Good morning. Happy Monday. I have no coffee in hand and it is perfect. Alright, a couple of housekeeping issues: Applications for the intensive 15 are rolling in, and we'll be turning a couple away from where I make the cutoff because there's a lot of applications to read for that, so probably cut that off at the end of business today. So if you're still interested in applying for the Intensive 15, which is in November—I believe it's the 18th through the 21st—then please get your application in today so you don't miss out on that opportunity. It'll be the last Intensive for 2021. We just moved over the weekend, so things are a little bit crazy at this point. So we're going to dig straight into today's Q&A. And I was talking to Manuel, and we were talking about pulling off the floor and how we're going to overcome the inertia and what we're going to see under certain circumstances. What do we need from a positioning standpoint to actually make that pull off the floor? So we're talking about max P here. We're talking about maximum propulsion into the ground. So we're going to have an IR representation, which means we're going to have a nutated sacrum and a concentrically oriented pelvic outlet. So we have to have a lot of pressure going upward. But what if you can't achieve that position? What is going to be our strategy under those circumstances? What are we going to see from a compensatory standpoint? So we talked a little bit about that. And then we talk a little bit about connective tissues as well. So I threw a little segment on the end of here that we've seen before. If you go back to the seven components of force video where we were talking about connective tissue behaviors, we also have to consider that if we have yielding actions where we need overcoming actions to make these pulls off the floor, then we're going to need to train those as well. So we talk a little bit about that as well. So very useful video in a number of regards in regards to positions and such, but especially pulling off the floor. If you would like to participate in a 15-minute consultation, please go to askbillhartman at gmail.com—askbillhartman at gmail.com—put '15-minute consultation' in the subject line. We will arrange that at our mutual convenience. I got a bus to move. Everybody have a great Monday. I'll see you later.

Maybe I was thinking about the first pull in a clean or a snatch. It's a little more of a squatting position than a hinge in a deadlift. And I noticed sometimes athletes will, instead of keeping their center of gravity closer to max P, they'll just shift back early and they'll let their hips rise. And so I was wondering, is that a lack of internal rotation at the pelvis? So then they're just trying to nutate and dump it forward to get the IR. Is that a way to think about it or is there too much so we can get into position? So they're not rounded or in a crazy position to begin with.

Yeah. So think about the inertia that's required to break the bar off the floor. That's going to require the orientation of the tibia relative to the foot, so the tibia is over the foot. Okay, so if they were moving forward, they would literally be at max P. And so what happens is they are going into max P to break the weight off the floor, but they're not going to go forward because that would be a mislift by a long shot. So what has to happen is that's why the tibia goes backwards as they're bringing the weight off the ground to the knee. That's max P, but it's max P with a heel on the ground. If I don't have the capacity to produce the downforce, so that's in high internal pressure, concentrically oriented outlet, nutated position of the sacrum. If I don't have that, I've got to go find a way to get to max P. So how do you do that? Well, if I lift my butt up, I can create more downforce by keeping my center of gravity over my forefoot. That's what you're looking at. They're just using an alternate, and again, a less effective strategy, obviously. Do you know what they typically blame for this? Like a typical Olympic coach would blame a muscle for this problem, right?

Yeah, they would say like weak quads or strong lower back or,

The hammy strings usually get blamed for it, right? Because they see the butt going up, right? And they say, oh, you can't, they're looking at, they blame hamstrings for it.

Yeah, because it doesn't keep the knee flex.

Exactly. Exactly right.

There you go.

Yeah. But what I would say is you just need to spend more time capturing the max propulsive capabilities. And then also think about, OK, so you know when you do your little hip bump before you pull? So now we're back to Andrew's question at the very beginning of the call. So you bump a couple of times to create the stiffness before you pull the weight off the floor. So that's a clue as to what strategy you're actually using as you break the weight off the floor. I need more stiffness. And so now you're going to be looking at some of your quicker activities probably to try to capture the mid to max P position in the pelvis. So assuming it's not a pure lack of understanding technical glitch, you need to train the physiology under those circumstances, because you could probably coach it to your blue in the face and it's not gonna matter diddly squat until they have the capacity to create that concentrically oriented outlet under a high pressure, right? Does that make sense?

Yeah. But that's why everybody wonders why you see the Olympic lifters bouncing their butt before they pull. It's like they're optimizing stiffness. It's the same thing that when you've got the bar racked before the jerk and you try to get that perfect amount of air. So you're like sipping and blowing, sipping and blowing, sipping and blowing before you go into the jerk. That's tuning. That's tuning stiffness. Same thing from the bottom up.

Yeah. But that's why everybody wonders why you see the Olympic lifters bouncing their butt before they pull. It's like they're optimizing stiffness. It's the same thing that when you've got the bar racked before the jerk and you try to get that perfect amount of air. So you're like sipping and blowing, sipping and blowing, sipping and blowing before you go into the jerk. That's tuning. That's tuning stiffness. Same thing from the bottom up.

Could you give a quick example of what you just described?

Take a box squat. And if you do a full load on a box squat, you're going to yield more than if you did a touch and go. So if I want somebody's connective tissues to behave more stiffly, I might say, okay, de-load to the box first, and then spend less time on the box, and then less time on the box, and then touch and go, and then, and you see where I'm getting at. You can also do this where you would do like, maybe I jump up to another box where you would start them on just a simple box squat, de-load, less time on the box, touch and go, and then jump. So I'm sort of ramping up the stiffness, versus somebody that's going from like a full yielding action that might be what we would deem less than ideal. So somebody that might like a tall slender volleyball player that might have a lot of eccentric orientation, a lot of yielding capabilities, but not a lot of turnaround. So the vertical jump is a little bit lower than you would like it to be. And so again, you transition them into a faster and faster loading representation so the tissue becomes stiffer. And then you turn that into the more explosive activity.

Put 15-minute consultation in the subject line so we don't delete it. We'll arrange that at our mutual convenience. Everybody have an outstanding Tuesday, and I will see you later.

In the last few calls, we've been talking about relationships between elbow position, knee position, and how the body will transition progressively from one shape to another. I was wondering if you've noticed any patterns in terms of back rounding in general when it comes to a deadlift because you'll have some athletes that round their lower back when they try to bend over to get a position, and then I've noticed some other athletes, especially narrow-hip athletes, when they bend over they tend to have like a big hump over the thoracic area, the T-spine area. And so I'm just wondering if there's a progression towards late extension that leads to different representations of back rounding when it comes to setting up for a deadlift.

Okay, so typically any form of what would be termed by traditional viewpoints as flexion is external rotation. All right, and so that might be what you're seeing is you're seeing somebody that's trying to acquire a position and then they're using a compensatory strategy to bend. It sounds like they're just bending forward. Is that what you're saying? Like when they're pulling the weight off the floor. Yeah, they're just trying to get into position than chances are they're using some form of strategy to create an external rotation that allows them to access a position. So you'll see this in some people that have like a really extreme round appearance to their back when they're doing their toe touch, or you'll see somebody as they're descending into a deep squat. So some people can descend very comfortably into the very, very deep squat, but they do it with a lumbar compensatory strategy that allows them to access that position. And it'll almost look like a huge bulge in their lower back as they descend into the squad or to the toe touch. So chances are that's what you're looking.

Yeah, like they're just trying to get into position so they can't.

Yeah, they're just trying to get into position than chances are they're using some form of strategy to create an external rotation that allows them to access a position. So you'll see this in some people that have like a really extreme round appearance to their back when they're doing their toe touch, or you'll see somebody as they're descending into a deep squat. So some people can descend very comfortably into the very, very deep squat, but they do it with a lumbar compensatory strategy that allows them to access that position. And it'll almost look like a huge bulge in their lower back as they descend into the squat or to the toe touch. So chances are that's what you're looking.

Right. And so is there a progression, like we've looked at valgus and varus knees, golfers elbow, tennis elbow, and stuff like that. Is there a progression that goes from there? Like do people start with lower back rounding and then work their way up? Or does that not exist? Is there not a progression toward lateral pelvic tilt where everyone ends up where you see a progression in terms of rounding?

I think I understand what you're asking. So let's go back to Andrew's question for a second. If we look at a counter-nutated versus a nutated sacrum, the counter-nutated sacrum as it counter-nutates, the sacral base would tilt backwards and brings the lumbar spine with it. As we compress that forward, the lumbar spine would have to go with it to some degree. And as you need to access space, that takes away your ER space, right? So as I compress the pelvis forward, I start to lose ER space. It's like the end of a whip. If I move the sacral base, or the whole pelvis, the spine has to go with it. Everything starts to move as more of a single unit. Then as you descend into a position where you need that space, that's where you'd see the substitution of flexion, traditional flexion, as the substitution versus somebody that could descend into a squat using a typical early representation, which would be the counter-nutated sacrum with the spine that follows. You'll see this in more accomplished weightlifters at the bottom of a clean or snatch. They access that space with counter-nutation and lumbar flexion, not the rounding of the spine you'd see in somebody less accomplished with less capability to access that space with relative motion. As I lose relative motions, that's where you'll see the flexion substitutions. So you'll see these represented more where someone has reached end-range positions. After I take away all the relative motion in the pelvis, I still have to have movement to access space. That's where you'll see lumbar and cervical substitutions. You'll see this in the cervical spine as well, though it's not as obvious because the cervical spine is smaller regarding bony structure, but it's there at the same time. So if you think about a progression, it's like I don't need that space until I take away the relative motions in the thorax or the pelvis. You won't see that until the pelvis is already pushed forward and you have posterior compressive strategies. Until then, I have ER somewhere, right? Then the spine would be one of your less desired compensatory strategies because that's usually where you see somebody substituting a very focal delay strategy in the lumbar spine.

And this would probably be where you start to see like disc related pathologies, um, ligamentous problems, things like that.

So is rounding in the thoracic spine, like having that hump versus lower backgrounding, is one person later than the other in either of those two cases?

Well, okay. So again, it's like if everything's starting to move as a single segment. So when you get a bend versus an expansion. A bend would be later, right? Because expansion would imply that I have relative motions available. Does that make sense?

Yes.

So the people that descend into a squat, the whole pelvis moves as a single segment, and then you see this just progressive, it'll look like a big C curve. That's somebody that's just bending their spine forward to maintain their center of gravity far enough forward over their feet that they don't fall back.

And that's a different curvature than like with the whole back rounding compared to somebody that has just lower back or lumbar rounding that's not an accomplished expansion there that's you know gross flexion. Right. And so I guess my question is if you have to choose which one is worse in terms of how much relative motion they lack.

So you would compensate in the lumbar spine most likely first because it's the easiest access, right? But again, it's like, so if I keep going forward, then the pelvis and the lumbar spine become a single segment too. Okay, because you have more muscle activity that is trying to keep you forward. And so then the only way that you're going to create the ER space under those circumstances is to actually create a bend in the axial skeleton, which is not expansion. It's just a bend, right? So that would be a later representation where you're essentially losing all of your segmental motion there. And you just like literally it's the, you know, just take any tube and, you know, bend it. That's what basically would be happening. And that's why the posterior structures then become compromised because they have to elongate. It's not this nice distributed thing. So just take like a string from the base of your head to the sacrum, right? they will try to elongate that string. Like literally that's where the lengthening would have to occur, but it's not like this nice AP expansion that you would associate with the volume change. There's no volume change in it, it's just a bend.

Under this circumstance though it's an externally rotated representation which creates a lot of problems for people because you think about an end game representation that would be anteriorly oriented and then they got this way under and so you have to create a posterior orientation. The mistake that people make is they drive a posterior orientation under this scenario and all they do is emphasize the compressive strategy in the posterior lower aspect of the pelvis. And then they wonder why they don't get their internal rotations back when they're trying to drive internal rotation in like a hook line position or something. Or so people put things between people's knees and they say, okay, squeeze this. And then it's their assumption that because they're quote unquote adducting, which they're not, they're actually externally rotating in that position because of the proximal representation of the femur. So you'll get a representation that looks kind of like this before you do that activity. So you have extra rotation at the hip. You've got internal rotation at the knee. So if they're squeezing something between their legs, they're actually externally rotating at the hip. Thus, you get big extra rotation return, no internal rotation return, which means you've got a spinal compensatory strategy. So that's where you're ER. You're actually ER-ing in the spine, and you're not internally rotating at the hip. So the first step you have to achieve is moving that issue of tuberosity back away from the femur.

So I had a question about the narrow archetype, specifically someone with a narrow bias who is A to P compressed and has restored some ER. For someone in an end game narrow state, I have trouble understanding anterior compression and strategies to reduce it or restore IR. How do you address anterior compression when ERs have sort of returned? One activity I can think of is the cross-connect because in the ER space you're superimposing IR. What else can be done to get the anterior compression to expand or expand anteriorly?

Okay, so in its simplest representation, what are we trying to move to create that space? Like where do I need expansion to create that space?