Thread: Plank exercise unreliable measure of core strength

Plank exercise unreliable measure of core strength
by Anthony Roberts

You know that little exercise where you lay there in a push-up position, but resting on your elbows instead of your hands? Well, a recent study examined its usefulness as a measure of isokinetic core strength, and found that it was unreliable.Think about that for a second…if the plank isn’t a good way to measure core strength, is it a good way to develop it? Just like most major strength-developing exercises are also an effective way to measure strength (squatting, cleaning, snatching, benching, deadlifting, etc…), I’d say that if we can’t measure core strength with the plank, we probably can’t develop it that way either…

But we always knew that, didn’t we? How strong do your abs really get by sitting in that position, versus (let’s say) doing weighted abdominal work?

There’s really only two types of people who should bother with plank exercises:

* #1. Ninjas. Ninjas often need to crawl undetected into castles and such, often across wires or in other hazardous situations, where they might end up sitting in a plank position for extended periods of time.

* #2. Spec-Ops Snipers. Snipers also need to crawl in a similar position to the plank, and then remain in that position for hours at a time. The plank exercise is perfect for them.

Frankly, other than these two situations, I’m unconvinced that the plank exercise is an appropriate exercise prescription for most athletes.

J Strength Cond Res. 2009 May;23(3):915-25.
Age, weight, and the front abdominal power test as predictors of isokinetic trunk strength and work in young men and women.

Cowley PM, Fitzgerald S, Sottung K, Swensen T.

Department of Exercise and Sport Sciences, Ithaca College, Ithaca, New York, USA. pmcowley@syr.edu

Abstract

First we tested the reliability of two new field tests of core stability (plank to fatigue test [PFT] and front abdominal power test [FAPT]), as well as established measures of core stability (isokinetic trunk extension and flexion strength [TES and TFS] and work [TEW and TFW]) over 3 days in 8 young men and women (24.0 +/- 3.1 years). The TES, TFS, TFW, and FAPT were highly reliable, TEW was moderately reliable, and PFT [plank for time] were unreliable for use during a single testing session. Next, we determined if age, weight, and the data from the reliable field test (FAPT) were predictive of TES, TEW, TFS, and TFW in 50 young men and women (19.0 +/- 1.2 years). The FAPT was the only significant predictor of TES and TEW in young women, explaining 16 and 15% of the variance in trunk performance, respectively. Weight was the only significant predictor of TFS and TFW in young women, explaining 28 and 14% of the variance in trunk performance, respectively. In young men, weight was the only significant predictor of TES, TEW, TFS, and TFW, and explained 27, 35, 42, and 33%, respectively, of the variance in trunk performance. In conclusion, the ability of weight and the FAPT to predict TES, TEW, TFS, and TFW was more frequent in young men than women. Additionally, because the FAPT requires few pieces of equipment, is fast to administer, and predicts isokinetic TES and TEW in young women, it can be used to provide a field-based estimate of isokinetic TES and TEW in women without history of back or lower-extremity injury.

Plank exercise unreliable measure of core strength | Anthony Roberts Blog

squats and deads please