It is hard to detect, because in badminton , and many other sports, a movement is so complex, that it utilize a lot of muscles, other than in the gym where you only train an isolated portion. When you play around a few sets (~10) you might start to feel a general fatigue in your upper body. Then try to do some bodyweight exercises like dips or pull ups and look where your muscles start to fail.
I reckon dips or pullups would probably fail in the same places after badminton. And it's even possible for badminton to make an individual body part used in badminton less likely to fail because it may be like a warm up. For the purposes of the test of what muscles are fatigued from badminton, it'd perhaps be more logical to do it the other way around, gym then playing badminton with some muscle fatigue, then seeing where it takes effect. Of course it may be like a warm down.. .So perhaps muscles would have to be so fatigued that play is severely hampered. (For the purposes of the test). But often i'm not even sure how much benefit there is in even knowing what muscles.. we have some ideas, but even with weighted pullups with eg a 20kg weight plate or a lot of weight on squats, I don't think made me anything unusual on the badminton court. Let's say you find out what muscles, so then what.. you'd need some weird machines to work badminton movements. Those weird machines don't exist. And once those are invented, it'd then be good for one to know what kind of weight to do on them as a requirement for doing xyz shot in badminton. Gyms at the moment, wherever they are, aren't really designed for badminton, they're designed for either bodybuilders or powerlifters or people trying to lose weight. (And you have gyms specific to sport of bodybuilding, or for powerlifting or strongman or perhaps olympic weightifting.. and general fitness gyms that aren't too serious so as to appeal to the general public). No badminton gyms exist partly 'cos most people wouldn't know what to put in them.. the research hasn't been done. . No doubt strong quads are good for jump smashes so somebody doing a jump smash would probably have a reasonably decent squat.. And where it's not just a weird machine for training the arm to do a particular stroke, there's also full body movements where you'd really need a system to measure muscle activation at each stage like EMG https://www.myontec.com/ But at the moment I think there's a huge gap between the gym and the badminton court.. Many countries people with an interest don't even seem to demonstrate much knowledge of biomechanics, besides individuals into badminton not even having very basic interest or knowledge to even use a term like 'forearm'). Maybe Denmark might develop something in this regard as at least I see some of their videos they take care in terms of their understanding of biomechanics and that's a start. But we are far from eg personal trainers specialising in badminton and not even at personal trainers measuring muscle activation.
Gyms are for (body) weight lifting, which is useful in a lot of sports. Just take a look at badminton athletes. Sukamuljo looks like he do deadlifts (traps), SYQ & CL will train their legs for sure, you will not get these legs from badminton alone. Even look at the quads of TYY, though not as ripped as a man, you can often see the silhouette of really powerful quads. I believe, that the standard deadlift/squat as whole body exercise and some special training for legs, will be part of many top badminton athletes. One example of LCW at the gym:
The gyms that they train at in China are significantly worse than my local gym. What more could you want?
weight training helps to an extent. but you also need to do it right. Those body builders with huge muscles will be very poor at badminton. They can lift a few hundred pounds but the muscles are bulky and slow. They go to the build to focus on size and strength, but not speed and agility. The opposite are the boxers, martial artists, they have the right type of muscles, speed and power, they do look very strong, but not bulky and slow, but fast, speed. so if you go to the gym, train for speed. use relatively lighter weight and do 20+ reps instead of 8-12 reps. it will take much longer for muscle to build up but you will know it is the right type of muscle. as for the OP original question, you just need to think about what muscle accelerates the hand/racket before the wrist takes over, and then you will realize tricep is very important (along with other) muscle to train.
Just wondering where you get the idea that speed athletes should train with lighter weights in the 20 plus rep range ?
Yep ^^. Sorry @kwun , but definitely disagree with you on this 20+ reps range. If you want to get generically stronger there are various factors to consider, but I would never think about going over 20 reps for power/isolation work - it just means you're doing 10+ reps of wasting your time. Cursory google backs this up. @ralphz , the following is some grade-A BS You don't need 'weird machines' to train for badminton. Why on earth would you think that!? You go to a gym and you train your muscles. You get on court to train your technique. There is a plethora of information freely available online on how to train for different purposes, e.g. strength, power, endurance. There is nothing that you need for badminton oriented fitness that is missing from a good gym.
What about fast twitch muscle training? I always thought you need to use quick, explosive moves to train the muscles for speed. Slower, longer weighted moves to develop slow twitch. substituting more weight and fewer reps might work for general training and save time. Assuming fast twitch muscles are desired.
You will do all this research and you will see someone that says this and someone else that says that. Then you will see this wildly successful athlete doing one thing and another wildly successful athlete doing another thing. Then you will come to the conclusion that there is no right way to train. Overanalysis is paralysis. All this time you spend thinking about the right way to train is time you wasted not training.
Not really, not at the level of question that 'ouchie' asked. It's pretty well known whether you are training more slow twitch or fast twitch. But nobody has a goal of "train fast twitch muscle fibres" or "train slow twitch muscle fibres". You have to consider what is your sport, and where are you struggling or where are you looking to improve. A person should really have a pretty good idea if they get more tired by lifting heavy weights, or by running a long distance (unless they've never lifted heavy weights!). If somebody that was born to powerlift decided to run marathons they might go to try the marathon and their legs just tire really fast compared to others of their experience level. Or they try powerlifting and they seem to be pretty good given their experience level.. (any powerlifter is going to get very tired muscles that need a lot of rest. but they have an ability to push a lot of weight explosively). So then you might be able to make a guess if the person's muscle composition is balanced, or has a predominance of slow twitch(natural marathon runner), or has a predominance of fast twitch(natural powerlifter). And it may be possible to make some change to that.. though to a large extent you have what you have. Also a person could have different muscle composition in their legs than in their arms. Badminton is a funny one 'cos when moving fast eg at the front, at the net, is fast but not explosive. There is a -very- strong neurological component in badminton in particular.. And not just for one muscle, but muscles in sequence. Or for complex footwork patterns that takes years to learn and often need to be corrected and adjusted.
Possible substantial usage of Triceps might be your partner low serves, and the opponent hits it flat onto your backhand side, It's not high and behind you. It's out to the side and low. I suppose a big past of that shot involves the arm extending thus triceps? It'd be interesting to know if anybody found that training triceps helped with that shot. Or actually on second thought, perhaps not as perhaps the shot should be done by extending the arm out long before doing the shot as it comes so fast. Then the shot is done by just contracting the arm a little bit.
you think fast always equals explosive? I don't think so. I don't fully understand why not, but I don't think so. Putting aside badminton, Imagine a child waving their arms around, that's fast but not explosive. Imagine somebody at the back of the court doing a good drop, the racket moves fast but not explosive. A slap in the face could be fast but not explosive. If you stood on a beach and started doing badminton footwork that you'd do at the front of the court, and somebody got in the way you might not knock them over. Perhaps because in badminton your weight is balanced so that you can stop. And recover, remain composed to hit teh shot. Be ready for the next shot. Whereas if you wanted to knock somebody over you wouldn't care about recovery afterwards you'd throw yourself into them. I don't know the mechanics of it, but some heavyweight boxers look like they aren't punching fast.. but their punches are very powerful.. and it's not just their weight.. there's some kind of technique.. I am probably somewhat confused on this issue 'cos I don't understand it, but i'm aware that one aspect is Force, which is 0 if there's no acceleration. And Momentum=mass * velocity.. so a slap might have much low momentum because even though the acceleration is high, it's over a short distance so the velocity low. People describe a jab as fast, but maybe it's not, maybe it's just a fast acceleration but over a short distance so velocity is low. So maybe 'fast' is ambiguous and it should be stated if what is meant is high acceleration or high velocity. Perhaps fast would often mean high velocity, but moving off fast would mean high acceleration not high velocity. So it's ambiguous. And a high acceleration at a short distance could be described as fast. So, definitely fast seems like an ambiguous term and that may be part of the problem. I don't know if mass can point, and i'd rather know a more correct way of saying it, but If you move around the court in badminton, then since you often want to keep balanced, your mass won't be "pointing" in the direction of movement, so even if you are moving at some speed, if you run into something it might not budge it as much as if you were off balance with your mass pointing in the direction of movement such that you'd struggle to stop yourself. When one says fast, do they mean high acceleration, or do they mean high velocity.. And if explosiveness is how much you can move something you hit then i don't know what factor counts most.. momentum, velocity, acceleration.. Maybe force or acceleration is irrelevant. And all that counts is velocity.(for the same mass of course), In which case fast is only explosive if we mean fast speed and forget acceleration. But if you got hit with something at 30mph that had just accelerated to 30mph I imagine it might be more explosive and push you further than if you got hit by something at 30mph with 0 acceleration. Which makes me wonder how you measure "explosiveness", if it's more about force or more about momentum or what. At the front of the court your feet and body accelerate fast over short distances. Also, if you ran forward on a racing track as fast accelerating as fast as you do on a badminton court, but no starting block, I wonder if maybe you'd still have more momentum/explosiveness on the race track because you don't have to worry about stopping suddenly. So you can be more oriented in the direction you are going, so there's that factor too that would perhaps make a race track movement more explosive. There are some here more educated in physics that could be more clear. I have been meaning to understand these things better.
If you're at the net and you need to move fast then it's an explosive movement. You need high acceleration. Nearly everything in badminton is explosive. If you're talking badminton and fast movements... It's explosive. Sent from my ONE E1001 using Tapatalk
you need to accelerate fast but if you want to say explosive, bear in mind that some beginners go so explosive they can't stop themselves running off the court.. so it's not *that* explosive 'cos you have to stop and get back into position it is pretty fast acceleration though obviously, nobody is disputing that.
A, that's bye the bye, and B, that's because they're not explosive *enough* to stop themselves. You're not looking at this correctly at a fundamental level. Sent from my ONE E1001 using Tapatalk
That's because they start late and accelerate to slowly and have bad footwork. It's not because the needed movement to reach every shuttle early doesn't need an explosive start.
definitely a lot of truth to that , they do start too late, but that then means they may go more explosive at the end. Also, part of it is leaning forward or not, So a runner near the finish line will lean forward to accelerate, and (perhaps due to speed or perhaps due to acceleration or perhaps just because he leans forward), can't just suddenly stop. a car is an interesting one, because it doesn't lean forwards, and the higher the speed, the greater the "stopping distance". i.e. the harder it is to just suddenly stop. I don't know if acceleration affects stopping distance too. But clearly more "explosiveness" in terms of speed and acceleration, makes it harder to stop. but you make a great point about needing an explosive stop. but if a runner learnt how to stop explosively like an explosive badminton stop, and didn't lean forward, would he always be able to stop explosively eg after his run? perhaps not, perhaps he'd move too explosive to stop explosively. Just like a car can't stop suddenly once it reaches a certain speed. also, a chasse forward may be "fast", for a small distance, I don't know if that means acceleration or speed, but if it was that "fast", then why don't runners do a chasse at the end of their run when they only have a small distance to get over the finish line?
In order to control movement and change direction you first need to reverse the direction of motion (equal and opposite force). If triceps are performing the opposite motion of biceps then the importance of triceps must be equally important as biceps. Which is probably not that high compared to the legs and core unless you spend a lot of time diving and need to spring back up quickly, like LCW diving defence. LCW can do about 10-20 dives in a match but his legs and core are in use for every rally. As for explosive movements around court; the more explosive or faster the movement the harder it is to stop (again equal and opposite force). Beginners tend to have no plan or technique to stop quickly. Instead they take 2 or 3 steps to come to a stop. This can give the impression that explosive movements are causing a problem so should be avoided. It is actually a good problem, the real problem is stopping. Better players will develop a lunging motion or wider stance in order to control their motion. Explosive movements are critical and should be encouraged. Stopping or controlling movement should also be encouraged. You will never reach anything close to your top speed in badminton, you are only 4 or 5 strides from any 2 corners of the court. So in reality your maximum badminton velocity is whatever you can achieve between 2 opposite corners but remember this also means starting with zero speed and ending with zero speed. Good players can look deceptively slow because they are rarely moving at speed, instead they explode with 1 or 2 steps then slow down. The idea is to slow down to have more body control at the point they need to make contact with the shuttle resulting in better quality shots. There is no point getting to the shuttle if you are still moving at 15 mph. It is better to get there and have the control to play a better quality shot. If you don't give yourself the opportunity to play the right shot then you have to resort to a less than ideal shot. I use the word "opportunity" often.
