Parkour will help you to strengthen your back and knees, but only to a point. Strength training does it much better. Adding to this, pylometric movements are often damaging to the joint if the body isn't prepared, ie strong enough. Yes, you can in theory start really, really small in parkour and really, really slowly build up, but what happened to efficiency?
The point at which Parkour-like practical training methods stop developing strength is the point at which developing strength stops being practical. Practical training methods give you what you need, nothing more, nothing less. You don't need any more than what you need for practical purposes.
Your argument makes the same fundamental mistake that I've pointed out numerous times in this thread alone, namely that it considers only physical strength. Yes, specialized strength training develops physical strength faster, but we need other skills besides physical strength and specialized training makes developing those other skills harder. The harm specialized training does to the development of those other skills outweighs the benefit to physical development, because each of those other skills are just as important as physical strength, if not more so. The most efficient way to develop all the skills you need is to practice them all at the same time and develop them together.
Adding to this, we didn't encounter back and knee problems millions of years ago, because we were all moving about from a very young age. What if the guy that posted was sedentary for most of his life? His leg and back muscles wouldn't be strong enough to cope with the impact parkour brings if he did it straight away, and so strength training is the ideal way for him to push past this obstacle.
This has also been covered earlier. Impact is not compulsory in Parkour. There are many obstacles and many ways of moving past them which do not require impact, and if you're new to Parkour then obviously you should start with what you can handle rather than what you can't. Wriggling, walking, crawling, balancing, climbing. Parkour can be scaled to suit anyone's starting condition.
If it causes an imbalance, that's not a bad thing. You can't train for absolutely every situation, because you don't have the capacity to do so. You have to choose the obstacles you wish to overcome, and then set about on achieving this. For most, strength training leads them to their goals a lot quicker than simply practicing parkour.
Yes, you can train for every situation. You can't become perfect at dealing with every situation, but you can improve your ability to deal with every situation. You do so by developing your most fundamental abilities, that are the building blocks of all complex tasks. Positive attitudes, relaxation, concentration, strength, speed, balance, self-control, self-determination, to name just a few of the abilities that practical training methods like Parkour help you develop. Adaptation, perception of surroundings and learning to make mistakes safely, three that specialized strength training hinders your development of.
The only goals that specialized strength training is more effective at achieving are those goals that are purely physical in nature, such as doing a big jump that you've seen in a video. If you want to find your own things, discover and take your own path (which is the stated goal of Parkour) then you need far more than just physical development. It is up to the individual to decide whether they want to progress along their own path or to just copy others, but all I'm doing here is explaining the purpose of Parkour and why Parkour's method is the best method of working towards that purpose. If you don't share that purpose then of course, there is no reason to practice Parkour.
Why does it cause an imbalance is the main quesion I want to ask? You improve physical capabilities with a rounded strength training program, and thus can apply yourself to obstacles better. Mentally, you gain focus, concentration and the drive to always go for the next level, again allowing yourself better application.
It causes an imbalance because it develops some skills more than is necessary (physical strength), develops some other skills not at all (the ability to judge the real environment), and actively makes it harder to develop some skills (the ability to adapt). Imbalances are bad because practical tasks, i.e. the only time you need these skills, require a balance of strengths in many skills.TR
I guess you don't have to do plyo, but that sort of limits you on the things you can do to move.. in a way.. as far as strengthening your legs a bit. What are you going to do meanwhile? Body weight squats? Why not just do barbell squats instead and make better, faster gains.. not to mention an increase in bone density... Oh nah, vaulting is plenty good for your legs for absolutely no conditioning to be involved at all. Cause you know, there's nothing plyometric about vaulting.. you know, jumping into it.. and then landing afterwards.. nothing plyometric about that.
Not doing plyometric exercise doesn't limit people who have very weak legs. Since their legs are weak they can strengthen their legs without needing the exercises to be plyometric. When they can no longer strengthen themselves with slower, more controlled movements, they can then safely try slightly more dynamic movements, because their legs will then be strong enough. When those movements no longer induce development, they're ready for the next. Mastering each stage of movement provides the strength you need to begin the next, slightly harder stage. Mastering each stage of movement in practical situations provides all of the skills you need to move on to the next stage.
Discussing ideas in a polite and respectful way, and avoiding directing insults at another member, is actually a requirement of posting in this forum. I'm sure both moderators and other members would appreciate it if you stayed within this guideline.Anias
So far you have been stubborn, refuse to acknowledge any opinions other than your own, and have the gall to refer to it as THE parkour training method.
Parkour is this one specific training method. If you don't believe me, how about David Belle (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWneBIz6ATg
), or any of the other explanations I included links to in the first post in this thread? Even the APK website agrees (http://www.americanparkour.com/whatisparkour
). This is not just a fact, it's now an established fact proved beyond reasonable doubt.
However you blatantly refuse to acknowledge it can help you grow physically or mentally. Whether it's because of your own stubborness or arrogance I don't know but a closed mind won't get you anymore in parkour or life in general.
Either try and make sure that you read my posts before you respond to them, or try and be more precise in your responses. Nowhere have I claimed that weightlifting won't help you grow physically and mentally. My point is simply that Parkour provides better growth when you consider a person as a whole.
It also wouldn't hurt you to abide by forum rules and treat others with respect.Belhade
So if you balance your strength training with your movement training, then it will have a positive effect on everything you do.
Balance doesn't work like that. If you add something that is balanced to something that is imbalanced, you still have an overall imbalance.
To correct a training imbalance you need to use training that is imbalanced in the opposite way. That's fine, you can often do this. However, then parts of the two training types are working against each other and parts of the effects are being canceled out, so there is effort being wasted. It's less efficient than when all of your training effort produces positive effect, as is the case with training that is balanced to begin with.Joe
Natural selection has been making knees and backs stronger for millions of years by eliminating the slow/weak/injured.
That's an incorrect application of the theory. You don't become strong enough to survive solely through genetics and natural selection, or else no one would survive the first generation and everyone would survive in later generations. That, I think, is clearly a nonsensical situation.
You're not born strong. You become strong enough to survive through exercise, through life giving you challenges that force you to develop. What natural selection has done is to leave us more adept at becoming strong in the situation and the environment we found ourselves in most often. This has enabled us to become stronger more easily, but it doesn't do everything for us. We still have to do things, like eat, be active and experience progressive challenge, to realize that potential.
On the timescale that natural selection works over, the situation and environment we have spent most time in is the struggle to live in a natural environment, having to solve practical problems in order to survive. We are adapted to developing in that situation, in any other situation we will find it harder to develop and realize our full potential.
Specialized strength training has never been something that humanity as a species has found necessary or beneficial for survival, therefore there has been no appreciable shift in adaptation towards it as a result of natural selection.