Strengthdifference in grip

[Mikael Siversson]

That post was even more random than mine!

Very impressive but champion in what organisation (given most of us don't read Russian very well)? Obviously not a NAGS sanctioned contest as eg. an IM bar was not used by the look of it. Good to see spin lockers used though as it does make the lift harder. Anyway I think we are way off topic now.

[jordi]

[Geralt]

1: very good achievement and it shows that more people are getting into grip, which causes standards to rise. 

2: if we could stay on track here for a bit, this topic could still be on one page, thank you...

[Squeezus]

@Mikael Siversson, I know that you probably have a different experience than I with "people of African descent", but that is a very wide definition. While there are a number of people who are very suited for running, like this:

 

There are also people who are more suited to lifting, like this: 

 

Aside from what arises from there being a disappointingly small amount of racial diversity in gripsport, I don't think you'll find any meaningful correlation between grip strength and race.

Edited December 18, 2016 by Squeezus

[Gabriel O'Keeffe]

I'll ramble a bit here, with the intent of staying on topic [in a roundabout way]. I'm still fairly a newbie with regards to the approach of this community towards measuring and documenting grip strength and achievements, but I'm not new to being strong or thinking critically. Rather than try to make assertions or take a side in a debate, I'd just like to throw some points out there to think over. Whether or not they are valid is left up to the reader to analyze if he/she so cares.

• As Geralt said, the grip community is small but this community here on gripboard is likely not an accurate representation of the worldwide interest in gripsport. We may know of many of the strongest but the post of the Russian above shows that there may be plenty we don't know of. Whether or not he or his org knows or cares of NAGS is irrelevant-he is a champion in *his* organization. We should be reaching out to other grip orgs when we find them, comparing records and events and techniques, networking. For every one of us posting workouts somewhere or videos, there's probably 10-20 more training quietly, not knowing there are communities waiting for them.
• As the active, visible community is so small, we can't really gather meaningful data. I don't subscribe to the idea that if this or that population suddenly jumped into gripsport, then suddenly records would be shredded. It's possible, but it seems to be wishful thinking. What's needed is for enough people to be active in the sport that the data evens out and trends emerge. The best deadlifters have a recognizable set of traits. So do the best squatters, and so on. With enough active grippers we'd begin to see clearly who is the best at pinch, who's best at open hand, hub, etc. There's just not enough people visibly participating in grip sport for the data points to be there, much less solid. Which ties into my first point: we won't have those trends until the community is built to a much larger size. And things like hand size, bodyweight, height, so on, so forth should be measured and recorded so as to analyze. I understand that's hoping for a  LOT but I'm mainly trying to address the question Geralt originally brought up.
• What detailed investigation into the actual science, the biomechanics, of grip? This is something else that would help determine who is suited best for certain tests. I know there's some good material out there, but is any of it at the same level of research and scrutiny that has been brought upon things like running, squatting, swimming, deadlifting, bench, Oly lifts? I honestly don't know, I'm asking. If there hasn't been, then where is the basis for what we consider as the true measures of hand strength? The hand is a very complex piece of physiology. But part of being able to measure those data points requires metrics that are simple and repeatable. There are some tests of grip strength that seem quite fundamental, even "natural" and then there are some that require very exact conditions and equipment [and the difference between someone who knows technique vs someone who doesn't]. Which brings me to
• Grip equipment. What do you think is out there that is a fundamental test of grip? If there's not a solid scientific backing of what constitutes the best metrics of grip strength, then consensus will have to do for now. Given that many accomplished gripsters have been at it for decades and have put much thought into it, that consensus should perhaps be held in pretty high regard. Example: the ubiquitous hand gripper. How much does it/doesn't it relate to true crushing strength? Why are they all seemingly the same size handles and angle? Why not parallel? Just things like that, strike my curiosity. How are implements designed, what's the mindset of a manufacturer regarding whether what they're making is inspired by something that already exists or if they're designing from first principles? For example, the very popular hub devices, which nearly everyone makes, are [as you all of course know] inspired by the old time feats of lifting large plates by the hub. So a design feature of a weight plate becomes the inspiration of a hotly contested feat. Which, I admit, is pretty fun. But is hub lifting a fundamental measure of an aspect of grip strength or is it just a measure of hub lifting strength? Things like the hub, the blob, plate pinching develop from tradition or accident of someone using something in a creative way. Sometimes it overlaps with fundamental grip strength, sometimes it maybe doesn't. So again, what do we do [and just as important, what DON'T we do]  that measures grip strength in a fair, repeatable, fundamental way?

 

That's all the thinking on the topic that I have and thank you for reading that wall of text, if indeed any of you did. I love this sport and I believe that it deserves to grow but to grow successfully it needs the scientific attention and adherence to standards of other mainstream strength sports. If anyone takes issue with something I said, know that it's in the spirit of speculation and analysis. I've learned a lot in my time lurking and then being active on this board and I look forward to continuing that learning from the great people here.

[Kluv#0]

7 hours ago, Gabriel O'Keeffe said:

I'll ramble a bit here, with the intent of staying on topic [in a roundabout way]. I'm still fairly a newbie with regards to the approach of this community towards measuring and documenting grip strength and achievements, but I'm not new to being strong or thinking critically. Rather than try to make assertions or take a side in a debate, I'd just like to throw some points out there to think over. Whether or not they are valid is left up to the reader to analyze if he/she so cares.

• As Geralt said, the grip community is small but this community here on gripboard is likely not an accurate representation of the worldwide interest in gripsport. We may know of many of the strongest but the post of the Russian above shows that there may be plenty we don't know of. Whether or not he or his org knows or cares of NAGS is irrelevant-he is a champion in *his* organization. We should be reaching out to other grip orgs when we find them, comparing records and events and techniques, networking. For every one of us posting workouts somewhere or videos, there's probably 10-20 more training quietly, not knowing there are communities waiting for them.
• As the active, visible community is so small, we can't really gather meaningful data. I don't subscribe to the idea that if this or that population suddenly jumped into gripsport, then suddenly records would be shredded. It's possible, but it seems to be wishful thinking. What's needed is for enough people to be active in the sport that the data evens out and trends emerge. The best deadlifters have a recognizable set of traits. So do the best squatters, and so on. With enough active grippers we'd begin to see clearly who is the best at pinch, who's best at open hand, hub, etc. There's just not enough people visibly participating in grip sport for the data points to be there, much less solid. Which ties into my first point: we won't have those trends until the community is built to a much larger size. And things like hand size, bodyweight, height, so on, so forth should be measured and recorded so as to analyze. I understand that's hoping for a  LOT but I'm mainly trying to address the question Geralt originally brought up.
• What detailed investigation into the actual science, the biomechanics, of grip? This is something else that would help determine who is suited best for certain tests. I know there's some good material out there, but is any of it at the same level of research and scrutiny that has been brought upon things like running, squatting, swimming, deadlifting, bench, Oly lifts? I honestly don't know, I'm asking. If there hasn't been, then where is the basis for what we consider as the true measures of hand strength? The hand is a very complex piece of physiology. But part of being able to measure those data points requires metrics that are simple and repeatable. There are some tests of grip strength that seem quite fundamental, even "natural" and then there are some that require very exact conditions and equipment [and the difference between someone who knows technique vs someone who doesn't]. Which brings me to
• Grip equipment. What do you think is out there that is a fundamental test of grip? If there's not a solid scientific backing of what constitutes the best metrics of grip strength, then consensus will have to do for now. Given that many accomplished gripsters have been at it for decades and have put much thought into it, that consensus should perhaps be held in pretty high regard. Example: the ubiquitous hand gripper. How much does it/doesn't it relate to true crushing strength? Why are they all seemingly the same size handles and angle? Why not parallel? Just things like that, strike my curiosity. How are implements designed, what's the mindset of a manufacturer regarding whether what they're making is inspired by something that already exists or if they're designing from first principles? For example, the very popular hub devices, which nearly everyone makes, are [as you all of course know] inspired by the old time feats of lifting large plates by the hub. So a design feature of a weight plate becomes the inspiration of a hotly contested feat. Which, I admit, is pretty fun. But is hub lifting a fundamental measure of an aspect of grip strength or is it just a measure of hub lifting strength? Things like the hub, the blob, plate pinching develop from tradition or accident of someone using something in a creative way. Sometimes it overlaps with fundamental grip strength, sometimes it maybe doesn't. So again, what do we do [and just as important, what DON'T we do]  that measures grip strength in a fair, repeatable, fundamental way?

 

That's all the thinking on the topic that I have and thank you for reading that wall of text, if indeed any of you did. I love this sport and I believe that it deserves to grow but to grow successfully it needs the scientific attention and adherence to standards of other mainstream strength sports. If anyone takes issue with something I said, know that it's in the spirit of speculation and analysis. I've learned a lot in my time lurking and then being active on this board and I look forward to continuing that learning from the great people here.

Gabriel- nice well thought of post. I love "adherence to standards of other mainstream strength sports" -.Drug test at highest levels. All competitors at nationals get drug tested and any world record should be tested. Traits for a great gripster( outliers of course) - Hand size 7 3/4" or larger( average adult male hand is 7.44- 7.61 depending on which study) experience - having a year of grip specific training is huge let alone 5-10 years. Overall body strength. Lastly, determination and patience as you can't get to point D skipping A,B,C

[Geralt]

@Gabriel O'Keeffe Thank you for your input, no boring or long story at all. Pretty much very valid points. 

"What detailed investigation into the actual science, the biomechanics, of grip? This is something else that would help determine who is suited best for certain tests. I know there's some good material out there, but is any of it at the same level of research and scrutiny that has been brought upon things like running, squatting, swimming, deadlifting, bench, Oly lifts? I honestly don't know, I'm asking. If there hasn't been, then where is the basis for what we consider as the true measures of hand strength? "

I remember reading some articles on T-Nation about which exercises for the abs, recruit the most muscles and, which ones are dominant in those exercises. This was done my measuring output with electrodes or so. I'm a noob in that area. I wonder if this can be done with the lowerarms? Muscles of the hand play a part also which makes that perhaps impossible to measure? I wonder what guys like @mightyjoe could tell about this, or any member here with such measuring equipment at hand? 

Edited December 20, 2016 by Geralt