We preach inclusive fitness. The scaleability of movement for all levels of exerciser.
But sometimes I think the method of scaling is missing the mark.
We scale for lower levels of current ability, but the real WHY of scaling comes down to two reasons:
- We’re trying to replicate the desired stimulus of the exercise.
- We’re trying to provide a path towards completing the full unscaled version of a desired movement.
I think sometimes too much focus is placed on point one, and not enough on point two. We try to emulate the superficial gross movement patterns of the full exercise, without building in the more profound nuances that are required to progress an athlete.
Sometimes this lack of foresight in progression comes from a lower expectation from a coach regarding an athlete’s abilities. I discuss this concept in terms of the Pygmalion Effect in Pigeon Holing Fitness, “If we base our expectations too much on age/appearance/experience or any other preconceived notion – an individual will match our expectations.”
The following commonly seen scaling methods provide an example of this lack of foresight in scaling. We provide an example of incorrect scaling due to changing muscle recruitment patterns, changing the stability requirement, and changing the range of movement.
Example: Ring dips being scaled by kneeling on a band placed between the rings.
Problems:
- Band removes the need for lateral stability (the band pulls the rings to the sides) meaning the muscles involved in adduction (lats etc) are not developed on par with those involved in shoulder flexion and elbow extension.
- Band disallows correct hollow body positions.
- Band disallows kipping.
Solution: Fix a band to the bar where the rings attach (above the athlete). Feed a lifting belt through the band and place the belt around athlete’s waist. Resolves the three listed issues.
Example: Scaling push-ups by completing on knees.
Problem:
- Shortening the length of the lever (torso) removes the need for stability through the midline. The benefits of push-ups should extend far beyond the gross upper body horizontal pushing movement, and should include the resistance of lumbar hyperextension.
Solution: Complete the movement with a band attached to a bar above the athlete, with the band sitting across the upper chest of the athlete. Ensure the band is not placed around the hips or midsection, as this removed the midline stability requirement.
Example: Scaling handstand push-ups by shortening the range of the movement (head on a raised surface).
Problems:
- Scaling the range of motion of a movement under develops strength through the full range, meaning that progress is limited.
Avoiding full depth in a HSPU often means that a strong and stable ‘triangle’ position formed by the head and hands is not achieved.
Solution: Fix a band to an attachment point high on the wall. Feed a lifting belt through the band and place the belt around athlete’s waist.
To summarise the guidelines that should be followed when scaling movement:
- Scale load above all else.
- Retain the range of motion.
- Retain the requirement for stability and balance.
- Ensure all scaling works to progress the athlete along a continuum to more advanced versions of movement, rather than just copying the gross movement pattern.
