Is where can you produce the greatest degree of force down into the ground? Well, you've got a bias towards external rotation, and a sumo would be in an externally rotated representation. So the question is, where can you produce the greatest degree of force down into the ground? If you're a narrow-stance deadlifter, your ability to capture the internal rotation position of the pelvis is reduced. It doesn't mean you don't produce internal rotation, just means that how you do it and where you do it will be different. If you were to try to lift conventional, you may not even be able to assume a position that will allow you to push down into the ground effectively. If you, like, and again, you might have a representation of this. If you're video yourself doing a conventional deadlift versus the sumo, what you'll find is that you can actually capture a better pelvic position in the wider stance just because of your—like you're more upright in a sumo than you would be in a conventional, right? And that would be advantageous for you to push down into the ground. If you have to, like, so if you sit down into a conventional deadlift and you see that, that, you know, that little rounding of your lower back, like right above your pelvis to get into that conventional position, you have not optimized your downforce. You actually have connective tissues that are in a position where they're not stiff enough and therefore you cannot push as hard into the ground. It actually dampens your ability to push down. So this requires an experiment as to what positions you can acquire most effectively. As a narrow-stance, your bias is towards more of an upright type of pull from the ground, which would be more like a squat. Does that make sense?

Yeah, I was just basically the first time I've been here and super nervous to ask me the question. I'm a powerlifter. And today my question is, I seem like a narrow type. I really want to increase the sumo deadlift because I want to be at the top level. So what do you think about the strategy for that, for increasing the sumo deadlift?

Well, you've got a bias towards external rotation, and a sumo would be in an externally rotated representation. The question is, where can you produce the greatest degree of force down into the ground? If you're a narrow stance, your ability to capture the internal rotation position of the pelvis is reduced. Doesn't mean you don't produce internal rotation, just means that how you do it and where you do it will be different. If you were to try to lift conventional, you may not even be able to assume a position that will allow you to push down into the ground effectively because if, like, and again, you might have a representation of this. If you're to video yourself doing a conventional deadlift versus the sumo, what you'll find is that you can actually capture a better pelvic position in the wider stance just because of your, like you're more upright in a sumo than you would be in a conventional, right? And that would be advantageous for you to push down into the ground. If you have to, like, so if you sit down into a conventional deadlift and you see that, that, you know, that little rounding of your lower back, like right above your pelvis to get into that conventional position, you have not optimized your downforce. You actually have connective tissues that are in a position where they're not stiff enough and therefore you cannot push as hard into the ground. It actually dampens your ability to push down. So this requires an experiment as to what positions you can acquire most effectively. As a narrow stance, your bias is towards more of an upright type of pull from the ground, which would be more like a squat. Does that make sense? And the thing about it is, it's like, if you test both of them, you tend to gravitate towards one because you'll, number one, it'll be more comfortable. You'll feel like you can push harder to the ground. And then ultimately you just track it over time and you'll see that, okay, if I'm a sumo guy, my sumo numbers keep going up, my conventional sort of tops out and it doesn't go far enough.

My sumo deadlift is about 30 to 50 pounds heavier than my conventional deadlift.

I'm sorry, I'm not understanding what you're saying.

My sumo deadlift is like 30 pounds to 50 pounds heavier than the conventional. Yeah.

That sounds like a better strategy already, right? Because that's the goal when you're a powerlifter is to lift heavier weights, right? Yeah. But what I would do is I would get a side view. Right. Get a side view. Side view on video. Okay. Get a side view on video. And I would compare the two positions. And then I would look at like, and get a decent amount of weight on there. Don't hurt yourself. and then make the comparison as to which position gives you the best direction of pull. If you find that you have to lean over or your low back has to round in the conventional, it's probably not gonna be suitable for you from a long-term strategy. Like I said, your bias is to turn outward as a narrow ISA individual. You'll tend to be able to produce more force in that position.

Yeah. But what I would do is I would get a side view. Get a side view on video. Okay. Get a side view on video. And I would compare the two positions. And then I would look at like, and get a decent amount of weight on there. Don't hurt yourself. And then make the comparison as to which position gives you the best direction of pull. If you find that you have to lean over or your low back has to round in the conventional, it's probably not gonna be suitable for you from a long-term strategy. Like I said, your bias is to turn outward as a narrow ISA individual. You'll tend to be able to produce more force in that position.

Yeah. But what I would do is get a side view on video and compare the two positions. Then I would look at that and get a decent amount of weight on there—don't hurt yourself—and make the comparison as to which position gives you the best direction of pull. If you find that you have to lean over or your low back has to round in the conventional, it's probably not going to be suitable for you from a long-term strategy. Like I said, your bias is to turn outward as a narrow ISA individual, so you'll tend to be able to produce more force in that position. In what pelvis shape do I need to push into the ground?

I wonder, you know, when someone is in mid-stance, they are not hiking the pelvis—it is going down. The pelvis is going down. So how do you explain this in the eyes of your model, in the view of your model? First, what happened that caused it? And how would you advise to fix it when it happens on one side or the left side?

Okay. We're going to make an assumption that there's no neurological disorders. Okay. Let's eliminate that. That's a different story. All right. In what pelvis shape do I need to push into the ground? I need an ER pelvis shape, right? Okay, so mutated sacrum, IR denominant, high pressure. I need an anti-republic outlet that can concentrically orient. You understand that?

Right.

Okay, what if I push into the ground and it's not that?

If I take an ER pelvis, if I take an ER pelvis

Dead center middle propulsion. You will orient forward. Yes, you're going to orient. But what if I squeeze you front to back? What directions can you move? To the side. Sideways. What do you think a Trendelenburg is? Exactly, yes. A Trendelenburg is an ERD pelvis with anterior, posterior compressor strategy and an anterior orientation. It's a turn into the ground. It's really an attempt to push into the ground with a low pressure pelvis representation. But there's only one place that the expansion is allowed in that sideways. So that's why you move in that direction. But it's a twist inward in an attempt to push down.

Exactly, yes.

Yes, a Trendelenburg is an ERD pelvis with anterior-posterior compressor strategy and an anterior orientation. It's a turn into the ground. It's really an attempt to push into the ground with a low pressure pelvis representation. But there's only one place that the expansion is allowed in that sideways. So that's why you move in that direction. But it's a twist inward in an attempt to push down.

So what would you do about it if there is no solution?

What is the obvious solution here, Annette? To create a real IR. And that's it. That's the solution, right? Now, when I say that, it's not looking to split that easy, obviously. But you know what you have to acquire. So what measures would you have to have intact to push into the ground.

I think that maybe the center of mass has to move.

One measure will assure that I have access to the position. I am straight down. It's interrotation straight down into the ground without compensation.

With the Trendelenburg on one side, you would get IR. When you lie them on their back and measure the femur, how the femur is IR-ing in there. Is that the femur IR-ing? The hip. Is that the hip IR-ing? No, it's the spine.

So is that IR? No. It is IR. It's just compensatory IR. What we want is relative motion, internal rotation of the hip, pushing straight down into the ground.

Yeah.

And you don't have it. Now, in the literature and in school, uh, who, who's close to school? Anybody on here that was close enough to PT school that they remember what they taught? No. Just me. Okay. And that, what muscle do they blame for weakness in a Trendelenburg gait?

The adductor, the inner adductor, the inner thigh muscles. They blame the adductor as the weak muscle? It is not adducting the, or

The glutes, the glute medius. They blame glute medius to be weak. And so what they do is they lay people on their side and they do the traditional Lawrence Kendall manual muscle test. They go, look, a weak glute medius. And then they do some stuff. And then they push on it again. They go, look, it's now strong. When the reality is is what they had to do is achieve a pelvic shape change to get the muscle to actually produce force. So it's not that the muscle itself is weak. It's not that it lacks cross-sectional area. It was out of position to produce force in the position that they tested in. They changed that position. The muscle is now forceful. Yeah, so they blame a muscle and they accidentally do something correct. But what the solution is, is to create the shape change that is necessary to produce force straight into the ground.

So you would give them a rolling on the side to shape the IR of the? Maybe.

Maybe. Depends on who we're talking about. See, this is it. This is the thing. It's like I can't give you the cookbook solution because I don't know who we're talking about. But I can tell you what your end game needs to be is you better be able to push straight down to the ground in IR. And there's a very simple measurement that you can take to determine that.

OK. Thank you.