimulation to some degree. There are so many types of muscles in our bodies that are built for so many specific functions, some must benefit by partials based upon their fiber makeup and general function(a good example being calves).

I had a point here but I'm haveing a bad injury day and took a few too many vicodin. I hope someone understands and is able to expand on what I'm trying to say.

 

[Baoh]

my calves have a hell of a lot more than 4'' of ROM

Same here but, in my post, it was for conceded just for the sake of creating a quantified argument.

 

[Jxaxsxe530]

my calves were so tiny its not funny but recently they've been growing like CRAZY! the secret? seated calf raises with my shoes off LOL. People in the gym look at me funny when i take off my shoes and step to the calf machine but i dont care. I get a much longer range of motion with the shoes off and i can lift much more weight. and contraction at the top is much better wid shoes off as well. my friends always made fun of my calves my whole life but last week i pulled my best friend over to the corner and rolled up my pants and the expression on his face made all that effort worth it. and i've only been training shoes-off for 3 weeks =)

 

[Thaibox]

I always train calves with my shoes off. I feel bad for the people near the calve equipment, but its so much better

 

[rjl296]

I always train calves with my shoes off. I feel bad for the people near the calve equipment, but its so much better

i do the same, except i feel bad for people near the building