Okay, so now you have to start thinking about where you are in space. So they're narrow ISAs under most circumstances. So where they're going to end up is they're going to get pushed forward on the left first. So this is your left limited straight leg raise. This is your inability to capture an early propulsive representation. Then you have to say, okay, they're most likely going to be forward on the left, but they go forward and then to the right as well. So now you're going to start looking at your right hip measures. So if I'm pushed forward into a late representation on the right side as well, you'll have to bring that side. You're going to have to move them to the left first. So this would be like, and it's a great representation for cricket bowlers, javelin throwers. And the same thing is this is your lateral sled drag. This is your sled drag to the left, which allows them to capture that medial foot representation. Okay, so I might need to do something along those lines first, okay, to capture that the right foot position that allows me to transition over to the left side without a compensation.

So now if we take that to actually coming into the change of direction with a little bit of momentum, and now you actually have a penultimate step on that right side. If we could take the snapshot at the same moment of time as trying to line it up with a plyo step, the mechanics are probably still going to look the same, I would imagine. It's not really going to change just because you have momentum; the forces will be different, but the mechanics are going to be the same.

So what I've been doing in these cases, I've been focusing more on hip shifts. So I'll keep them in their split position, but just focusing on pushing the left hip back to kind of delay, lay that motion. But I saw your video on carries and I was trying to figure out how I could apply it. For a case like this, would it be all right to do a left suitcase carry to get the IR for the right foot? But then should I do any carries for the right arm? Because if I do a suitcase carry on the right side, then I'm going to be accelerating the left, which I don't want to do. And then I was thinking, what if I do a front rack carry? Because that could at least create some expansion on the right and help him get some ER to capture IR. So I was getting a little confused in this.

Makes sense.

I would look at that very, very closely because that's going to give you how much anterior translation you're actually looking at. OK. Because chances are, if they're translating anteriorly at all, there's no way that they can get the medial ground contacts. And so what they'll have to do is they'll have to shift their entire center of gravity. And then they hop off of that foot towards the lead foot instead of sitting down into it where they can actually push into the ground. They're going to have to hop off of it because they're translating towards third base, not towards home plate. Right. And it could be really small because you're only talking about the length of your foot. So if the tibia is translating forward in some way, shape, or form that is not associated with the normal pronation, they're going to get like a four-foot load. They're going to hop off of that foot because they'll have to because again, they're translating towards third base and they want to go towards home. They have to kind of create the little push off. It's almost like if you were coming out of a really sharp cut, but you didn't have a heel.

Have a great day. That is a lumbar compensation that allows him to descend very comfortably, in fact, into a deep squat, but probably not the strategy that we would be looking for. Good morning. Happy Tuesday. I have no coffee in hand and it is perfect. All right, we got to get rolling. So let's dig straight into today's Q&A. I had a couple of questions that came in through email. Very similar, but actually kind of at opposite ends of the spectrum. One question was: 'Why do some of my clients squat like deadlifts?' And the other one was: 'Why do some of my clients deadlifts look like squats?' And a lot of times I think what we're just looking at is purely structural bias. And so we can actually go to our foundational archetypes under these situations. And so if we look at the two archetypes and keep in mind, plastic model, not reality, but close enough for rock and roll. So if we looked at our narrow ISA bias, we're going to have this inhale representation in the axial skeleton. So from a pelvic perspective, we're going to see that narrowing of the infrapubic angle. We see counter-nutation here. And this is somebody that has a pelvic outlet that can descend. And so this would be somebody that would bias towards a deeper squatting capability just by physical structure. That eccentric orientation allows them to descend straight down between their feet and keep their center of gravity over their feet. Whereas if I had somebody that was biased towards an exhaled strategy, which would be an ISA that is IR, I have a nutated sacrum under these circumstances and have a concentric orientation of that pelvic outlet. This is somebody that's going to have trouble descending into that space, but because the expansion is more posterior, they're going to be those people that are going to be better deadlifters, so to speak. If we would refer to that as a hinging motion, you would see a better hinger under those circumstances. So just by pure structural bias, you're going to see these deviations where your narrow ISAs are gonna tend to be better squatters. They're not gonna be great kettlebell swingers, they're not gonna be great deadlifters. Whereas with your wide ISAs, much better deadlifters, they're gonna be like your squat to parallel kind of a guy that might be very, very capable when it comes to heavier loads because they have a much higher internal pressure capability. And then you have that concentric orientation of the pelvic diaphragm that's going to allow them to lift more weight. So again, we're looking at some structural biases. What about those situations where you say, 'Well, Bill, I have a wide ISA and you can squat really, really deep.' In many of those cases, all they need to do is create some form of compensatory strategy that produces enough external rotation to allow them to descend. What you might see is compensations through the extremity: a wider stance, toe-out to create that ER space to allow me to descend, and then they can produce the internal rotation at the bottom of the squat. So you'll see that in a lot of accomplished Olympic lifters. Or you might see a compensatory strategy that looks like that, which is a lumbar compensation that allows them to descend very comfortably, in fact, into a deep squat, but probably not the strategy that we would be looking for. On the other end of the spectrum, if I'm a narrow ISA, I should be capable of deep squatting based on pure structure. If I superimpose enough superficial strategies on top of that axial skeleton, I'm going to create a higher pressure situation that will prevent me from accessing the external rotation that I'm going to need to descend in the squat. So it'll look something like that where you will see them sort of hit that hard stop just above parallel where they can no longer descend, the pelvic diaphragm. They can no longer expand A to P that they would need to get into the deep squat.

So, step one: when you're looking at people in a two-dimensional representation, it doesn't really give you any information about what you're looking at. You always hear me talk about moving in space right? I don't measure things in straight planes for that reason. You're taking a two-dimensional representation and saying these two people are the same. The reason they measure differently is because you're measuring it in a minimum of three dimensions. You have to account for the turns as you're performing these measures. You can't just throw a blanket statement and say everybody that looks like this from the side is the same because they're not. If you look at the commonality for these guys, it's that they have limited hip external rotation. So you know that wherever you have limited hip ER, you've got an anterior orientation of the pelvis. You understand that, correct? Okay. And then if I've limited hip internal rotation on top of that, I've got an anterior compression. So we're just talking about movement within the pelvis right now. When I see somebody that appears to have a lot of hip internal rotation where it's kind of a surprise that they would have that under the circumstances, I think you're correct in assuming that you're getting a lot of spinal rotation associated with that measure. As you're performing the hip rotation measure, the spine is turning away. So the internal rotation that appears to be coming from the hip is actually that whole pelvis moving as a unit, which is turning the spine away. If I have anterior orientation in both situations, which you probably do, I'm going to have a similar representation in the thorax. That's going to make the thorax appear to be flattened on the backside and tipped forward as well. So you're just seeing the iterative effects in the anatomy of the orientation under those circumstances. But again, you can't just look at this thing in two dimensions. In your first representation, the first athlete, because of the way their ER and IR are represented, they're just more turned than the second athlete. So both athletes are anteriorly oriented. Both athletes are coming forward, but one is turning more than the other. The first representation is just showing you that there's more turn.

So Bill, I work in the performance sector and I see athletes generally within anterior orientation of the pelvis. So would you typically want these athletes to get their weight back or should I let them be?

Boats don't travel in straight lines, or at least very rarely. They have to take advantage of the direction of the wind by moving the sails. To go from point A to point B, you might have to navigate in various zigzag patterns to reach the endpoint. Similarly, training rarely follows a straight path. It involves adjustments and corrections along the way, but the goal is to eventually move in the right direction. This doesn't always happen because we have limited predictability and don't have all the answers.

It's not a turn because his center of gravity went forward and to the right. So you have to bring the center of gravity back to the left. He's pushing right to left. It could be something as simple as a left crossover step with a sled drag. That might be enough to do it.

Does that make sense? Yes. I'm just trying to figure out where heavy training fits into more like court and field athletes. They need to accelerate and change direction.

All right.

I usually like to ask them how sensitive their lower back is, and whether or not they're comfortable on their sides.

Correct.

Okay, but you can. Oh, maybe, I'm sorry, you're a student, right?

Absolutely, for sure.

Hmm.

First and foremost, you have to start thinking about position. So where would you expect to see more nutation versus the counter-nutated position? I'm going to be towards that middle propulsive strategy, which is going to produce a lot more of that nutation. Now keep in mind, I need to reduce the amount of turn to capture that position. So right away, you've eliminated a whole bunch of activities. Anything that produces a great deal of turning is off the table, because if I'm trying to capture a nutated position, there's no turn there, at least not within the pelvis. I'm going to have some turn with the femur relative to the pelvis as a whole, but anything that would be like a side throw where I'm inducing a tremendous amount of turn, I probably don't want to spend a lot of time there because I've got my very early representations and my very late representations in that type of throw. So if I'm trying to emphasize this middle propulsive phase of force production, then everything is going to be square to the front. I'm going to do a lot of bilateral symmetrical type of throws under those circumstances. Do you see it? A two-handed chest pass, a two-handed overhead throw, a scoop toss—anything that looks bilateral symmetrical under those circumstances is going to be a much more nutated orientation of the pelvis, and therefore, I'm going to reduce the amount of turn. Does that make sense?

I think I'm with you now. So if we're talking about someone that we're trying to restore, I would discuss relative motion. So relative motion within the axial skeleton and within the relationships between the extremities and the axial skeleton. We're trying to get somebody from a general statement standpoint to move more effectively. Yes. And that's the principle that we want to talk about. So what activities now support that intention? If we're talking about anything in a split stance orientation, that orientation is specifically designed to create relative motions within the axial skeleton at some points in time and within the relationship between the extremity and the axial skeleton. When we're in the top position, legs split front to back, I have two points of contact on the floor, which I need to create relative motions within the axial skeleton. To get the interaction between the bones, such as the sacrum relative to the ilia, I need two points of contact on the ground. If I pick up one foot, the pelvis tends to solidify into a single segment with limited relative motion. If I pick up my foot and I don't want to collapse into the ground, I have to compress things into a single segment, creating relative motion between the femur and the pelvis as a unit. That's the distinguishing characteristic between two points of contact and one point of contact on the floor. Classifying a split stance activity as a single leg exercise is absolutely wrong. We can bias back and forth between one leg and the other, which will change elements of how much relative motion we have available to us. But the reality is if I get the two points of contact, it's totally different than being in a single leg stance. As I'm moving through space in that split stance orientation at the top of the exercise, that's where I'm establishing a position of relative motion in external rotation representations, which establishes the field within which I can move. So I have relative motions available to me within the axial skeleton itself. As I descend into the split squat and start to approach a position with more internal rotation and force into the ground, I actually have to reduce the amount of relative motion available because the higher the force output, the less relative motion I can demonstrate. If I try to produce force where I have lots of relative motion available, I dissipate the force and don't really produce a high level of force. It gets so distributed that there's no increase in force output. This can be risky because if I accidentally load a structure that is trying to distribute force, I may take it to its end constraint. That's a situation we really don't want to have. If I can't control it and a lot of people don't know about injury potential, that's where we run into problems. I don't want a massive amount of relative motion when the force output is very high unless I have the capacity to distribute that safely and effectively, which is a byproduct of exposure, experience, and training. So for somebody that I'm trying to improve their capabilities of relative motion and force production, I absolutely want that, but the rule is not that you have to do split squats. The rule is that I need to create the environment that allows relative motion under certain circumstances and produce force under certain circumstances. The great thing about the split squat is that it gives me an element of both under certain circumstances. I can tweak the split squat in any number of ways—asymmetrical loads, offset loading on contralateral or ipsilateral sides, bilateral symmetrical loading, or putting a bar on your back—to bias more towards force production or more towards relative motion. So your rule of thumb is not that you need to do split squats; your rule of thumb is that I need to select exercises that fulfill my intent of restoring relative motion or producing force.

Thank you. All right, man. Have a great day. And they need to see that they are making progress as well. People always get concerned about how do I get my patient to buy into this? It's like, hey, how about being successful? Good morning. Happy Tuesday. I have neuro-coffee in hand and it is perfect. All right. Tuesday, clinic day, so we're going to be kind of busy today. So we got to dig into this Q&A for today. This is with Zach. So I've talked to Zach a couple of other times and I interact with him every Thursday morning on the Coffee and Coaches conference call, 6am, don't forget, Thursday. And this is going to be a really, really good call for younger coaches and therapists who maybe are challenged by the interaction element of working with clients and patients. It is the hardest part. So we can talk about structure and ISAs and intervention and exercises and all that kind of stuff. And obviously that's very important because that's a big part of what we do. But the most difficult portion is working with complex human beings. And so that's what this call is about. This is about how to establish your process, how to understand the difference between what you're asking of the client and what they think you're asking of them. So there's always a disconnect between what you're trying to accomplish and what the client thinks you're trying to accomplish. So we talk about how do you get client buy-in under these circumstances? How do you set the expectations? And then how do you interact throughout this process? So this is a huge, huge call for a lot of people. It would be very useful. So please pass this on. If you know a young therapist or a young coach, this is going to be a big Q&A for them. So please enjoy the call. If you would like to participate in a 15 minute consultation, please go to askbillhartman at gmail.com. Send me a question. Put 15 minute consultation in the subject line so I do not delete it. Don't forget to go to the YouTube channel and please sign up and subscribe for that as well so you get first dibs on all of those videos as well. I will see you guys tomorrow. Have a great Tuesday. We are rolling and clock has started. Zach, what is your question?

No.

The thing we want to recognize is, number one, if you're going to keep playing the bass, don't worry about the position that you're using to play the bass. Play the bass well. Do that really, really well. What we need now is the strategy for all other circumstances. So there's got to be enough work done to make sure that you can create that delay strategy on the left side. Everything that you do, you're going to be the guy that kind of falls into the platformed, heels elevated, goblet squat stuff to start to create some of that. So when you get into the deeper end of that squat, you want to be able to create the counter-neutated sacrum with the delay strategy. So with the yielding action at the base of the sacrum. You're going to do a front foot lead. So the split stance activities for you are going to become very, very important because the split stance is what allows you to create the turns. The traditional single leg stuff is probably not where you would want to start. You need two foot contacts, but an asymmetrical foot contact. Everything that you're doing, except for maybe the foot elevated goblet squat, because you need to learn how to maintain and create turns. That requires a two foot contact. The minute you pick up the other foot and you're in a single leg stance, you have just reduced the amount of turning that you're capable of within the pelvis, because that's where we have to start to look at this thing. We're going to build this from the pelvis up. Split stance, staggered stance is where your money is. Does that make sense to you? So, again, that's going to be—you have to think about all the cool stuff that I want to be able to do. And then I just need to offset it with enough of the opposing activities so I don't lose my ability to make those turns, because that's what's blocking your ability to raise your arm. Any questions so far?

Okay. So with left foot forward, anything in a split stance, you want her in a heel elevated position, but you want a platform. You don't want her in late position. You want her in early position. So you got to get the whole foot supported on the platforms where toes are in line with the foot. So we don't want any toe extension under those circumstances. Otherwise, you're just not going to get the yielding action. You get external rotation, but you don't get the yielding action. Everything about this whole situation right now is about teaching that tendon to yield. And to do that, you got to get the foot, you got to get the pelvis because the knee's a dumb joint, right? And these don't make very good decisions. They're not very bright. They're just going to follow along and they're going to try to take over when everybody else can't. And so you've got to create that situation where the knee does not have to be the compensation. Gotcha. Awesome. Yeah. So this is one of those situations where people go, 'Oh, you need quad strengthening and stuff like that.' No, no.

Yeah. Okay. So I guess I'm wondering because I can't even think of a circumstance since I haven't done the abduction test. I'm wondering what would be a circumstance where either the abduction test would confirm a suspicion from the overhead test or vice versa. Because I can't even put myself in that head frame right now.

Okay. So my other question that I was coming up with is, I guess it's kind of in regards to me a little bit. So how would you go about progressing somebody who wanted to be able to do like a back bend bridge, not necessarily walking out into it, but like a gymnastics bridge where they fully bridge up.

But the point is, now you have a context, you have a framework to apply what you just expressed to me is the points that you want to make. And you say, 'Well, if I see this, and I have this test, I have this test, and I have this test, and I receive this limitation in range of motion, then I know it means this or this.' So I have a compressive strategy. I have increased muscle activity that prevents the expansion from occurring in these areas when I breathe in and out. That creates a limitation in this motion. So I have just taken your bullet points and applied them to a specific context that now people are going to go, 'Well, that's useful. That's good to know. Now I know why this test would be positive.' So when I say 'shoulder impingement' and somebody says, 'Oh, you have a positive Hawkins-Kennedy test,' and you say, 'Here's why that test is positive,' you see the difference? Because what you were going to do is you were going to take information that I give away and repeat it, and that's not useful for anybody within a context. If you had three days to explain things and build out the model to some degree, it might be more useful under those circumstances, but you don't have enough time for that. So take a specific context that everybody's familiar with, and then show them the difference.

There are fine moves like that.

So here's the problem. You never thought about who you want to work with.

So, you're going to study what the inhaled and exhaled positions of the pelvis are, right? And as soon as you understand that, now you're going to say, 'Oh, so when I get into the lower part of the split squat, the pelvis should look like this. If it doesn't, I need to do something that makes it look like this.' Okay, so this is how you layer. So you already understand the principle. You just explain the principle to me, right? What you need is another element of detail, right? So, 'Oh, so if I need interpretation, what does that look like?' This is how you do it. This is how you do it. This is where the struggle is. This is where you have to do the work, right? And again, I can tell you exactly what it looks like. Like I can say, 'Oh, it's a mutated sacrum on an IR at Ilium. I have an outlet that widens and then I get a pelvic diaphragm that becomes concentrically oriented.' I can tell you all that stuff, but it's not going to be meaningful. You can repeat it now. You can go into social media and say, 'Oh, I'm working on the bottom of the split squat,' and you can repeat exactly what I said, but you're not going to understand it.

You know what I know. I'm just asking, maybe. No, I don't. I don't know what you know. Right. So we can't really talk about my process too much now, can we? How valuable to you is the information you just asked me about? So how valuable to you is an ISA?