ianders1 Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 I've read several times that grippers are fun and a good test of strength but aren't that great for developing strength. That may be true when "setting" the gripper, but I've found "no-set" closes have really strengthened my hand to a great degree. I'm not suggesting that they're better than block weights, etc. and I know they don't work the thumbs, etc. I'm just wondering why so many people would discount them as a training tool. Still being relatively new to grip, I have to ask. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Van Weele Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 No set work is prbably the best way to train grippers. Like you said it really helps bevelope the hand in all positions from being open to be being closed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crushjunior Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 The grippers test and work crushing strength but I've found that for holding on to a deadlift doing timed holds (like one-arm or two arm holds with a barbell) is better. In fact I lose static holding strength even if I hold even on COC closing strength. They are two different things to be sure. If you meant does working the grippers improve your ability to close the grippers? Yeah, for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Dockery Posted February 16, 2004 Share Posted February 16, 2004 Ian, I'd say that the comments about grippers being fun but... are based upon an assumption of comparing to the optimal. I think there is a continuum of training devices from nothing to optimal. And grippers fall soewhere between nothing and Blockweights. Sure, grippers will strengthen your hand, but in comparison to something like block weights or thickbar they are less than perfect. The biggest advantage to these other exercises is the large amount of carryover to other forms of grip. While grippers will have some carryover it is not as much as these other exercises. It's like saying squats are better than leg presses. Sure both strengthen the legs. It is just that squats seem to have much greater carryover to other areas of strength than legpress. Is this making sense or am I just suffering from diarrhea of the mouth? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianders1 Posted February 16, 2004 Author Share Posted February 16, 2004 Is this making sense or am I just suffering from diarrhea of the mouth? Makes sense to me - I guess I've just been suprised how much the grippers have strengthened my hands. Of course I've been doing block weights and lots of other stuff as well. I haven't done any thickbar stuff, though - don't have access to any, nor do I (currently) have the funds or tools to buy/make one. Right now I'm looking to get some more block weights because I have the most fun with them and of course they are a killer workout. Thanks for the responses, all. 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.