Jump to content

Gripper training methods


Ivan Cuk

Recommended Posts

What is ideally best set to be training from? Some people seem to be super good at mms and others good at wide but it seems only mms can have the best carryover once they can close a certain rgc?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ivan Cuk said:

What is ideally best set to be training from? Some people seem to be super good at mms and others good at wide but it seems only mms can have the best carryover once they can close a certain rgc?

I am not a super strong gripper guy by any means but I would say something like MMS/CCS/wide sets or DS/CCS/Wide sets.

This way you train both the sweep and the crush so you are getting stronger through the entire range of motion and on top of that deep sets and MMS train your set really well.

I also think it depends on the person when it comes to MMS/deep sets.

I think handsize is the biggest factor here I personally think deep sets can be useless with hands that are REALLY big but that is just my opinion.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me training MMS has had good carryover to stronger CCS. For me training CCS/TNS has always taxed my hands more then MMS so I could train harder and thougher mms to increase my strength.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My view on MMS carrying over to CCS:  Higher MMS will translate to higher CCS.  Because of course.  CCS basically means you started with a "bad" set, but if you are stronger than you were last time you had a bad set, you should close more this time.  Not as much as you can MMS, but more than your CCS when you were weaker.  So working MMS really has to help.

I am not sure that CCS training won't also increase your MMS.  You won't close a higher RGC rating than you do MMS, so you may not feel like you are increasing your MMS, but if you improve your CCS close it means you improved what you can close with a "bad" set.  So why would that not mean you can also close more with a better set? I think it would.  If you are pushing at the end to make the handles touch, you must be working the muscles.

What I did find was that my CCS improved dramatically when I started training CCS a lot, in anticipation of signing up for the cert.  My MMS did not go up much although maybe a little, but I think I got used to the mechanics of putting the credit card where it was supposed to go and moving through the process efficiently, and I also got used to how it feels in the hand to start there and finish the close.  These feelings are a little different than those associated with MMS, so it is good to get used to them.  It gives you a sense of control over the process.  So these gains were more form than strength I think.  But substantial.  Almost 10 pounds RGC in a couple of months.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway shouldn't YOU be schooling US on this, Mr. 3.5?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he's just tryna get more perspective from other people since he only does wide sets/CCS, From my perspective personally i find it beneficial going back and forth in allocated training blocks, One block focusing on heavy MMS/DS, And then switching up to a block solely dedicated on CCS, I feel like i get stronger at one when i'm doing the other and vice versa

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

mms setting is all I’ve done. And my ccs is blah! Just switched over to ccs the last two workouts, and noticed a nice jump from the first. I feel momentum in the close starting from that width. 
though it’s impressive to see a deep set with a no.4, it’s no where near wide strength…and I don’t want to pretend it is.

Ivan, you have a great start…coming from the wide position I wouldn’t mess with too much.

you already made your 3.5 ccs look easier than any no.4 deep setter ever did. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Lennix said:

For me training MMS has had good carryover to stronger CCS. For me training CCS/TNS has always taxed my hands more then MMS so I could train harder and thougher mms to increase my strength.

Yes I agree it seems to be that training for deep and opening it up over time is more efficient. 

 

2 hours ago, Vinnie said:

I am not sure that CCS training won't also increase your MMS.  You won't close a higher RGC rating than you do MMS, so you may not feel like you are increasing your MMS, but if you improve your CCS close it means you improved what you can close with a "bad" set.  So why would that not mean you can also close more with a better set? I think it would.  If you are pushing at the end to make the handles touch, you must be working the muscles.

Yes and for some reason I cannot deep set (I have tried). More painful for me and don't think my mms would be any higher than my wide because of that. Ghp set is even too much for me as it makes me work more just to keep it in that width than to try to close it. Strange but doesn't seem to hurt much. Congrats on the 3 cert btw!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, slazbob said:

though it’s impressive to see a deep set with a no.4, it’s no where near wide strength…and I don’t want to pretend it is.

True, of course the hand size plays factor into it but it is indeed harder. Although something like GHP 10 ds vs a Average 4 ccs is idk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great thread everyone and respect to @Ivan Cukyou could be more closed minded and a know-it-all given your a monster on grippers but yet you still value others opinions, I tip my hat to you sir. 

One thing I could never grasp was the crowd on here who say MMS will translate better to CCS. It's not that I dont believe them rather I'm confused. In raw powerlifting you would never tell someone "do a 3 board bench press to get stronger through a greater range of motion." Or just squat half way instead of proper depth because the carryover is little as opposed to fuller range of motions. So why then would folks advocate to set a gripper in a manner(MMS style) and perform very little range of motion in an attempt to ultimately do better on wide set closes? Not trying to be argumentative rather seeking to understand. Personally I find wide set as @DevilEriksaid builds the whole range of motion strength up and seems to just build a stronger hand in general. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Bigfoot Grip

That analogy is not correct since in gripper closing it's the final part that is the hardest. That's not the case in powerlifting, it's the start that is hardest. Lockout could be harder but in a case like that it has to do with a weakness.

 

To answer the question:

The way I see it, there's no best way to train. It's different for different people, depends on your genetics, how your hands are built etc. The one thing I know is that you should do what works for you, there's definitely not a one way that works for all.

Try to mix it up maybe. If you stagnate, try another set width. It's all about getting stronger, if you get stronger at one set it will carryover to another. And when I say stronger I mean stronger not just better at it. It will be harder to progress on wider sets because you have less leverage to work with, so progressing with wider sets will take longer time. You might not have grippers with small jumps that you need. That is why I think MMS works easier for most people to progress with. If you don't like MMS try another set with that is narrower, like 30 mm or 38 mm (1.5") for example, see how that feels.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bigfoot Grip said:

Great thread everyone and respect to @Ivan Cukyou could be more closed minded and a know-it-all given your a monster on grippers but yet you still value others opinions, I tip my hat to you sir. 

One thing I could never grasp was the crowd on here who say MMS will translate better to CCS. It's not that I dont believe them rather I'm confused. In raw powerlifting you would never tell someone "do a 3 board bench press to get stronger through a greater range of motion." Or just squat half way instead of proper depth because the carryover is little as opposed to fuller range of motions. So why then would folks advocate to set a gripper in a manner(MMS style) and perform very little range of motion in an attempt to ultimately do better on wide set closes? Not trying to be argumentative rather seeking to understand. Personally I find wide set as @DevilEriksaid builds the whole range of motion strength up and seems to just build a stronger hand in general. 

MMS is more like specific training for a stickingpoint, and since the last part of the gripperclose is the hardest its beneficial to be able to deal with that. The first part of the close is not that hard. Plus working the stickingpoint which is harder then the sweep will make your fingers more tolerant and your crushing strength stronger. Then when going back to a wider set you surely need some time to adjust into the sweep but since its much easier then the crush it takes less time then doing the opposite. These are my thoughts about it, I know people who train completely different and have great success.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it all comes down to preference take people like Chez and Nathan Holle for example 2 people with completely different training modalities yet they are both elite gripper guys. 

Edited by DevilErik
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, I have thought for a while about mms and why its done. I found it is due to the pinky and thumb, below shows from @SeNoLD doing ghp set vs ccs. You can see how the back handle has to sit in that spot in order to maintain the best leverage which everyone should be doing, now he has 19.5 hands and for him this ghp set feels for him how the ccs feels for me. If you notice how in the ccs picture the back handle started to slide back into his palm before he could get the card to fully pass through. That means the ccs is so wide for him that he could not physically get the same position as he does in mms or 38mm ghp set. I can because my hands bigger but mainly my pinky and thumb can wrap sooner without setting deep. So the true reason mms and ghp exists is setting to where you can get your pinky around since it is the strongest next to ring finger. Therefore if someone with bigger hands that only does wide and ccs would want to compare their strength to someone like David, they should close the same rgc or more with wider set and then can say they are truly stronger)

image.png.f8ae3fa388d95e77161a04c4e74ac9af.pngimage.png.64010e0f65ec1d3e5c4d9c5a84230c82.png

9 hours ago, Bigfoot Grip said:

Great thread everyone and respect to @Ivan Cukyou could be more closed minded and a know-it-all given your a monster on grippers but yet you still value others opinions, I tip my hat to you sir. 

So why then would folks advocate to set a gripper in a manner(MMS style) and perform very little range of motion in an attempt to ultimately do better on wide set closes? Not trying to be argumentative rather seeking to understand. Personally I find wide set as @DevilEriksaid builds the whole range of motion strength up and seems to just build a stronger hand in general. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ivan Cuk said:

Thanks, I have thought for a while about mms and why its done. I found it is due to the pinky and thumb, below shows from @SeNoLD doing ghp set vs ccs. You can see how the back handle has to sit in that spot in order to maintain the best leverage which everyone should be doing, now he has 19.5 hands and for him this ghp set feels for him how the ccs feels for me. If you notice how in the ccs picture the back handle started to slide back into his palm before he could get the card to fully pass through. That means the ccs is so wide for him that he could not physically get the same position as he does in mms or 38mm ghp set. I can because my hands bigger but mainly my pinky and thumb can wrap sooner without setting deep. So the true reason mms and ghp exists is setting to where you can get your pinky around since it is the strongest next to ring finger. Therefore if someone with bigger hands that only does wide and ccs would want to compare their strength to someone like David, they should close the same rgc or more with wider set and then can say they are truly stronger)

image.png.f8ae3fa388d95e77161a04c4e74ac9af.pngimage.png.64010e0f65ec1d3e5c4d9c5a84230c82.png

These are all excellent points.

If I recall correctly, when Warren Tetting had a certification process, all closes were to be done with no setting.  However, grippers appropriate for certification (not the Mash Monster certs) were different spreads according to hand size: narrower (2.75") for smaller hands, wider (2.95-3.0"?) for bigger hands.  Maybe someone with a better memory can chime in.

The importance of the pinky has to do with the muscles: the finger flexors involved in closing a gripper for the index, middle and ring finger are all in the forearm.  The pinky is the only finger that takes advantage of the muscles in the hand (hypothenar eminence).  Those pinky flexors aren't always the strongest, but the pinky has the best leverage on a gripper and can contribute a significant amount of force to the close.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ivan Cuk said:

Thanks, I have thought for a while about mms and why its done. I found it is due to the pinky and thumb, below shows from @SeNoLD doing ghp set vs ccs. You can see how the back handle has to sit in that spot in order to maintain the best leverage which everyone should be doing, now he has 19.5 hands and for him this ghp set feels for him how the ccs feels for me. If you notice how in the ccs picture the back handle started to slide back into his palm before he could get the card to fully pass through. That means the ccs is so wide for him that he could not physically get the same position as he does in mms or 38mm ghp set. Я могу, потому что мои руки больше, но в основном мой мизинец и большой палец могут обернуться быстрее, не заходя глубоко. Таким образом, истинная причина существования mms и ghp заключается в том, что вы можете передвигать свой мизинец, так как он самый сильный рядом с безымянным пальцем. Поэтому, если кто-то с большими руками, который делает только широкие и ccs, захочет сравнить свою силу с кем-то вроде Дэвида, они должны закрыть тот же rgc или больше с более широким набором, а затем могут сказать, что они действительно сильнее)

image.png.f8ae3fa388d95e77161a04c4e74ac9af.pngimage.png.64010e0f65ec1d3e5c4d9c5a84230c82.png

An interesting thought and remark, yes, my main problem with CSS is sliding the handle deep into the palm of my hand, from now on I can't exert maximum force

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is your hand palm length @SeNoLD? I think the 19.5cm @Ivan Cuk referred to was your wrist circumference. :) 

7 hours ago, Ivan Cuk said:

So the true reason mms and ghp exists is setting to where you can get your pinky around since it is the strongest next to ring finger.

I agree 100%, it’s much harder to get strong leverage with just three or even two digits on the gripper! On deeper sets I think everyone’s roughly in the same boat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s comparable to arm wrestlers training partials…Levan is probably the best in the world at curling, but if he had to start from the hang position, he’d have to use much less weight! But that’s not where he needs the strength. Total arm strength would be full-range allowing the forearm to do its work…and your partial bicep strength will increase as well. I’ve noticed doing partial curls of all positions for weeks at a time during the years, you get a sort of a muscle lock…when you open up to 90 degrees, it’s  almost like your body fights the opening; that’s good for arm wrestling, bad for guys trying to have a full range gripper close. It can be done of course, but why make it harder on yourself?
if you want to certify COC, you might as well train full-range and have complete strength. And not messing around with setting, and elbow torque etc. when you have to increase your bench press so you can chase bigger grippers, you may be a deep setter. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I've noticed that my explosion in the deep sets or MMS is very poor. 

Probably cause I compete in powerlifting and all my reps are paused. Bench, overhead presses and almost all of my squat variations are paused. So I'm really good at maintaining good strength under tension but when it comes to my goal grippers I'm very very slow to improve. And by goal gripper I mean less then 4-5mm before it closes. 

I'm impossible. I seem to have no explosive strength whatsoever in my hands lol.

My TNS is decent provided that I can set the gripper. If it's super wide it taxes my fingers greatly. My hands are both a bit over 20.5cm in length by the way. 

Been trying to strengthen the ring finger and pinky as well. But I see that if I focus on that for say 2-3 weeks and skip regular gripper training, I lose a little strength. 

Thought I should share this on here. Seeing some of your insightful comments definitely helps me ponder a little more 🤔

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Terry Conjugate Iron said:

Personally, I've noticed that my explosion in the deep sets or MMS is very poor. 

Probably cause I compete in powerlifting and all my reps are paused. Bench, overhead presses and almost all of my squat variations are paused. So I'm really good at maintaining good strength under tension but when it comes to my goal grippers I'm very very slow to improve. And by goal gripper I mean less then 4-5mm before it closes. 

I'm impossible. I seem to have no explosive strength whatsoever in my hands lol.

My TNS is decent provided that I can set the gripper. If it's super wide it taxes my fingers greatly. My hands are both a bit over 20.5cm in length by the way. 

Been trying to strengthen the ring finger and pinky as well. But I see that if I focus on that for say 2-3 weeks and skip regular gripper training, I lose a little strength. 

Thought I should share this on here. Seeing some of your insightful comments definitely helps me ponder a little more 🤔

Use a very light gripper and do speed closes. With very light I mean very light. Start with a gripper you can do more than 50 reps with.

Use 20 mm block so you get 100% accurate setting on each rep.

You will notice your speed will go up pretty quickly. Then you can slowly progress to harder grippers.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Fist of Fury said:

Use a very light gripper and do speed closes. With very light I mean very light. Start with a gripper you can do more than 50 reps with.

Use 20 mm block so you get 100% accurate setting on each rep.

You will notice your speed will go up pretty quickly. Then you can slowly progress to harder grippers.

That actually sounds super interesting it reminds me of conjugate speed work.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Ivan Cuk said:

Thanks, I have thought for a while about mms and why its done. I found it is due to the pinky and thumb, below shows from @SeNoLD doing ghp set vs ccs. You can see how the back handle has to sit in that spot in order to maintain the best leverage which everyone should be doing, now he has 19.5 hands and for him this ghp set feels for him how the ccs feels for me. If you notice how in the ccs picture the back handle started to slide back into his palm before he could get the card to fully pass through. That means the ccs is so wide for him that he could not physically get the same position as he does in mms or 38mm ghp set. I can because my hands bigger but mainly my pinky and thumb can wrap sooner without setting deep. So the true reason mms and ghp exists is setting to where you can get your pinky around since it is the strongest next to ring finger. Therefore if someone with bigger hands that only does wide and ccs would want to compare their strength to someone like David, they should close the same rgc or more with wider set and then can say they are truly stronger)

image.png.f8ae3fa388d95e77161a04c4e74ac9af.pngimage.png.64010e0f65ec1d3e5c4d9c5a84230c82.png

Yeah I agree I think with big enough hands that setting becomes useless.

Take me as an example my hands are 22cm which is 8.66 inches my credit card set is actually weaker than my no set.

Of course assuming you can line it up correctly and get the ideal leverages without setting it.

Edited by DevilErik
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My no set is absolutely horrible due to now knowing how to do it so i don't really bother, Even with my meathooks i still find credit card setting a good bit more difficult, Hence why i switch it up between CCS and MMS

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Jermiah Merciconah said:

My no set is absolutely horrible due to now knowing how to do it so i don't really bother, Even with my meathooks i still find credit card setting a good bit more difficult, Hence why i switch it up between CCS and MMS

Yeah I get that just do what works for you.

I have built 90% of my strength with the Ivanko super gripper so maybe that's why my no sets are stronger than my sets.

You can't set the super gripper and on top of that I usually just do super wide sets with my vulcan because it is a bitch to set.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy policies.