The Physics of Fitness

Chapter Nine
“Dynamic” vs “Static” Muscle Contraction
and Range of Motion

“Dynamic” muscle contraction occurs when a muscle lengthens and

shortens, against resistance. This type of muscle contraction causes
the joint over which that muscle crosses, to bend (flex or extend),
thereby producing anatomical movement.

“Static” muscle contraction (aka “Isometric” muscle contraction)

occurs when a muscle holds tension, without lengthening or
shortening. Instead of causing the joint to flex or extend, the muscle
holds that anatomical position, without movement.

Generally speaking, dynamic muscle contraction is considered more

productive for the purpose of muscle growth / physique development,
as compared with static muscle contraction. It is also believed to be
more “functional”, from a strength-building standpoint.

Dynamic muscle contraction requires “range of motion” (movement) -

though not necessarily “full” range of motion. However, for muscle
building purposes, a longer range of motion is more productive than a
very short range of motion, generally speaking.

- - - - - -
When we speak of “bodybuilding” and/or weight training programs, the issue of “sets
and reps” is usually included in the conversation.

The concept of “repetitions per set” is a system of measurement. Theoretically, it could

be considered a “dose” of muscle stimulation, part of which the weight being used is

1
also a factor. Various studies have been performed over the years comparing the effect
of “high reps” versus “low reps”. Both have benefits.

For the purpose muscular development, the concept of reps (“repetitions” of movement
during a given exercise) is considered an established and important part of resistance
exercise. “Repetitions of movement”, against resistance, implies “dynamic” exercise.

Muscle contraction without movement, is called “static” or “isometric” exercise. The

reason isometric exercise is not used much, if at all, in bodybuilding or in general
fitness, is because it has been proven to be not as productive as dynamic exercise. It
does not “build” (grow) a muscle as well, and its strength stimulation is limited primarily
to the particular point in the range of motion where the limb (joint) is held static. It
produces less “full range” strength benefits, as compared with dynamic exercise.

Isometric exercise is most often used in physical therapy programs, as a way of

introducing “resistance” exercise to specific muscles, while avoiding the movement of a
joint which may be injured or is being rehabilitated.

In the photo below, we see an example of static Pectoral muscle contraction. Here, the
Pectoral muscle is contracted without the shoulder joint movement that is typical during
standard (dynamic) Pectoral exercises. The hands are simply pressed against each
other, thereby causing the Pectorals to experience static muscle tension.

There is no “range of motion” nor any “reps”, with isometric exercise. Instead, muscle
tension is typically held for a count (e.g., 20 seconds, 30 seconds, etc.). When pushing
against one’s own opposing force, or against in immovable object (e.g., a wall), there is
no way of establishing how much force is being used, because there is no weight being
lifted. In such cases, there is no particular force threshold that needs to be met. One
simply uses his own judgement as to the degree of force applied.

In the illustration below-left, we see a man performing an Isometric Anterior Deltoid

exercise. He is pressing his fist (of his left arm) forward, against the wall, thereby
creating static muscle contraction of his Anterior Deltoid (black arrow). In the illustration
below-right, the man is performing an Isometric Posterior Deltoid exercise. He is
pressing his elbow (of his right arm) posteriorly against the wall, thereby creating static
muscle contraction of his Posterior Deltoid. These are exercises typically used in
Shoulder Rehabilitation, without joint movement. (Note: There are other muscles which
also participate in both of these exercises”below, although to a lesser degree.)

Isometric exercise can also be done with free weights. One could hold a pair of 10
pound dumbbells out to the sides (below-left), with arms straight, for a time count (e.g.,
30 seconds). Or one could hold a barbell, with elbows bent at 90 degrees, at the mid-
point of a “Barbell Curl”, for a pre-determined time count (below-right). Using weights
establishes a threshold of force to be met, which makes allows one to gauge better how
much force is being used, and whether strength is improving.

3
When rehabilitating an injury, dynamic muscle contraction (exercise with joint
movement) may not be feasible. Often, an injury limits joint mobility. The concept of
challenging a muscle without causing a joint to move, has merit in those circumstances.

However, from a functional standpoint, performing exercise WITH joint movement

produces a more useful benefit, because it increases strength through a muscle’s entire
range of motion. Also, since Dynamic exercise involves elongation of muscles
(stretching) against resistance, flexibility tends to improve, as does joint mobility.

In terms of muscle growth, it seems clear that isometric exercise is not a good training
strategy. There has never been a competitive bodybuilder of any renown that has
developed his (or her) physique, by way of isometric exercise. If muscular development
could be achieved with isometric exercise, it would certainly have been demonstrated
by now, considering the degree of obsession that is often found in the bodybuilding
community. Yet, not a single person has ever achieved a significant level of muscular
development, using primarily isometric exercise.

Research also supports the fact that isometric exercise does not produce the degree of
muscular development that does dynamic resistance exercise.

- - - - - -
Resistance exercise often involves a combination of dynamic contraction for the target
muscle, while stabilizing muscles work isometrically to maintain posture.
For example, in the illustration above, we see a man performing a Standing Barbell
Curl. His Biceps are performing dynamic muscle contraction - lengthening and
shortening, elongating and contracting - as they bend (flex) his elbows. However, other
muscles are stabilizing his upright position - isometrically.

His “lower back” (Erector Spinae) is holding static tension, to prevent him from being
pulled forward by the front-loaded torso. His Trapezius is loaded by the “opposite
position loading” / downward resistance of the free weights. His Gluteus and
Hamstrings are also maintaining isometric tension in helping to maintain rigid posture
against the forward pulling barbell. His forearm flexor muscles are keeping his hands in
line with his forearms, even though the barbell is “trying” to bend his wrists back. His
fingers are maintaining a static tension grip on the barbell, and the muscles of his calves
and feet are also in some degree of static activation.

The stabilizing muscles are participating isometrically, but they are not getting the kind
of stimulation that is necessary for growth, nor for strength gains through their entire
range of motion. This is why full range of motion is encouraged, when pursuing
muscular gains.

As we’ll learn in Chapters 13 and 14, participation by stabilizing muscles, during a given
exercise, can be referred to as “Peripheral Recruitment”. In a sense, almost all
resistance exercises have some degree of Peripheral Recruitment.

- - - - - -
5
 Using Dynamic Tension for Target Muscles
and Isometric Tension for Stabilizing Muscles
Ideally speaking, all exercises should be like the Standing Barbell Curl demonstrated
above. With exercises like that, the intended target muscle (the Biceps, in this case) is
the muscle that is working dynamically, while all the stabilizing muscles are merely
working isometrically.

However, people often mistakenly cause the target muscle to work isometrically, while
the non-target muscles are working dynamically. When this happens, the target
muscle gets less productive stimulation than do the non-target muscles.

Here’s an irony for you. The Standing Barbell Curl is considered a “Biceps Exercise” -
NOT a “Lower Back Exercise”. This is because the stabilizing (isometric contraction)
that is provided by the “lower back” is not good enough to qualify it as a “lower back
exercise”.

However, when we do a Leg Raises (like the ones shown below), we consider it an
Abdominal Exercise, even though the Abs are mostly stabilizing the spine during the
exercise. The Abs do NOT lift the legs, because the Abs are not even connected to the
legs. The “Hip Flexors” are lifting the legs. So, when we do Leg Raises, the Hip Flexors
are doing the dynamic work (even though they are NOT the target muscle), and the Abs
are doing the isometric work - mostly providing spinal support. Yet we call it an “Ab
exercise”.

In the illustrations below, we see the Rectus abdominis (the “Abs”). This muscle
originates on the pubic bone of the pelvis. It then reaches up and attaches onto the
front part of the lower ribs. It does not attach to the legs at all. In fact, do you see any
leg bones in these illustrations? Of course not. The Abs simply cannot pull on the legs.
Now, compare the illustration above-right, with the Leg Raise movement being
performed above it. It should be obvious that the Abs cannot produce that motion.

If the fitness industry wants to call Leg Raises an “Ab exercise”, then Barbell Curls
should be called a “Lower Back exercise”. Otherwise, Leg Raises should be called a
“Hip Flexor exercise”. The name of the exercise should be based on the muscle that is
doing the MOST work - the muscle that is working dynamically. It’s ridiculous to name
an exercise based on a muscle which only works isometrically to stabilize the posture,
while another (less prioritized) muscle does the majority of the work.

Any type of Leg Raise - whether it’s performed while Lying flat on the floor, or while
hanging from a Chinning Bar, or while suspended on a “Roman Chair” (shown below) -
is an extremely inefficient Abdominal exercise. This is because the Abs are not
working dynamically.

7
Some would argue that a Leg Raise is considered an “Ab Exercise” because the pubic
bone should be pulled forward - toward the rib cage - as the legs are raised. This
would theoretically cause the Abs to shorten / contract, to a small degree. However, as
we’ll see more clearly in Chapters 23 (Hip Flexors) and 24 (Abs), it’s extremely difficult
for the Abs to function properly during a Leg Raise. This is because the Hip Flexors are
trying to arch the spine, while the Abs are trying to flex (curl) the spine. The result is
that Abs are not able to fully contract, because the Hip Flexors are preventing spinal
flexion.

- - - - - -
The criteria that determines which muscle is working Dynamically versus
Isometrically, is JOINT MOVEMENT. We first identify where the joint movement is
occurring, and then we identify which muscle(s) cross(es) that particular joint.

In order to deliberately cause a target muscle to contract dynamically, we need to

know which joint to bend - and then cause that joint to bend during the exercise.

In the Abdominal exercise shown below, I am deliberately bending (flexing) the mid-
spine, because that is the action that is produced by dynamic contraction of the Rectus
abdominis. The spine is the joint (actually, multiple joints) that must bend, for the Abs to
contract. By flexing (forward-bending) the mid-spine, I am bringing the insertion of the
Abs (on the front of the ribs), toward the origin of the Abs (on the pubic bone of the
pelvis).
This exercise demonstrates the action that is required in order to cause dynamic
contraction to the Abs. Compare the degree of spinal flexion (bending) occurring here,
with the amount of spinal flexion occurring in the example of the first example of a Leg
Raise, above.

It is also worth noting that the entire Rectus abdominis is working here - from top to
bottom. We’ll explore this concept more fully in Chapter 11 - “The All or Nothing
Principle of Muscle Contraction” - and also in Chapter 24 (“Abs”).

- - - - - -
The exercise below - called a “Lower Back Extension” - is another example of a person
bending the “wrong” joint, for the intended target muscle. This exercise is typically
intended for the Erector spinae. However, the Erector spinae extends the spine; it does
not extend the hips. Yet, it is the hip joint that is primarily being moved in this exercise.

9
During this exercise, the torso (spine) is typically held in the same position throughout
the exercise. Thus, the Erector spinae are working mostly isometrically to maintain
(hold steady) that torso position. Meanwhile, the Glutes (with some help from the
adductors and hamstrings) are extending the hip joint - dynamically. Therefore, the
intended target muscle of the exercise (which is the Erector spinae) is getting less
stimulation than are the non-target muscles (the Glutes, adductors and hamstrings).

Again, this demonstrates how we sometimes mistakenly use dynamic (i.e., superior)
muscle contraction for a muscle that is NOT our target muscle, while using isometric
(i.e., inferior) muscle contraction for the muscle we most want to prioritize.

(* Note: In this context, “inferior” refers to stimulation that is LESS likely to produce muscle
hypertrophy and less likely to produce strength through a broad range of motion. “Superior”
refers to stimulation that is MORE likely to produce muscle hypertrophy.)

Some people might think that if this exercise provides better stimulation for the Gluteus,
“why not just use it, and regard it, as a Gluteus exercise?”. That isn’t a bad idea,
provided people are knowingly using it that way. However, the Glutes are generally
much stronger than the resistance this exercise normally provides.

In fact, this exercise (performed as demonstrated above) is very similar to a Deadlift -

with a slightly different resistance curve and straighter legs. If Deadlifts are already
being done, this exercise (above) would be considered redundant. Either way, neither
the Low Back Extensions nor Deadlifts, are NOT as beneficial for the Erector spinae as
they are for the Gluteus. The reason for this is that in both exercises, it’s the hip joint
that is doing most of the bending, rather than the spine.
 - - - - - -
If your goal is to target the Spinal Erectors (aka “Erector Spinae), you’d be wise to use
dynamic exercise, instead of isometric exercise. In order to work the Spinal Erectors
dynamically, you need bend the SPINE - not the hip joint.

This can be done very easily, without much involvement of the hip joint. In fact, it would
be a good strategy to not involve the hip joint much, when attempting to develop the
Erector Spinae, because spinal extension is best performed with undivided attention.
Most people tend to be out of touch with the way their spine moves, so they lack much
coordination of it. But with a little practice, spinal coordination and spinal mobility can
be greatly improved.

The exercise shown below is a “Seated Torso Extension”. First, the spine is forward-
rounded (“flexed”), which elongates the Erector spinae. Then, the spine is arched
(“extended”), which contracts the Erector spinae. This will be further explained in
greater detail, in Chapter 24.

In this exercise above, there is more movement in the spine (the dot indicates a “pivot”),
and less movement at the hip, as compared with the standard “Low Back Extension”.
The target muscle (the Erector Spinae) is now working dynamically. Notice that I am
staying entirely on the left side of the Apex (indicated by the vertical line). I am not
crossing over to the right side. Thus, I am keeping the same muscle loaded the entire
time.

11
Care should be taken, when doing this exercise, to not “over round / flex” the spine, nor
to “over arch / extend” the spine. The spine IS made to move, but - just like any joint - it
has limits as to how much it can move safely. Never force any joint motion, and that
includes spinal movement. But certainly, some degree of spinal movement is better
than no movement at all, for the goals of improved muscular development as well as
improved mobility.

- - - - - -
So, when considering “dynamic versus isometric” as part of your exercise analysis,
the questions to ask are as follows:

1) “Which muscle am I intending to target with this exercise?”

2) “Which joint is moved by the muscle I am intending to target?”

3) “Is the joint which is operated by the muscle I’m intending to target, the one that
bends most (or exclusively) during this exercise?”

If the joint that is crossed by your target muscle is NOT the joint that moves most during
a given exercise, than you are activating a non-target muscle more than your target
muscle.

The target muscle should be producing the actual movement. It should not merely be
holding its joint steady, while another non-target muscle does most of the actual work at
a different joint.

As one final example of this type of “error”, we sometimes see people in the gym
attempting to perform a Cable Triceps Pushdown, with the intention of working their
Triceps muscle. However, because they are unaware of how to do the exercise properly,
they sometimes mostly bend at the shoulder joint, while keeping their elbows mostly
straight (illustration below-left). Of course, the correct form of Triceps Pushdowns
requires that the elbows bend, and the shoulder joint be held still (illustration below-
right).
(Note: Of course, I am referring to people who are intending to work their Triceps. This is not to
be confused with people who are performing a “Straight Arm Pulldown” for their Lats.)

Performing a Triceps Pushdown with this kind of improper form (above-left), does
engage the Triceps muscle, but only isometrically. The Triceps is keeping the elbow
in a rigid position, by way of static tension. Meanwhile, the muscles that cross the
shoulder joint - the Latissimus, the Posterior Deltoids and the Teres major - are the ones
that are producing the downward movement, by bending (“adducting”) the shoulder
joint.

The reason the version that is illustrated above-left would be considered “incorrect” as
a Triceps exercise, is because tensing the Triceps isometrically is NOT as productive
as contracting the Triceps dynamically.

The reason we perform dynamic Squats (below-left), is because they develop the
Quadriceps and the Gluteus better than static Squats against a wall (below-right).

13
The reason we perform Supine Bench Dumbbell Presses (with movement), is because
they develop the Pectorals better than a static (no movement) Push-Up.

Torso Rotations, performed with movement - against an opposing resistance - are

more productive than a static torso hold, with resistance.

Side Bends - moving laterally, back and forth, against an opposing resistance - is more
productive than a Static Side Plank.

Ab crunches (with movement, below left) - using bodyweight or resistance provided by

a cable - is more productive for development of the Abs than are static Planks (no
movement, below right).
Dynamic muscle contraction is good. Static muscle contraction is less good. Static
muscle tension is better than no muscle contraction at all, but it’s not nearly as
beneficial as dynamic muscle contraction, for muscular development and for improving
functional strength through a full range of motion.

The are only two exceptions to this rule:

1. A joint injury or other physical anomaly is preventing or inhibiting normal freedom of

movement.

2. A person’s goal is to maximize the strength of a muscle in one specific position. For
example, a Boxer may want to improve torso “rigidity”, to allow better resilience to
receiving punches in the Ring.

In these cases, isometric muscle tension may be preferable over dynamic muscle
contraction. But for the purpose of general fitness and muscular development, dynamic
exercise is preferable over isometric exercise.

- - - - - -
Range of Motion
Up to this point, our discussion has been comparing “movement” (dynamic) with “no
movement” (isometric). Exercise with movement is generally more productive than
exercise without movement, for the purpose of visible and functional muscular
development.

The next question is, “how much movement is ideal - or sufficient?”. It’s easy to
compare full range of motion with zero range of motion. It’s not so easy to establish
an absolute rule about how much range of motion is ideal.

We’ve all seen people in the gym carelessly doing exercises with very abbreviated
(short) ranges of motion. It’s logical to assume that insufficient range of motion will
compromise the benefit of an exercise. After all, a range of motion of 10% is almost
“isometric”. But is 100% range of motion absolutely necessary - or even “best”? Is
100% range of motion always safe? Is 80% ROM as effective as 100% ROM? At what
point (percentage-wise) does a reduced range of motion become insufficient?

A muscle’s “full” range of motion could theoretically be defined as being “from the point
at which the muscle is most elongated, to the point at which it is most shortened”.

However, it’s clear (to those of us who have been participating in the sport for decades)
that using 100% full range of motion is not necessary for optimal muscular
development, and often has potential risk. So, 100% may not be necessary, but how

15
much is “enough”? The answer depends on a number of variables, which include the
following:

1. The resistance curve of a particular exercise

2. Whether a “muscle/joint” experiences Mechanical Disadvantage during the early

part of its range of motion

3. The amount of weight being used in a given exercise (represented as a percentage

of maximum effort for that muscle)

4. The skeletal limitations of the joint being operated

5. Whether or not a muscle has been warmed up

In Chapter 3, we discussed the Mechanical Disadvantage that occurs when the Biceps
is pulling on the forearm from a parallel angle - when the elbow is straight. As such, it
would be risky to perform a 100% full range of motion (full extension) on a Preacher
Barbell Curl (below-left), while using a weight that represents anything more than about
70% of the Biceps’ maximum effort. This is because the combination of Mechanical
Disadvantage, with a Resistance Curve that provides too much resistance at the
beginning of the movement, and using a significant amount of weight, could easily
jeopardize the safety of the Biceps tendon.
However, it would not be risky to perform a 100% full range of motion when performing
a Standing Barbell Curl (above-right) with that same weight, because when the forearm
is parallel to gravity (at the beginning of the range of motion), there is no load on the
Biceps. So the Mechanical Disadvantage that occurs during Standing Barbell Curls
would be not pose any injury risk. A person could thus use a weight that requires
maximum effort, with full range of motion, without much risk at all, when doing a
Standing Barbell Curls.

It would not be risky to perform a full extension on a Preacher Barbell Curl if the
weight being used is “light” (less than 30% of maximum effort, approximately). So,
you can see how the factors combine to determine when “full range of motion” is safe,
and when its not.

Determining “enough” or “too much” ROM is also subject to other factors, including
momentum, repetition speed, and whether there is an apex or base at the beginning or
at the end of the range of motion.

All these factors combine and determine what the “appropriate” range of motion might
be, for a particular exercise under those specific circumstances. Each exercise has a
different sets of mechanical circumstances, so each exercise would require its own
parameters, in terms of the range of motion that would be considered ideal.

Nevertheless, basic “Range of Motion” guidelines can and should be established here,
since this chapter deals with “Dynamic Muscle Contraction”, and that automatically
implies range of motion.

1. We know that skeletal muscles have more strength potential when they are
elongated, versus when they’re shortened / contracted. Therefore, it’s reasonable to
assume that the early part of the range of motion, is more productive than the latter part
of the range of motion. So, as a rule, we could say the if one is going to abbreviate part
of the range of motion of an exercise, it’s better to abbreviate the latter part of the range
of motion, rather than the early part of the range of motion.

2. We know that there can be some degree of increased injury risk at the maximum
stretch position of a muscle, especially if the weight being used is “very heavy” (allowing
fewer than 6 repetitions, generally). This would be further exacerbated if there is a
Mechanical Disadvantage occurring at that point. So, as a rule, we could say that
caution should be used during the most elongated 10 to 20% of the range of motion, of
exercises that load heavily in the early phase - especially if the weight being used is
“heavy” and if there is Mechanical Disadvantage occurring.

3. The final 10% of a muscle’s range of motion seems to be the least “productive”, from
the perspective of hypertrophy (growth). A muscle generally has the least strength
potential in the final phase. In fact, it’s often difficult to even the latter part of the range
of motion, when using a weight that sufficiently challenges the early phase of the
repetition. Also, there does seem to be a bit more risk - especially in the joints that

17
extend, like the elbows (Triceps extension) and knees (Quadriceps / Leg Extensions), in
the final degrees of full extension. So, be careful upon full extension, or abbreviate that
final part by about 10%.

4. This leaves the middle 80% of the range of motion, which seems to be “always safe”
and “always productive”.

5. During the first few repetitions of a set - when the muscle is least fatigued - it is good
to use as much range as possible, assuming it’s within one’s comfort range (no pain or
discomfort). However, as the muscle becomes more and more fatigue, and less
capable of doing full range of motion, it’s “acceptable” to lessen the range of motion to
whatever is necessary - even if it’s only 50% movement. But this should be determined
only by necessity - not by “laziness” or carelessness. It should be determined by a
greatly diminished physical ability - not by lack of willingness. Reduce the range of
motion, only when you must - if the only other alternative is to stop completely.

6. Never use so much range of motion that it distorts a joint to a painful degree, or
takes a limb significantly beyond “normal” ranges, or contorts the body into extremely
“unnatural” positions. Extreme stretch - as part of the “weighted” range of motion of an
exercise - has never been associated with greatly enhanced muscle growth. In the
extreme stretch position, there is a reduced potential benefit, and also a drastically
increased risk of injury.

In Chapters 18 through 25, all “physique” muscles (and joints) will be analyzed, to
determine each muscle’s “ideal” range of motion.

- - - - - -
A Bit of History: The Marketing of Isometric Exercise

In the early 1920s, a man calling himself “Charles Atlas” (real name: Angelo Siciliano)
began promoting an exercise program called “Dynamic Tension” - which was based
entirely on Isometric Exercise. The irony here is that he called his course “Dynamic”,
but, in actuality, it was the opposite of dynamic exercise.

In the course that he marketed, a person would perform a series of exercises - all
without weights and without movement. The exercises were all static holds, whereby a
person would simply hold a tensed position - pressing or pulling against immovable
objects (e.g., a wall or floor), or their own opposing force.

His advertisements (shown below) became iconic: A cartoon showing a scrawny man
on the beach, bullied by a larger, more muscular man - embarrassing him in front of his
girlfriend. The scrawny man then buys the “Dynamic Tension” course, and - after a
short while (“in only 15 minutes a day”) - he miraculously transforms himself into a
muscular “He-Man”. He returns to the beach and punches the bully in the face, thereby
winning the admiration of his girlfriend.

In his advertisements, Charles Atlas publicly claimed that he had developed his
physique using this very same static tension exercise course. He became the poster
boy for isometrics, of that era. However, that was not entirely truthful. He actually
developed his physique by performing traditional (dynamic) weight lifting exercises -
with movement.

19
In a 1918 edition of a magazine called “Liederman”, it was reported that “Atlas”
performed a one-arm overhead press with a 236 pound weight. A separate 1920
edition stated that he did a one-arm press with a 266 pound weight. He clearly trained
and developed his physique using weights - dynamically (with movement).
Of course, he realized the marketing appeal of selling a course that “anyone could do,
without any equipment, in the comfort and privacy of their own home”. The exercises
were easy to understand and easy to do, as compared with the more intimidating and
complicated, weight-lifting exercises. Apparently, by the early 1940s, he had sold over
400,000 courses - at $30 each. If those figures are correct, “Charles Atlas” and his
business partner made over $12 million, which would have been a staggering amount of
money in those days.

Obviously, very few people knew back then that Charles Atlas had actually not
developed his physique using only the program he was selling. Today, this might be
considered “false advertising”. There was no way of researching such things back then.
But even today, there are many products that are marketed as “miraculous”, even
though they could not possibly produce the results the manufacturers claim.

Charles Atlas was a dedicated fitness practitioner and exercised diligently his entire life.
Even at the age of 75, he was known to do a daily morning exercise routine which
included 50 knee bends, 100 sit-ups and 300 push-ups (all of which are dynamic - with

21
movement). He was also a devoted husband and father. However, he was a business
person, and he realized that many people wanted to be strong and muscular, and were
willing to pay a price for that - and he took full advantage of that fact.
If we were told today, that the exercises above would develop a very muscular
physique, we might not believe it. We might suspect that we are being fed propaganda.

But are we any wiser now? Are we less likely to believe a “too good to be true” notion
about getting fit, without skepticism? It appears not. In fact, the same deceptive
marketing of fitness programs and methods occurs today, on an even larger scale.

The fitness industry is more commercially driven now than ever before. There will never
be a shortage of people willing to sell a program that cannot possibly deliver the results
promised. Nor will there ever be a shortage of people who are gullible enough to buy
an exercise method that promises miraculous results, unrealistically.

Whether we’re students or teachers of exercise, we should know which exercises have
more benefit and which ones have less benefit - which ones have more risk and less
risk. We should not believe, nor create the false impression, that all exercises - and all
exercise methods - are equally productive, and therefore all interchangeable.

- - - - - -
Summary
For purposes of physique development, visible muscle growth and strength gains
through a muscle’s entire range of motion, dynamic resistance exercise is better than
isometric resistance exercise.

Using a longer, mostly complete range of motion when performing resistance exercise,
is more effective for increasing muscle size and strength, as compared with using a
shorter range of motion.

A study* published in the “Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research” concluded

that increases of muscular size, and also of muscular strength, was greatest in a test
group that used the longest range of motion (the exercise tested was the Squat). This
was true even though the group using the shorter range of motion used 10% to 25%
more weight (resistance), than the group using the longer range of motion.
* (January 2014 - Volume 28 - Issue 1 - p 245-255)

When evaluating an isometric exercise - like the Plank - one needs to consider the
energy cost vs benefit, of that exercise, as compared with using dynamic exercise
options. For example, the Plank causes isometric contraction of the Rectus abdominis,
the Quadriceps and the hip flexors. So, one might think that since there are three
muscle groups working at the same time, that it’s “good” because it saves time.
However, the benefit of isometric contraction is compromised and loading three muscles
simultaneously is physically and psychologically demanding. This results in high energy
cost / low benefit.

23
Would we consider holding a straight-knee position on a Leg Extension machine, a
“good exercise” for the Quadriceps? Of course not - at least not compared with
performing full range of motion repetitions on that same machine. Therefore, the
isometric Quadriceps participation during a Plank is not as productive as dynamic
exercise for the Quads (i.e., Leg Extensions, Squats, etc.).

The primary goal of performing Planks is for the benefit of our Rectus abdominis.
However, the isometric tension (of the Abs) that occurs when doing Planks is less
productive for abdominal development, than is dynamic abdominal exercise - like
Seated Cable Crunches or Incline Ab Crunches.

Isometric exercise is not productive enough to achieve visible muscular development of

the Pectorals, the Quadriceps, the Deltoids, etc. So, why would we think that isometric
exercise for the Abs is “as good as” (or “better than”) dynamic exercise for the Abs?

Many exercises require isometric stabilization from certain muscles, while the target
muscle works dynamically - and this is perfectly acceptable. However, it’s important to
do this “correctly”, ensuring that the target muscle(s) is working dynamically (with joint
movement), and the stabilizing muscles are working Isometrically (without joint
movement).