|
|
| One of the most frequent instructions in pilates exercises is to not arch the lower back off the mat when lowering the legs. However, I wonder whether this means not lifting "one milimeter" off the mat at all, or if a little arching is OK.
I notice that when I'm doing The hundred, or exercises of the abdominal series as Double leg stretch, Double straight leg stretch where we have to lie flat on the back, while lowering the legs even to 45o I can feel a little arching. The arching is not visible at all, it would still be impossible to pass a sheet of paper below my lower back. But I can feel that the lower back is not as flat on the mat as when I am simply resting or with the legs at 90o.
Books often picture people really arching the back off the mat, like centimeters above the mat, to illustrate what shouldn't be done. I am certainly not doing this. I refer to a slight feeling that my back is a little (milimeters, possibly) above the mat.
Would anybody tell me whether this little, non-visible arching of the lower back is alright or still harmful?
Thanks! |
|
| |
|
   
Location: London, England | Hey there,
not all harmful-when you lie down, you should be able to put your fingers under your low back and almost touch the fingers of the opposite hand-this signifies that your 'lordosis' is normal. In fact, having the low back actually touching the floor would saignify a risk for the low back, in this instance.
Nick |
|
| |
|
| That's interesting. Mrs. Geezer and I both do Pilates classes at the local sports centre, she with a Body Control Pilates instructor, me with a sport's centre employee. She is instructed to do the hundred in neutral spine, I'm told to do it with lower spine 'imprinted on the mat'. Similarly with some other exercises. I find it quite hard and sometimes painful to try and keep the lower spine imprinted. Should I stop doing it this way? I started the class following a succession of lower back muscle strains due to poor posture.
Cheers,
Geezer. |
|
| |
|
Location: London, England | hi there,
Pain tells you to stop doing something, not to carry on!!
Nick |
|
| |
|
| Thanks for the replies!
All the instructions I've ever had tell to do The hundred and all exercises in this position with no arching (back lying flat on the floor)! This is what you get when you pull the navel to spine or engage the B-line core.
All the 3 books I checked (Brook Siler's The pilates body, Alycea Ungaro's Body in motion and Alan Menezes' The complete guide...) say the same thing: NO to neutral spine (natural arching), YES stable spine/back lying flat/imprinted back).
All pictures I've ever seen instruct to lie with the back flat.
It musn't be painful, I agree. One of the principles of pilates is to work with no pain at all.
Interestingly, Ungaro says that neutral spine is not original pilates. So probably there is a new school that defends neutral spine.
Nonetheless, I feel that neutral spine in exercises like The hundred can be harmful, and as far as I can understand, Pilates created the Stable spine/flat back to protect the spine. What happens when you are lying on your back and lower the legs, the weight of the legs is sustained by the muscles that surround the spine, and the spine itself. When you lie flat on the back, you force the muscles to engage and protect the spine.
If you arch the back too much, the muscles will have to work even more, because they are extended.
My question was on how much the arching should be avoided, because due to the legs' weight, the back will arch a little bit, the extent depending on the strength of your back.
Nick, if you can provide me references on what you said about having the back arched a little (finger height), I would be very thankful. This can bring me new knowledge that I am ignoring.
Thanks again! |
|
| |
|
Location: London, England | Hi PLT,
Haven't time to find those references just now-will search later.
I've never practiced pilates, so maybe my views are not worthwhile, but I would seriously question anyone who said to imprint the back-as a doctor of chiropractic who is interested in ways of using exercise to return a person to optimal health, I would not attend a class that used the technique of imprinting, and I would not tell anybody else to attend the class-the teaching is without merit. This is not just my opinion, will try to dig those references out.
Nick |
|
| |
|
| Nick, there seems to be a controversy about "neutral spine" vs. "flat back/stable spine/imprinting the back" indeed. This seems to a controversial issue as the "navel to spine", that for some authors is not good (alternatives: Menezes' B-line core and Reineke's midpoint lift).
I did some research and I found this article to be the most balanced. What the author says seems reasonable, there is no law for everyone.
http://www.centerworkspilates.com/artman/publish/article_2.shtml
This one seems reasonable too:
www.pilatesmethodalliance.org/pmanews4.pdf
For exercises like The hundred, I cannot see how it is possible to keep neutral spine. When we lie on our backs, with the legs bent over our chest, the back automatically lengthens and imprints on the mat.
So in response to my own question, I guess that some (not visible as I mentioned) arching during The hundred is not harmful. |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 1738
Location: right where I'm supposed to be | geezer - 2006-11-29 2:55 AM
That's interesting. Mrs. Geezer and I both do Pilates classes at the local sports centre, she with a Body Control Pilates instructor, me with a sport's centre employee. She is instructed to do the hundred in neutral spine, I'm told to do it with lower spine 'imprinted on the mat'. Similarly with some other exercises. I find it quite hard and sometimes painful to try and keep the lower spine imprinted. Should I stop doing it this way? I started the class following a succession of lower back muscle strains due to poor posture.
Cheers,
Geezer.
Geezer, is you head lifted in a pilates C-curve while performing, the hundr4ed, double leg stretch, single leg, etc.....
If you are correctly in your c-curve form, your spine should make contact with your mat from approximately mid-thoracic region to mid to low lumber.
Neutral Spine and true Joseph Pilates movement do not go together. You can and will hurt yourself.Pilates is a very concentrated set of movements that target strengthening all muscles that support the spine. Personally, I have not experienced anything that brings about positive change within a short amount of time like pilates. I am not speaking of physical appearance but more in strength. It is a good routine for back health but is rough on a beginner.
Beginners would really benefit from a well respected, experienced teacher, maybe even a reformer session. Correct form is very important so you may enjoy pilates with continuous success.
Mish
Edited by mishoga 2006-12-01 1:26 PM
|
|
| |
|
Location: London, England | Hey there,
I don't think the emhasis on the neutral spine is meant to mean that you aren't allowed to do exercise like the hundred-if that were the case, we would not be allowed to move at all, because all movement means changes on the forces that a spine must face, and it is better to align the spine to better face those challenges.
i think it is good to work on postures that improve our ability to maintain a neutral spine, but to then test our ability to maintain the neutral spine by bracing the abdominals and core musculature. If the abdominal are braced, the hundred becomes a much harder exercise-the abdominals almost push against you as you try to lift. In this way, the exercise keeps being beneficial, as it will always be challenging.
Nick |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 1738
Location: right where I'm supposed to be | Nick - 2006-12-01 1:31 PM
Hey there,
I don't think the emhasis on the neutral spine is meant to mean that you aren't allowed to do exercise like the hundred
True, but you want to engage the rectus abdominus (My spelling stinks Nick, please excuse)
Quite honestly, this si how Joseph Pilates designed the movements. of course ther is going to be some movement within the vertebrae, but you want to learn to focus and activate the muscles you are targeting.
-if that were the case, we would not be allowed to move at all, because all movement means changes on the forces that a spine must face, and it is better to align the spine to better face those challenges.
i think it is good to work on postures that improve our ability to maintain a neutral spine, but to then test our ability to maintain the neutral spine by bracing the abdominals and core musculature. If the abdominal are braced, the hundred becomes a much harder exercise-the abdominals almost push against you as you try to lift. In this way, the exercise keeps being beneficial, as it will always be challenging.
NO DOUBT about about your hundred reference. The abs do push against you. I like Pilates. it is a very strong practice. You really feel strong in all the muscles that support the mid section of the torso.
Mish
Nick |
|
| |
|
Location: London, England | Hi Mish,
I think that's true, to activate rectus abdominus-I think that if it was pre-contracted, with the spine in neutral, it couldn't fail to contribute spinal stability. But I think that when it is asked to contribute to performing an abdominal crunch type movement, and the result is extreme spinal flexion, then it's contraction becomes an undesirable component of therapeutic exercise.
There are similarities between a hundred and an abdominal crunch, which is why I used this example, as it has been extensively studied with regards to it's effect on the spine.
Nick
|
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 1738
Location: right where I'm supposed to be | The therapeutic benefits come from the pilates breath, which is similar in length to the dirgha breath in yoga but is distinguishable by the exhale. Exhale is a slow release of breath through the lips (pursed)
In general, Pilates is a strong practice, but I also believe that if it is the only form of movement one participates in, certain muscles will condition and eventually feel jaded for the basic repetitive movements.
Watcha think?
Nick, do you have a good memory? How hard was it through school to memorize every muscle and their proper titles? 
Mish
Edited by mishoga 2006-12-01 3:38 PM
|
|
| |
|
Location: London, England | hi Mish,
How hard is it to learn all the muscles? Well you have to remember, you are in an environment where it is expected that you will know what the hell the lecturer is talking about-and these guys go nineteen to the dozen-so you have to memorize what goes where very quickly-otherwise you feel like a dunce. The pressure makes you learn muscle names very quickly. It takes longer to learn all their attachments-very useful for yoga, otherwise you are basically ignorant about what a muscle does, so there's no point in learning its name.
One of the best ways of learning muscle names is to get a book which I have recommended before, 'anatomy and human movement' by Palastanga. It is a fantastic book for yoga teachers, as it designed for therapists to detect which muscle they are palpating. So for instance, if you put your hand on the brim of your students pelvis, on the anterior superior iliac spine, you know you have the origin of sartorius under your finger-then you can guide strtch or contraction, because you know where sartorius inserts, in the tibia. the book goes through all the so-called bony landmarks by which a therapist can tell exactly what is underneath their fingertips. It's not a book to learn of by heart-but I think you can quickly memorize those parts of it that seem most relevant-and this is information that, in my experience, has never been equalled-the book is incomparable. I have the second edition, which I think is the best-the layout is fantastic. Comes in useful as a yoga block too-only kidding.
This book has a funny story behind it. One day, our lecturer asked what we would like to study, in order to beef up on the exams the next week. I said "the muscles of the forearm," causing everyone in the class to groan-they had enough of the forearm and looked at me digustedly. Our lecturer introduced his friend who was sitting in the corner as Derek Field, one of the co-authors of the above book-a world class anatomist (as was my lecturer-I was very lucky).
The lecturer put up a picture of the forearm, and said what's this lump-I immediately answered 'anconeus'-nobody had heard of it-thev only reason I knew of it was because I had studied field's book very carefully-so if you want to be a cut above, get this book. If you rely on the usual yoga teacher's books, they are useless-they seem to withold knowledge in order to make the subject simpler-'anatomy and human movement' force-feeds you with information. if you even go halfway to understanding this book, or at least attending to it's info, I would rate you amongst the most informed yoga teachers in the world, as far as muscles go-and if the muscle doesn't go there, why should the mind? So the book becomes philosophical, and you don't feel like you are neglecting this part of yoga by concentrating on the physical aspects.
The reason I'm writing so much is because it very exciting to think of the marvel you have in front of you with this book-wish I could re-live them-hope you get it and find it fantastic 
nick |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 1738
Location: right where I'm supposed to be | I'll look into that. I'm reading the Anatomy of Hatha Yoga and so far there's some decent info in there. I always have to reread everything several times. Never had that capacity to acquire information quickly, and if I don't use it, I lose it  
Mish |
|
| |
|
Location: London, England | Hi Mish,
I think you would find that the book brings the anatomy alive-so it's easier to use in a class or on your own body. I don't think Coulter's background enables him to put muscles and bones across to his audience anywhere near as well-this makesi t harder to learn, memorize, and use..
Nick |
|
| |
|
| Mishoga, what's your view on the first post of mine?
I started this thread to ask whether a little, non-visible, arching of the lower back while doing The hundred and lowering the legs is acceptable. As I said in the post, I am not referring to a full arching. I just can feel that my back "gave in" a little, in relation to a resting position.
I assume this milimetrical arching isn't harmful, but sometimes I wonder whether "no arching" means completely static. In this case I wouldn't be able to lower the legs to 45o, rather I would have to keep it at 90.
Thanks! |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 1738
Location: right where I'm supposed to be | First, how long are you practicing pilates. 45 degrees for the legs is advanced and should only be practiced by persons who have taken classes for sometime and preferably with a teacher. Even so, the spine will lift slightly and I mran slightly. There should absolutely be no pain present. If there is you need to practice with legs to 90 degrees.
Are you in your C-curve (chin lifted)?
Mish |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 1738
Location: right where I'm supposed to be | Nick - 2006-12-01 4:30 PM
Hi Mish,
I think you would find that the book brings the anatomy alive-so it's easier to use in a class or on your own body. I don't think Coulter's background enables him to put muscles and bones across to his audience anywhere near as well-this makesi t harder to learn, memorize, and use..
Nick m
It looks like I might want this book for Christmas. Thanks! I need a bookcase for my library of books |
|
| |
|
| Mishoga, thank you for your post.
I am keeping the C-curve and feel no pain at all. It was only a worry that occurred me. Because the arching I mentioned is absolutely non-visible to the instructor, but I feel the very, very slight arching. Actually, I don't feel, I just thought whether I could be arching and not even noticing. I then noticed that a sheet of paper slides more easily under my lower back (but still gets stuck) when my legs are at 45o than when they are at 90o.
So I just thought whether this could be harmful if kept unnoticed to the instructor.
Thanks! |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 1738
Location: right where I'm supposed to be | If there's no pain during and after the routine and following 24 to 48 hours than you are fine. Just make sure when you are performing the hundred that your abdominals are contracted and engaged. Focus on your breath.
Mishy |
|
| |
|
Location: London, England | Hi Mish,
But surely you can do an exercise wrongly, and get no pain from it for years-I mean, just because you dont feel pain within two days, that's no proof of correct technique. Many people with arthritis for example, have spent their whole lives damaging the affected joints-. maybe i'm being pedantic.
Nick |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 1738
Location: right where I'm supposed to be | Nick,
You are correct but I can only offer quick advice from her description. I can't see her form. What she should be doing is taking a class with a qualified and experienced teacher.
I'm sure you can agree as a teacher it's hard to offer advice via interent conversations about alignment. You can describe but someone must be in tune with their body to understand the mechanics of movement and form.
The spine should be stable.
Mish
|
|
| |
|
Location: London, England | Hi Mish,
Too true!!
Nick |
|
| |
no back arching at all?
