Roark Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 Those with experience agree that the rotation of the Inch bell toward the thumb is a larger failure factor in the one hand deadlift than the weight of it. BarBender, a question, please: 1. If two 45 pound plates were wedged onto an Inch dumbell bar to prevent rotation, would this greater radius help in training against non-rotation? Other weights could be wedged/welded on as needed. (I realize that the lifter would need to have his feet elevated so that the bending distance equalled the short distance of the Inch handle from the floor, and that the 45s would get in the way during the lift, but what do you think ?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apdwler Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 Don't know about the plates. However, I think you could make a box, out of scrap wood, to fit the inch somewhat tight and it would prevent rotation. You wouldn't need a top or bottom, just the sides. If you wanted to make it adjustable, you could use long screw rods. I don't even think you would need ends to the box if you went that route. I'm fairly certain it would work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roark Posted January 8, 2003 Author Share Posted January 8, 2003 But my point was to increase rotation as a training aid, not to decrease it, thinking that lighter weights on the Inch handle using larger diameter plates may assist in training to counter the rotation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarBender Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 For lifting a dumbbell as in performing a deadlift or partial deadlift, we need to consider the rotational inertia about the axis that runs through the length of the handle. An axle with larger diameter wheels of proportional composition will have greater rotational inertia than one with smaller wheels. If two objects were allowed to roll down a shallow decline, the first object to finish has less rotational inertia than the next object to finish. Obviously, if one or both objects do not roll, this test is useless. To train against an increased moment of inertia, the object must have torque applied at the handle so that the resulting moment provides an increased challenge for holding the object. In lay speak: welding 45 plates onto each side of a thick handle is a good training idea for fighting the spin factor in thick handled dumbbell lifting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roark Posted January 8, 2003 Author Share Posted January 8, 2003 BarBender, Thank you. Especially for the final paragraph Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnimalCage Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 Please, somebody correct me if I'm wrong, or just shoot me if I'm stupid. When I, and others I see, attempt to lift a thick handled db, the effort usually begins at the point where the hand is cupped under the handle like a thin handled db. The effort continues as the db rolls, as if to stop the rotation, which generally won't happen. The dumbbell quits rotating when the hand and wrist are in a mostly vertical position over the db. This is where the attempt fails because the grip fails. It seems to me that the effort spent rolling the db around on the floor is a waste of energy. If I know that the db will rotate, why not simply begin with my hand in the vertical position, where there is no rotation? In other words, shouldn't rotation be a moot point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roark Posted January 8, 2003 Author Share Posted January 8, 2003 It becomes a moot point if the handle revolves freely in the plate holes, or, as I understand it, as plate diameter decreases in proportion to handle diameter- so, if you pick up a length of 2-3/8" solid rod weighing 100 lbs, it would be easier than picking up an Inch bell that weighed 100 lbs-at least so far as rotattion is concerned. Step in here BarBender is red pencil correction is needed! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apdwler Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 Sorry, I was confused. I should never respond before noon! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan McMillan Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 The idea of using a box to stand on would be good even if your not training with 45's on the handle as a longer pull should translate to an easier time when you go back to the normal ROM. Animalcage, I haven't seen anyone lift an inch dumbell before, but your point seems quite valid..maybe its psychological? Jon@han Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGuy Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 I have stated this theory before. It is that solid globe dumbbells are crudely made. Most likely the weight in each bell is probably not evenly distributed throughout their mass. Any heavier portion of the globe would want to rotate to the lowest point. The heaviest area in each globe would probably be in a different place further complicating things. Added to this the strength of the thumb will not equal that of the fingers so this can create rotation. This is only theory, and might well be nonsense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CalvinP Posted January 8, 2003 Share Posted January 8, 2003 AnimalCage well said, it's also my point exactly. To cup the hand under such db like The Inch's it will rotate as the hand can not sustain such posittion, and the cupped fingers will rotate to the side of the dumbell (thumb too). Unless your grip is real tight it certainly will drop, start the lift with palm directly on top of the handle (fingers N thumb on the side) and it would not rotate. Of course the weight of the globe, being large in diameter will add to the rotating momentum. I think most peopel would start the Inch lift with their finger cupped under, because naturally it feel impossible for most peopel to grip such a heavy db so we position our hand under it. Unless again your grip is strong enough. Even with a regular db we usually pick it up with our fingers under it as if to scoop it. Am I being redundant here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roark Posted January 8, 2003 Author Share Posted January 8, 2003 Though starting as you suggest will aid, the fact remains that the thumb is still opposed by the strength of the other four fingers AND the palm, which of course aligns with those four fingers. Even a mechanical device composed to resemble a hand, and having the same strength proportions as a hand, would find the bell rotating toward the weaker (thumb) side. I think. But I agree that placing the hand under the bar so that the wrist is actually 'beside' the bar in the starting position is even worse, because unless your fingers are very long, or your wrist world class strong, you will be 'pushing' the bell sideways. Has anyone tried lifting the Inch against a wall? Dray the bell up a wall which is close to the backside of the hand? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnimalCage Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 I re-re-read your idea, Joe, and I like it. I think we are looking at 2 scenarios: one wrist strength and one pinch-style strength. Train for whichever serves the purpose. Ideally, train for both, and the lift will come at a happy medium. Increase the rotation? You are a madman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.