View Single Post
Old 07-28-14, 10:08 PM
  #21  
jyl
Senior Member
 
jyl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland OR
Posts: 7,639

Bikes: 61 Bianchi Specialissima 71 Peugeot G50 7? P'geot PX10 74 Raleigh GranSport 75 P'geot UO8 78? Raleigh Team Pro 82 P'geot PSV 86 P'geot PX 91 Bridgestone MB0 92 B'stone XO1 97 Rans VRex 92 Cannondale R1000 94 B'stone MB5 97 Vitus 997

Mentioned: 146 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 49 Times in 31 Posts
Originally Posted by wphamilton
Then you are likely pressing down unconsciously, or unconsciously engaging your core. Put scales under your feet and keep the same reading both ways, and stay relaxed from the waist down.


Hoggs is just incorrect.
Of course you engage your core.

In the saddle forward position, if you are trying to avoid supporting yourself with your hands, you would have to engage your core hard, really hold your trunk rigid, because you are fighting the imbalance that wants to topple you forward. Your center of gravity is too far forward, and an unbalanced object still tips over, no matter how rigid it is. In the saddle rearward position, you still engage your core, but you don't have to do it as hard, because you are not fighting an imbalanced position, you are simply doing a not-very-deep squat.

Here is another experiment you can try. You've done squats with a bar and weights, I assume. Get in the squat rack, put that loaded bar on your shoulders, keep your butt directly over your feet, and bend forward at the waist. You'll hurt yourself, fall forward, and get yelled at by all the lifters who know what they are about. One of them will get in the squat rack and show you the right way. He'll push his butt way back while bending forward at the hips. Because he is balanced, he will not fall over. Sure he is engaging his core, but so were you; you were imbalanced and he is balanced.
jyl is offline