Want Stronger Abs? Use a Belt.

[Gary Gibson]

I am so sick of the belt-bashing.

Belts are a legitimate training tool that help you get stronger faster.

A couple days ago I was heading to the water fountain after a set of squats. An acquaintance at the gym stopped me and asked "Gary, what's happened to your stomach? It didn't used to bulge out like that."

What he was witnessing was my powerlifter "mono-ab." I'd been using a belt and squatting increasingly heavier loads and--gasp!--my abs were growing!

Yet according to all the internet chatter, the midsection "goes to sleep because of reliance on the belt."

Wake up call to all the internet geniuses out there: The belt allows one to squat more weight NOT because it provides rebound...and not because the belt itself increases the necessary intra-abdominal pressure. The belt gives the abs something to push against so that the ABS THEMSELVES can provide more pressure. The belt just allows the abs to generate more tension by providing external resistance...just like a freaking weighted barbell on your back allows you to generate more tension than just flexing your lower body muscles really hard without the barbell as you stand up.

I repeat: a belt allows the midsection to work HARDER.

A belt is not a crutch; it is a training tool, much like proper footwear in the squat.

Weighted sit ups will build up abs, but so will strapping on a belt and doing heavy low bar squats. The belt gives you the additional benefit of training the abs as they will be used in the movement.

No, you will not be able to use as much weight in the low bar/bent over squat without the belt. But your beltless squat WILL improve even if you train with the belt all the time. It's easy to forget to pressurize the midsection properly if you're used to the tactile cue that the belt provides and are suddenly without it...but a couple of reps should be sufficient to remind you that you have to push OUT your abs and stay tight through the midsection.

You still won't be able to squat as much without the belt because it's just not possible to build up as much tension without something pushing back. Just remember that even with the belt, it is YOUR abs providing the tension, not the belt. Just like it is YOUR muscles providing the tension, not the bar against which they're pushing.

Feel free to disregard this little post and still poo-poo the belt as a crutch. But you won't get as strong in the low bar squat without the belt as quickly as you could with it.

[msingh]

Is any belt better than no belt?

[misspelledgeoff]

very interesting post Gary. it might explain the increased soreness i feel in my obliques the day after heavy squat workouts--soreness i didn't feel when squating without a belt.

[Platus]

Based on my experience, I agree. I can definitely feel some ab soreness after doing max singles on the deadlift.

[Gwynn]

How interesting that you should post this right as I've been wondering if I should get a belt.
Noob question: Is a belt a good training tool even if you're not squatting that much weight yet? I'm still squatting around 160 for reps at a bodyweight of 160 and height of 5'9". So I could benefit from a belt now?

[Mr.City]

I've just started using a belt for my deadlifts and squats (same color as yours, Gary) and I've noticed these lifts have been a lot easier. In fact, almost to the point where I'm worried that I'm worried that I'm wearing the belt in a manner that somehow cheats the lift. I know that's not possible, but it still pops up into my head.

Gone are the days of an achy back after deadlifts and squats. Not only that the belt serves as a great reminder to really set those abs tight by providing you with feedback.

To answer Gwynn's question, the belt is used a means of support when the abs can no longer keep the torso upright during a lift. I recognized the signs when I had an achy feeling in my lower back, a feeling that felt more spinal than muscle-related.

[brobinson]

How important is belt quality? I have squat shoes but have put off getting a belt, but I was recently thinking it would be good to have for my work sets. I live in a small town in eastern Canada and could probably find a Weider or similar belt local, but if that's not sufficient I'd have to spend some more and order online.

[nisora33]

How important is belt quality?

Very. Inzer sells quality belts, and I'm sure others here can suggest alternative sources for them.

[Gary Gibson]

Is any belt better than no belt?

A dress belt--the sort you wear with your Sunday best or in a nice pair of tan slacks--is best. If you cannot get a hold of one of these, then a belt that tapers in the front is second best. NEVER ever use a thick leather belt that is four inches all the way around like the strongest men in the world do when they lift the greatest loads possible by genetically elite humans.

And NEVER ever read Starting Strength, especially the pages at the end of the squat chapter that talk about belts, why to use them and which kind to use.

Seriously...

You want to give your abs and obliques as much surface area to push against as possible without compromising form...and as much resistance as possible. Strapping a thin, elastic hose around your waist is about 0.00001% better than going belt-less. There's a reason powerlifting belts are as thick and wide as they are. Shorter squatters with less space between ribcage and iliac crest would probably be more comfortable with a 3" wide belt, but--again--there is a reason powerlifting belts are about 4" of thick leather all the way around.


How interesting that you should post this right as I've been wondering if I should get a belt.
Noob question: Is a belt a good training tool even if you're not squatting that much weight yet? I'm still squatting around 160 for reps at a bodyweight of 160 and height of 5'9". So I could benefit from a belt now?

This is a judgment call. At the urging of a big powerlifting friend I strapped one on when I had a 325 max. Got me 355 right away and my form was sharper than it had been at 325. I never looked back when it came to maxing out. I hesitated to use a belt for training sets then realized that according to my log--surprise!--I got stronger faster when I used the belt to be able to load my legs and hips heavier with more volume. And my abs and obliques actually got bigger and thicker, too. And my belt-less strength was going up.

Realize that a belt is "gear"...but so are proper squat shoes; every gear is beautiful in its own way. Far be it from me to recommend gear to anyone before the time is right. But you should have proper squat shoes from the beginning...and then a good belt not too long after that. At some point, at least a little knee protection in the form of neoprene sleeves as well as some hip protection in the form of neoprene "warm pants". ("But I can squat fine without neoprene"; wait till you're squatting over double bodyweight for volume a few times per week, then we'll talk.)

My advice: you're going to end up needing a belt at some point anyway...so go ahead and get one and try it out. Odds are that you'll see immediate improvement in your 1RM, just like I did. Then you'll realize that you can do 185 for reps at the same bodyweight, and that your legs and midsection are getting bigger, harder and stronger faster than before.

[Mr.City]

a 325 max? And here I am belting up at 280 lbs and I probably outweigh you by 80 lbs or so. Were you doing direct ab work at the time?

[brobinson]

Thanks for the writeup Gary, you've persuaded me into buying one. I'll start shopping around tomorrow.

[isis]

Gwynn,
I started using a belt when my squat got about to bodyweight -- 135ish for me. It immediately helped with my main form problem--keeping the chest up. At the time I thought I was at the limit of novice progression, but the belt gave me another 6 weeks of steady progress. I think you should give it a try.

[Gary Gibson]

a 325 max? And here I am belting up at 280 lbs and I probably outweigh you by 80 lbs or so. Were you doing direct ab work at the time?

I count the low bar squat with a belt as direct ab work.

If you mean the usual waist bending stuff with extra resistance on the abs as they hold position isometrically...then no. Hadn't done anything like that in many years.

And when you start using a belt is an individual choice. I would have started using it earlier if I'd have known better. Still, as a rule of thumb, I'd say between 1.5 and 2x bodyweight for guys and 1 and 1.5x bodyweight for the ladies. As you get stronger, things change: programming, how often you deadlift, and the sort of supportive apparel you should be using. Start with shoes when you're just using the bar, add the belt later. Neoprene is your friend as you get really strong. Single-ply, multi-ply and canvas are there for when you get REALLY strong.

The voices on the Dragondoor forum--particularly Pavel, Jack Reape and formerly Garm--have helped me tremendously when it comes to programming...but I feel they let me down with the anti-belt sentiment that is prevalent there. Even my PL hero Jack who specializes in the single-ply gear allowed by the USAPL advises training without the belt most of the time.

Why (why!) is training the abs isometrically during HIP flexion (weighted sit ups and hanging leg/knee raises) considered ideal, but training the abs isometrically during hip EXTENSION (the squat with the belt providing resistance) not?

Think of the low bar squat with a belt as doing a "reverse standing knee raise" with the belt providing resistance for the abs (while the bar provides resistance for the reverse standing knee raise).

[stronger]

Nice post Gary. The analogy of the usefulness of a belt to bring about a stress reaction and a barbell doing the same thing is an excellent one.

Do you have any information or experience on how a belted 1rm transfers to a 1rm with no belt?

[confuzzl3don3]

Very interesting. I was always thinking of using a belt later when i was 'stronger' you know. I thought that squatting, etc without a belt would make your core stronger (kinda like the whole deadlift without straps to develop grip). If this is the case, should i get myself a belt? Would it help with like my press and stuff? I find that i'm really having trouble keeping a tight core for the press so i was wondering if it could cue me in to a better, tighter core. Any1 know where i can buy a belt in australia? Can't seem to find any off the usual online gym stores i look at.

[Gary Gibson]

Nice post Gary. The analogy of the usefulness of a belt to bring about a stress reaction and a barbell doing the same thing is an excellent one.

Do you have any information or experience on how a belted 1rm transfers to a 1rm with no belt?

Thanks. Arguing that the belt somehow makes the squat strength "fake" is like arguing that using a barbell (instead of, say, Hindu squats) makes leg strength "fake." I got a lot of exposure to guys who insisted push ups and Hindu squats were somehow better than bench presses and squats. Better for what? Increasing the external resistance makes people stronger 1000 times more effectively than what quickly becomes an endurance exercise with relatively unchanging bodyweight. And stronger is better than weaker. (And in sports, fighting and escaping faster is better than slower!)

Belt gives around 30 lbs. Those people who get nothing from it are doing a high bar squat or don't understand the proper use of the belt (probably both). Those who get more than 30 lbs are just plain lucky. I've never seen or heard of anyone getting more than 50 lbs out of a belt, but if you're getting more than 50 when you belt up, then maybe your midsection DOES need some direct work.

[confuzzl3don3]

Sorry for the semi-hijack, but could someone comment on the quality of these belts. Only ones i could find on an aussie site so far.
http://www.a1supplements.com.au/search_results.aspx?search=belt

The bronx neoprene and 2 prong economy are $31.95 each. While the standard leather is 41.95 and the quick release is 63.95.

Thanks

[stronger]

Thanks. Arguing that the belt somehow makes the squat strength "fake" is like arguing that using a barbell (instead of, say, Hindu squats) makes leg strength "fake." I got a lot of exposure to guys who insisted push ups and Hindu squats were somehow better than bench presses and squats. Better for what? Increasing the external resistance makes people stronger 1000 times more effectively than what quickly becomes an endurance exercise with relatively unchanging bodyweight. And stronger is better than weaker. (And in sports, fighting and escaping faster is better than slower!)

Belt gives around 30 lbs. Those people who get nothing from it are doing a high bar squat or don't understand the proper use of the belt (probably both). Those who get more than 30 lbs are just plain lucky. I've never seen or heard of anyone getting more than 50 lbs out of a belt, but if you're getting more than 50 when you belt up, then maybe your midsection DOES need some direct work.

The answer seems like it would be "yes", but maybe you've got experience with this: Will the unbelted squat also be higher if belted squats are used, and then the unbelted 1rm is tested (obviously not as high as the belted 1rm, I just dont want it to get left in the dust if I start belting up)?

[msingh]

A dress belt--the sort you wear with your Sunday best or in a nice pair of tan slacks--is best. If you cannot get a hold of one of these, then a belt that tapers in the front is second best. NEVER ever use a thick leather belt that is four inches all the way around like the strongest men in the world do when they lift the greatest loads possible by genetically elite humans.

And NEVER ever read Starting Strength, especially the pages at the end of the squat chapter that talk about belts, why to use them and which kind to use.

Seriously...

You want to give your abs and obliques as much surface area to push against as possible without compromising form...and as much resistance as possible. Strapping a thin, elastic hose around your waist is about 0.00001% better than going belt-less. There's a reason powerlifting belts are as thick and wide as they are. Shorter squatters with less space between ribcage and iliac crest would probably be more comfortable with a 3" wide belt, but--again--there is a reason powerlifting belts are about 4" of thick leather all the way around.

My question was whether it mattered what belt one should pick among the myriad of different belts available by reputable brands like Inzer. Your reply was quite good anyhow. As a starting strength novice it seems pointless buying a belt because one that fits me now will not fit me once i take off the large amount of fat on my body. Having said that, once i've cut excess fat i'll definitely look to buy a belt having read your excellent justification.

[Gary Gibson]

The answer seems like it would be "yes", but maybe you've got experience with this: Will the unbelted squat also be higher if belted squats are used, and then the unbelted 1rm is tested (obviously not as high as the belted 1rm, I just dont want it to get left in the dust if I start belting up)?

I already addressed this, but it's worth addressing again. I was thinking about it on the way home from the gym...

Yes, your beltless max will go up. The less you squat without a belt, however, the more practice it will take to get your beltless squat up to within 30-50 lbs of your squat with a belt. That's just the way it works; you get good at what you practice...and people really don't understand how much specificity really rules when it comes to complex activities involving animal central nervous systems.

The belt is a bit of gear. And guys who practice with their gear more than without their gear get better at gear than without their gear. Doesn't mean they're not strong. Strong has to be given a context. They are strong in the gear they use, but their performance without the gear will lag a bit. Those who train more raw won't get as much out of their gear. Again, the belt is gear and if you use it, you will get a lot stronger with it...but you will find that your strength without the belt may be as much as 50 lbs under what you can do with the belt. To me, that's just fine and worth the added safety and the added load on my legs/hips/midsection.

Lookit: if I hadn't been using a belt, my max right now would probably be around 350. But I DID use a belt and now I just finished the next to last day of a Smolov base with 350x5x7 and expect to test around 440 in a week. Maybe I could only get 390-400 without a belt at that point...but that's still a lot better than the 350 I would be doing because I eschewed the belt as "too much help."

I do all my warm-ups without neoprene sleeves or a belt, just so my body gets some exposure to heavy loads without any support. But the work sets over 70-75% get the belt. And the last warm up will be with a belt if I'm going above 80% of my max w/belt.

Also, as a rule: I use a belt if I'm doing high volume with as little as 70% of my 1RM. For example, I wouldn't use a belt for 70% for 5 sets of 3...but I WOULD use it for Smolov Day I 70% for 4 sets of 9.

It seems 80% of the max w/belt is a good cutoff point for training. 90% of your max w/belt done without a belt is where you're really pushing it and where the belt shines as a tool to increase safety, help maintain good form and add that little bit extra to the lift. The belt is an example of gear whose relatively minute addition to the lift is well worth the added benefit of safety it brings.

To all those asking WHICH belt...

I recommend going with what the pros use. Inzer or Toro belts seem to be standard and they have several price points. I have a Toro that I got for around $50 or so and it serves me fine. You could probably get away with one of the cheaper ones as a training belt for around $30, especially if you don't plan to use it for competition.

I would also go with a single prong just because it's easier to fasten.

[confuzzl3don3]

Gary, would you know whether these 2 companies ship to australia and if they do about how much it would cost? Or would it be more advisable to try and find a reputable brand purchaseable in australia?

[JesseJJ]

Very good thread, Gary. Thanks for starting.

To some of the "which belt?" posters, I bought one of these a couple years ago and love it:

http://www.inzernet.com/detail_econobelt.asp?PRODUCT_ID=ECON_POWER_BELT

Excellent price, quality, and service, and I'm pretty sure they ship internationally.

[Sami]

I will echo what Gary said about getting a single prong belt. Double prongs serve no purpose over single prongs, and they just make a lot harder to buckle. If you can afford a lever belt, even better.

[misspelledgeoff]

where did you get your neoprene 'warm pants'?

[Gary Gibson]

Rehband makes the best stuff. They also cost the most, but you get what you pay for.

Jackalysgym.com have are the exclusive sellers of the discontinued blue knee sleeves, however. The new black and grey ones are thinner and just not as supportive or durable by all accounts.

[Kenny Croxdale]

I am so sick of the belt-bashing.

Gary,

Like you, I get a bit tired of the belt bashing. Overall, I agree with you.

Here is some interesting Duke University Research.

"...the belt condition produced significantly greater rectus abdominis activity and significantly less external oblique activity." (An Electronmygraphic Analysis Of Sumo And Conventional Style Deadlifts)http://journals.lww.com/acsm-msse/Abstract/2002/04000/An_electromyographic_analysis_of_sumo_and.19.aspx

As you noted, "The belt gives the abs something to push against so that the ABS THEMSELVES can provide more pressure." Great point.

That pressure increases the support for you lower back, Intra Adominal Pressure.

I went into that in a previous post: "The lower back support provided by pushing you abdominals on the belt has to do with (Dr Mel Siff--Facts and Fallacies and Supertraining) Intra Abdominal Pressure, IAP. Greater Intra Abdominal Pressure increases stabilization of the erectors

You want a belt that is just as wide in the front as it is in the back. (Some exceptions exist). That enables you to have a greater surface to push against with you abdominals. Thus, powerlifing belts that are about 4 inches all the way around work best." http://www.startingstrength.com/resources/forum/showthread.php?t=13528

Kenny Croxdale

[hatmanii]

I will echo the sentiments of buying a Single Prong or Lever belt over the double prong. I have a double prong inzer 13mm belt, and I wish every training session that I had gone with either of the former. The second prong literally offers no benefit, it only makes the belt harder to don/doff.

[Sami]

A couple days ago I was heading to the water fountain after a set of squats. An acquaintance at the gym stopped me and asked "Gary, what's happened to your stomach? It didn't used to bulge out like that."

What he was witnessing was my powerlifter "mono-ab." I'd been using a belt and squatting increasingly heavier loads and--gasp!--my abs were growing!


Come on Gary, it was the burgers. Fess up.

[Gary Gibson]

Come on Gary, it was the burgers. Fess up.

Heh.

You all would be pissed at me if you knew how incredibly little I've been eating during this latest cycle. I dropped GOMAD and have been eating a couple meals per day when I felt like it. Yet I'm up a couple pounds to 172 and my legs both gained almost an inch; left thigh is a little over 25" around just below the glute and the right is about 24.5".

But my body is beginning to look like I do nothing but squat. This is probably because I do nothing but squat.

My abs, waist, glutes and thighs (especially the upper thighs) are bulging out while my chest, shoulders and my poor little lower legs are definitely not.

[Mr.City]

Gary is very right about double prongs. I thought double the prongs meant double...the whatever. It's a pain to get on and off. Always go single prong.

[Benthic]

Another question for those of you with belts.

I was looking at the belts that Inzer makes, based on the suggestions above. I notice that they make belts that are 10mm thick and belts that are 13mm thick. Is there one I should be looking at over the other?

Brian

[Webbie]

I'm just SSing my way into the low to mid 300's on my lifts...+1 to add to the many who have said to wear a belt. I've had one for a about a month and the change in the strength and tightness of my core has been amazing.

I'm sure the Inzer is an awesome product just thought I'd share the one I bought...I bought it because it has an american flag on it and it's made in the USA :)

http://www.schiek.com/6010.html

I thought the reason I was having trouble getting my two pronged belt off is because I'm barely concious by the end of the workout :)

[El Viejo]

I use a belt that the gym provides, but want to buy my own. I want the type that is an even width with all around. My question is: should I get the 3'' or 4'' width? I'm short, 5' 6'' . I have a feeling that the 3'' would be more comfortable for me, but I'm wondering if there's any disadvantage with a narrower belt. I'd hate to spend the money and then realize I made a mistake. Anybody have any experience with this?

[Sami]

Another question for those of you with belts.

I was looking at the belts that Inzer makes, based on the suggestions above. I notice that they make belts that are 10mm thick and belts that are 13mm thick. Is there one I should be looking at over the other?

Brian

The 13mm belts are a bit overkill and usually used by the super heavy weight monsters. 10mm is plenty. The 13mm belts are very stiff, can take a long time to break in and are often quite uncomfortable for average sized lifter. And you don't get any more out of the thicker belts.

[kabab]

I was wondering if as a novice I can use those belt that become wider at the back (they have those at my gym) just as a cue for tightning my abs and keeping my lumber tight, or will using those poorly designed belts will cause a bad technique habits?

[Benthic]

The 13mm belts are a bit overkill and usually used by the super heavy weight monsters. 10mm is plenty. The 13mm belts are very stiff, can take a long time to break in and are often quite uncomfortable for average sized lifter. And you don't get any more out of the thicker belts.

Thanks Sami.

Brian

[brobinson]

@ kabab

I considered using a cheap, uneven diameter belt as well to save having to order through the mail, but reading through this thread convinced me otherwise.

Rip mentions in SS those belts were designed by someone who doesn't understand the function of a lifting belt.

I ordered one on Ebay for 30.00. 4" the whole way around, 11mm, leather- I'll sleep better at night:)

[RobertFontaine]

I have a 10mm belt lever belt. No break in required and I really can't imagine needing or wanting the 13mm which does require breakin.

The vendors that I came up with when looking for a belt were toro, bobs belts, inzer, elitefts and apt. All have good products and you'll have to decide what you like best.

I liked the idea of the lever and am happy with it. I don't mind carrying a screwdriver in my gym bag although I haven't found a need to vary my fit between squats and deadlifts as some do.

[pbjorge12]

I picked up this belt. I have not had any experience with belts before and can't compare it to any, but as far as I can tell it does its job.

It's cheap. 4 inches, 13mm, double pronged.

http://www.bodybuilding.com/store/pwr4belt.html

It needed to be broken in quite a bit but now that it is I'm a fan (after duct taping over the bodybuilding.com logo).

[juicysweet]

Duct tape fixes everything.

If you need non-standard stuff or special deco then try http://bobsbelts.com/ I have a 2.5" x 23" single prong that is exactly what I needed.

[strongdaniel]

Great post. I am convinced and will buy a belt.

[Ryan Dell Whitley]

Gary...I don't disagree with you on your affinity for squats. I see you are pursuing some power lifting goals, so a belt makes perfect sense.

I don't use a belt. I also don't wear a squat suit, use a sumo stance, or put a piece of wood underneath my heels to increase my flexibility. Because for me, and a lot of lifters out there, I don't care about how much weight is on the bar. I only care about consistently getting stronger.

If you can squat more with a belt than without a belt, then clearly the belt is helping your body do something that it can't do on its own. I don't have a problem with that, just like I don't have a problem with people using squat suits. But why use a belt at all? Why do I want my abs to work harder while I'm squatting? Your argument just doesn't make a whole hell of a lot of sense to me. Because a belt does help stabilize your "core," and I think a better way of building a stronger "core" would be to simply build a stronger core by doing squats completely raw.

My $0.02

[confuzzl3don3]

Ryan, i think i brought up (or at least thought of) this same argument when reading Gary's post on the benefits of using a belt.

I think Gary's argument is this,
"No, you will not be able to use as much weight in the low bar/bent over squat without the belt. But your beltless squat WILL improve even if you train with the belt all the time. It's easy to forget to pressurize the midsection properly if you're used to the tactile cue that the belt provides and are suddenly without it...but a couple of reps should be sufficient to remind you that you have to push OUT your abs and stay tight through the midsection.

You still won't be able to squat as much without the belt because it's just not possible to build up as much tension without something pushing back. Just remember that even with the belt, it is YOUR abs providing the tension, not the belt. Just like it is YOUR muscles providing the tension, not the bar against which they're pushing."

I try to think of it sort of like using chalk for the deadlift. Using your argument, you should not be using chalk either, because it helps improve the grip and thus means less grip strength (forearm) development. I think Ripp addressed the flaw in that argument but i just can't remember it. I'm sure someone will explain it

[Ryan Dell Whitley]

I use chalk to dry perspiration. I don't think it improves grip strength, it just keeps your hands dry. I think a better example would be wrist straps, which I don't use.

I understand your unbelted squats will go up as your belted squats go up...but you could also make your unbelted squats go up by just adding more weight. I don't buy it. Like I said...it's just my $0.02

[Mr.City]

Ryan, what happens when your squat outpaces your ab strength? I went beltless to about 280, and my back would be be achy after after each session. I held my my abs and took a deep breathe. Theoretically, my abs should be getting stronger but my squat is getting stronger than they can.

[pbjorge12]

Ryan, what happens when your squat outpaces your ab strength? I went beltless to about 280, and my back would be be achy after after each session. I held my my abs and took a deep breathe. Theoretically, my abs should be getting stronger but my squat is getting stronger than they can.

Exactly. And since the prime motivation for squatting is hip strength it would make sense that you wouldn't want to limit their adaption because of your slower to adapt "trunk" musculature.

Now... If your goal in squatting is primarily for a strong "trunk" than you probably would forgo the belt.

[stronger]

Now... If your goal in squatting is primarily for a strong "trunk" than you probably would forgo the belt.

It seems to me that Gary is arguing that a stronger trunk can be achieved with a belt as well, given his now-prominent muscle gut

[Mr.City]

It seems to me that the belt provides support to reduce the load on the abs to a manageable level( manageable meaning the abs can still keep the torso upright), however the level of support is always the same while (hopefully) the weight on the bar is continually increasing. If the support provided by the belt never changes and the weight on the bar increases, then obviously the abs are getting stronger.

Also, Ryan, belt are not just for powerlifters. They're used by individuals who have reached a point in their lifts that they may need one to ensure the safety of their spine.

[Gary Gibson]

Gary...I don't disagree with you on your affinity for squats. I see you are pursuing some power lifting goals, so a belt makes perfect sense.

I don't use a belt. I also don't wear a squat suit, use a sumo stance, or put a piece of wood underneath my heels to increase my flexibility. Because for me, and a lot of lifters out there, I don't care about how much weight is on the bar. I only care about consistently getting stronger.

If you can squat more with a belt than without a belt, then clearly the belt is helping your body do something that it can't do on its own. I don't have a problem with that, just like I don't have a problem with people using squat suits. But why use a belt at all? Why do I want my abs to work harder while I'm squatting? Your argument just doesn't make a whole hell of a lot of sense to me. Because a belt does help stabilize your "core," and I think a better way of building a stronger "core" would be to simply build a stronger core by doing squats completely raw.

My $0.02

There's always one.

There are people who "believe" a six-day creation myth makes more sense than what cosmology and biology have to say.

There are people who "believe" in true love and the perfectability of mankind instead of what evolutionary psychology has to say.

There are people who "believe" a smith machine is safer and more productive than regular barbell training.

I promised myself I wouldn't get into pointless internet arguments anymore. I stated my case and my experience. What more can I do?

There are those who will continue to call the belt a crutch and insist it's not necessary and even harmful to ab strength. They can argue with me, Andy Bolton and the experiences of hundreds of thousands of people. I'm squatting more with bigger, stronger abs and I would not be as far along if I'd refused to use the belt.


Andy Bolton (http://www.andyboltonstrength.com/training-articles/articles/How%20to%20Pull%201000lbs%20easy.htm) thinks belts from 40% are a good idea and over 80% are mandatory but that chalk should be avoided as much as possible to build the best possible grip. I agree and only use chalk at meets, but use belts in my training.


Before even setting up to the bar, the issue of what to wear must be addressed. For all Powerlifters and Athletes, flat soled shoes (such as Converse) or deadlift slippers should be worn. If you don’t have either of those two items, train the lift barefoot, (if your gym owner allows it. If he doesn’t, change gyms).

I have always worn a belt from about 400lbs/182.5kg upwards. Bear in mind this is only about 40% of my best. I recommend that all powerlifters learn to use a belt, as it should add pounds to the bar and help prevent back injury. The issue of belts for athletes is slightly more complex as there are a couple of different view points. Some coaches feel that athletes have no aids (such as a belt) when competing in their sport, so they should train in the weight room the same way. Others feel that precautions should be taken in the weight room and the belt should be worn. I have given you the guidelines I use for my own training; it is up to you to establish your own. What I would say is that all athletes and bodybuilders should wear a belt if going over 80% of their 1RM.

I believe in using chalk on my heaviest weights, (over 80%). The exception to this is on really hot days, where my hands are slippery and I may use chalk on all sets. The reason for generally not using chalk until my top weights is because I think it builds better grip strength. This is important for powerlifters and many other athletes. Believe it or not, in my early days whilst training with strongman Jamie Reeves, I often trained deadlifts with a bar that had no knurling and still did not use chalk. This made my grip very strong!

[coldfire]

Gary...I don't disagree with you on your affinity for squats. I see you are pursuing some power lifting goals, so a belt makes perfect sense.

I don't use a belt. I also don't wear a squat suit, use a sumo stance, or put a piece of wood underneath my heels to increase my flexibility. Because for me, and a lot of lifters out there, I don't care about how much weight is on the bar. I only care about consistently getting stronger.

If you can squat more with a belt than without a belt, then clearly the belt is helping your body do something that it can't do on its own. I don't have a problem with that, just like I don't have a problem with people using squat suits. But why use a belt at all? Why do I want my abs to work harder while I'm squatting? Your argument just doesn't make a whole hell of a lot of sense to me. Because a belt does help stabilize your "core," and I think a better way of building a stronger "core" would be to simply build a stronger core by doing squats completely raw.

My $0.02

A belt does not directly aid you to lift the weight, but it allows the abs to work harder which allows you to lift more weight, which actually does make you stronger. Where is the problem with this argument?

It's not like your "completely raw" squat doesn't increase when your belted squat does.

[Gary Gibson]

A belt does not directly aid you to lift the weight, but it allows the abs to work harder which allows you to lift more weight, which actually does make you stronger. Where is the problem with this argument?

It's not like your "completely raw" squat doesn't increase when your belted squat does.

coldfire,

This is that "you should squat completely naked" dogma that I've tried to dispel on this forum.

A slight heel is actually a great idea to increase possible depth and get the quads into the lift. Elevated toes are stupid, flat feet shifts stress away from quads onto PC, and too much of a heel means knees way out over toes and too much quad. A slight rise from a good shoe with a non-compressible heel is a good thing.

Some compression and warmth from neoprene (or rubber) knee sleeves and shorts are good things.

Wearing a cotton shirt and using a bar with a center knurl so the bar doesn't roll around on your back is a good thing.

A belt is a good thing. A rack helps, too.

The "anti-gear" and "gear makes you weak" mentality goes too far sometimes. It often comes perilously close to the "you only need bodyweight exercises" thought that afflicts some folks.

[TomF]

You've made a good point, Gary, and I'll likely buy a belt soon. I've no doubt that it will help my hips get stronger faster, and won't stop my abs (and the rest of my torso) from getting stronger too.

But.

But if my squat progress is lagging because my torso's not strong enough to act as an efficient transmission for the force generated by my hips (and quads and hams), there are two approaches to correct that. To make the weak link less weak.

The first is, as you're advocating, use something external to provide support. As you've said, a belt's different from a squat suit or bench shirt ... it won't reduce the load by storing elastic energy, but simply gives a way to make your torso contraction more efficient at doing its job. It's still "all you," but there's something to push against.

The second is to do accessory work for the torso, so it won't continue to hold up progress. Glute-ham raises, good mornings, weighted situps, knees-to-elbows etc. That might be especially useful if you're likely to need to use the strength your squat's developed ... when you don't have something to push against.

In the final analysis, the biggest squat will emerge from combining both approaches. If that's the goal, great. But if the goal is building useful, proportionate strength for daily life ... seems to me there's a logical argument for training without a belt, and doing the accessory work instead.

[coldfire]

coldfire,

This is that "you should squat completely naked" dogma that I've tried to dispel on this forum.

A slight heel is actually a great idea to increase possible depth and get the quads into the lift. Elevated toes are stupid, flat feet shifts stress away from quads onto PC, and too much of a heel means knees way out over toes and too much quad. A slight rise from a good shoe with a non-compressible heel is a good thing.

Some compression and warmth from neoprene (or rubber) knee sleeves and shorts are good things.

Wearing a cotton shirt and using a bar with a center knurl so the bar doesn't roll around on your back is a good thing.

A belt is a good thing. A rack helps, too.

The "anti-gear" and "gear makes you weak" mentality goes too far sometimes. It often comes perilously close to the "you only need bodyweight exercises" thought that afflicts some folks.

I completely agree with you. Next thing you know, the only real test of strength will be naked men lifting stones overhead.

Don't take these debates too seriously though. Seems like you were somewhat insulted by Ryan's comment.

[Ryan Dell Whitley]

There's always one.

There are people who "believe" a six-day creation myth makes more sense than what cosmology and biology have to say.

There are people who "believe" in true love and the perfectability of mankind instead of what evolutionary psychology has to say.

There are people who "believe" a smith machine is safer and more productive than regular barbell training.

I promised myself I wouldn't get into pointless internet arguments anymore. I stated my case and my experience. What more can I do?

What does the above have to do with this conversation? Because I don't agree with you, I should be marginalized as someone that is unrealistic or irrational? That doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. If you are uncomfortable with someone disagreeing with you then perhaps posting your personal strength training dogma on a forum which encourages healthy discussion and criticism is a bad idea.

I completely agree with TomF. I do a lot of accessory work that focuses on my "core" (I really don't like this term. It reminds me of a late night informercial). I am a soldier, so I prefer to lift in as close of a manner as possible as I would find myself on the battlefield (within reason). It is a personal bias of mine, and I don't think that you are weak or being a pussy for using a belt. I simply think that there is a valid argument for not using a belt.

I don't know about the safety issue. I did 425 for a triple yesterday in a t-shirt, gym shorts, and a pair of Chuck Taylor's. I've never had any injuries due to weight training. Maybe I'm the exception. Like you said about yourself, I am only applying my experiences to the conversation.

[Kenny Croxdale]

I use chalk to dry perspiration. I don't think it improves grip strength, it just keeps your hands dry.

Ryan,

Chalk (carbonate of magnesium) does keep you hand dry. However, it also is an adhesive that increases how much/long you can hold on to the bar or anything else.

As an example, chalk you legs with carbonate magnesium prior to deadlifting. You'll notice that once the bar hit you legs where you have applied carbonate of magnesium chalk, the bar sticks and is much harder to pull up.


I think a better example would be wrist straps, which I don't use. There is a place and time to use wrist straps in you training.

Kenny Croxdale

[Gary Gibson]

What does the above have to do with this conversation? Because I don't agree with you, I should be marginalized as someone that is unrealistic or irrational? That doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. If you are uncomfortable with someone disagreeing with you then perhaps posting your personal strength training dogma on a forum which encourages healthy discussion and criticism is a bad idea.

I completely agree with TomF. I do a lot of accessory work that focuses on my "core" (I really don't like this term. It reminds me of a late night informercial). I am a soldier, so I prefer to lift in as close of a manner as possible as I would find myself on the battlefield (within reason). It is a personal bias of mine, and I don't think that you are weak or being a pussy for using a belt. I simply think that there is a valid argument for not using a belt.

I don't know about the safety issue. I did 425 for a triple yesterday in a t-shirt, gym shorts, and a pair of Chuck Taylor's. I've never had any injuries due to weight training. Maybe I'm the exception. Like you said about yourself, I am only applying my experiences to the conversation.


What you said was "I don't buy it" which sounded more like "you're wrong" than "my experience has been different." Sorry if I took it the wrong way.

Ah, internet forum thread apologies. Makes me tear up every time.

I've already answered your points at length I think, even before you posted them.

We're not going to argue about who should be posting or who can take the heat of internet discussion and all that. We're both going to keep posting here no matter how angry we get at each other or who calls whom as an internet weenie. Please don't take it personally that I used the comparisons I did. That is truly the way I see a lot of arguments; you make your point, present your evidence; yet people still disagree and somewhere out there is the real truth that at least one party is missing.

I will agree that not EVERYONE will get the same benefit from a belt. But the people who won't get as much are usually those with long torsos relative to their legs and who stay extremely upright by design when squatting. A squat with an upright torso is a squat that won't rely very much on intra-abdominal pressure (a front squat loads the abs with weight directly above them and doesn't require the abs to generate IAP the way a low bar back squat does).

I don't know which percentage of people in the world are built like me with my extremely short torso, but I do know that those of us who ARE built this way have been shortchanged by the advice to avoid belts...much more than "natural" squatters have.



Kenny,

Agree on the wrist straps. Wrists straps are no more evil than a belt or chalk. The deadlift is supposed to test the grip, particularly in competition, but I have found it impossible to do high volume deadlift training that challenges the OTHER stuff (you know, torso, hip and knee musculature) without grip failure getting in the way.

[Kenny Croxdale]

If you can squat more with a belt than without a belt, then clearly the belt is helping your body do something that it can't do on its own. I don't have a problem with that, just like I don't have a problem with people using squat suits. But why use a belt at all? Why do I want my abs to work harder while I'm squatting? Your argument just doesn't make a whole hell of a lot of sense to me. Because a belt does help stabilize your "core," and I think a better way of building a stronger "core" would be to simply build a stronger core by doing squats completely raw.

Ryan,

I see the use or non-use of a belt more of a method of eliciting a different training effect. One is not necessarily better than another, simply different.

It like ice cream. Let's say wearing a belt is vanilla ice cream and not wearing a belt is chocolate ice cream. Both are a little different but they are still ice cream.

The Duke University Research has shown "...the belt condition produced significantly greater rectus abdominis activity and significantly less external oblique activity." (An Electronmygraphic Analysis Of Sumo And Conventional Style Deadlifts)http://journals.lww.com/acsm-msse/Ab...mo_and.19.aspx

Thus, if you want to involve the rectus abdominis muscles more, use a belt.

The non-use of a belt indicates that the external oblique muscle are activated more.

Seems to me there a place for both in one training.

Regarding the "Core" Stability "Training," Mark goes off (rightfully so) on the "Core Training Cult".
http://startingstrength.com/articles/core_stability_rippetoe.pdf

Kenny Croxdale

[Gary Gibson]

If you can squat more with a belt than without a belt, then clearly the belt is helping your body do something that it can't do on its own. I don't have a problem with that, just like I don't have a problem with people using squat suits. But why use a belt at all? Why do I want my abs to work harder while I'm squatting? Your argument just doesn't make a whole hell of a lot of sense to me. Because a belt does help stabilize your "core," and I think a better way of building a stronger "core" would be to simply build a stronger core by doing squats completely raw.

My $0.02

I addressed this already.

I understand how the belt can be seen as a crutch, but I already addressed why it's actually a tool to help your abs and legs work harder. It's like a barbell. It something to push against.

There are those who think barbells are evil/unnecessary and that real men get stronger with bodyweight only or tension only. The barbell is just a tool and it helps you get stronger more efficiently than just doing bodyweight squats because it allows your hip and knee muscles to generate tension they couldn't on their own...like a belt does for your ab muscles.

[Ryan Dell Whitley]

Don't mistake me...I don't see the belt as a crutch. I see it as a tool that isn't necessarily beneficial to all trainees.

I get what you are saying about abdominal involvment while using a belt. And I tend to lean towards whichever exercise uses the most muscles is the best. But I wonder if using a belt when you squat is the most effective way to train your abdominal muscles. I think overhead squats, weight situps, weighted hanging leg raises, and the various get ups might be better. I use all of these, and they have definitely made a difference.

[tescott]

But I wonder if using a belt when you squat is the most effective way to train your abdominal muscles. I think overhead squats, weight situps, weighted hanging leg raises, and the various get ups might be better. I use all of these, and they have definitely made a difference.

Squat with a belt

OR

Squat with no belt + overhead squats, weight situps, weighted hanging leg raises, and the various get ups...

I know what I'd choose.


I know that sounds simplistic, but seriously, why do you think the accessory exercises might be better?

[franklie]

Gary,

I use a 4" belt for any squat loads over 200lb because of problems with my back.

I have never used a belt for my deadlifts. my deadlift is in the 330lb range. If I understood your posts correctly, the 4" belt should help me with stabilizing my mid-section so the power generated by my hips goes into lifting the weight.

Does the belt ever cut in below your ribs as you are setting up for the deadlift?

[Kenny Croxdale]

But if my squat progress is lagging because my torso's not strong enough...

The trunk is usually the weak link in the squatting chain. Hollie Evette (Strength Coach and one of the best powerlifters/squatters of the 1980s) went into this in an article.

"When The Back Says NO and The Legs Say GO."

The essance of the article was how to maximize you leg training since the trunk usually gave out long before the legs do.

Most powerlifters and lifter get enough lower back training with deadlifts, good mornings, etc. The lower back is easily and quickly overtrained. As Dr Tom McLaughlin cautioned, "...whatever you do, DON'T OVER TRAIN THE LOWER BACK. These muscles fatigue faster than almost any other muscle group in the body and also take more time to recover."

That primarily leaves the abdominals and the obliques. These muscle are very involved in squats, deadlifts, military presses, etc. Some athletes such as Bill Kamaeir's ab training revolved around these exercises

The athletes that usually needs to additional direct abdominal ab work are those with a long torso. A heavy squat for a lifter with a long torso is similar to a tall tree (with a long torso) in storm. The lifter/tree with the long torso tends to "sway in the wind" much more than shorter trees with a shorter torso.

As a long torso lifter, I have found that to be true. At one meet years ago, the weight folded me over like a card table.

One of my buddies told me that I probably needed to strengthen my lower back. I replied that my lower back was made of titanium, very strong.

My problem was weak abs. I've found with myself and most long torso lifters, more abdominal work is madatory for heavy squatting...much moreso than those with a shorter torso.

Kenny Croxdale

[misspelledgeoff]

I've found with myself and most long torso lifters, more abdominal work is madatory for heavy squatting...much moreso than those with a shorter torso.

Kenny Croxdale


What kind of exercises and what kind of programming work best for abs? I too am a long torso lifter. I even experienced a mild oblique tear squating before I started using a belt.

[RyanH]

I am also a long torso person and actually squat better by *GASP* high bar squatting. Direct ab work never seemed to do much, but good mornings did.

I just went back to using a belt after years of not, but don't use it until I hit 315.

[Polynomial]

Another thing to keep in mind is that as weights get heavy, deads, squats, and presses put a good amount of stress on the abs and the lower back. In my experience, my back doesn't recover as fast as my bigger muscles, and wearing a belt allows me to complete my lifts with much better form.

[confuzzl3don3]

Sorry but i just need some belt advice. I'm an unsure whether to get a small (100cm) belt that the customer service tells me fits (75-90cm) or a medium (110cm) that they said fits (85-100cm). I did a rough measurement of my waist with a shirt on and it's around 85cm. I am worried that medium will be too loose, but at the same time i don't want to add like 5cm to my waist and have to buy a new belt. What should i do? Would it be better to err for the smaller because you put on a belt tightly so it would be less than at the waist it would be less than 85cm anyways?

Thanks

[TomC]

Consider buying both and returning the one that you don't want.

[Ryan Dell Whitley]

Squat with a belt

OR

Squat with no belt + overhead squats, weight situps, weighted hanging leg raises, and the various get ups...

I know what I'd choose.


I know that sounds simplistic, but seriously, why do you think the accessory exercises might be better?

I think they are better for someone that is training for strength that is useful in moving things that aren't necessarily barbells in situations that don't involve a lifting platform.

You make it seem as if I am advocating training your abs for hours on end when you can get the same results from just squatting with a belt. Five minutes of get ups at the end of a workout isn't that much of a commitment.

[Scrofula]

I wonder if part of the confusion here comes from the fact that there are a whole bunch of muscle we lump together as the abs, even though they have different functions. I was having trouble seeing how weight belts relate to the rectus abdominis, which is what I usually think of when I hear 'abs'. After all, I'm (hopefully) not trying to flex my spine while squatting. But I guess the real point is to push against the transverse abdominis, which are probably not hit very hard during sit-ups etc. Does this make sense? I'm just speculating here, so perhaps someone can confirm or correct this.

Anecdotally, I've found that conventional ab work helps my press, but doesn't really seem to affect my squat noticeably.

[confuzzl3don3]

Scrofula, this is from Kenny's earlier post:

The Duke University Research has shown "...the belt condition produced significantly greater rectus abdominis activity and significantly less external oblique activity." (An Electronmygraphic Analysis Of Sumo And Conventional Style Deadlifts)http://journals.lww.com/acsm-msse/Ab...mo_and.19.aspx

Thus, if you want to involve the rectus abdominis muscles more, use a belt.

The non-use of a belt indicates that the external oblique muscle are activated more.

Seems to me there a place for both in one training.

[Scrofula]

Hm. Thanks, I missed that.

[Gary Gibson]

I was having trouble seeing how weight belts relate to the rectus abdominis, which is what I usually think of when I hear 'abs'. After all, I'm (hopefully) not trying to flex my spine while squatting. But I guess the real point is to push against the transverse abdominis, which are probably not hit very hard during sit-ups etc. Does this make sense? I'm just speculating here, so perhaps someone can confirm or correct this.

Anecdotally, I've found that conventional ab work helps my press, but doesn't really seem to affect my squat noticeably.


Despite the notions the fitness industry has spent years popularizing, the primary function of the rectus abdominis is to brace the spine by pushing out and producing a high level of intra-abdominal pressure. This stabilizes the spine so that the energy generated by the lower body musculature can be efficiently transmitted to the whatever load is at the end of the kinematic chain on the shoulders or in the hands, usually an opponent or a barbell.

The (standing overhead) press requires very strong abs to keep the spine rigid so it doesn't deform as the shoulder and elbow musculature work and so they can transmit energy to the barbell effectively. If the abs don't contract hard enough to maintain the high level of IAP required to keep the spine rigid, then some of the energy that should be going into moving the bar instead goes into bending the spine. Less weight is moved. The press is more an exercise of the rectus abdominis than it is the delts, tris and pecs.

I suspect that the reason more rectus abdominis activity occurs with a belt is because a belt allows the rectus abdominis to work so hard enough that they give the other muscles much less work to do. Take the belt away and the RA can't work as hard and the external obliques have to pick up the slack.

[knox]

I think they are better for someone that is training for strength that is useful in moving things that aren't necessarily barbells in situations that don't involve a lifting platform.

Like what? What possible situation can you imagine for which performing situps will provide better abdominal strength than squatting with a belt?

[msingh]

Shall i make a seperate thread or is it ok to ask here what are the best exercises to get big strong abs? I have an interest in attaining a big press one day, and want to work on my abs now while still a novice. I can't get a belt because i'm too fat to buy one now and then another one later when i take the fat off. thanks. Also i dont have access to any specialised equipment like GHR raise thingies.

[Platus]

In addition to squats and deadlifts, weighted situps and cable pulldowns are helpful.

[msingh]

weighted situps require some sort of roman chair contraption, dont they?

[knox]

I have an interest in attaining a big press one day, and want to work on my abs now while still a novice.

That's not how it works. Re-read the assistance exercise chapter of SS. You stick to the basic lifts until they need help - meaning that for you, for now, the best way to attain big, strong abs is to squat, deadlift, and press. Doing a bunch of specific abdominal work will not help your lifts at this point and will just fuck with your recovery.

[msingh]

but.. i dont use a belt so those exercises dont really work my abs that much, do they? and i know my abs are weak because i struggle to keep tight while doing presses.. so...

[Scrofula]

Despite the notions the fitness industry has spent years popularizing, the primary function of the rectus abdominis is to brace the spine by pushing out and producing a high level of intra-abdominal pressure. This stabilizes the spine so that the energy generated by the lower body musculature can be efficiently transmitted to the whatever load is at the end of the kinematic chain on the shoulders or in the hands, usually an opponent or a barbell.
Interesting. Does EXRX generally tend to be pretty reliable about these kinds of things, do you know? The rectus abdominis' role in intra-abdominal pressure seems like an important omission from their page (http://exrx.net/Muscles/RectusAbdominis.html).


Like what? What possible situation can you imagine for which performing situps will provide better abdominal strength than squatting with a belt?
Well, some judo throws require flexing hard at the hips and spine, sort of like you would in a sit up. Granted, you also need to transmit force from your feet to your torso, and sometimes even in the opposite direction, so it's hard to say which sort of abdominal strength is more useful for these kinds of tasks.

[Gary Gibson]

Interesting. Does EXRX generally tend to be pretty reliable about these kinds of things, do you know? The rectus abdominis' role in intra-abdominal pressure seems like an important omission from their page (http://exrx.net/Muscles/RectusAbdominis.html).


Well, some judo throws require flexing hard at the hips and spine, sort of like you would in a sit up. Granted, you also need to transmit force from your feet to your torso, and sometimes even in the opposite direction, so it's hard to say which sort of abdominal strength is more useful for these kinds of tasks.

Hmmm...Maybe I should clean that up.

"Pushing out" the abs really means your contracting them as hard as possible and that means that they're causing a bit of flexion in the spine. But done properly, this just takes the arch out of the lower back and makes it neutral. In a proper squat, the abs are braced hard, the lower spine neutral and the upper spine arched hard with the shoulder blades drawn together.

Try this:

Arch your entire spine as HARD as you can so that your back forms a "C" from neck to hips. Draw your shoulder blades together hard as you would in a squat.

Now push out your abs as HARD as you can. Your upper back will stay arched while your abs pull your lower back out of the arch and into a neutral position.

THAT is how your abs are supposed to brace your back; they flex till the spine is neutral and they form a lumpy "shelf" of muscle against which your ribcage feels like it's resting. They don't flex till you are doing a crunch. Although I can see how direct ab work would make them stronger. Westside used to love standing cable crunches for getting the abs stronger for how they're needed in the squat.

[coldfire]

but.. i dont use a belt so those exercises dont really work my abs that much, do they? and i know my abs are weak because i struggle to keep tight while doing presses.. so...

Just press.

[Sami]

Sorry but i just need some belt advice. I'm an unsure whether to get a small (100cm) belt that the customer service tells me fits (75-90cm) or a medium (110cm) that they said fits (85-100cm). I did a rough measurement of my waist with a shirt on and it's around 85cm. I am worried that medium will be too loose, but at the same time i don't want to add like 5cm to my waist and have to buy a new belt. What should i do? Would it be better to err for the smaller because you put on a belt tightly so it would be less than at the waist it would be less than 85cm anyways?

Thanks

Get the slightly larger one and just drill holes to make it fit tightly now.

[Chris H Laing]

Is it ever to early to start using a belt?

During my workout today I'll be doing 185#x5x5. I feel like my squat isn't heavy enough yet to warrant the use of a belt, but, having just read the newest 70's Big post, I'm interested in giving it a try.

[Sgsolberg]

I think there is a reasonable point at which to start wearing a belt. While it will vary a bit, you have to have actually been on the program for some time (you do not need a belt when squatting less than your 1.25*bodyweight). This also assumes you are not a child nor extroardinarily large (300+ lbs as a novice).

I am a 215 lb man, and am considering a belt now that my squat has hit 315 lbs. My abs and lower back are the weak point in my squat and I feel my progress beginning to slow. I wanted to milk a purely raw state as far as I could without risking stalling. Now I think it is time to use another tool to help push me to another level of growth.

Of course YMMV.

And for those who are still small (<190), keep with the basic program and EAT MORE.

[strongdaniel]

What do you guys think of this as a belt? It's $30 cheaper than Inzer's cheapest belt and for the next two months, I don't have a lot of money to spare.

http://www.sportsmemorabilia.com/sports-products/4-inch-performance-foam-core-weight-lifting-belt-by-valeo.html?channel=GoogleAffiliateNetwork&ci_src=15781033&ci_sku=JR*Val-VLN4&performicsid=k232270

[pbjorge12]

What do you guys think of this as a belt? It's $30 cheaper than Inzer's cheapest belt and for the next two months, I don't have a lot of money to spare.

http://www.sportsmemorabilia.com/sports-products/4-inch-performance-foam-core-weight-lifting-belt-by-valeo.html?channel=GoogleAffiliateNetwork&ci_src=15781033&ci_sku=JR*Val-VLN4&performicsid=k232270

I think this one would be better in your price range.
http://startingstrength.com/resources/forum/showpost.php?p=82079&postcount=39

[Squeegy]

I think there is a reasonable point at which to start wearing a belt. While it will vary a bit, you have to have actually been on the program for some time (you do not need a belt when squatting less than your 1.25*bodyweight). This also assumes you are not a child nor extroardinarily large (300+ lbs as a novice).

I am a 215 lb man, and am considering a belt now that my squat has hit 315 lbs. My abs and lower back are the weak point in my squat and I feel my progress beginning to slow. I wanted to milk a purely raw state as far as I could without risking stalling. Now I think it is time to use another tool to help push me to another level of growth.

Of course YMMV.

And for those who are still small (<190), keep with the basic program and EAT MORE.

Sorry, but what? Not that I know anything, but I would suggest anybody to start using belt once they feel it will be useful. I started using belt when I hit 90 kg, which was about my bodyweight at the time. And while you might be right that I didn't necessarily need it yet, it certainly helped me a lot. In fact, you could say nobody really needs (in the strong sense of the word) a belt. But it sure is useful.

[confuzzl3don3]

I think this one would be better in your price range.
http://startingstrength.com/resources/forum/showpost.php?p=82079&postcount=39


Hmm how strange. The title says its a 4" wide belt, but if you read the description it says its 3"...so yeah

[pbjorge12]

Hmm how strange. The title says its a 4" wide belt, but if you read the description it says its 3"...so yeah

I don't see three inches anywhere...
Assuming it is there and I'm missing it, I own the belt and it is 4 inches.

[confuzzl3don3]

I don't see three inches anywhere...
Assuming it is there and I'm missing it, I own the belt and it is 4 inches.

Haha sorry my bad. I was referring to Strongdaniel. Quoted wrong post

[Kyle Aaron]

Belts obviously essential. Obviously (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQwA4M1tAVw&feature=player_embedded).

http://ptcfrankston.com/img/a2.jpg

http://ptcfrankston.com/img/a6.jpg

Here (http://ptcfrankston.com/the200club.html) are pictured 45 different lifters from a garage gym who all deadlifted 200+kg without a belt. I guess if they wore a belt they could deadlift 400kg?

Obviously these guys all lack ab strength.

Seriously, it is not only "internet experts" who mock belts and the rest. Experienced strength and conditioning coaches, PTs, osteopaths, and so on do it as well.

[Sgsolberg]

Thankyou, Kyle. I think we can all admit that the belt is not necessary... I don't think anyone ever said it was. It is a tool that can help increase pressure in the abdomen and train the body to lift heavier weights. Even to the point where lifts without the belt have progressed (who'd a thunk?).

[Kyle Aaron]

Well, again, I wonder why it is that GG has his 200kg deadlift which he acquired with a belt matched or exceeded by 45 other people who never use belts in training or competition. I mean, if belts help a lot, wouldn't they all be held back by not having them? Wouldn't he be way ahead of them?

I wouldn't know, myself - never lifted that heavy, both GG and those 45 are all much stronger than me. I'm just looking at the evidence before me. 1 guy lifts with a belt and manages a 200kg deadlift. 45 others in a single-car-sized garage gym all lift 200+kg and have no belts except the ones to hold their trousers up.

It doesn't look exactly compelling evidence in favour of the belts. Maybe the cash you splurge on the belt would have a greater strengthening effect if you put it on the counter at an all you can eat joint.

[msingh]

I'm neither for or against the belt but...

i don't like the argument that because your beltless squat goes up after you use a belt that that means anything but that your supporting muscles in your legs and and back have gotten stronger to compensate for the lack of a belt. i'm sure you guys can come up with a better pro-belt argument than this one.

[RobertFontaine]

Well, again, I wonder why it is that GG has his 200kg deadlift which he acquired with a belt matched or exceeded by 45 other people who never use belts in training or competition. I mean, if belts help a lot, wouldn't they all be held back by not having them? Wouldn't he be way ahead of them?

I wouldn't know, myself - never lifted that heavy, both GG and those 45 are all much stronger than me. I'm just looking at the evidence before me. 1 guy lifts with a belt and manages a 200kg deadlift. 45 others in a single-car-sized garage gym all lift 200+kg and have no belts except the ones to hold their trousers up.

It doesn't look exactly compelling evidence in favour of the belts. Maybe the cash you splurge on the belt would have a greater strengthening effect if you put it on the counter at an all you can eat joint.

I'm not sure if you are baiting for fun or in seriousness. A belt doesn't have much advantage in the deadlift from a weight perspective till you get the weight above the knees. For me the means 0 as if I can get it off the ground it's going up.

The squat however will see a fairly significant advantage throughout the movement once you have gotten used to it.

The advantage of a more stable core during maximal lifts seems to me to mostly be one of safety. Form is not perfect during maximal lifts and injury is less likely if you've got things under control. The belt helps with this. If you aren't into 1RM's where you end up bailing or on the pins then maybe you have no need for a belt. It's certainly up to you. I bomb on a regular basis and while my damn IT Band definitely aches afterward my back and hips don't even notice when I'm wearing my belt.

[Gary Gibson]

Well, again, I wonder why it is that GG has his 200kg deadlift which he acquired with a belt matched or exceeded by 45 other people who never use belts in training or competition. I mean, if belts help a lot, wouldn't they all be held back by not having them? Wouldn't he be way ahead of them?

I wouldn't know, myself - never lifted that heavy, both GG and those 45 are all much stronger than me. I'm just looking at the evidence before me. 1 guy lifts with a belt and manages a 200kg deadlift. 45 others in a single-car-sized garage gym all lift 200+kg and have no belts except the ones to hold their trousers up.

It doesn't look exactly compelling evidence in favour of the belts. Maybe the cash you splurge on the belt would have a greater strengthening effect if you put it on the counter at an all you can eat joint.


Way to miss the fucking point, m'man.

I squat more with the belt like every other fucking lifter on the planet. I recommend it in training. I actually deadlift the same with or without and just wear it for safety on my record pull attempts.

I squat 405 @175 with the belt. I squat 375 without it, but I'd rather not. Again, I pull the same with or without it, but I'd rather pull my heaviest rep with it.

Jesus fucking Christ.

Edit:

You don't do as much weight, but find people stronger than you to make your point.

Would you like me to find pictures of people stronger than your people who use a belt?

Fucking loser.

[Kyle Aaron]

You don't do as much weight, but find people stronger than you to make your point.
Yes. Is their weight less weighty because it's not me lifting it?

See, I'm sensing a catch-22 here. If I'd said, "I lift more than you, and without a belt", you would have said, "oh that's just you, how many others manage it?" But since I pointed out 45 drug-free others who'd managed it, you say, "you find people stronger than you to make your point." So whether it's me or others, either way you reject it.

45 drug-free people at a single gym lift as much or more than you without belts in training. That's the evidence against your assertion that belts make a difference. What you got against that?


Would you like me to find pictures of people stronger than your people who use a belt?
Yes, please. I would like you to find a single gym with more than 45 drug-free lifters who all manage over 200kg deadlifts and who have used a belt in training.

Or let's say, more than 3 drug-free lifters who deadlift over triple bodyweight.

http://www.ptcfrankston.com/img/photogallery/200kgdl/5.jpg
Shorty 212.5kg @ 70kg

http://www.ptcfrankston.com/img/photogallery/200kgdl/12.jpg
Simon 240kg @ 79kg

http://www.ptcfrankston.com/img/photogallery/batb3_09/159.jpg
Kelly 245kg @ 82kg (okay, he is 1kg short of triple bodyweight)


Fucking loser.
Poopyhead!

Did that make you feel better? Shall we just exchange obscenities all day? I was in the Army, so I'm quite capable of that. Would it achieve anything, though? I mean, if you're feeling tense and upset, you could just have a wank to relax, no need to splatter it all over the comments, though.

Let's be serious, here.

Your lifts are very good, obviously a lot of hard work behind them. However, given that other lifters have achieved similar or better results without belts, it is not apparent that your training with a belt has had anything more than a placebo effect.

[coldfire]

Kyle, are you even paying attention? We are talking about squats here. Nobody squats more without a belt. How many lifters squat beltless?

The belt doesn't assist the deadlift much. And 200kg deadlift is not very impressive. Stop trolling. Fuck.

[JC400]

Kyle I would hesitate a guess here that those 45 lifters and many more that come out of that gym are not strong because they do/do not wear a belt when they train but as a reflection of how they are training and the competitive environment their gym provides. i.e. The big lifts... bet you do not see much leg extensions or tricep kick backs in that place! I think this has far more weight in deciding what results come out from their programming. Looking at a set of results from a gym that does not promote the use of a belt to support your argument is not a very robust argument mate as it is always going to be biased, but i think you know that.

It does not offer any evidence from which you can assert that you are better of not using a belt. Ask yourself, would they have been able to lift 1kg more if they used a belt in their attempt or in their training? there is no way of knowing. What it does do is prove you can get strong and lift heavy things without the dependence of a belt.

From my own experience I don't get any benefit from using a belt when deadlifting, like others have commented on. However I do get a lot when squating. The result is if I feel like I need to wear the belt I do if I don't I don't, simples. I think there is far more important things in your training to be concerned about tbh.

[Squeegy]

Yes. Is their weight less weighty because it's not me lifting it?

See, I'm sensing a catch-22 here. If I'd said, "I lift more than you, and without a belt", you would have said, "oh that's just you, how many others manage it?" But since I pointed out 45 drug-free others who'd managed it, you say, "you find people stronger than you to make your point." So whether it's me or others, either way you reject it.

45 drug-free people at a single gym lift as much or more than you without belts in training. That's the evidence against your assertion that belts make a difference. What you got against that?


Yes, please. I would like you to find a single gym with more than 45 drug-free lifters who all manage over 200kg deadlifts and who have used a belt in training.

Your logic is funny. It doesn't follow from "there exists people who are able to lift heavy without using belts" that "belts don't make a difference". Have you seen their belted results? Have you seen their results after having used a belt for a while? Do you know how long they have trained? Nope. I doubt anyoned denied that people are able to lift good numbers without a belt. But that doesn't mean a belt won't help you lift a litte more, or prevent injuries, or make your abs stronger. You can make your abs stronger without a belt too, I'm sure, but so what? There are people who have gotten strong without barbells, but I'd still pick barbells over the others for my purposes. Wouldn't you?

[coldfire]

Belts obviously essential. Obviously (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQwA4M1tAVw&feature=player_embedded).

Judging by the lifts on this video, belts are not exactly something they should be concerned about. Those are fucking ugly deadlifts, partial squats, cleans and jerks.

[Kyle Aaron]

Kyle, are you even paying attention? We are talking about squats here. Nobody squats more without a belt.
GG says he does. Are you calling him a liar?


How many lifters squat beltless?
All of those at the garage gym I've linked to (http://ptcfrankston.com/).

"We don't wear assistance gear at PTC, not even a lifting belt, it's all real world practical lifting."

http://ptcfrankston.com/img/photogallery/batb3_09/46.jpg
http://ptcfrankston.com/img/photogallery/batb3_09/47.jpg
http://ptcfrankston.com/img/photogallery/batb3_09/50.jpg

Startling, I know. It sure scared the fuck out of me when I saw it. But there you go.

The belt doesn't assist the deadlift much.
Then why wear it?


And 200kg deadlift is not very impressive.
Someone better tell GG, since his belt helped him get there, he says. If not impressive, he better rethink his strategy.

I won't tell him it's unimpressive, because I think it's a very respectable lift.


Stop trolling. Fuck.
Stop whinging. Fuck.

Kyle I would hesitate a guess here that those 45 lifters and many more that come out of that gym are not strong because they do/do not wear a belt when they train but as a reflection of how they are training and the competitive environment their gym provides.
Absolutely. However, I think the absence of the belt, in that atmosphere, has a placebo effect. There's just that whole macho thing of "no assistance!" going on, that sort of attitude helps people lift more.

It reminds me of that study floating around where they compared guys who just did curls with those who curled and squatted, they got the same gains... so why different outside the lab? Intensity. They suggested that the sort of guys who only curl in the gym take it pretty easy on the curl, while the sort of guys who squat go pretty hard on the curl.

So in this case, the lack of belts etc could have a similar intensity-increasing effect. "Harden up, lift heavier" and so on. Dunno, really, just tossing it out there.

Those are fucking ugly deadlifts, partial squats, cleans and jerks.
It's a competition. Amazingly, people tend not to have perfect form when pushing their 1RMs. Maybe your lifts at max weight are practically ballet to watch, I dunno, but most of us turn sloppy.

[misspelledgeoff]

LMFAO at 45 'drug-free' lifters. yeah buddy,nobody here thinks this group of twigs with their very average deadlifts is in anyway 'enhanced'.

why don't get in the gym and lift a little bit before dolling out advice on a weightlifting board.

troll

[milesdyson]

form in that video shows lots of stuff far beyond what are standard 1rm breakdowns. high bar squats trying to be low bar squats with hips back (lol bars rolling up necks). low bar squats with knees nearly touching after they cave horrendously. few were to parallel. many weren't close, yet people applauded. looks like the gym encourages hitching deadlifts and complete back rounding before the bar even breaks off the mat. round back + massive hitch is a plus i guess. many of the bench presses are bounced way too hard off the chest, and a lot of the cleans are bad in many different ways, including jumping into super wide stances, racking the bar in the hands, etc.

[coldfire]

GG says he does. Are you calling him a liar?


What? He squats with a belt.



All of those at the garage gym I've linked to (http://ptcfrankston.com/).

"We don't wear assistance gear at PTC, not even a lifting belt, it's all real world practical lifting."
These are not lifters. They are a bunch of people who train. They don't compete in any respectable organization.



Then why wear it?
We are talking about squats, goddammit. Squats. I don't wear belts on deadlifts, and if someone who competes gets another kilogram from it, why wouldn't he put a belt? Becuase someone pulls 200kg without one?



Someone better tell GG, since his belt helped him get there, he says. If not impressive, he better rethink his strategy.

I won't tell him it's unimpressive, because I think it's a very respectable lift.
You are retarded. He was talking about squats.



Stop whinging. Fuck.
I am not whininig. You are trolling, your logic sucks and you make funny claims.



It's a competition. Amazingly, people tend not to have perfect form when pushing their 1RMs. Maybe your lifts at max weight are practically ballet to watch, I dunno, but most of us turn sloppy.Yes, form does break down on 1RM, but their form sucks even with sub maximal weights. And it's not a slight break down from perfect. It is fucking awful, which says a lot about their coach. It is just terrible and painful to watch.

Anyway, let us just examine your logic:

Gary Gibson: Belts make your squats stronger and make your abs work harder.
Every one who has ever squatted heavy or competed agrees. Research agrees.
Kyle: Oh no, I've seen a bunch of guys who pull ugly 200kg deadlifts without a belt. Gary you are wrong. Belts do not increase your lifts and do not make your abs work harder.

Great one, Kyle.

[Steve in ATL]

I laughed at the lack of logic when I read this:


"We don't wear assistance gear at PTC, not even a lifting belt, it's all real world practical lifting."

So they don't wear shoes? Socks? Use chalk? Hell, why use a bar and weights, because I've been out in the real world a long time, and pretty much only in the gym is the only fucking place I've been provided a bar to lift weight with.

My "real world" includes a belt. And knees wraps if I feel like using them. 'Cause I got them in the real fucking world.

But YMMV.

[coldfire]

I laughed at the lack of logic when I read this:

"We don't wear assistance gear at PTC, not even a lifting belt, it's all real world practical lifting."So they don't wear shoes? Socks? Use chalk? Hell, why use a bar and weights, because I've been out in the real world a long time, and pretty much only in the gym is the only fucking place I've been provided a bar to lift weight with.

My "real world" includes a belt. And knees wraps if I feel like using them. 'Cause I got them in the real fucking world.

But YMMV.

They should all get naked together and lift heavy rocks overhead. This is the only way to measure real strength.

[Sami]

Jesus H. Christ, Kyle. No one is making you use a belt, you don't have to if you don't want to. But you should at least try using logic and reason; skills you are certainly lacking at the moment.

[Sgsolberg]

This morning, I read through this again and I have one thought... PAY NO ATTENTION TO THE TROLL.

[nisora33]

Well, well. Here's a pretty definitive statement on the use and usefulness of belts over at 70sbig.com from Mr. Lascek:

http://70sbig.com/?p=891

"Before addressing other belt related topics, I want to make a bold, clarifying statement. If your goal is to get stronger (and you have been lifting longer than two months) and you refuse to wear a belt, you are a fucking idiot. I’m sorry I’m not sorry. Look, not only are the abdominals working harder, but the pressure is increased within the trunk which stabilizes and strengthens the spine. This makes you stronger, and it is usable strength. The first time someone wears their belt in a serious training session (especially when pressing and deadlifting), their abs get sore. Not to mention the work sets are handled easier than without the belt. The belt is not something that you use to “bust out of a training rut”, it is a tool that you use to get stronger, and if you aren’t wearing one, then you aren’t serious about your training."

[misspelledgeoff]

I'm neither for or against the belt but...

i don't like the argument that because your beltless squat goes up after you use a belt that that means anything but that your supporting muscles in your legs and and back have gotten stronger to compensate for the lack of a belt. i'm sure you guys can come up with a better pro-belt argument than this one.

wat?

jimminy-fucking-crickets your logic is even worse than Kyle Aaron's.

[msingh]

wat?

jimminy-fucking-crickets your logic is even worse than Kyle Aaron's.

lol.. let me try again. are you familiar with ripp's argument that an excess of strength can make up for a lack of technique in the olympic lifts? if you get much stronger by using a belt, the additional strength can make up for you weaker abs, when you're not wearing a belt. do you follow?

[JesseJJ]

lol.. let me try again. are you familiar with ripp's argument that an excess of strength can make up for a lack of technique in the olympic lifts? if you get much stronger by using a belt, the additional strength can make up for you weaker abs, when you're not wearing a belt. do you follow?

Not apples and apples, imo. Strength overriding technique limitations does not compare to strong links overriding weak links.

[nisora33]

if you get much stronger by using a belt, the additional strength can make up for you weaker abs, when you're not wearing a belt. do you follow?

Except most in this thread, including Gary in his original post, aren't arguing this at all. Most are arguing that the belt actually makes your abs STRONGER than they would have been without the use of the belt. And I agree.

And anyway, any extra strength that you might develop in the legs and hips by virtue of the belt, or in any other part of the body for that matter, cannot "make up" for a lack of strength in the abs. If the abs are not working effectively in conjunction with the low back musculature to brace the spine, and the spine isn't, therefore, being held rigid like it should, then any force being devloped against the ground by the legs and hips will not make it up the bar unabated because the spine will go "soft." The spine is like the transmission of a car, and if it isn't braced tightly, then what good would all the extra-abundant strength of the legs and hips actually make? See?

-Stacey

[Paul Sousa]

lol.. let me try again. are you familiar with ripp's argument that an excess of strength can make up for a lack of technique in the olympic lifts? if you get much stronger by using a belt, the additional strength can make up for you weaker abs, when you're not wearing a belt. do you follow?

The problem with this logic is you're comparing strength overcoming technique with strength (in one are of the body) overcoming lack of strength (in another area). Strong abs are vital to squatting heavier weights since if they can't support the weight you will fold. If your abs didn't get stronger with a belt the gap between your belted and unbelted squat would grow exponentially, but this doesn't appear to be the case.

[pauld]

I just looked at that PTC video and the form is really fucking bad. I couldn't get through it, kept cringing.

I'd rather talk about food babies and the resultant pythons than watch that video again.

[knox]

lol.. let me try again. are you familiar with ripp's argument that an excess of strength can make up for a lack of technique in the olympic lifts? if you get much stronger by using a belt, the additional strength can make up for you weaker abs, when you're not wearing a belt. do you follow?

You apparently have a very skewed view as to how the abdominals function. Maybe you need to do some re-reading? Or even easier, read this (http://70sbig.com/?m=20091203), which is yesterday's article from 70sbig.com. I have a funny feeling that Mr. Lascek's inspiration for this article came in part from the posts in this thread.

Also read the one from today (http://70sbig.com/?m=20091204), which talks more about belts.

[python2705]

@pauld

Yes!

And anyway this is my first post, I've been meaning to join the forums here for a while but I literally created an account last night after seeing that bullshit written by Kyle Aaron (two first names!) and the linked video with shit-tastic form. Belts make you stronger. Period.

[TomV]

Hmm, though I guess it's not really relevant and Kyle seems to have stopped trolling...

He mentioned a lifter "Shorty" that has deadlifted 3xBW.

I train with Shorty on occassion in real life. He wears a belt when he deadlifts in competition and when training.

[davew]

It reminds me of that study floating around where they compared guys who just did curls with those who curled and squatted, they got the same gains... so why different outside the lab? Intensity. They suggested that the sort of guys who only curl in the gym take it pretty easy on the curl, while the sort of guys who squat go pretty hard on the curl.

For anyone reading this, the use of "[t]hey" here is misleading, as this wasn't the actual conclusion of the study. The researchers concluded that the hormone response after heavy squats coupled with curls did not induce more arm muscle hypertrophy versus that from curls alone.


So in this case, the lack of belts etc could have a similar intensity-increasing effect. "Harden up, lift heavier" and so on. Dunno, really, just tossing it out there.In that competitive environment, sure, maybe the beltless bit does add some intensity. Not everyone can get that excitement in every training session though.

I'm getting the impression that you're trying to conclude that belts do NOT allow one to get stronger faster, is this correct? If so, I don't think your argument is a complete one. After all, from what you've presented and point out: they got strong without a belt. However, you can't conclude from this yet that a belt would not have helped them get stronger in the same amount of time.

[Gary Gibson]

Thanks to those of you who get what I've been trying to say.

Fuck Kyle Aaron and the whore who spawned him.

I honestly welcome a dissenting opinion, but Kyle is a confrontational dick whom I could easily beat up.

Please check this link. (http://startingstrength.com/resources/forum/showthread.php?t=13716)

[Armando]

Taken from the Equipment page from the SS Wiki...

"The only time I wear a belt is when I'm going for a heavy max of 5 or less and for the last warm-up set leading up to my max. 90% of the time I don't wear a belt for squats nor deadlifts. Rule of thumb: If it feels really heavy, wear a belt. If you are self aware enough to know that you back/abs are stong enough not to need a belt, don't wear a belt. It really comes down to preference. Beginners need not wear a belt for the greater part of their training."

Gary, you've had this conversation with Rippetoe on numerous occasions in the Q&A section, and he has yet to agree with a position as strong as yours. Case in point...

This is in response to your post titled "Should Belts Be Mandatory?":

"It is possible that a belt is a requirement for the training of some people, like me, who have a history of back injury. It might be quite possible to coach you, Gary Gibson, around the problem you may think you have, but it also might be true that you need the belt as much as I do for other reasons. Whatever the situation, anybody who says the belt is a crutch and that it makes the abs Go To Sleep or relax or whatever they say a belt does that is bad is utterly full of shit and has never had a heavy weight on their back with a belt on. These people should shut the fuck up. "

...I put the whole thing up there because I want to make clear I happen to agree with the latter part of his post as well. While I don't believe the belt to be a crutch (for people who know how to use it), I don't believe it is a necessary tool of the trade. There are people (like myself) who also invest in a pair of WL shoes, not because they are an essential tool, but because I have some serious ankle flexibility issues due to a long history of ankle injuries.

[Mr.City]

Don't know if I should, but...

WL shoes are very important, unless you're debating WL shoes versus thin-soled, flat shoes like Chuck Taylors. In that case, I would agree...although, I really would like to try squatting in a pair of WL shoes to see what it feels like.

I don't know how this thread can rage considering that 1) you can always lift more with a belt than without, 2) some may never have need for a belt, and 3) a belt does make your abs stronger because if the amount of weight on the bar goes up than either you or the belt is getting stronger, and I like not to think of my belt as a living entity.

Also, Kyle, of those lifters you posted deadlifting without a belt, how many of them squat without one?

[Armando]

Yes, that is what I meant as the alternative to the WL shoes. Sorry I didn't make that clear.

I would have to agree with you, Mr. City.

[davew]

Fuck Kyle Aaron and the whore who spawned him.

I honestly welcome a dissenting opinion, but Kyle is a confrontational dick whom I could easily beat up.


Wow, speaking of confrontational dicks...

[Mr.City]

Okay, this thread is getting silly.

[Kyle Aaron]

Fuck Kyle Aaron and the whore who spawned him.

[...] Kyle is a confrontational dick whom I could easily beat up.
Um, irony?

I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings. I realise that the issue of belts must be one which is very important to you. It is, after all, of great global importance.

Seriously mate, harden up. Save that aggro for the lifting.

I thought you'd been around the internet for a few years already? You should know by now that boasts of who you could beat up are really not that impressive.

[confuzzl3don3]

Hey Gary or any experienced belt users, what is the difference between the suede and leather weightlifting belts. Is one stronger, tougher material than the other? Was wondering if i should get a suede or leather one seeing as they both cost the same.

[K.Diesel]

The suede has better friction. Most, if not all the leather belts I've paid attention to have suede or cowhide or something similar on the inside, or both sides. To me, the suede belts are thicker and stiffer, giving a better ring to push your abs against. I'd go with that. Don't know which one you're looking at, but here's the one I have...

http://www.inzernet.com/detail_econobelt.asp?PRODUCT_ID=ECON_POWER_BELT

Has worked well for almost 2 years, with no signs of declining performance.

[Mr.City]

I use a suede belt and it's great. It's nice and thick and provides plenty of support.

[confuzzl3don3]

Ok thanks guys. Suede it is :D

[mjoseph]

Fuck Kyle Aaron and the whore who spawned him.

I honestly welcome a dissenting opinion, but Kyle is a confrontational dick whom I could easily beat up.


This kind of post is acceptable on these forums? That's mighty disappointing.

[Sami]

This kind of post is acceptable on these forums? That's mighty disappointing.

Fuck you, you fucking fucker! Idiot-ass. FOK!


;)

[misspelledgeoff]

This kind of post is acceptable on these forums? That's mighty disappointing.

quoth our Aussie friends, 'HTFU'

[Sami]

quoth our Aussie friends, 'HTFU'

That's just going too far, take it easy on the guy.

[misspelledgeoff]

watch your fucking language. this is a civilised board
**note the very civilized spelling of 'civilised'**


That's just going too far, take it easy on the guy.

[RobertFontaine]

watch your fucking language. this is a civilised board
**note the very civilized spelling of 'civilised'**

I want to be the first to offer to buy a "Who Killed Kyle" T-Shirt.

[TomV]

quoth our Aussie friends, 'HTFU'

Haha spot on mate.

[confuzzl3don3]

Finally got my suede belt but it's so dam stiff. And i'm gonna have to get used to having it on. It feels so stiff and like its squeezing the shit out of me when i squat. Too tight? But any ideas for unstiffening it? Right now i'm just keeping it wrapped around but any better ideas? or do i just have to live with it until it gets better

[Gary Gibson]

This kind of post is acceptable on these forums? That's mighty disappointing.

Man, I was pretty drunk when I posted that. I'm amazed there were no misspellings.

Kids, don't drink and post.

Confuzzle,

1) The belt needs to be broken in. Give it time. Break it in.

2) It should be fastened so you actually have a little room to push out your gut against it. If it's too tight, you prevent your abs from contracting and you become LESS stable under the bar.

[StrongIslander,NY]

Damn what a throw down about belts. good stuff really.

I have and use a belt. got it a few years back before i was serious about lifting. its one of thos Altus 4 inch nylon velcro

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51b9oKPQjOL._SL160_.jpg


it seems to work. would i be better served with a leather belt and why?

[Ben00]

I'm considering ordering the Inzer Forever 10MM belt. My waist is around 35.5" so I think getting the large (36-39") would be best. I plan on gaining weight too so I don't think my waist will get any smaller even if I do lose fat. So should I choose Inzer or EFS for my belt?