Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Benefits of Balance Training
III. How Balance Works
IV. Balance Training and the Athlete
V. What Balance Training Will NOT Do
VI. Training Methods
VII. Summary
Introduction/ To the top
The human body is a rather tall assembly of bones and soft tissue that stands erect and tall on a relatively small base. Gravity and the environment are consistently pulling the erect body downwards and in all sorts of other directions yet our bodies manage to stay upright. Despite the fact that standing on our own two feet can be “simple” there has been an influx of all sorts of balance training methodologies that can be useless at their best, or dangerous at their worst. It is my opinion that balance training, in one form or another, should be part of everyone’s program – particularly those that prefer bodyweight-only training (or misguidedly favor machines as opposed to free weights). This article will address why balance training is important (both upright and inverted), how our bodies balance themselves, and some tips on how to train balance effectively.
Benefits of Balance Training/ To the top
Since few people aside from gymnasts and traceurs incorporate regular balance training into their program, there should probably be a major case that is made for why people should even bother.
There are loads of studies that explore balance training and most of them are in the elderly. Why? Because the elderly are highly likely to experience a fall that will break a hip. The danger is that about 24% of people over 50 years of age die within 12 months after a hip fracture. This should be particularly alarming to women who are more likely to break a hip due to post-menopausal dips in estrogens that cause osteoporosis. In fact, post-menopausal women have about a 15% chance of breaking their hip in their life time. That risk is easily mitigated by spending short periods of time performing balancing training – even if you don’t start until you are over 70, do simple drills and only balance train for 9 weeks. Other studies show similar results – in fact one can balance like other adults who are 3-10 years younger with Tai Chi training. If you found this site, it is more likely that you are an athlete looking for ways to avoid injury or improve performance as opposed to an elderly woman in an assisted living home. So, while these studies are interesting and highlight the need for good balance – we would likely want to shift our focus to those studies that show the relationship between balance, training, prehab and longevity (aside from avoiding a hip fracture).
If you have been through rehab for a lower limb you may have been subjected to balance training. The rehabilitation environment is one where balance training was first introduced because of studies like this one. This study, along with several others, suggests balance training to be an effective means of improving proprioception in those with an impaired joint (in this case the ankle). But what if you haven’t suffered a lower limb injury? Are there still benefits to balance training? The research suggests that this may be the case.
When it comes to injury prevention, there are some compelling studies that suggest balance training can ward off injury. Most of the work in this area has been done on the lower limb. For example, one study shows that healthy young soccer players can improve their proprioception and prevent lower limb injuries by incorporating specific lower limb balance training into their program. Another study on soccer players looks specifically at the incidence of ACL injuries. The findings show that proprioceptive/balance training using wobble-boards can significantly reduce the incidence of ACL injuries in soccer players. Another wobble board study showed similar results where adolescents added balance training into their program for only 6 weeks. Another study included balance training with plyometic training and it showed an overall reduction in the extremity of valgus measures on the knee joint. If you have read our article by Steve Low on the drawbacks of shoes and sitting regularly, then you would know that increased valgus stress should be avoided to minimize injury and maximize performance. If you haven’t read that article, then you may want to click onto it here: Shoes, Sitting and Lower Body Dysfunctions..
There is also data to suggest that balance training will reduce the chance of relapse in addition to reducing the chance of an initial injury. For example, in this study researchers were examining the ankle. From these results, there is a lesser incidence of recurring ankle sprains if the athlete (soccer or basketball, in this case) undergoes a balance training program.
Finally, there are also some studies that suggest that balance training is an effective means of making strength gains. While I am sure these strength gains are mostly limited to novices, I am still sure that balance training is worthwhile for maintenance programs. This study and this study both show that strength and performance gains have been made by participants using programs that take advantage of balance training. Considering that higher level and novice athletes should utilize lighter days in their programs, making balance training a key part of these “light days” may actually help to accelerate strength gains.
Something to notice is that none of the aforementioned studies look at inverted balance (i.e. handstands) at all. These studies are extremely hard to come by and I am assuming that is because hand balancing is just regaining steam among performance athletes. I am confident that similar studies that examine rehabilitation rates and injury prevention in those that take part in hand balancing would yield similar results since the same mechanisms are at work – just on a different set of joints (the wrist, elbows and shoulders as opposed to hips, knees and ankles).
One side note that I would like to make is that there are LOADS of studies that go into how balance training on a Bosu Ball, wobble board, etc. lead to increased muscle activation. That is, muscle activation increases during some movement when you do it on an uneven surface. These studies gave way to the hoards of trainees standing on Bosu and Swiss balls while doing things like squats and curls. For the performance athlete, it’s not really necessary to worry about muscle activation at all. Doing focused training for increased activation will not benefit too much in terms of performance and will likely take time away from other more useful applications of balance and strength training. With that said, muscle activation isn’t really the focus of this article and it shouldn’t be the focus of a balance training program since it really doesn’t matter all that much in the context of performance gains. The only exception to this would be when some muscle has been identified as a “weak link” and increased muscle activation is required to overcome a plateau or correct pathologies.
In summary, the main proven benefits of balance training, aside from actually being able to balance on narrow objects and unstable surfaces, include injury prevention, rehabilitation, strength increases and increased muscle activation. The fact that we can achieve these ends while working on the functional task of traversing narrow/unstable surfaces and on standing on our hands is compelling enough to include regular balance training into one’s routine for GPP and performance gains. Aside from that, balance training is just plain fun.
How Balance Works/ To the top
Human balance is actually a pretty remarkable feat. The average male stands about 70 inches tall whilst standing on a base that averages out to be about 10-12 inches long and 3-4 inches wide. Balancing objects to stand that tall while on that small of a base is incredibly difficult. As our bodies move through space, muscles up and down the entirety of the kinetic chain are constant reacting to hold our body upright – and most of the time this is a completely involuntary process. So, how do our bodies make it all happen?
There is a popular text on the subject written by Dr. Nashner called Pracitcal biomechanics and physiology of balance taken from his book, Handbook of Balance Function and Testing. If you are interested in the full text from the book, you can find a digital copy here. The gist of it is that our bodies sense the position of the body in relation to gravity and the surroundings. To do this, the body utilizes three sensory inputs:
- Visual input – optical input from the eyes.
- Vestibular input – input from the vestibules in the inner ear caused by fluid moving around.
- Somatosensory input – input from the sense organs on muscles and tendons.
Visual input contains information from about the overall state of our surroundings. Vestibular input contains information about where and how our bodies (actually, our heads) are moving in space. Somatosensory input contains information about how our muscles are reacting to our environment.
Without getting too boring here, these three inputs are the basis of all balance and we balance the best when all three of these are working well together. However, we can rely on any one of these inputs and our balance will remain intact – just diminished. The real trouble with poor balance is when we inappropriately depend on a sense that is “fooling” us as opposed to a sense that is more reliable. This intersensory conflict can cause sickness or balance loss. For example, when you are sea sick you are relying on your sense on vision for balance when you should be relying on your somatosensory perception – that is why staring at a fixed image in the horizon will reduce the sea/motion sickness symptoms. Similarly, when you are having a tough time balancing on a narrow ledge, fixing your eyes on a fixed object in space will stabilize the rest of the system as it forces the somatosensory or vestibular systems to controlling balance for us. So, if you take nothing else from this article, just remember that poor balance can be acutely cured by fixing your vision on a stationary object so that the other two systems can do their job.
So, in short, balance works by taking these three systems and integrates their information to bring the center of gravity (COG) back to a stable or balanced position when balance is disturbed. Training our balance allows the body’s automatic responses to learn how to adjust to these disturbances. Beginning slackliners, for example, have a major shake on the line but that goes away as the brain learns to integrate new somatosensory information from the lower limbs. The adjustment is specific to the stimulus (training on rings is different than a slackline is different than a solid rail is different than a bosu ball) so we need to train balance in the most applicable of ways. (This means that the BOSU ball is useless, by the way, since we rarely balance in a static place on an unstable semispherical surface).
With that said, if we want to improve our balance and get all of the benefits that were stated in the first section, then we typically want to train all three of these systems in harmony as well as independently. For example, you may be balancing on a narrow ledge and are having difficulty – so you fix your eyes in place and keep your head in a static position. This will reduce vestibular processing and visual processing and will train your somatosensory mechanisms to respond adequately to control balance. As your somatosensory system becomes proficient at balance (that is, you balance easily with a fixed head and fixed eyes) then you may want to try balancing with a fixed head and moving gaze. This will introduce more intense visual processing into the mix which will train the visual and somatosensory systems to work in harmony. As this gets easier, you may close your eyes so that the two remaining systems have to pick up the slack or you can start moving your head/neck/body position so that you are training all three systems in concert. These are all respected mechanisms for increasing the difficulty of balancing.
Here are some other tidbits/factoids on balance and how it works that you may want to spout out at your next dinner party:
- Males demonstrated greater sway (difficulty balancing) than females
- One leg increases postural sway (difficulty balancing) by roughly 800%
- Blindfolding increases postural sway up to 300%
- Age tends to degrade balance
- This is due to degradations in feedback from all three systems.
- Broken hips in the elderly lead to increased incidence of death and are caused by balance degradation.
- Significant correlations were found between age and length of sway path for one-leg standing (larger sway indicates degraded balance).
- Youngest groups in studies demonstrate the largest area of stability over which weight could be shifted and controlled. The oldest group demonstrated the smallest area. That means you can’t deal with disturbances better in old age!
- One-leg balance scores are an important predictor of injurious falls in older persons.
- Vision plays a small/non-existant roll in balance control in children up until the age of 7.
- This is possibly useful if you plan on coaching children.
<Balance training and the Athlete/ To the top
Now, as athletes we usually have enough on our plates. In addition to our S&C program of choice as well as sport specific training, what exactly is the benefit on balance training? Well, for the older folks it’s clear that balancing and redeveloping proper balance can add years onto lifespan just because once you break a hip the recovery alone can be fatal. However, for people who are training in sport, there are stark benefits to training balance aside from strengthening our sense for old age.
Firstly, at any age, poor balance leaves us prone to injury. Recognizing this, recent trends in the diagnosis and rehabilitation of athletic injuries have been placing more and more weight on balance deficiencies. Among other things, studies are indicating that balance training can enhance dynamic balance ability for up to one year after training with minimal maintenance training. Other studies, such as this one, are showing that cohorts are using balance measurements to predict injury susceptibility. For those who have had previous injuries, this is proving worthwhiles – for others, its proving not to work so well. The point is that clinicians are starting to look at balance as a method for predicting and controlling injuries in athletes and in some cases its working very well. Aside from injury prevention, some early studies in the matter are also showing that mixing balance with other methods of training can be effective at improving measures of neuromuscular power and control. To put it more simply, this study shows that a combination of plyometrics and balance training may maximize the effectiveness of training in a group of female athletes.
What Balance Training will NOT Do/ To the top
Up until this point, I have been pushing balance training and its benefits pretty hard. It is worthwhile to take a minute, step back, and look at what balance training will NOT do just so that we can avoid any confusion.
Firstly, balance training may alleviate symptoms or reduce risks but it won’t fix underlying problems in some cases. For example, if your mother is suffering from osteoporosis she is very susceptible to breaking a hip. Balance training will help her to avoid the fall but it won’t magically make her bone density increase. On the plus side, for certain balance deficiencies, specific balance training can be worthwhile as a therapy that does act on the root of the problem
Secondly, studies suggest that balance training may fix some of the balance deficiencies that correlate well with injury rates. This does NOT imply that balance training will actually avoid injury – it just fixes the markers that are currently being used as correlates. Compare this to cholesterol. Cholesterol is NOT the cause of cardiovascular disease but it is used as a correlate for disease. Fixing the cholesterol problem does not fix the underlying problems such as high stress, high inflammation and inactivity.
Also, certain balance problems originate from problems in the nerve signals such as those from the optic nerve, vestibular systems and muscles. Balance training may help to increase balance to compensate for these problems (as the two other systems may be able to compensate for the deficiency) but the actual nervous system problems themselves will not be fixed by balance training.
The last point in this vein that I would like to mention relates to Mile Head Injury (MHI). A few studies point to the fact that MHI can impair balance for a day or two and balance training will not fix these problems during that time. Additionally, it can be dangerous to engage in balance training in the two days following a mild head injury. After a hit to the head, it is best to stay off the slackline and high ledges. Balance will be impaired and it is best to steer clear of balance training at that time.
Training Methods/ To the top
There is no shortage of training methods to improve balance. For some reason though, very few of these methods have been well represented in peer reviewed studies. In peer reviewed journals, the most represented forms of balance training include the BOSU ball and the balance board – both of which are suboptimal balance training methodologies. Why are they suboptimal? The first rule of S&C for any sort of skill enhancement is that the movement should be as close as possible to the target skill. For general preparedness and sport’s sake, the BOSU ball and balance board are novel and dissimilar to most practical movements. Other methods of training are rarely inspected for balance work but there is more than enough reason to believe that training in these less-researched methods will be just as beneficial (if not more beneficial due to their similarity to real world and sport related movements). Below is a short list on the different types of training methods that exist for balance training and even though they aren’t studied directly, there are some interesting studies that are quite relevant when we think about them with respect to balance training.
Slackline
Slacklining is my preferred method of balance training. Anecdotally, I have seen a lot of people improve greatly in balance on rails, balance beams, ledges and slacklines in as little as 1 week of consistent practice. After 4-5 one hour sessions with a partner, it is not uncommon to be able to walk on the slackline which, in my experience, has a very solid translation to all other situations in which balance is needed. Slacklining is not only easy to learn with a partner, but it is also a lot of fun. Setting up the line takes only a few minutes but it draws a lot of attention. In the park when I would train slacklining alone in Colorado, I would often convince a passer-by to get on the line with my assistance which would make for an interesting afternoon.
The basis of slacklining is to set up a strong nylon webbing between two trees or posts. The webbing is held onto the endposts/trees by either a ratchet or carabineer setup. I prefer ratchet setups when I am alone since they are quicker and easier to set up – though carabineers don’t require much re-tightening and readjusting. Once the line is established, you either step up onto the line (or jump on if you are a bit more advanced) and train various skill. The line is an unstable surface which requires the somatosensory portion of the brain to adjust substantially. The initial adjustment can take as little as 5 minutes or as much as a week of consistent practice depending on the individual. Some drills that can be performed on the slackline include walking backwards, forwards, sideways, kneeling, pistols, squats, turning, pivoting, jumping, line surfing, line bouncing. Each of these can be done with a moving head, moving gaze, closed eyes or eyes behind the back which will cause conflicting signals from the vestibular, somatosensory and visual components of balance. In short, these modifications will make balancing harder and will make you a better at balance.
If you were only able to choose one type of balance training, then I would certainly go with slacklining for an hour a week, or so, since it has a high degree of translation to other balance applications and the real world. It also fun and makes for a fun activity to do in leisure time with friends and family.
Rail Balance
Rail balance is very similar to slacklining. The only difference is that rail balancing does not require you to purchase a line and the balancing surface generally doesn’t move. Rail balance is one of the most practical methods of training balance since finding a rail to stand on is relatively easy (so long as there are buildings around). The techniques that can be trained on rail balancing are the exact same as slacklining so reread that section if you need some ideas. A good balance program would mix rail balancing with slacklining – but performing rail balance does not have a great translation over to slacklining, in my experience.
Weightlifting
Weightlifting doesn’t really get enough credit for aiding in balance. It doesn’t get enough credit for anything, really. In general, even if you only do isolation exercises, strength correlates to balance in at least some populations (like this study that examined strength-trained women or the study linked earlier in this sentence). That means, even if you only do isolation exercises on the major muscles of the lower limb, you may see an increase in your balance. Just for good measure, this link points to another study where back extensor isolations helped with balance – but in a different way than direct balance training. Strength training through isolations helped to increase postural control by increasing the fast compensatory responses that are necessary to maintain balance after it has been disturbed. Standard balance training increased balanced by reducing variance (or sway) overall. This is important evidence that suggests that strength training is a great compliment to standard balance training. And these studies just looked at isolations! I speculate that the highly coordinated and variable nature of the core lifts (squat and deadlift) along with the Olympic lifts (Snatch, Clean, Jerk) all provide a much better means of increasing balance through strength training. If you are reading this site it is likely you already incorporate at least some or all of these lifts into your program and these studies really drive home that there is no replacement for these exercises – but they should be done in conjunction with standard balance work on a slackline, beam or rail. Standard balance training cannot replace the benefits of strength training. The converse is also true.
Hand Balancing
If you know anything about me at all it’s that I love handstands. Handstands all the time, everywhere. Personally, I feel like doing a handstand is one of the most fun acts that I can do anywhere, anytime. Most balance training targets mostly the lower body and few people aside from gymnasts, crossfitters and traceurs even touch on handstands anymore. That may be the reason why handstands are understudied and basically ignored by most peer reviewed journals.
Luckily, I managed to dig up some studies that have some good implications regarding upper body balance training and their effects on health and performance. To put it into perspective, lower body balance surely helps with walking and avoiding a fall but upper body balance should have similar benefits. The bad news is that performing upper body balance training (in my experience and this study) has little to no translation to balance performance. The same is true that lower body balance training has little to no translation to inverted balance (that is, handstands). However, postural regulation when inverted appears to be regulated in the same way as when we are standing on our feet – all three systems play a part. So, what does this mean? If we want to have the most stability and control over our bodies, we need to train balance on our feet and on our hands (handstands and rings).
When it comes to handstands, I am not going to go over the basics of how to get started and learn how to balance. You can find some great resources on how to work on handstands either at BeastSkills, Drills and Skills or Gymnastics Bodies. Rather, I want to delve deeper into the intricacies of handstands and some things that are overlooked by beginners that relate back to the topics in this article.
Balance, overall, is a closed kinetic chain movement. For people who are unfamiliar with this term, it basically means that you are performing the movement with your body in contact with the ground such that you act on the ground to move a weight rather than acting on the weight itself. A deadlift is a closed kinetic chain movement whereas a leg extension is not, for example. In closed kinetic chain movements, each segment of the chain transmits forces to every other segment along the chain. Each segment’s motions are influenced by forces transmitted from other segments. In plain English, each part of your body will influence another part of your body so it is important that form is perfect. Most new handstanders ignore most of their chain and this is why you see lots of beginners flailing their legs and/or getting a “banana back”. This leads to balance impairments due to a lack of consciousness of the entire chain. Recall that balance contains three components which include somatosensory input. By forcing the muscles to learn how to balance while receiving this wacked out input from the muscles while legs are flailing in the air is entrenching horrible habits and the benefits of balance training may not be as great. This was just a very longwinded way of saying to train your handstands with good form or your brain may not be able to be reprogrammed so easily!
Another point goes to head position. For some reason, some people still think that your head should be in a neutral position while doing handstands. As we know from the previous sections of this article, vision and head position are a main component of balance – so head position is much more important than most people will lead you to believe. This study shows that having the head tilted WAY far back or in a slightly bent-back position was far more stable than keeping the head neutral or ventroflexed (looking at the feet). With this in mind, beginners should keep head position very slightly tilted with the goal of progressing to competence with ALL head positions, noting that looking at the feet is the most unstable of all positions that have been studied.
One final point for coaches – touch your trainee’s thighs! As we saw in our previous sections, the three systems that control balance don’t necessarily need to work in concert – they just happen to work in concert better than when they work alone. Touching the thighs enhances the somatosensory perception of inverted trainees. This also means that it can compensate for losses of vision such as closed eyes or for altered head positions. If there is a novice struggling with handstands or an advanced student struggling with a new handstand variation, touching the thighs will help in getting new skills more quickly.
Aside from handstands, most of these facts apply directly to other upper body gymnastics skills. The elbow levers and planche progression are also phenomenal tools to work on upper limb balance techniques. Additionally, any sort of rings training in a support position such as dips, support, L-sits, iron cross, etc. will contribute to the stability in the shoulder girdle that will help drastically with upper body balancing skills.
Balance Board
As stated earlier, the balance board is a classic in peer reviewed articles. Why? I don’t really know. Balance boarding has no significant translation to any sort of practical movement that I can discern. Balance boarding, practically, is extremely boring. The only thing worth mentioning on the balance board is that people who snowboard tend to pick up balance boarding very easily…though I have yet to see someone proficient on a balance board translate that to snowboarding skill. The balance board still provides a lot of researchers with a tool to work with and some data that is compelling regarding balance. Personally, though, I think you can save your money on a balance board and start walking on rails and slacklines.
BOSU Balls
When people mention balance training, the BOSU Ball is typically the first thing that comes to mind. This is probably because the BOSU ball has been a great tool for researchers performing studies. Researchers can easily get a BOSU ball to use in their studies as they are cheap and readily available. The BOSU balls provide an unstable surface that is highly controlled. People on the BOSU ball appear to be consciously balancing for long periods of time which lends itself to easy data collection. This is one of the main reasons EMG (muscle activity) studies are done on the BOSU ball…it’s easy as hell to do!
Studies that have been conducted using BOSU balls appear to be very compelling until we look a bit deeper. One study, for example, shows that performing exercises such as pushups on a BOSU or swiss ball increases EMG activity. That sounds great, right? Well, as performance athletes, we don’t really care about muscle activating muscles in this way. The instability of the BOSU ball is making muscles work harder to control themselves under the BOSU ball. When you remove the BOSU ball, the muscles still act with increased activity that is not necessary because they have been conditioned to do so. This might sound good, but it ingrains motor patters that are not desirable. In fact, BOSU ball training may decrease sport applicable performance due to improper activation and conditioning – the increased EMG activity may actually hurt performance!
That aside, this is all a moot point since studies indicates that advanced athletes benefit very little from BOSU ball training. That means if you train hard with heavy weights, then the BOSU balls won’t do much for you once you pass the novice phase – so why do two things instead of just one?! Stick to heavy weights and leave the BOSU ball on the shelf.
I know what some of you may be thinking. Why not do the heavy weights ON the BOSU ball, just to cover all of your bases! Well, firstly, that’s idiotic. No one should have any significantly stressful amount of weight loaded onto the body or in their hands when they are performing on an unstable surface. That is a great way to get yourself or someone else hurt or killed. Secondly, if you read the first part of this section, you would see that increasing muscle activity while weighted can actually hurt your performance. Just to make sure I say it again – keep the BOSU ball on the shelf.
Summary/ To the top
Well, in summary, balance training is often ignored when it should be an integral part of a trainees program. Most of the people reading this article should already recognize the benefits of the core lifts and lifting heavy and this actually covers most of your bases in terms of bringing balancing skills up to par – at least the clinical par. For performance, I believe that specific balance training (of at least 1 hour a week, in a casual setting) should be implemented to make the most progress in balance training. If you are a traceur, this training is absolutely necessary for your sport. If you are looking for general preparedness, then it is necessary for your active lifestyle where you may need to balance across a river or narrow ledge sometime during one of your misadventures. If you are a competitive athlete then it is probably less necessary to go out of your way to balance train for your sport even though there is some evidence supporting that it will maximize performance. Rather, as an athlete, it may be worthwhile to investigate balancing as a hobby that way you get the training in on your “off time” out of the gym. Keeping training fun is half the battle of being competitive and sticking with it – and balance training can be a blast.
Note: Most of the studies cited in this article are linked as they are cited. However, many studies were cited based off of the terrific article on balance titled Research and Clinical Applications of Assessing Balance. If you would like further reading then this article is a great place to start.
Chris first became interested in human performance enhancement during a short time as a martial artist. This led him to focus his computer engineering degree more intently on human anatomy and physiology. For the past 3 years, Chris has continued to dedicate all of his free time to studying human physiology as well as practical approaches to enhancing human performance through exercise, diet and lifestyle. Through his contributions on the American Parkour website, he has helped hundreds of novice and intermediate athletes identify goals and better training practices to excel in their discipline. Since September 3, 2007, parkour has been the sport/discipline of choice for Chris. He currently follows his own, custom program of strength and skill training which is heavily based in gymnastics. Originally from Brooklyn, NY, Chris currently resides in Colorado Springs, CO working as a Biomedical Research Consultant. 
<3
I found the info on sea sickness to be really interesting as I easily get sea sick myself. If I understand you correctly, what happens is that my proprioceptors don’t give my brain information trustworthy enough to be relied upon so the brain relies entirely on the vision instead and only trusting vision on sea is inevitably leading to sea sickness? Or is it that the brain trusts the information it gets from the proprioceptors, but the information it gets is so bad that when it’s mixed with the vision input the brain gets totally confused?
Are you also implying that I should be able to get rid of my sea sickness by improving my balance?
And I also suspect that tight hip flexors, tight hamstrings (probably from sitting) and having worn shoes all my life is a likely cause for bad proprioceptors and balance?
Thanks for your great articles!
Wow Tim, that is an extremely loaded post.
Firstly, I am not entirely sure that the pathway you are describing is accurate. If I had to speculate as to the ACTUAL neural processing, your 3 pathways are all sending information for neural processing back to the relevant parts of your brain (likely some combination not limited to the thalamus, cerebellum, sensory and motor cortex). Following this line of thought, when the three primary balance sensors (vestibular, visual and somatosensory) send information back to the brain it is likely that a confusing barrage of conflicting information can cause a bout of sickness. It is not necessarily that the proprioceptors are giving the brain information that is less trustworthy – just highly conflicting/confusing. By staring at a fixed object, the processing of visual information becomes much more simple (since it is now a constant image in space) and that brain area can better integrate the complicated information coming from the vestibular and somatosensory systems. It would be the equivalent of holding a variable constant so that an equation is more easily solved. Is this a bit more clear now?
I would also speculate that improving balance may help with motion sensitivities but no data exists to support that hypothesis (that I am aware of, anyway).
Tight hip flexors and hamstrings may cause more sway (an indicator of poor balance) since the posterior chain may not be activated properly to compensate for certain movements in space…but this would probably not be noticeable in normal, every day situations and would only be noticeable through bigger disturbances. For example, being pushed gently probably won’t cause any balance problems, but you may have a harder time balancing on the hull of a ship that is rocking heavily if your posterior chain isn’t used to compensation…but no data supports this hypothesis either – so it remains speculation, as well.
That said, any poor balance from shoes/sitting is likely not due to a deficiency in proprioceptors since, after all, these are just sensors within the muscles. Balance training just helps to better hone the signals from these proprioceptors so that we can put them to better use. Poor training won’t necessarily make your proprioceptors “bad” but they will make you integrate information from these sensors poorly.
Well, I was just expecting three yeses, not a novel
If my sea sickness goes away after improving my balance I’ll let you know.
You really should explore the Alexander Technique as a ‘Training Method.’ The Technique requires no minimum level of strength/fitness and works directly with proprioception, poise, and coordination.
Check the STAT Website (http://www.stat.org.uk/index.htm) which links to other resources and recent papers.
Could you elaborate on this technique a bit more? Their website is a bit cryptic…
Nice article, Chris. I’m interested in learning more about the papers you cited on proprioceptive training, but my college doesn’t have access to those publishers. Would you be able to please email me the articles (namely Caraffa et al 2006, Myer et al 2006, and Malliou 2005)? Keep up the good work.
Hey Silverton,
I apologize for the delay but I was trying to track down the full texts that I used as a reference….but I was unable to find the PDFs (likely because I recently switched computers). I no longer have access to the publishers as I obtained them through a friend, so maybe you can see if someone at another university has access?
I am sorry that I am unable to send them to you directly…
Chris
Chris;
The Technique is notoriously difficult to explain without actual demonstration. Typically, the teacher will ask the student to, say, stand up from a chair. If the student obeys the instruction, they will demonstrate their ‘normal’ coordination: excess tension, poor mechanics etc.
After this demonstration the teacher will get the student to perform the same act without interfereing with postural reflexes. The experience is absolutely amazing. Effort is reduced by as much as 40% (usually 15% or so).
Over time the student acquires a new experience of their own poise, weight, and motion. Old habitual stresses and pressures go away, the student’s posture improves and in process, a rational approach to unfamiliar activities is learned.
Does that help?
Is there a YouTube video that you could recommend that displays the technique in action?
I don’t think a video can convey the kinesthetic significance of lessons. Still, the STAT website has a Youtube page:
http://www.youtube.com/user/TheSTATChannel?gl=GB&hl=en-GB
The British Medical Journal produced a video to go with a recent study:
http://www.viddler.com/explore/atbmj/videos/1/
STAT and the American society webpages http://www.alexandertech.org/
have pretty good explanatory materials.
The most effective introduction would a few lessons with a qualified teacher. AmSAT has a list for Colorado T:
http://www.alexandertech.org/
John,
I very much appreciate your resources and links. While I am sure that I dont understand everything about the technique fully, it appears that this technique certainly may have merit in terms of reducing back pain. It looks as though the tactile cues help with “poise” which is consistent with a few of the studies that I have listed here in this article. More specifically, you see a great increase in balance and proprioceptive awareness in hand balancing when a spotter just gently touches the thighs or shins.
I can definitely see how this technique may help proprioception and reduce pain. I would be interested to see how it would affect other “conventional” measures of balance like SLS – even though I dont necessarily hold these dear to my heart.
For back pain, I may recommend people to this technique if they are open minded, just so that I can see if it would work for them.
Chris
Back pain is probably the broadest ‘corrective’ application of the Technique. However, in the real world the Technique is best known in performing arts; as part of the basic curricula of the Royal Academy of Dramatic Art, Juiliiard Acting school, etc. etc. I don’t know if they still do, but for many years the Israeli Air force trained all their pilots in the Technique.
What makes the Technique seem mysterious is the issue of habit and sensation. Each of us enters into any act with expectations of what it will feel like, that includes corrective exercises. I know of no other educations that starts by taking us out of our ‘normal’ range of sensation.
Good luck in your inquiries, do watch out for New Agey fringe people or ‘do it yourself’ claims.
Sweet article. I’ve never had (or been on) a, but I’m going to by the parts to make my own. If I’m getting it just for balance training for Parkour, do you think I should get a 2 inch or 1 inch line? I’ve heard that the 2 inch line is easier to walk and better for tricks, while the 1 inch is harder to walk but worse for tricks. Which do you think has the most potential to improve my balance? (in the long term)
Also, how much has slacklining improved your rail balancing and confidence on rails?
I would go with 2 inch line if you are new — i learned on a 2 inch line and switching to a 1 inch line was easy.
Slacklining makes rail balancing much easier, in my opinion, but i am not sure studies back up that there is a translation.
Also, another balance training method that should be mentioned/investigated is taijiquan (“tai chi”). A typical syllabus is to learn some principles and a form which is comprised of individual postures, often repeated several times in the form, which is done very slowly with concentration, taking about 10 minutes. The postures typically have a 70%-30% or 0%-100% weight distribution, and emphasize being low and relaxed, with careful attention to footwork and transitions between postures.
Outside of form practice, practitioners often practice holding individual postures for a certain about of time, such as 30 seconds, 1 minute, 5 minutes, up to hours for the advanced students.
There are many studies on taijiquan and balance, some show effects and some don’t.
Justin
Tai Chi is briefly mentioned in section II of this article. It is certainly a great option for balance training, but I personally think that training Tai Chi dedicates too much time to the slow movements and this dedication of time to something with minimal translation probably doesn’t effect the athlete too much.
Isn’t the arguement against BOSU balls and balance boards also applies to still rings? They are also an unstable surface that the muscles need to work harder in order to balance over it. Does it mean that training with still rings isn’t optimal?
This is actually an interesting thing that I have thought about a lot, and I would say that it is not true.
Consider the fact that we as humans operate within the environment with our lower bodies (feet/legs) as closed kinetic chain exercise. On the other hand, typically most of our interaction with the environment with the upper body is through open kinetic chain movements.
See a brief summary here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_kinetic_chain_exercises
Generally, closed kinetic chain exercises are more beneficial for strength (and functional… even though I don’t like the word). CKC exercises in particular with rings occur in a frictionless plane which is beneficial for muscle activation and developing synergistic muscle patterns for developing strength. This can be developed in combination with the true closed chain stuff like handstands, HSPUs, etc. Remember, training on rings is for strength — not as much balance (although it does help with some).
Since our legs interactive with closed chain exercises everyday generally the problem is not that we need increased muscle activation but that we need increased strength and other more sensory methods to improve balance.
So basically, since generally we interact with the environment differently with the upper and lower body means that to develop optimal strength and balance we need to train them somewhat differently.
With the upper body which we use mostly OKC exercises we need to develop the CKC pathways and other balance aspects (e.g. coupling the CKC exercises with inversion in the case of handstands). With lower body which we use mostly CKC pathways already, to develop balance we focus on strength (by adding weight to squat/DL) and develop our sensory pathways with other stuff like slackline, rails, etc.
I agree with you on the distinction between lower and upper body that results in the need for different types of training. But I referred only to the distinction between BOSU balls and still rings when the same exercise is trained. What is the difference between doing push ups on a BOSU ball and doing push ups on still rings? I fail to see it.
The article mentions that push ups on a BOSU ball, although possesses higher muscle activity, isn’t beneficial and will actually result in undesirable motor patterns. If this is true for the BOSU ball, I must assume it is also true for still rings. Dips on rings are harder than dips on a stable surface beacuse they require the muscles to work harder only to balance, therefore they are traditionally considered a better and more beneficial exercise. However, according to the article it seems that the very opposite is true, and regular dips are better.
I am not fond of BOSU balls, but I can’t understand why they should be considered completely useless while at the same time still rings are constantly praised as the best tool for upper body strength. Something doesn’t seem right.
You’re making an excellent point and I’m glad this is brought up.
While there are many things on my mind on this topic and the specifics in question are very important, I do like the examples you used.
In the case of the pushups I’d bring up a few points. Specificity (1), Adjustment (2), and Intensity (3). They all tie in together but I’ll attempt to go about them separately.
1) Specificity actually determines that, when looked at in the scope of pushups alone, it doesn’t really matter. BOSU pushups could mess with movement patterns of regular on-the-floor and rings pushups, rings pushups could mess with BOSU and regular pushups, and regular pushups could mess with the other two.
But who the hell cares? As long as the set/rep/frequency/intensity scheme is effective for what you’re trying to aim for (and usually pushups don’t fall into this category for athletes, so keep that in mind), it’s really up to what else you want to get out of it.
If you’re aiming to impress your friends at the local gym, then train BOSU pushups. If you only have a floor available or want to have the ability to train when only a floor is available, then train floor pushups. If you’re training to be able to train on the rings, then do rings pushups.
This is exactly why it’s typically recommended to train the pushups on the rings if you’re looking to advance in bodyweight training. Many moves further down the line will require the rings as a training tool, and learning to use them earlier on will facilitate the process. A rings handstand will greatly improve handstand ability and its benefits, as handstands derive a lot of their benefits from the balance aspect. On the rings, a muscle up can be performed more slowly and strictly even in a person who would typically have to kip on a bar to perform a muscle up. In the case of dips, this actually leads me to
(2) The ability to adjust the orientation of the rings, even mid set or repetition, makes an enormous difference as well. While the raw unstable nature of rings adds to some of the difficulty of dips, real benefits start to show through when the rings are turned out and/or widened. We don’t really have this option with a BOSU ball or bars.
|But, everyone’s needs and background is different, so this isn’t good or bad per se, just a different approach to training for those who would benefit from it the most.
If someone didn’t have rings consistently available, it would be ill-advised to recommend trying to improve strength through a lot of ring-based work. This is where bars or the floor would be more practical, as bars could be simulated from twin chairs side-by-side or anything along those lines. And we’d be hard pressed to not find a floor. |
Turning out the rings in a dip will involve the biceps, chest, and wrist flexors much more, and very importantly will allow one to lean forward much further during the dip,
3) increasing the intensity. This is a very, very relevant point. The adjustments we can make with the rings will allow us to make progress. And it’s all about progress. Again, availability of equipment is a huge determinant, too, so if only a weight belt and bars are available, it’s a completely viable option to increase intensity through adding weight to oneself.
This isn’t possible for all, moves, though. It’d be unrealistic to try and add weight to the feet while doing a straight-arm handstand press. Not only do we run an unnecessary risk of dropping the weight (and to our male audience: let’s just say that in a perfect handstand, the last thing you’d want is to drop a weight held in the feet), but this would be a case where interfering with the movement patterns is an issue.
Increasing the difficulty of the press handstand in that manner would actually change much of the mechanics compared to the body solo, so when done solo, perhaps to impress friends again, that person will probably find it much harder to find the proper balance points and feel “off”. If he or she is doing the handstand presses for shoulder strength alone, this doesn’t matter in the end. However, if the goal is not only raw shoulder strength but also the ability to perform a straight-arm handstand press for the sake of the skill itself, this wouldn’t be recommended.
So, to sum it all up, it really depends on the specifics (and it always does), but sometimes general statements have to be made as best as possible. In that vein, BOSU balls rarely end up meaning much in the scope of the training as a whole, other than the BOSU ball skills themselves. Meanwhile, also in the scope of the training as a whole, rings-based training ends up being a very, very crucial element to further advancement in bodyweight strength.
I understand that the rings have many advantages other than their instability which makes them much superior to the BOSU ball. There is no argue about that.
However, if referring only to the instability aspect, if the strength which one builds on the rings can’t be transferred to other dimenstions like a stable surface – and you say that it would be the case to an extent, according to the specifity conecpt – then I think that on contrary to what you’ve said this is a manner to care for very much, as I assume that other than competitive gymnasts no one wants to build strength on the rings just for the sake of strength on the rings. For non-gymnasts, the rings are only relevant if what you build on them is also effective when your not on them.
*Dimension
*Specificity
Pardon me for my misspells, English is not my mother tongue.
The interesting thing is that rings strength does actually apply to stable surfaces, but things such as bosu training actually don’t.
There is something unique about the frictionless plane for rings which gives better muscle synergies (or whatever else I may not be aware of) that makes rings applicable to ground strength. I don’t think anyone can deny that if someone has say a planche on rings that they won’t be able to do it on the ground.
The instability of the bosu doesn’t apply as much though maybe because the hands are on a fixed point even if the point is an unstable surface. It’s different than a frictionless plane.
Shrug. I’m not too sure on those points though.
I do know the rings is superior to any equipment in the development and cross trainability of strength though. That’s the one definite thing I can say.
This is a very good point, Steven. Perhaps the essential difference between a BOSU ball and still rings that makes the tremendous difference in results is that on a BOSU ball you’re muscles are completely submitting to external conditions, while on still rings it’s the other way around – the rings adapting to your body position and movement pattern. Kind of like in weight training working with one of those commercial machines in the gym is quite useless as you are submitting to it’s movement pattern, but working with free weights is beneficial as it allows you to maintain your natural movement pattern.
It finally seems to add up.
*Your
Apologies again.
I think that’s a good way to think about it, but I wasn’t sure how to put it into words. Thanks for the good analogy.
Okay, again let me make this a bit more simple than KC put it.
1. We have concluded that BOSU et al aren’t optimal for lower body development.
2. We have concluded that rings are great for upper body strength.
When we talk about using bosu or other methods with the upper body specifically to build strength that can be the case. I don’t see why there would be a reason to exclude bosus with the upper body (except that they are inferior to rings) to increase strength if that’s all you had access to.
However, rings are better because they are frictionless and provide a larger element of stabilization and activation which requires much more upper body synergy and strength between the muscles.
In this context, pushups on the bosu are a bit better than pushups on the floor, but rings since they are frictionless and allow the freedom of movement like the hands instead of just the instability of the hands on a bosu + friction from our hands on the ground.
Basically, I don’t see any problem with using bosus for upper body, but rings are better so why use inferior equipment when you can get much better results with the rings.
(All of this is in the context of strength training. Balance may be a different issue)
This makes sense. Although I understood from the article that the BOSU ball is also useless for upper body movements, as the writer mentions push ups. But perhaps I misunderstood. I would need to see the writer’s comment about the subject.
I think what Chris was trying to say is that things that he listed like hand balancing/slackline/rail balancing/rings/etc. are generally superior to things like bosu.
I think we could agree on that even if bosu is not actually “useless” but rather less useful.
My apologies for the delayed response.
After reading the comments, it seems that the main contention is with this assertion (paraphrased): “BOSU Ball is useless for upper body, whereas rings are useful for upper body.”
To analyze each of these movements, lets do it from the ground up. Stability training with a BOSU ball is a teetering surface with the “moment arm” (not technically a moment arm, thus the quotes) at the bottom of the ball, creating a sort of lever. The amount of force on one side of the BOSU ball is directly proportional to the amount of lift on the opposing side – that is, it is a positive feedback system where pushing down on the left side causes the right side to accelerate up more quickly. That is, controlling the apparatus requires a mix of inhibition and activation, in concert between both limbs.
Stability training on rings is different. The instability doesn’t come from a teeter-totter sort of setup like a BOSU; rather it comes from the instability of the actual apparatus. Controlling the apparatus (rings) comes from individually controlling each ring’s spatial location. How you control one ring does not affect the other ring, generally speaking.
Compare this to a lower body movement. The BOSU is the equivalent of balancing on a teeter totter/lever system vs. the rings, where it is similar to balancing on two ropes, or small platforms; or balancing one leg at a time on a slackline.
I hope I painted a clear picture here – because now this gets into the general overruling statement of all training – you get better at what you train.
If you are training on a lever/teeter-totter type of system, then that is the task at which you you will improve. If you are training on a system where you are controlling the two balance points independently, then that is the task at which you will improve. As I say in the article: “…the BOSU ball is useless, by the way, since we rarely balance in a static place on an unstable semispherical surface”.
This carries the assumption that rings are a more common situation in which we find ourselves needing strength than on BOSU balls/teeter totter systems. Surely, if you are a circus performer, then BOSU ball training might help with teeter-totter balance while juggling, but this isn’t something we come across in practical situations (in which a GPP/General Preparedness course would target) nor is it common or similar to any movement in any sport that I can conceive. Rings, on the other hand, is a specific sport in itself – so rings training will prepare you for rings sport. The instability of rings is also similar to lifting oneself up on two independent unstable surfaces, which is more common than balancing on a teeter-totter type system of dependent unstable surfaces.
In short, my speculation for the reasons why rings training translates better to static movements is because of the nature of the apparatus – that is, it is a system of independent unstable supports. BOSU ball is a dependent support, which is a very novel situation, and does not translate into any general movement or sport specific movement (aside from circus skills, which is totally awesome and respectable, just specialized).