Video Blog: Belts: Good Or Evil?

[Charles Staley]

Enjoy, lemme know your thoughts!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YG9UP9TJD-8

[Gary Gibson]

Little biased myself, but I loved it.

[Scrofula]

Very illustrative. I now have a better idea what people mean when they say, "it gives your abs something to push against".

[Kelly Moore]

Interesting explanation....I hate messing around with any gear, but I will experiment with a belt for a while.

Thank you.

[metermanja]

i get the whole idea that if the abs are tighter it manages to hold the spine straighter thereby helping lift better weights. BUT from my personal experience in SS, after i take a big breath just before descending into the squat i tighten my abs. The muscles of the back are tight already since they are loaded by the bar. When i contract my abs, my stomach goes in and not out. If my stomach goes in then the whole argument for the belt is defeated.

I would appreciate comments on this.

Disclaimer - i never used a belt the way it should be. I probably used it for a month or so, so no personal experience with a belt.

[Nauticus]

i get the whole idea that if the abs are tighter it manages to hold the spine straighter thereby helping lift better weights. BUT from my personal experience in SS, after i take a big breath just before descending into the squat i tighten my abs. The muscles of the back are tight already since they are loaded by the bar. When i contract my abs, my stomach goes in and not out. If my stomach goes in then the whole argument for the belt is defeated.

I would appreciate comments on this.

Disclaimer - i never used a belt the way it should be. I probably used it for a month or so, so no personal experience with a belt.

You're supposed to push your stomach out when contracting.

[metermanja]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15Mlti_7jG0#movie_player

This is a video i recorded to check my form. Please see stomach position just before rep #2. i take a big breath and then as a contract my abs, the stomach gets pulled in.

I see what you are saying, but just seems a little counterintuitive to me. Maybe i should use a belt first to gain practical experience instead of theorizing.

Anyhow, so i am breathing correctly by expanding the stomach?

So whats the deal with physical trainers at gyms asking people to pull the navel in.

[metermanja]

Charles,

I wish the video was longer and more descriptive. I am afraid the analogy didnt strike home for me, although i understood the basic premise.

[Nauticus]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15Mlti_7jG0#movie_player

This is a video i recorded to check my form. Please see stomach position just before rep #2. i take a big breath and then as a contract my abs, the stomach gets pulled in.

I see what you are saying, but just seems a little counterintuitive to me. Maybe i should use a belt first to gain practical experience instead of theorizing.

Anyhow, so i am breathing correctly by expanding the stomach?

So whats the deal with physical trainers at gyms asking people to pull the navel in.

Use a belt and you'll quickly understand. Actually, I think you could simulate it by using a dress belt - just strap it very tightly around your tummy and push out. Try it and tell us what you think.

Your breathing looks right to me, trying to consciously suck your navel in is terrible advise. Which is harder to break in half: a skinny twig, or a thick one? The thick one, obviously, so your gut must go out. And when I say "out", I mean no further than it is after inhaling.

[Gary Gibson]

Use a belt and you'll quickly understand. Actually, I think you could simulate it by using a dress belt - just strap it very tightly around your tummy and push out. Try it and tell us what you think.

Your breathing looks right to me, trying to consciously suck your navel in is terrible advise. Which is harder to break in half: a skinny twig, or a thick one? The thick one, obviously, so your gut must go out. And when I say "out", I mean no further than it is after inhaling.

You mean...Paul Chek could be wrong?!!

[IWillLiveFreeOrDie]

If you suck your belly in when you inhale then you are breathing backwards. A good, deep breath should push your belly out.

[JCavin]

Yeah, kinda sounds like you're breathing with your chest instead of your diaphragm...

[Gary Gibson]

Coach Staley,

Wanted to mention a very important point you made...

WHERE do people think the extra ~30 lbs comes from when you use a belt properly?

I mean, this isn't a suit. The belt clearly isn't storing energy. WHAT do people think it's doing?

Experienced people realized that the leg and hip muscles are still doing the work. They energy is just being conducted more efficiently when its not lost with the bending of the spine.

The question is: does the belt directly cause the spine to be straighter...or are the abs themselves causing the spine to be straighter because the belt gives them something to push against. Your illustration with the weights on the floor to demonstrate the importance of an anchor is a very good one.

So again, my question to belt-haters is exactly what do you think is going on physically with the belt? Is the belt "taking over the work" or are the abs working harder? This is what trips a lot of people up: "the belt allows me to use more weight, so it must be a cheat like squat suit."

Coach, you said you used to think the same way. How did you come to change your mind?

[Charles Staley]

I wouldn't use the term straighter per se, I just think proper belt use gives the abdominal wall an anchor so that it can create higher intra-abdominal pressure, which helps to protect and stabalize the spine during lifting

Coach Staley,

Wanted to mention a very important point you made...

WHERE do people think the extra ~30 lbs comes from when you use a belt properly?

I mean, this isn't a suit. The belt clearly isn't storing energy. WHAT do people think it's doing?

Experienced people realized that the leg and hip muscles are still doing the work. They energy is just being conducted more efficiently when its not lost with the bending of the spine.

The question is: does the belt directly cause the spine to be straighter...or are the abs themselves causing the spine to be straighter because the belt gives them something to push against. Your illustration with the weights on the floor to demonstrate the importance of an anchor is a very good one.

So again, my question to belt-haters is exactly what do you think is going on physically with the belt? Is the belt "taking over the work" or are the abs working harder? This is what trips a lot of people up: "the belt allows me to use more weight, so it must be a cheat like squat suit."

Coach, you said you used to think the same way. How did you come to change your mind?

[Squatson]

I just got my belt in last week and it mos def made a difference in my squats. You can "feel" where your abs need to be and I didn't realize how much I had to think about keeping that tightness all the way into the bottom. Hip drive is faster because I think I was getting loose coming out of the hole and absorbing some of the energy.

Question for you guys...I have a eFTS retro belt, and I find that I need to wear it one hole tighter from what I like on my squats for the press and deadlift, I was just wondering if that is normal.

[metermanja]

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

Coach Stanley,

I doubt so many people could be wrong about their experiences and i get your argument for a belt too. I will just bite the bullet and buy one. I will post my experience soon. Please continue posting your educational videos. Thanks!

Forumites,
I know Rip recommends a 4 inch wide belt. I found one (link above). Please let me know if that is ok in your experience.
The cheapest one is all i can afford give or take a few $. If you have any other belt recommendations, please post.
Regards
Vijay

[gman]

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

Coach Stanley,

I doubt so many people could be wrong about their experiences and i get your argument for a belt too. I will just bite the bullet and buy one. I will post my experience soon. Please continue posting your educational videos. Thanks!

Forumites,
I know Rip recommends a 4 inch wide belt. I found one (link above). Please let me know if that is ok in your experience.
The cheapest one is all i can afford give or take a few $. If you have any other belt recommendations, please post.
Regards
Vijay

Vijay,
Unless you are lifting some serious weight, the 10mm belt may be more comfortable to wear. I have the 10mm Inzer forever belt and it's a great belt.

My experience with wearing a belt the last few weeks is my IAP has gone up quite a bit, and consequently, so have my squats. Am I cheating? No.
Are my abs working harder? Yes.

[metermanja]

Coach,

Q1 - Is it normal that squeezing of the abs is accompanied by a tightening of the sphincter?

Q2 - What impact will a belt have on this reflex action? The reason for asking this question is with all the milk i consume, i am nervous about ,well, any kind of incontinence in a public gym. I would think that if the abs presss against the belt on one direction, Pascals law states that pressure is distributed equally in alll directions.

Apologies in advance for all this theorising. :o

[hamster]

I totally understand that a belt helps you lift more, and is recommended for that reason, however, how does this translate into athletic performance where abdominal strength is necessary? It seems to me that training and lifting with a belt makes total sense for power lifters and possibly Oly lifters, but what about football players or others that would compete without a belt?

I myself am a boxer, so a strong core is key to helping me deliver hard punches and take strikes to the midsection. Of course I do ab specific work, but certainly do appreciate the carry-over I've experienced from heavy squats and DLs. Would you recommend a belt for someone like me, who needs strong abs and will be competing without a belt?

Many thanks,
Ham

[elVarouza]

@metermanja: I have the belt you linked and it works fine for me.

I've never found "pushing the abs out" to be a useful cue, even with a belt. Personally, I find holding a valsalva while squeezing the hell out of the lower back muscles, but not hyperextending my lower back, keeps my abs/low back/everything very tight. My guess is the abs come into play to help prevent lumbar hyperextension when I'm squeezing my erector spinae very hard.

[Sami]

I totally understand that a belt helps you lift more, and is recommended for that reason, however, how does this translate into athletic performance where abdominal strength is necessary? It seems to me that training and lifting with a belt makes total sense for power lifters and possibly Oly lifters, but what about football players or others that would compete without a belt?

I myself am a boxer, so a strong core is key to helping me deliver hard punches and take strikes to the midsection. Of course I do ab specific work, but certainly do appreciate the carry-over I've experienced from heavy squats and DLs. Would you recommend a belt for someone like me, who needs strong abs and will be competing without a belt?

Many thanks,
Ham

You probably need to read around here and at 70sBig.com more to understand why belts do not make your abs weaker. It's of the opinion here, that belts make the abs stronger.

[hamster]

You probably need to read around here and at 70sBig.com more to understand why belts do not make your abs weaker. It's of the opinion here, that belts make the abs stronger.

I've read around plenty. My understanding is that your core muscles push out against the belt to brace the spine and increase IAP. However, in unbelted athletic pursuits, you don't have anything to push out against. Instead, the core is moving and stabilizing my trunk. How can the added belt-elicited work for the abs translate to this very different role for the core during sports?

[Gary Gibson]

I've read around plenty. My understanding is that your core muscles push out against the belt to brace the spine and increase IAP. However, in unbelted athletic pursuits, you don't have anything to push out against. Instead, the core is moving and stabilizing my trunk. How can the added belt-elicited work for the abs translate to this very different role for the core during sports?

In non-barbell sports, the strength you got from pushing against the barbell is still there.

When you take the belt off, your abs still have the strength they got from pushing against the belt. Think of using the belt like doing weighted sit ups. The problem is people keep thinking of the belt as "support" when in fact the belt is a way to make your abs work harder, just like the barbell is a way to make your legs work harder. I thought I made this clear in my article, but apparently I'm not as good a writer as I like to think.

(My next article details how my unbelted squats got stronger because of belted squats.)

[hamster]

In non-barbell sports, the strength you got from pushing against the barbell is still there.

When you take the belt off, your abs still have the strength they got from pushing against the belt. Think of using the belt like doing weighted sit ups. The problem is people keep thinking of the belt as "support" when in fact the belt is a way to make your abs work harder, just like the barbell is a way to make your legs work harder. I thought I made this clear in my article, but apparently I'm not as good a writer as I like to think.

(My next article details how my unbelted squats got stronger because of belted squats.)

Your article was well-written, but didn't explicitly address transfer of core stimlation through belted barbell work to sports. You can't cover everything in one article.

To put my concern another way, let me draw a parallel with leg extensions vs. barbell squats. Leg extensions at heavier weights are hard work, and they make the muscle bigger and stronger at leg extensions. However, unlike squats, the application of the strength gained to sports is questionable because the movement pattern is unusual and generally "non-functional" (I use that phrase with trepidation).

And let me say I'm not trying to naysay, just trying to understand better. I've been on the verge of buying a belt for some time, but these doubts are holding me back.


Thanks for your time, Gary. I really appreciate it.

[Gary Gibson]

Your article was well-written, but didn't explicitly address transfer of core stimlation through belted barbell work to sports. You can't cover everything in one article.

To put my concern another way, let me draw a parallel with leg extensions vs. barbell squats. Leg extensions at heavier weights are hard work, and they make the muscle bigger and stronger at leg extensions. However, unlike squats, the application of the strength gained to sports is questionable because the movement pattern is unusual and generally "non-functional" (I use that phrase with trepidation).

And let me say I'm not trying to naysay, just trying to understand better. I've been on the verge of buying a belt for some time, but these doubts are holding me back.


Thanks for your time, Gary. I really appreciate it.

I understand. You're wondering if low bar squatting with a belt is the "best thing you can do for your abs" or at least among the best things you can do for your abs the way that squats are the best thing you can do to become stronger in a way that counts on the field of contest.

Charles Staley has called squatting with a belt one of the best things you can do for your abs. I happen to agree. I worry mainly that people think a belt makes the squat somehow "less work" for your abs when the contrary is true. The belt makes the squat MORE work for your abs while allowing you to use more weight in the squat. Does this make belted squatting a better movement for real life ab strength than weight sit ups? Well, that's open to debate, but around these parts we'd also list the classic press as something that is more highly transferable to sport and to how the abs function in real life.

Does this mean you shouldn't do specific ab-targeting work? I dunno. I personally think that belted low bar squats and classic presses work the abs in a real world fashion much better than any type of waist-bending or spine curling. The abs real world function is NOT waist-bending and spine-curling, but providing support to the spine to keep it straight to allow for the more efficient transfer of energy from the lower body through the trunk. I'm not saying you shouldn't do waist-bending or spine-curling or that these things won't enhance the squatting and pressing experience. Heavy ab specific work is in fact the FIRST extra stuff you should add.

I don't, however, do anything more for my abs than squat heavy low bar with a belt on. My abs continue to grow more muscular from my heavy squats with a belt on. My abs are usually so fatigued after low bar squatting with a belt that I can barely do even one hanging leg raise after a squat or deadlift session. My experience indicates that heavy squatting with a belt on is making my abs as strong as I need them to be in the manner in which I need them strong.

[Bergie]

I totally understand that a belt helps you lift more, and is recommended for that reason, however, how does this translate into athletic performance where abdominal strength is necessary? It seems to me that training and lifting with a belt makes total sense for power lifters and possibly Oly lifters, but what about football players or others that would compete without a belt?

I myself am a boxer, so a strong core is key to helping me deliver hard punches and take strikes to the midsection. Of course I do ab specific work, but certainly do appreciate the carry-over I've experienced from heavy squats and DLs. Would you recommend a belt for someone like me, who needs strong abs and will be competing without a belt?

Many thanks,
Ham

During a squat your body is working against a resistance, the weighted bar. to gain strength. That gained strength is carried over to athletic performance even if you do not bring the bar with you. The belt works is a similar fashion. Your abs are working against the resistence of the belt and gaining strength. Just like the squat, that ab strength is still there when you take away the belt and hit the field, or what ever atheletic endevor you are participating in.

[Benthic]

I bought a belt a while back based on commentary I read here from Gary and others. I must admit, at the time I wasn't squatting a huge amount of weight so while I had the belt, I didn't begin using it immediately. I figured that as my squat began to approach 1.5x my bodyweight I'd use the belt.

Well, some time went by and last week my squat made it to 270lbs--but I got stuck there. I failed on Monday, and again on Wednesday. So on Friday I decided to give the belt a try and see how it worked. I used it on my last warmup set and my work sets, and it got me through 3x5 with 270. Now I'm not saying it was a silver bullet or that 270 was suddenly easy. It wasn't. But I got them done. I also got the squats done on Monday and Wednesday of this week. I notice that my lower back isn't sore after squatting anymore and that the belt has allowed me to focus more on pressing down with my legs because I don't have to worry about keeping the <ahem> 'core' tight. I just get a big lung/belly full of air, press out against the belt and squat. So far I'm only using the belt on squats and deadlifts, but it seems to be helping. I'll probably add it in on presses as the weight gets a bit heavier.

For the record, I've only been lifting for about 6 months. I'm 36 and 6'3" at 230lbs, so squatting 270 isn't exactly remarkable. But I'm back on track with my linear progress now, and I'll take that. Take my experience for whatever it's worth. Personally I'm happy I got the belt.

Brian

[Gary Gibson]

I bought a belt a while back based on commentary I read here from Gary and others. I must admit, at the time I wasn't squatting a huge amount of weight so while I had the belt, I didn't begin using it immediately. I figured that as my squat began to approach 1.5x my bodyweight I'd use the belt.

Well, some time went by and last week my squat made it to 270lbs--but I got stuck there. I failed on Monday, and again on Wednesday. So on Friday I decided to give the belt a try and see how it worked. I used it on my last warmup set and my work sets, and it got me through 3x5 with 270. Now I'm not saying it was a silver bullet or that 270 was suddenly easy. It wasn't. But I got them done. I also got the squats done on Monday and Wednesday of this week. I notice that my lower back isn't sore after squatting anymore and that the belt has allowed me to focus more on pressing down with my legs because I don't have to worry about keeping the <ahem> 'core' tight. I just get a big lung/belly full of air, press out against the belt and squat. So far I'm only using the belt on squats and deadlifts, but it seems to be helping. I'll probably add it in on presses as the weight gets a bit heavier.

For the record, I've only been lifting for about 6 months. I'm 36 and 6'3" at 230lbs, so squatting 270 isn't exactly remarkable. But I'm back on track with my linear progress now, and I'll take that. Take my experience for whatever it's worth. Personally I'm happy I got the belt.

Brian

We have to be careful here because people will take this to mean that the belt "obviously did some of the work." Your core was tighter because your abs were able to do their job better because the belt was there to push against. You were indeed working harder to keep your core tight, but having the belt caused your efforts to bear more fruit. Your back didn't round when the going got tough which is why your lumbars aren't feeling any pain (same thing happens when you belt up for max deadlifts).

I want to stress this next part.

People are going to keep saying that all this means that the belt is keeping the abs from getting strong, even if it allows the legs to work against more weight. This is not true. The ultimate test is to see if you can squat more weight without the belt after you've spent time training with the belt.

My next article addresses all this. My unbelted squats--high bar, low bar, front squat--all were much higher when I tested them, by almost exactly as much as the belted low bar squat which I consistently use. My unbelted low bar max used to be 315. I trained all heavy sets for a year with the belt. Now I use the unbelted 315 as heavy-ish warm ups. I can get at least five, but usually do only two or three as warm ups without the belt. If the belted squats weren't getting me stronger, I would not be able to do this now.

To put it even more dramatically: when I started really training the squat it was without a belt and I could barely do 245 for a single. Now without a belt I can do a fairly hard 365 on any given day and maybe as much as 385 at the top of my last cycle. How have I put well over 100 lbs on my beltless max if all my training with the belt made my abs weaker? I ask because the anti-belt 140% raw crowd insists that somehow that's exactly what has happened.

[hamster]

We have to be careful here because people will take this to mean that the belt "obviously did some of the work." Your core was tighter because your abs were able to do their job better because the belt was there to push against. You were indeed working harder to keep your core tight, but having the belt caused your efforts to bear more fruit. Your back didn't round when the going got tough which is why your lumbars aren't feeling any pain (same thing happens when you belt up for max deadlifts).

I want to stress this next part.

People are going to keep saying that all this means that the belt is keeping the abs from getting strong, even if it allows the legs to work against more weight. This is not true. The ultimate test is to see if you can squat more weight without the belt after you've spent time training with the belt.

My next article addresses all this. My unbelted squats--high bar, low bar, front squat--all were much higher when I tested them, by almost exactly as much as the belted low bar squat which I consistently use. My unbelted low bar max used to be 315. I trained all heavy sets for a year with the belt. Now I use the unbelted 315 as heavy-ish warm ups. I can get at least five, but usually do only two or three as warm ups without the belt. If the belted squats weren't getting me stronger, I would not be able to do this now.

To put it even more dramatically: when I started really training the squat it was without a belt and I could barely do 245 for a single. Now without a belt I can do a fairly hard 365 on any given day and maybe as much as 385 at the top of my last cycle. How have I put well over 100 lbs on my beltless max if all my training with the belt made my abs weaker? I ask because the anti-belt 140% raw crowd insists that somehow that's exactly what has happened.

Very convincing rationale.

Thank you.

[zzt]

Coach Staley,

Wanted to mention a very important point you made...

WHERE do people think the extra ~30 lbs comes from when you use a belt properly?

I mean, this isn't a suit. The belt clearly isn't storing energy. WHAT do people think it's doing?

Experienced people realized that the leg and hip muscles are still doing the work. They energy is just being conducted more efficiently when its not lost with the bending of the spine.

The question is: does the belt directly cause the spine to be straighter...or are the abs themselves causing the spine to be straighter because the belt gives them something to push against. Your illustration with the weights on the floor to demonstrate the importance of an anchor is a very good one.

So again, my question to belt-haters is exactly what do you think is going on physically with the belt? Is the belt "taking over the work" or are the abs working harder? This is what trips a lot of people up: "the belt allows me to use more weight, so it must be a cheat like squat suit."

Coach, you said you used to think the same way. How did you come to change your mind?

This is spot on....I think the best analogy, is a car chasis. If you put a bigger engine in a car or motorbike, you have to stiffen the chasis, or you cant transfer the extra power to the road....the chasis will twist and the energey will be lost. Thats all a belt does...it stiffens your chasis and helps you transfer power. It doesn't store any energy, it just helps you transfer it from your legs to the bar more efficiently.

[bomb1977]

Well I started lifting with a belt, but I almost felt like it was a crutch. I have been lifting without a belt for a little over a month now and I haven't had any issues, my weights keep going up.

This came oddly enough after a visit to my local crossfit gym. Where they told me to only use my belt on weights that I have never attempted before.

Am I wrong to assume that by going through my warm up's and my light sets that I am not gaining more benefit from my core than I would be if I was relying on a belt?

Then again maybe I have just never been instructed on how to properly wear and use a belt...

I'm willing to try anything if it will help me lift.

[Charles Staley]

You know, I depend on a rotating barbell more than I do a belt, but I never thought of that as a crutch...


Well I started lifting with a belt, but I almost felt like it was a crutch.

[51M0n]

I agree fully with you on the benefits of wearing a belt, squatting just wouldn't be the same without it. My only problem is I cannot find a belt that feels comfortable on the deadlift, they always seem to squash part of my gut into my legs in the bottom position.

[imnotbncre8ive]

Am I wrong to assume that by going through my warm up's and my light sets that I am not gaining more benefit from my core than I would be if I was relying on a belt?


I don't understand your question. So instead I'll randomly offer the following in the hopes that you find something useful.

Here are Justin Lascek's posts on 70sbig.com regarding belts:
http://www.70sbig.com/?p=884
http://www.70sbig.com/?p=891
http://www.70sbig.com/?p=1594
He advises that you use the belt for your last heavy warmup and your worksets.