|
Now that the Pilates system of training has undergone a huge rebirth in the USA
and started to attain the status of culthood, its latter day practitioners
are now reviving some of the myths of strength training. Here are a few
that are now doing the rounds, taken directly from the advertising blurb
that is promoting Pilates in the media:
Myth 1. Weight training tends to shorten the muscles, but Pilates lengthens
them. All that lifting bunches up the muscles and makes one tight and stiff.
Fact: All muscles contract and shorten when they are activated. All muscle
lengthen when they relax. If muscles appear to lengthen and flatten with
training, then this would imply that one is losing muscle bulk, which is not
a highly desirable state for anyone. This Pilates belief is total nonsense
and betrays a sorry knowledge of muscle physiology. It would also seem to suggest
that the more Pilates work you do, the longer your muscles become. That, of course, would mean that your muscles would develop slack and you
eventually would not be able to move your joints!
Myth 2. Pilates offers much more variety than weight training. It now has over
2000 exercises.
Fact: The field of weight training, which includes free barbell and dumbbell weights
and machines, offers at least ten times that number of exercises and exercise
variations. Pilates does not even come close.
Pilates practitioners, of course, should note that the well-known Pilates machine,
the Reformer (a type of lying sled device), the Cadillac, the Spine Corrector
and various other machines were developed by Joseph Pilates from a host of
earlier weird and wonderful machines that were on the fitness market of
Europe and Russia during the late 19th and early 20th century. If one examines
some early patents from Germany, for example, even some weight training
devices like some made by Nautilus were derived from these earlier
innovations.
One might even state that "Pilates training" constitutes just another
man's own range of strength training routines and machines, someone like
Arthur Jones, Bob Hoffman, Eugene Sandow, Professor Attila or Joe Weider.
Those who are "doing Pilates" thus are simply doing another type
of strength training program and they don't even recognise that fact. If
any of their instructors think that old Joe Pilates had a totally unique
approach or philosophy, then they would do well to learn that several of
the strengthening trend setters of the past 100 years all had some
fascinating philosophies and methodologies that are not dramatically different
from that of Pilates. Reading through a book such as Webster's "The
Iron Game" or talking to Dr Terry Todd and his wife will fill in some
of the gaps in their education if anyone is unaware of that fact.
Myth 3. Pilates realigns the body, corrects muscle imbalances and helps to heal
injured backs. Weight training usually causes imbalances and overstresses
the back.
Fact: Suitably individualised Pilates and progressive weight training programs
both can be used to "correct imbalances" and improve postural alignment,
which actually have a lot more to do with motor education than what means
is used to achieve those ends. Conversely, poorly taught Pilates and weight
training both can be injurious. There are very few other methods that can
develop such spinal strength, power and stability than a well-designed
heavy weight training program.
The bottom line? Why don't modern Pilates teachers and enthusiasts simply state
that they really prefer Pilates training to any other methods at the moment
and that other forms of training may well be more enjoyable and productive
for others? There is no scientific or clinical evidence that Pilates is any
better or worse than any other form of training for the average
population, so let it be marketed as such.
Of course, anyone who is a student of international sport knows that Pilates training
done as the sole form of conditioning has produced very few or none of the
world champions in sport, nor has it been shown to offer superior musculoskeletal
healing to any other form of therapy. That does not make it any the less
enjoyable or effective for those who feel justified in spending thousands
of dollars a year to learn it. Those people simply enjoy it because they
have found that it suits them, nothing more, nothing less.
Fortunately, when I was being taught Pilates methods more than 15 years ago by
some Pilates teachers in return for my teaching them modified forms of PNF
training which Pilates did not specifically address, we discovered that we all
had something to teach and learn from one another's training -- though we agreed
that Pilates methods of pelvic stabilisation were not intended for lifting
heavy loads in weightlifting and powerlifting. Once again, a case of live
and let live! Pilates teachers and weight trainers were getting along just
fine until the commercial marketeers came along to distort the facts with
their comparative advertising.
Dr Mel C Siff
Denver, USA
(Boy will Dr. Siff be missed!)
|
