ISOArms

[IniNew 53]

Website.

Now, the main bar thing is not what I'm posting about. The rings are specifically designed to workout your forearms with isometric resistance. Seems like it would be perfect for a hockey player.

Thoughts?

[Quintin 16]

Bit of a gimmick really isn't it?

Join a gym, get out the house and off the 360/PS3 and eat right. You'll feel better for it :)

[Hooah4 12]

I saw that ad on nhl network the other night and lost it. My brother bought one of those in the late 70's. Everything old is new again. I think it was called the IsoBar back then ('78).

the next one will be the ropes you put on the doorknob and lay on your back to simulate swimming.

[biff44 0]

Things been around for decades. Used to be called something like a "Bullworker". Probably just the patent expired, and they can make it for free now.

[pantherfan 0]

Wow, thats a blast from the past.

[ndlancer95 0]

Don't want to sound like a thread Nazi, but shouldn't this be in misc discussions?

[titand19 0]

Go to a junkyard and get a old trunk hydraulic.

[IniNew 53]

Don't want to sound like a thread Nazi, but shouldn't this be in misc discussions?

Well considering I was posting concerning the forearm workout item only, and in relation to hockey players... nah, General Hockey Discussion looks fine.

As far as recycling, everything goes in cycles yeah, but I figured some people (like myself) have never seen the round IsoArm workout device.

[ndlancer95 0]

Don't want to sound like a thread Nazi, but shouldn't this be in misc discussions?

Well considering I was posting concerning the forearm workout item only, and in relation to hockey players... nah, General Hockey Discussion looks fine.

As far as recycling, everything goes in cycles yeah, but I figured some people (like myself) have never seen the round IsoArm workout device.

I see where you're coming from B)

[Chadd 916]

If you have a question regarding the placement of a topic, PM one of the admins. Since this was regarding the usefulness of this item for hockey players, it was left in place.

Assuming the item in question does what it implies, it would be perfect for hockey players. Far better than bench presses and curls.

[Scotty 8]

If you have a question regarding the placement of a topic, PM one of the admins. Since this was regarding the usefulness of this item for hockey players, it was left in place.

Assuming the item in question does what it implies, it would be perfect for hockey players. Far better than bench presses and curls.

It's a gimmick, just like every one of those things since the 70s have been.

As far as building strength, you seriously think a joke like that is better than actually pushing free weight around? I can see its effectiveness as far as using multiple groups of muscles rather than isolations like curls, but bench is a very compound lift and something like that won't touch it.

[Chadd 916]

If you have a question regarding the placement of a topic, PM one of the admins. Since this was regarding the usefulness of this item for hockey players, it was left in place.

Assuming the item in question does what it implies, it would be perfect for hockey players. Far better than bench presses and curls.

It's a gimmick, just like every one of those things since the 70s have been.

As far as building strength, you seriously think a joke like that is better than actually pushing free weight around? I can see its effectiveness as far as using multiple groups of muscles rather than isolations like curls, but bench is a very compound lift and something like that won't touch it.

I use small dumbells and use them in a fairly similar motion as the product in question. Because of that my forearms are roughly the same size as my biceps and that has benefited me greatly in hockey as well as golf. Benches and curls are not nearly as beneficial for hockey players as something that develops the forearms. For overall muscle development, benches and curls are better. For hockey specific results, they are not.

[gxc999 7]

If you have a question regarding the placement of a topic, PM one of the admins. Since this was regarding the usefulness of this item for hockey players, it was left in place.

Assuming the item in question does what it implies, it would be perfect for hockey players. Far better than bench presses and curls.

It's a gimmick, just like every one of those things since the 70s have been.

As far as building strength, you seriously think a joke like that is better than actually pushing free weight around? I can see its effectiveness as far as using multiple groups of muscles rather than isolations like curls, but bench is a very compound lift and something like that won't touch it.

I use small dumbells and use them in a fairly similar motion as the product in question. Because of that my forearms are roughly the same size as my biceps and that has benefited me greatly in hockey as well as golf. Benches and curls are not nearly as beneficial for hockey players as something that develops the forearms. For overall muscle development, benches and curls are better. For hockey specific results, they are not.

I do agree and the triceps also do heavy work while shooting. One other thing I have to add is the value of shoulders/upper back on shooting. Also remember that the group that generates the most power on shots is the upper legs. Despite having somewhat small forearms, I have big upper arms and shoulders, I think you can have multiple combinations for better shooting. If your forearms are the #1 power generating body part on shots, you probably won't ever shoot as hard as you should. My (slightly) educated guess on muscle group importance for wristers is 1) legs and hips 2) shoulders and upper back, 3)forearms and upper arms. It's probably the same for slap shots as well.

[Chadd 916]

1. legs

2. abs/core

3. lower arms

Power comes up from the bottom and out. The worst thing you can do is overdevelop your chest and upper arms.

[gxc999 7]

1. legs

2. abs/core

3. lower arms

Power comes up from the bottom and out. The worst thing you can do is overdevelop your chest and upper arms.

I agree. I did a lot of ab side bends and crunches last summer and noticed a difference. Lower arms are tricky, they take a while to build up but I think the best way is just to shoot more.

[ts.krajewski 0]

I know some good sites that lets you work out your forearms, only issue is you gota be 18 to look at them. But they are free so I guess that is a plus. I think you could just use normal wieghts and do the same motion and get the same results maybe not as fast but pretty much the same thing.

[gxc999 7]

I found something interesting, http://www.iowaahperd.org/journal/j97s_baseball.html It is about baseball but might be a fun parallel. It suggests some of what I thought might be true, triceps for instance, although I don't know exactly how much that translates into hockey.

[booyaagrandma 4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullworker, these were originally called The Bullworker.I remember them in Europe in the 80's but seem to have been around since the 60's.They actually wotk well believe it or not.No substitute for the gym and a good diet but not terrible either.

[biff44 0]

I think something like this device is good for one specific purpose: If you are travelling all over the place and living out of a hotel room. After a long bus ride, you can pull out a couple of these "portable" devices and do a little work out. Get the blood flowing and wake up the muscles before a game. Carrying around dumbells is....heavy!

[SolarWind 23]

the idea behind the device is solid - it's well known that if you dynamic max is 100% then your static max would be ~125%, and your negative max would be ~ 140-150%

in other words if you can lift 100#, then you can hold 120 & lower 140.

the problem is that static strength doesn't directy transfer into dynamic for example, so by holding staticly one'd get good at it, but not at anything else so there'd be no direct correlation to active sports.

Plus for someone who's got a CNS (central nerve system) not trained to send strong impulse through their muscles wouldn't be able to put 100% effort into the hold.

re the device: I personally find it quite useless simply because it's not needed it at all to develop static strenght - one can just as well statically squeeze whatever is around or hang on something etc

just my .5 :)

[gxc999 7]

the idea behind the device is solid - it's well known that if you dynamic max is 100% then your static max would be ~125%, and your negative max would be ~ 140-150%

in other words if you can lift 100#, then you can hold 120 & lower 140.

the problem is that static strength doesn't directy transfer into dynamic for example, so by holding staticly one'd get good at it, but not at anything else so there'd be no direct correlation to active sports.

Plus for someone who's got a CNS (central nerve system) not trained to send strong impulse through their muscles wouldn't be able to put 100% effort into the hold.

re the device: I personally find it quite useless simply because it's not needed it at all to develop static strenght - one can just as well statically squeeze whatever is around or hang on something etc

just my .5 :)

Thank you so much for making an important point. One of the main components of physical strength is neurological activity, which leads to dynamic tension, which is where strength comes from. I hate how everything has been trained to a non to think mass=strength when that is, at best, a half truth. which leads to many senseless results...

[Trooper 8]

the idea behind the device is solid - it's well known that if you dynamic max is 100% then your static max would be ~125%, and your negative max would be ~ 140-150%

in other words if you can lift 100#, then you can hold 120 & lower 140.

the problem is that static strength doesn't directy transfer into dynamic for example, so by holding staticly one'd get good at it, but not at anything else so there'd be no direct correlation to active sports.

Plus for someone who's got a CNS (central nerve system) not trained to send strong impulse through their muscles wouldn't be able to put 100% effort into the hold.

re the device: I personally find it quite useless simply because it's not needed it at all to develop static strenght - one can just as well statically squeeze whatever is around or hang on something etc

just my .5 :)

Thank you so much for making an important point. One of the main components of physical strength is neurological activity, which leads to dynamic tension, which is where strength comes from. I hate how everything has been trained to a non to think mass=strength when that is, at best, a half truth. which leads to many senseless results...

Good points by both. Athletics are about training movement, not muscles. Muscles play a part in it, but the inter and intra muscular coordination is all CNS.

[BLKHKhockey 0]

I know some good sites that lets you work out your forearms, only issue is you gota be 18 to look at them. But they are free so I guess that is a plus. I think you could just use normal wieghts and do the same motion and get the same results maybe not as fast but pretty much the same thing.

The old fashioned way. ;)

But back on topic, I have a few questions on shooting and muscles.

I don't see how having stronger legs helps in shooting, can someone explain how legs are the most important part?

What muscle(s) help a player flex the stick? To me it seems like just body weight that flexes it.

Can someone give me a few workouts that will help my shot besides shooting pucks as I'm already doing that?

[Chadd 916]

I know some good sites that lets you work out your forearms, only issue is you gota be 18 to look at them. But they are free so I guess that is a plus. I think you could just use normal wieghts and do the same motion and get the same results maybe not as fast but pretty much the same thing.

The old fashioned way. ;)

But back on topic, I have a few questions on shooting and muscles.

I don't see how having stronger legs helps in shooting, can someone explain how legs are the most important part?

What muscle(s) help a player flex the stick? To me it seems like just body weight that flexes it.

Can someone give me a few workouts that will help my shot besides shooting pucks as I'm already doing that?

If you aren't getting leg drive into your shot, you are losing a significant amount of velocity. You need to tansfer your weight forward as you shoot if you want to maximize your velocity. Using body weight to flex the stick is a very poor technique. You don't get velocity by going down, you get it by going forward. Anything more than a minimal amount of downward force is waster effort.

Joe Sakic used to say that his legs were the reason that his wrist shot was so good.

[BLKHKhockey 0]

What do you mean by leg drive and how do you do it? I need you to be specific, please.