By
John
Platero
First, let me say I'm a huge Vern Gambetta fan. However, I disagree
with some of his points in the article "Perfect Posture" (Training & Conditioning, March 2006, Vol. XVI, No. 2). Discussing
ideal posture for sports and ideal health can be challenging as he
states "When posing for photos or giving a presentation, our posture is
static. In sports, posture is dynamic, always moving." This is true.
However, if you were to examine the static posture of most right-handed
tennis players or right-handed pitchers you might see a hiked right
hip, a lower right shoulder and a longer right arm. Compare that to a
professional cyclist with a posterior pelvic tilt, reduced lumbar curve
and exaggerated thoracic curve and you might come to the conclusion
that structure follows function. Is this okay? Is this healthy? As
Diane Sahrmann states in
her book Diagnosis and Treatment of Movement Impairment Syndromes, "A
useful criterion for assessing precise or balanced movement is
observing the path of instantaneous center of rotation (PICR) during
active motion. The PICR is not easily analyzed and radiologic methods
are necessary to depict the precision of the motion. "Great. Who has
access to that?"
If all these sports have different demands which
result in different structural or postural changes then the only
thing we do have that remains constant is static posture. Ideal
static posture is exactly that; ideal. Sports are challenging, fun and
demanding, but in my opinion not exactly healthy. Going down a mountain
at 70+ mph on skis wearing nothing but Lycra is not exactly healthy.
Flying into a corner with 30 other people on motorcycles is not exactly
healthy. Look at John Elway or Jim McMahon's knees and tell me playing
professional football is a healthy thing to do.
Mr. Gambetta
makes valid points. He suggests "The first step is training yourself to
critique key points in movement." I agree with him, but how? Fluidity
is very hard to assess and is very subjective. It's an art. I play
drums, which requires as much balance, timing, coordination and accuracy
as any sport. If you were to study the posture of 10 of the world's
best drummers you would find quite a variety in their set up. Will
there be some postural changes? Definitely. Not unlike the pitcher,
tennis player or cyclist, the repetitive movements or function required
by the activity will create tightness and weaknesses. How can you
identify tightness or weakness without a starting point or ideal point?
You have to start with static posture. Ideal static posture is the only
common place to start.
Mr. Gambetta states "We must think of
proportionality rather than symmetric muscle balance." For what? For
the sport or for health? This is also very subjective. If, for example, a hiked hip
and lower right shoulder on a pitcher is working, should we
change that or leave it because he's got a great record? The gist of
this article makes me think yes, we should leave it. For a professional
athlete who makes millions of dollars and can afford the possible
surgeries and pain-management techniques when they are over 40, this
might be the answer. But how about the kids? How would a coach, athletic trainer
or therapist know whether or not his or her athlete can withstand the
repetitive movements that caused this posture? Without a video camera
and a force plate, dynamometer, or some contraption to measure force,
how could you determine how much force these joints can take in that
position performing the repetitive
movements of their sport? You can't. Everyone is the same but also
different. That's my point. Dynamic posture is a reality, but every
time we determine what ideal dynamic posture is, someone breaks the
mold. Take Sean Kelly, the #1 cyclist in the world during the 1980's who
had the worst posture on a bike of any cyclist at the time, or imagine
the thickness of the meniscus in the knees of Shaquille O'Neal. Can the
average athletic participant follow these leaders in their sport? Will
their structure be able to withstand the demands of the function of
their sports?
The reality is static posture remains the same.
Dynamic and static posture are both equally important for the longevity
of the health of the athlete. However, static posture is a lot easier
to quantify. No one I know of has the ability to see the future to
determine how long an athlete's body will last performing the same
repetitive movements of their sport. Look at Bo Jackson and Brian
Bosworth, both great athletes whose injuries ended their careers. In
his article, Mr. Gambetta states "Tight muscles can contribute to poor
dynamic posture, so a sound program of functional flexibility that
addresses the target muscles must also be part of the athlete's daily
routine." How could you quantify which muscles are tight if not by
comparing them to some kind of standard? That standard is static
posture.
He also states "If an athlete has particularly bad dynamic
posture, he or she may need some remedial work. First analyze the
posture to ascertain the cause. If there is a weakness in a particular
muscle group then those muscles must be targeted for recruitment." I
agree with him, however, we must have a starting point. That starting
point is static posture.
Again, I highly respect Mr. Gambetta's
expertise and have enjoyed his writings. This article insinuates we
should discard static posture altogether. I think that would be folly.
He makes a multitude of good points but I disagree with him on static
posture.
John
Platero
Director of Education
The National Council for Certified
Personal Trainers