The Physics of Fitness

Chapter Fifteen
Balance / Core Exercises
in Physique Development Training

One of the most prolific trends these days is people combining

resistance exercises with instability. The purpose of this, in theory, is
to improve “balance” and to strengthen “the core”. However, these
concepts are not well understood by most participants - nor even
most trainers.

This method of exercise is not as productive as it might seem.

In this chapter, we’ll explore the following questions:

Do “unstable exercises” actually produce improvements in balance?

Does adding “instability” during exercise, compromise the physique

development benefits?

Does the average person need to improve his balance?

What is the “core”? And is “instability” the best way to strengthen it?

- - - - - -

One of the most common things we see in gyms these days, is people doing exercises
while standing on one leg (instead of two legs), while sitting on a Stability Ball (instead
of on a bench), or while standing on an unstable surface, like a wobble board (instead of
solid ground). In other words, people are doing resistance exercises while unstable.

Examples of this would include One-Legged Dumbbell Curls (below - left) and Squats
on a Bosu Ball (below - right).

1
The intention behind this type of modification is, ostensibly, to improve balance, while
simultaneously developing the physique and strengthening the body.

Let’s examine where this trend fits in with traditional fitness goals.

Historically, the goals below have been the primary ones associated with physical
fitness for last 50 to 100 years.

1. Leanness (lower percentage of body fat)

2. Muscular Development (visible hypertrophy)

3. Muscle Strength

4. Muscular Endurance

5. Cardiovascular Endurance (heart and lung capacity / VO2-max)

6. Flexibility

7. Improved Health (reduced cardiovascular risk factors, etc.)

The vast majority of people are usually very content making progress toward these
seven goals. The methods by which these goals are achieved are generally
straightforward, notwithstanding common mistakes in biomechanics.

2
We do higher reps with lower weight for muscular endurance, and lower reps with
heavier weight for muscle strength - both of which contribute to muscle growth.

We do aerobic exercise for cardiovascular endurance, and - together with the

anaerobic exercise and diet modifications - we achieve leanness.

For flexibility, we stretch and do full range of motion resistance exercise.

Some people also play basketball or participate in some other sport, for athleticism and
recreation.

These activities also make us healthier. They improve our insulin sensitivity, reduce
our risk of diabetes, lower our blood pressure, improve our VO2 max (ability to utilize
oxygen), improve our bone density, improve our coordination, and provide us with a
variety of other health benefits.

Since the early 1900s, millions of people have achieved outstanding physical condition
using these types of activities. Even world class athletes have trained using these
methods. However, some time around the late 1990s, “balance” training started
becoming popular. Today many people have been convinced that “balance” training is
essential. But this begs the question: If it is “essential”, how could people have gotten
into such good condition before it became popular?

Does “essential” refer to its effects on general conditioning (body fat loss, muscular
development, cardiovascular and metabolic benefits), or to its improvement of people’s
balance. Let’s briefly examine each of these.

3
The chart above shows that since 1960, obesity rates in the United States have been
steadily rising. As of the date of this study (2010), nearly 36% of all Americans qualified
as “obese” (i.e., defined as > 30 pounds overweight). Currently, obesity is more
prevalent than ever before, and it is projected to reach the 50% mark by the year 2030.

Interestingly, revenues spent on “fitness club memberships” has also been rising at
approximately the same rate.

Currently, there are more dollars being spent annually on fitness products and services
than ever before - see graph below.

4
So, it would appear that “new products and services” (which would include “balance”
products and instruction) - on which a growing amount of money is being spent - is not
translating to fewer people being overweight. Also, those who are participating in
fitness programs today are not necessarily in “better” shape than people who
participated in fitness programs twenty or thirty years ago - as defined by the traditional
standards (body fat level, muscular development, cardiovascular risk factors, etc.).

Given the fact that overall fitness has not improved since “balance exercise” became
popular, it would appear that it is not “essential” for overall fitness. So, should we then
assume that “essential” refers to the improvement of balance?

If that is the context, we need to first establish that “balance” was a problem for most
people, before the advent of this type of exercise. And, we would have to demonstrate
that this type of exercise has made a significant improvement on this “problem”, in order
to consider this type of exercise as “essential”. Did the majority of people have a real
problem with “balance”, which has now been dramatically improved? Unfortunately,
there is no evidence of either of these being true.

With the exception of people over the age of 70, few people ever complain about
balance. Of course, the idea of “improving balance” naturally appeals to most people,
but those under the age of 50 would generally not include it among their top five fitness
goals, nor do they complain of “falling down frequently”.

5
Interestingly, it seems that the advent of “balance exercise” coincides with the use of
“proprioception” training, which top level athletes and physical therapists began using
in the late 90s. Top level athletes - tennis players, basketball players, boxers, etc. -
typically use proprioceptive (unstable) exercises to improve their specific sports
performance requirements.

During the late 90s, fitness magazines began writing stories about top level competitive
athletes, and how they train for their respective sports. Publishers (marketers) knew
that consumers would love the idea of using the same training program as their favorite
celebrity or professional athlete.

Of course, the performance requirements of a top level tennis player or boxer are very
different than the goals of the average fitness consumer. Those requirements are also
very different than the goal of a person pursuing physique development. Nevertheless,
“sports star / celebrity” workouts became massively appealing, and the marketing
opportunities were readily apparent.

Suddenly, a multitude of new “balance” products and programs began popping up,
targeting fitness consumers. These products were marketed as either “performance”
training or “remedial balance” training. This type of marketing was very catchy, and an
entirely new category of “fitness” was created.

6
 - - - - - - -
What is Balance ?
Technically speaking, balance is known as “spacial orientation”. It is our ability to
sense the position of our body, relative to gravity. It allows us to know if we are leaning
to the right or to the left…forward or backward. It allows us to sense whether we are
standing on a flat surface or on one that is slightly inclined. We are born with this sense
of balance, because the mechanisms are built into our anatomy. It involves our brain’s
innate ability to receive and process information from the various balance sensors in our
body - our inner ears primarily, but also our eyes, feet and joints.

7
The “vestibular system” in our inner-ears is our primary balance sensor. It is made up of
tiny fluid-filled canals that are lined with microscopic hairs, plus a network of nerves and
calcium crystals.

This inner-ear system, together with our eyes, plus the sensors on the bottoms of our
feet and in our joints, inform our brain whether we are stable or off-balance.

Older people who begin having difficulty with their spacial orientation (usually over the
age of 70) typically experience a degradation of these balance sensors. This causes a
person to feel as if they are about to fall, when they are actually stable - or to feel as if
they are stable, when they are actually leaning too far in one direction or the other.
Sometimes it is accompanied by dizziness (i.e., “vertigo”).

“Disequilibrium” (loss of spacial orientation) is usually caused by dysfunction in the

inner-ear, vision problems (cataracts, macular degeneration, glaucoma, etc.),
“peripheral neuropathy” (numbness in the legs and/or feet), or some other neurological
disorder. These are medical issues which need to be addressed by a neurologist or
“Otolaryngologist” (i.e., ear, nose and throat doctor) - not by a Personal Trainer.

8
 What is Proprioception ?
Proprioception is the learned ability to control what our limbs and torso are doing,
without actually looking at them or thinking about them. For example, when we drive a
car, we can maneuver the brake and gas pedal, without consciously thinking about
them. We are able to apply just the right amount of pressure on each pedal, at the
appropriate time, without much conscious thought - just as an experienced pianist or
guitarist is able to play his/her instrument without much conscious thought of what his/
her fingers are doing. It is “learned coordination”.

This is ONLY similar to “spacial orientation” in the sense that the brain receives signals
from various sensors. However, proprioception training is NOT a remedy for
“disequilibrium”.

Proprioception is the subconscious learning of physical skills, so they become

“automatic” - like juggling or punching a speed bag. Improving our ability to Squat while
on a Bosu Ball (without falling off) is a learned skill, in which our central nervous system
and muscles become increasingly familiar with the feeling of standing on a surface that
is not solid.

Specifically, the body is learning to respond to the pliable surface on which the person is
standing. So, the skill learned of standing on a Bosu Ball is relatively useless when that
person stands on a solid surface, because there is no “floor pliability” to which the body
has learned to adjust. A solid floor does not require pliable floor skills.

This explains why people who spend a considerable amount of time doing this type of
exercise, do not notice much difference in their day-to-day “balance” - even when they
have gotten very good at stabilizing themselves on unstable surfaces. Their body has
learned how to compensate for a “wobbly” foundation, but this is only useful if and when
the foundation wobbles.

In fact, calling One-Legged Dumbbell Curl or a Bosu Ball Squat, “Balance Training” is a
misnomer. It should be called “Proprioceptive Training”, and this is not just semantics.
Calling it “balance training” is borderline marketing deception.

Referring to unstable exercises as “balance” training suggests we are fixing an

essential part of our physicality, which might be failing. This naturally makes people feel
obligated to do it. They might even think it is “essential” - and they might be
irresponsible to “neglect” it.

On the other hand, referring to unstable exercises as “skill learning” would likely make
people think twice about whether or not they want to spend time and energy learning
that particular skill. It should also make them wonder if it’s wise to MIX that type of
activity with normal resistance exercise, since it does compromise the effectiveness of
resistance exercise.

9
Learning to balance ourselves on a Stability Ball is a skill that will only manifest its value
when attempting to perform daily activities that are very similar to balancing ourselves
on a Stability Ball. That is not likely to happen very often. Like juggling, it is a skill
which may be fun, but is not essential.

More importantly, the question you should be asking is this: “Even if I think there is a
value in learning how to coordinate myself on unstable surfaces, should I combine that
with resistance exercise - simultaneously?”. The answer is “no”.

Who Needs Proprioceptive Exercise?

There are people with special circumstances who could benefit from learning
proprioception of the feet and legs. This would include anyone who participates
(competes) in a sport which requires exceptional reactive coordination of the legs.

It might also include people with a neurological disorder, or people over the age of 70,
who have lost coordination due to inactivity. In those cases, practicing standing or
Squatting on unstable surfaces might be useful, although dancing and various other
coordination drills would likely produce a better result. But it is a specialized activity,
and appropriate mainly for people with coordination / proprioception problems, or sports
specific needs. Proprioceptive exercise is not appropriate for everyone.

Proprioceptive learning is tedious and time consuming. It should be done frequently, for
best results. Thirty minutes per week is not enough to make a significant difference.
Any type of learning - especially tactile learning - requires frequency and enough

10
familiarity with the activity to produce an automatic response. Like piano or dance, it
requires frequency and consistency. And even then, one needs to be aware of precisely
what it is that they “learning”.

Unfortunately, the fitness industry is promoting this type of activity to everyone - even to
those who are not experiencing a neurological disorder, as well as to those who are
under the age of 50, and to those who have NOT expressed any concern with a lack of
coordination. People with basic fitness goals are treated as if they have a coordination
“problem” that needs fixing. It has become “standard prescription” for the masses now.

A Common Scenario at the Gym

An overweight man in his 40s, joins a gym. He’s been neglecting it for a while, in part
because he feels embarrassed about his current condition. He assumes that most
people in the gym will be more fit than him, and thinks he’ll stand out as “the fat guy”.
But he has finally mustered up the courage to join a gym, and is eager to get “lean,
strong and healthy”. Let’s call him “Joe”.

One day, when Joe is at the gym, he starts doing a set of Supine Dumbbell Presses,
(shown below) for his Pectoral muscles, with a pair of 30 pound dumbbells. Joe is not
entirely sure what his fitness goals are, but he knows that this exercise is good for his
Pectorals, and figures it’s a good place to start.

Along comes a trainer, who is employed by this particular gym. The trainer sees this
“overweight man in his 40s”, and correctly assumes that this man may be a little unsure

11
about what he’s doing. So, the trainer approaches Joe and says, “Would you like me
to show you a better way of doing that?”.

Joe is delighted that this trainer is offering to help him, and automatically assumes that
this trainer will honestly show him a “better way”. Joe says, “yes - thanks!”.

The trainer leads Joe to an area where the large “Stability Balls” are kept. The trainer
asks Joe to lie on the ball with the same 30 pound dumbbells he was previously using.
Joe complies.

Joe lies back on the ball (below), and places both feet securely on the ground with a
wide foot stance. He then begins doing the same movement he was doing on the
bench. Naturally, it feels a little less stable than it did when he was on the solid bench.
The ball is a little bouncy and less solid than the flat bench, but it’s not entirely
uncomfortable. It’s still within Joe’s ability to do the exercise with the same weights.

However, the trainer stops Joe, and tells him that he wants him to do it a bit differently.
He asks Joe to raise one foot off the ground (with leg straight), and place the other foot
in the center, on the floor. Joe follows this instruction, and quickly realizes that it’s much
less stable than it was with both feet on the ground. Before, there were three points of
contact with the ground, so it was a “tripod”. Now, there are only two points of contact
with the ground, so it is a “bi-pod”.

12
Joe realizes that in order to stay balanced, he needs to keep both dumbbells equally
distant from the center of his torso, as he brings them down….just as a person walking
a tight-rope would have to keep his balance-bar equally balanced on both sides.

13
But the trainer now makes an additional request. He wants Joe to bring the dumbbells
down “alternately” - first only the right arm, while keeping the left arm up…..and then
only the left arm, while keeping the right arm up. Not knowing what to expect, and
assuming the trainer is the “expert”, Joe complies with the instruction.

Almost immediately, Joe falls to the right side of the ball, because he had extended
more weight to the right side of his body, than to the left side of his body. In essence, it
would be the same as if the tight-rope walker had extended his balance bar too far to
the right, creating “imbalance”.

Joe is now on the floor, feeling embarrassed that he was not able to stay on the ball.
He feels clumsy and blames himself entirely for not being able to stay on the ball. The
trainer looks at Joe with an amused smirk, suggesting - “It looks like we’ve found a
‘problem’ with your BALANCE”.

14
Joe suddenly becomes concerned that he has a more serious issue to worry about -
other than the fact that he’s overweight and has very little muscle tone. Apparently he
has a balance problem - or so he is being lead to believe.

The trainer helps Joe stand up and tells him to try again. Joe is determined to NOT fall
off the ball, and will try his best to prevent that from happening. He exchanges his 30
pound dumbbells for 20 pound dumbbells, knowing this will reduce the odds of him
falling off.

He gets back on the ball with the lighter weights. It is a bit easier to keep his balance
using the lighter weight, but still not quite easy enough to be sure he won't fall off again.

So he brings the weight (the dumbbell) closer to his side as he lowers it, rather than so
far out to the side. This creates LESS imbalance, because it reduces the magnification
of the weight, due to a shorter lever. This helps Joe stay on the ball.

After a few sets of this, Joe asks the trainer what the difference is between him doing
the exercise on a solid bench, using both arms simultaneously - versus doing it on a
Stability Ball with one leg off the ground, and using only one arm at a time. The trainer,
with complete confidence, replies, “Core”.

Many people have heard of this concept, but are not exactly sure what it means. So
Joe asks the trainer what it’s all about. The trainer tells Joe that the “core” is the
“center of your body”. He tells Joe that it “stabilizes your lower back and
abdomen, and helps you coordinate all your movements - including balance”. Of
course, this is what the trainer has been taught by the industry.

The trainer further explains that “without a strong core, you have nothing”. He then
asks Joe the rhetorical question, “You wouldn’t build a house on a weak foundation,
would you?” - with a smug expression of “common sense”.

(Note: This is a ridiculous comparison. An architectural foundation is a flat slab of concrete, on

which the weight of an entire house SITS. The muscles of the midsection are important, but
they do not serve the same function as an architectural slab of concrete.)

“Wow”, says Joe - thinking how lucky he is to have had this trainer help him discover
this glaring “balance” problem he has. Almost immediately, Joe asks the trainer if he
has any openings in his schedule for some “training sessions”. Bingo - the trainer has a
new client.

Being Lead Astray

Let’s examine what actually happened here.

When Joe was doing his Supine Dumbbell Press on the flat bench, he was effectively
working his Pectorals. He was using a pair of 30 pound dumbbells, and he was using

15
“good form”. He brought his humerus (upper arm bone) laterally, out to the side, with a
vertical (neutral) forearm, so that the humerus maintained a normal lever length. This is
the proper mechanics for getting the most benefit to the Pectorals.

Later, when Joe experienced difficulty staying on the Stability Ball while using the 30-
pound weights, he reduced the resistance to 20 pounds AND also brought the weight in
closer to his torso - which shortened the effective lever length of the humerus. Both of
these “adjustments” reduced the resistance to his Pectorals.

Joe was then told that doing this unstable version of a Supine Dumbbell Press would
improve his “core”. In essence, Joe was told that the “trade-off” for him getting less
Pectoral benefit, was that he would be rewarded with benefits to his CORE, and
improved balance. However, this is not true.

In fact, both of the “exercises” being attempted on the Swiss Ball (the Dumbbell Press
and the Static Torso Rotation) are compromised. His Pectoral stimulation is significantly
reduced, and his “core” stimulation is half as effective as it could be. The reason why
both exercises are compromised is entirely due to the instability.

If Joe had continued doing his normal, flat bench Supine Dumbbell Press, using the 30
pound weights that he was originally using, and maintained the “normal” arm length (90
degree elbow bend), he would have been able to work his Pectorals much more
effectively.

And - although Joe wasn’t entirely aware of it - the instability of being on the Ball forced
him to perform the “core” part of the exercise with half the resistance he’d be able to use
if he was in a more stable situation.

If Joe stood securely on the ground, and performed a Standing Torso Rotation with a
Cable (shown below), he’d be able to load his torso-rotation muscles with twice as
much resistance - thereby working his “core” muscles much more effectively, as
compared with lying on the Stability Ball.

16
Imagine trying to do the above exercise, if the ground was covered with oil - making it
“unstable”. It would prevent a firm footing on the ground, and would thus force the
person to use a lighter weight to prevent sliding. This would then compromise the
loading of the target muscles. Instability always limits the amount of weight that
can be used, which then compromises the strengthening of the target muscles.

Attempting to work both muscle functions - the Pectorals and the “core” muscles -
simultaneously, compromises both. Some people may think it’s a clever way to
exercise because it (theoretically) allows both muscle groups to be worked
simultaneously. But this would only be worth doing if both muscle groups are able to
work as well as they could if they were worked independently. However, combining
these two movements FAILS to work each muscle as well as each could be worked
separately.

What about the Proprioceptive benefit? Yes, Joe would learn how to coordinate himself
on the Swiss Ball, such that he would eventually get pretty good at not falling off the ball
while performing this “stunt”. But that would only be useful if he encounters situations
exactly like this in his day-to-day life. Otherwise, it’s pretty much useless.

Some people may consider it “fun” - trying to avoid falling off the ball, while doing the
exercise. It may seem like a game that tests their skill. That’s fine - juggling is also fun
and challenging. However, let us not delude ourselves into thinking that we’re gaining
some wonderful fitness benefit, by doing an exercise that compromises our power by
way of instability. In terms of strength gains and muscle development, what this trainer
instructed Joe to do was entirely counterproductive.

In retrospect, you can now see that the trainer did not show Joe a “better way” to do
that exercise. Instead, he lead Joe to believe that Joe had a problem with his balance,
which needed to be corrected. But Joe did not have a balance problem that needed
“fixing”. So, instead of helping Joe build muscle, lose fat, develop endurance and
become healthier, the trainer actually impeded Joe’s efforts and lead him in an entirely
different direction. It almost could be viewed as a “bait and switch”, except that not
even the trainer is aware that the “advice” he’s giving Joe is counterproductive to Joe’s
actual goals.

It’s not that the trainer is corrupt, deceptive or unscrupulous. A trainer simply wants to
earn a living, and wants to do his job well. The fitness industry has convinced trainers
that doing their job “well” (these days) requires focusing on “balance” and “core”. The
industry has taught them that this creates more business opportunities, more activities,
more services, more equipment and more gadgets. This is usually perceived by
consumers as “good”, and it allows the trainer to seem more knowledgeable. However,
neither is quite true.

Teaching this type of exercise is lucrative for health clubs; it’s lucrative for the fitness
associations which host workshops and conventions; it’s lucrative for manufacturers of
products; it’s lucrative for publishers of magazines; it’s lucrative for presenters and for

17
trainers. But it is not necessarily beneficial for most consumers, as demonstrated by
industry statistics.

There is an inverse relationship between a person’s ability to use a significant amount of

weight during an exercise, and the degree of instability during that exercise. The more
unstable the exercise, the more the ability to generate power is compromised. In
addition, the heavier the weight that is used, while unstable, the greater the potential for
injury. Instability limits the amount of weight a person can use during an exercise, and
using lesser weight naturally compromises the potential muscular development benefit
of that exercise.
- - - - - -
Instability Example # 1
You may have noticed that some people take this “instability” training to an absurd level.

In the photo below, we see a man performing a Barbell Squat, with 135 pounds on his
back, while on a Swiss Ball. Obviously, this is extremely dangerous. If one of his feet
slips off the ball (which could easily happen), he could experience a spinal injury, a
twisted knee, dislocated shoulder, broken ankle, a torn muscle or tendon, etc. And this
only addresses the injury risk. What could the benefit possibly be?

18
He is not gaining any useful improvement in coordination that can be applied in day-to-
day life. It’s highly unlikely that he’ll encounter a similar set of circumstances, other than
during this particular stunt - so this “skill” is essentially worthless. His ability to use a
heavier weight is greatly limited by the instability, which compromises his ability to
stimulate muscle development.

Granted, this kind of “exercise” (above) is not seen very often. However, exercises that
are a little less extreme - like “Squats on a Bosu Ball” with no additional weight (below) -
are very common. And, although the “risk / benefit” ratio is less severe , the same
questions should be asked: What is the actual benefit? What is the risk? And to what
degree are the potential benefits compromised by the instability?

In virtually all cases, the potential muscle building benefit is significantly compromised
by the instability. Further, the learned proprioceptive skill (i.e., not falling, despite the
“wobbly” foundation) has very little “real world” application. Unless one surfs regularly,
or rides a skateboard, it’s unlikely that a similar “wobbly” foundation will be encountered
in day-to-day life.

If one doubts this, simply turn the question around. “What disadvantage does a person
have if they do not perform unstable exercise?” What “problem” does this type of
exercise theoretically resolve? In fact, there is no disadvantage that a person would
experience, if they abstain from doing “unstable” exercise.

Coordination “drills” can be done separately, with much better methods, if one feels a
need for those skills. But combining instability with resistance exercise is a bad idea.

19
 Instability Example # 2
Standing on one leg, while Curling a pair of dumbbells, may seem innocuous, but it has
some degree of risk. This risk is in addition to the compromised ability to generate as
much power, and the subsequent limitation of Biceps stimulation that results from that.

In order to compensate for the fact that only one leg is supporting the bodyweight, we
must shift the center of our body mass directly over the one foot that is on the ground.
This causes the supporting leg to not be vertical.

In the illustration below, we see the angle change of the left leg supporting the weight of
the body, because the right foot has been lifted off the ground. The arrow shows how
the foot has been placed directly under the center of the body mass, to prevent falling.
If this “automatic” shift is not done, the person would fall toward the side of the elevated
leg. However, this shift increases the “Q Angle” at the hip joint that is bearing the
weight.

The “Q Angle” is the variance between the line that follows upward from the Tibia (the
lower leg bone), and the line that follows from the knee toward the origin of the

20
Quadriceps. The wider the hips, the more severe the “Q Angle” is, even when standing
on both legs. Since women tend to have wider hips than men, they tend to have a
slightly more dramatic Q Angle. A degree of Q-angle is somewhat inevitable, but it’s not
good to exacerbate it. The greater the Q Angle, the more strain there is in the hip joint.

When we stand on one leg, we exacerbate the Q Angle. Then, if the Quadriceps
contracts, it naturally pulls the Quadriceps insertion toward its origin, which pulls the
patella (knee cap) laterally, due to this variance. This causes a degree of knee strain.

Increasing the Q Angle also tends to create a compensatory shifting of the lower leg -
laterally (outward). This is called “Valgus” (illustration below). Some people have
“Genu Valgus” (genetically determined), even when they stand on two legs. But - in
either case (genetic or not) - it is exacerbated when standing on one leg.

21
So, standing on one leg while performing a weighted exercise, could eventually lead to
hip and knee pain. And this risk is not off-set by any kind of extraordinary benefit.
“Spacial orientation” will not improve. The coordination to do this particular
“exercise” (proprioception) will improve, but that has little value in daily life. And the
muscular benefit that could be experienced by the muscle loading will be compromised
by the instability.

In the photo below, we see a man standing on one leg, on a surface that’s unstable,
while pressing a single dumbbell overhead. Or, to put it another way, “Here we see man
who is creating a degree of hip strain due to a compensating Q Angle, plus creating a
degree of knee strain due to his lower leg’s Valgus, plus possibly distorting his right
ankle by pronating it, plus possibly impinging his Supraspinatus tendon (of his left
shoulder) by pressing a weight overhead”. And the only benefit he’ll gain from it is the
improved ability to perform this one exercise - the proprioceptive skill of doing this one
stunt.

22
When people do these “exercises”, they think they’re improving their balance and
coordination. But, it’s a very specific adaptation that occurs. It’s limited to the “balance
and coordination” of stunts that are exactly like this. There is essentially no usefulness
outside this one stunt.

Any of the muscles involved here could be better activated, and better loaded, using
exercises that are stable - assuming the goal is to have stronger muscles that are
visibly developed, with minimal injury risk.

One Legged (“Pistol”) Squat

It is very common to see people performing this type of Squat in the gym these days.
People believe that the difference between doing a One Legged Squat, versus a Two
Legged Squat, is that it improves their balance and their “core”. It obviously doubles the
load on the one working leg - as compared with two legs. Some people simply like the
challenge of seeing whether or not they are able to do it. They feel gratified when they
discover they can - or eventually can - do it, and may even revel in the fact that others
cannot.

Let’s examine the “pros” and “cons” of doing this type of Squat.

23
We now know that standing on one leg does not actually improve our balance - as
per the technical definition of balance (“spacial orientation”). It is another form of
Proprioceptive Training - a skill. Regularly performing One Legged Squats familiarizes
a person with that movement, thereby allowing them to “learn” how to coordinate it.
Thus, a person improves his ability to do it - as any skill improves with practice.

But, again, this is a not a skill which has much practical application in daily life. Yes - it
does double the load on the working leg. But one could easily do a two-legged Squat
while holding a pair of dumbbells, and achieve the same load per leg. That leaves
the question of risk. What is the potential consequence to doing this exercise?

Below, we see two front views and one back view of a One Legged Squat. As you can
see, the lower we descend, the more drastic the Q Angle becomes, and the tendency to
create Valgus with the knee and Tibia increases.

24
In addition to the Q Angle and Valgus compensation that occurs, there is also the issue
of the spine. Whereas it’s fairly easy to keep a neutral spine when doing Two Legged
Squats (below-left), it is virtually impossible to do so when doing One Legged Squats
(below-right). This adds a third skeletal stress to this exercise - the possibility of
intervertebral disc damage, or strain of the Erector spinae, or of the Quadratus
lumborum.

25
It is impossible to descend to the bottom of a One Legged Squat, without the tailbone
tucking under, thereby rounding the spine. The reason this happens is because the
Hamstring of the leg that is held out in front is required to stretch beyond its capacity, if
the tailbone is back (spine arched). Stretching the Hamstrings creates “reciprocal
innervation”, which inhibits the ability of the Hip Flexors and Quadriceps to hold the leg
up high enough to clear the ground. In order to hold the leg up high enough to clear the
ground, the Hamstrings stretch must reduced, and this is accomplished by rounding the
spine. But this is not especially good for the spine.

A better result could be achieved - in terms of actual fitness benefits - by doing a

standard Two Legged Squat (below-left), for higher reps. Or, if that’s not challenging
enough, you could hold a pair of dumbbells in each hand, or use a slightly forward
pulling Cable. Or, you could do “Jump Squats” (below-right). In all of these cases, the

26
demand on the working muscles is increased WITHOUT creating the skeletal distortion
that occurs with One Legged Squats.

(Note: Jump Squats should not be done while holding weights.)

- - - - - -
What is the “Core” ?

The “core” simply refers to the group of muscles that surround our midsection. They
include the Rectus Abdominis, the Erector Spinae, the Internal and External Obliques,
the Transverse Abdominis and the Quadratus lumborum. These are the muscles that
bend our torso forward, backward, side-to-side, rotate the torso, pull our abdomen
inward, and assist in breathing. They are also important for posture and for spinal
support, and participate in most whole-body movements, like dancing, tennis,
basketball, etc..

The illustration below-left is a front view of a torso, showing the “Abs”. Below-right is a
rear view of the torso, showing the Erector Spinae (aka “spinal erectors”) and the
Quadratus Lumborum.

27
The illustrations below show the Internal and External Oblique muscles and the
Tranverse abdominis. These six muscle groups constitute the “core”.

These muscles will be discussed more thoroughly in Chapters 23 and 24.

Mention of the “core” is included in this chapter primarily because it is frequently

included in the conversation about “balance” - although somewhat inappropriately. In

28
fact, the term “core” is over-used. It is usually referred to in very ambiguous terms, and
often incorrectly.

In the theoretical scenario I described above (the one about “Joe” and the trainer) I
explained how the trainer’s rationale for recommending Dumbbell Presses on the
Stability Ball, while keeping one leg off the ground, and using one arm at a time -
included the terms “core” and “balance”, as the justification.

We sometimes hear people say that, “Tight-rope-walking (or walking on a narrow board)
is good for the core”; “Standing on one leg is good for the core”; “Kneeling on a Swiss
Ball is good for the core”. People hear and embrace this belief, without questioning its
validity. They then pass along this misinformation - telling others about it, as if it’s a fact.
However, it’s not quite accurate.

These exercises do NOT (and cannot) affect one’s “spacial orientation” - so they do not
improve balance, in that sense. They do improve the learned coordination of that one
activity, which is technically called “proprioception”. But those learned skills are not
applicable in situations that are very different than those specific “exercises”.

Do they affect one’s “core” - the muscles that surround the waistline, shown above?
Perhaps a tiny bit, although not nearly as much as playing basketball or dancing would,
and certainly not as much as doing exercises that directly target those muscles.

29
Exercises that are truly good for the “core” are ones that deliberately work (load, extend
and contract) the Abs, the Obliques, and the Spinal Erectors. Athletic activities and
sports typically involve the core muscles, but not as directly as targeted exercises do.

If a person regularly performs exercises for the Abs, the Obliques and the Spinal
Erectors, they will have a strong core. There is no need to do off-balance / unstable
exercise, in order to have a strong core.

Tennis, basketball, dancing and other similar activities will “proprioceptively” coordinate
the muscles of the body - including the core muscles. The more we do those types of
activities, the better we get at doing them, and the more “athletic” (coordinated) we
become. But playing basketball and dancing are not a replacement for directly
“working” the core muscles - the Abs, the Obliques and the Spinal Erectors.

- - - - - -
Summary
People who have a legitimate problem with balance (“spacial orientation”) likely have a
problem with their inner-ear, eyes, feet and/or neurological system, and should seek
help from a qualified medical professional.

Performing exercise while standing, lying or sitting on an unstable foundation will not
resolve a balance problem that is caused by an inner-ear, eye, feet and/or neurological
system dysfunction.

Exercises performed on an unstable foundation will improve the “proprioceptive” skills

required of that specific activity, or other activities where the foundation is unstable.

Performing an exercise on an unstable foundation compromises one’s ability to

simultaneously perform resistance exercise, as compared to performing those exercises
on a stable foundation. This leads to compromised strength and muscular development
benefits.

Unstable exercises generally have a higher degree of injury risk, as compared with
stable exercises. When unstable exercises are performed with additional weight
(beyond body weight), the injury risk increases. The more weight that is added, the
more the injury risk increases.

Activities involving movement of the whole body - dancing, sports and specific
coordination drills - tend to be more productive for the improvement of coordination,
than activities where one simply stands on one leg or tries to stabilize on a Wobble
Board.

30
As people get older, they tend to do fewer activities that are “physical / athletic”, and
which require moving the body in multiple directions. So, naturally, they lose some of
the ability to move their body in multiple directions, with coordination. The solution to
this loss is not standing on one leg, or on an unstable board, but to begin doing
activities that require whole body movement in multiple directions. This could be in the
form of dancing, or in well-designed “drills”, supervised by a trainer.

Moving the feet (as in dancing), side-stepping, backward stepping, stepping over low
barriers in all four directions - ideally while moving the arms (perhaps even catching and
throwing a light ball) - all help the body / brain coordination connection. These are
“macro” movements, which are far more beneficial for regaining coordination, than are
the “micro” adjustments that are required when standing on an unstable foundation.

A good exercise for older adults, which improves coordination of lateral (side-to-side)
motion, is one where a person shuffles two steps to the right, catches a ball, throws it
back - and then shuffles two steps to the left, catches a ball, throws it back, etc.. This
causes the sideways leg activity to become more “automatic” (without need of
deliberate thought), because the person focuses more on catching the ball, and less on
moving the feet.

This type of “proprioceptive” learning allows the feet and legs (and brain) to be better
prepared (coordinated) for the possibility of having to suddenly shift or step sideways.
For example, if a person is bumped sideways or backward in a crowded place, the legs

31
and brain need to react automatically by lifting the leg, stepping over an object, or
repositioning the leg to accommodate a bodyweight shift. This is the type of
coordination that is required to prevent a fall.

Simply losing strength in the legs (common in older people), due to inactivity or “under-
activity”, will result in what feels like a loss of balance. Walking up stairs, walking on un-
paved or uneven surfaces, climbing a ladder, etc., will all feel “unstable” if a person’s
legs are WEAK. So, simply strengthening the legs - doing leg exercises (Squats, Leg
Extensions, Leg Curls, Calf Raises, etc.) is the first step in improving an older person’s
stability.

“Core” exercises should not be considered synonymous with “balance” (proprioception).

The “core” muscles are peripherally involved in many activities, but exercises that are
truly good for the core should be ones that follow the same biomechanical principles
that are applied to all the other skeletal muscles - including “range of motion” and
“opposing resistance”.

If you feel that you would benefit from performing proprioceptive exercise, it should
ideally be done separately - not done simultaneously with resistance exercise.

Resistance exercise which is intended for the purpose of muscular development will be
compromised by simultaneously incorporating instability.

The idea that combining instability and resistance exercise “saves” time, is far from
accurate. When performing them simultaneously, the effectiveness of both is
compromised, and the risk of injury greatly increases.

32