Is doing stretches with resistance objectively better than without for flexibility gains?
haha he's doing a funny little dance
>>74776395Its definitely easier to get more flexible with force added onto you. But it quite literally sends you to snap city in order to get that flexible. Thats how gymnasts do it when learning how to do splits, they just forcefully snap their shit up
>>74776395yes because flexibility is essentially strength over a greater range of motion so by adding resistance you're training just that, strength, when you're down at the ends of your rom.
>>74777669>yes because flexibility is essentially strength over a greater range of motionthat's mobility, and no u don't need any weight to stretch - that's bs get into specyfics, stretch what? provide example - i will smack ur ass so hard u will leave solar system lol
>>74776395You realise you can just stretch further to get the same effect, right?
>>74778379>>74777669Holy retards, mobility refers to the ROM that your joints allow and flexibility is the ROM that your muscles allow
>>74778496Well the thought comes from a lot of flexibility coaches doing this exercise and it just came to my mind... Like why are we doing this with just body weight?If we're strengthening the abductors, why not do them with resistance? Abductor machine and loaded cossack squats come to mind
>>74776395If you were strong and flexible enough to actually have a use case for this, you wouldn't need to ask this question. But for the record yes, there is a level at which this yields better gains. At your level you'll just snap your shit.
>>74776395you can get flexibility equally or faster using no resistance static stretches. what you get out of strength stretches is flexibility that recedes slower, and is more functional cause you're not utterly weak in the extended position. this is also why no resistance stretches regress, the tissue gets shocked when you put load on it that it isn't adapted for, and it contracts and regresses in responseif the anons in the thread have stated otherwise, ignore them, I'm right
>>74780389So what's the point of fire hydrants (>>74778694) for middle splits?
