# Do you lock out



## ed220 (Mar 7, 2010)

*Do you lock out your arms when pressing*​
Yes 5343.09%No 3528.46%Sometimes3528.46%


----------



## ed220 (Mar 7, 2010)

Do you lock out your arms when you do pressing exercises for chest of shoulders, and what are your reasons. I personally dont sometimes when training shoulders if I feel my triceps are tired from previous days training.


----------



## sully807 (Jul 28, 2010)

locking out isnt good for any joint, i do with heavy leg sessions sometimes, but never upper body


----------



## monkeybiker (Jul 21, 2010)

I do lock out but I don't hyper extend. Never had any joint problems. I think not locking out might actually cause you problems because you are not strengthening the muscle at lock out.


----------



## Ak_88 (Nov 9, 2008)

sully807 said:


> locking out isnt good for any joint, i do with heavy leg sessions sometimes, but never upper body


You put far more stress through a joint if you don't lock out than if you do.

Locking out = transfer load more evenly through the kinetic chain.

Constant tension for muscles means constant tension for joints too.


----------



## Musashi (Oct 21, 2009)

Ak_88 said:


> You put far more stress through a joint if you don't lock out than if you do.
> 
> Locking out = transfer load more evenly through the kinetic chain.
> 
> Constant tension for muscles means constant tension for joints too.


Yep spot on.

On light weights on certain exercises I don't lock out, but in the main I do.


----------



## Greyphantom (Oct 23, 2003)

As with Monkey I lock out but dont hyper extend... keep the tension on the muscle with a good contraction at the top/bottom of the movement but lock it out...


----------



## tom0311 (Nov 17, 2008)

I think the only exercise I fully lock out on is bench press and that's when I take a breath or two before last rep. Don't hyper extend though.


----------



## Lois_Lane (Jul 21, 2009)

Some times i do some times i don't just depends how i am feeling the movement.


----------



## hilly (Jan 19, 2008)

i will lock out once i feel i cant get any more reps, this allows for a second or 2 break and allows me to get another rep or 2 which i feel is more beneficial than trying to not lock out at all but getting less reps


----------



## Mikazagreat (Apr 10, 2009)

Ak_88 said:


> You put far more stress through a joint if you don't lock out than if you do.
> 
> Locking out = transfer load more evenly through the kinetic chain.
> 
> Constant tension for muscles means constant tension for joints too.


Am i reading that right and u mean when u lock out u decrease the load off the joints ?


----------



## keir27 (Sep 17, 2010)

Ak_88 said:


> You put far more stress through a joint if you don't lock out than if you do.
> 
> Locking out = transfer load more evenly through the kinetic chain.
> 
> Constant tension for muscles means constant tension for joints too.


You got any info backing you up ther mate?

Just when i did my gym instuctors award, we were told then and tbh ive always bin told not to lock out :confused1: espec in the knees on the leg press machine.

Not being a smart **** just going on what ive bin told


----------



## phys sam (Jan 11, 2008)

keir27 said:


> You got any info backing you up ther mate?
> 
> Just when i did my gym instuctors award, we were told then and tbh ive always bin told not to lock out :confused1: espec in the knees on the leg press machine.
> 
> Not being a smart **** just going on what ive bin told


Well from a clinical point of view, joint degeneration occurs more quickly in people with loss of end range position.

So for example, someone with a loss of terminal knee extension (lock out position) after surgery (could be meniscal implant, TKR etc) more often than not needs their implant or surgery revisited sooner than someone who can achieve full lock out.

Put simply, if you stand with knees slightly bent all the time, your knee joint (tibfem) will probably wear out more quickly.

I had a quick look and couldn't find anything which fits the bill exactly. I did find this (before you jump on me, I know the study looks at patients with spinal cord injury, but theyre measuring a knee joint compression force all the same.

I'm also assuming that passive stance means locked out and active means unlocked.

Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2004 Mar;19(3):313-21.

*Femoral loads during passive, active, and active-resistive stance after spinal cord injury: a mathematical model.*

Frey Law LA, Shields RK.

Graduate Program in Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Science, The University of Iowa, 1-252 Medical Education Building, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA.

*Abstract*

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to estimate the loading environment for the distal femur during a novel standing exercise paradigm for people with spinal cord injury.

DESIGN: A mathematical model based on experimentally derived parameters.

BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal deterioration is common after spinal cord injury, often resulting in osteoporotic bone and increased risk of lower extremity fracture. Potential mechanical treatments have yet to be shown to be efficacious; however, no previous attempts have been made to quantify the lower extremity loading during passive, active, and active-resistive stance.

METHODS: A static, 2-D model was developed to estimate the external forces; the activated quadriceps forces; and the overall bone compression and shear forces in the distal femur during passive (total support of frame), active (quadriceps activated minimally), and active-resistive (quadriceps activated against a resistance) stance.

RESULTS: Passive, active, and active-resistive stance resulted in maximal distal femur compression estimates of approximately 45%, approximately 75%, and approximately 240% of body weight, respectively. Quadriceps force estimates peaked at 190% of body weight with active-resistive stance. The distal femur shear force estimates never exceeded 24% of body weight with any form of stance.

CONCLUSIONS: These results support our hypothesis that active-resistive stance induces the highest lower extremity loads of the three stance paradigms, while keeping shear to a minimum.

RELEVANCE: This model allows clinicians to better understand the lower extremity forces resulting from passive, active, and active-resistive stance in individuals with spinal cord injury.


----------



## phys sam (Jan 11, 2008)

This requires an extreme extrapolation of data, but you get the jist.

It does not deal with hyperextension.

It also does not mean that bodybuilders should lock out.

It's just a little bit interesting...sort of


----------



## Mikazagreat (Apr 10, 2009)

Sam i think what u posted is another case, what makes sense (and what i read before and can't remember where) that when u lock out u shift the load from muscle to the joint and that press cartilage of each side of the joint tword each others which causes troubles.


----------



## phys sam (Jan 11, 2008)

To be honest I dont know (and probably should) for sure. I'll give myself a sound thrashing later 

I did mean what I said though. I think (with anecdotal evidence) joint compression is increased if you don't lock out (hence more wear and tear of joint replacements etc).

I agree with AK.

The joint is designed to lock out and as such is a passive position. From an evolutionary position this makes sense. Otherwise we would all stand with knees unlocked and have enormous quads!!


----------



## bigbear21 (Oct 11, 2009)

Mikazagreat said:


> Sam i think what u posted is another case, what makes sense (and what i read before and can't remember where) that *when u lock out u shift the load from muscle to the joint* and that press cartilage of each side of the joint tword each others which causes troubles.


not nessacerily if you contract correctly and dont rest in the lock out the load and tension stays on the muscle also better muscular condition around the joint better support. locking out as far as im concerned actually aids joint health.

the problem is people use the constant tension as an excuse to do partials try full range with a hard contraction, youll be shocked


----------



## Ak_88 (Nov 9, 2008)

Sam's pretty much covered the logic I had in my mind, but better articulated.

Mika - You're most likely right that cartilage compression occurs at the joint in question at lockout, but cartilage is quite readily able to absorb loads like that. Impact loads (i.e those when you strike the floor running for example) are probably more degenerative than a static, albeit slightly longer duration compression than impact forces.

I think of it this way; if you're leg pressing, and you never lock your knees out, the force going through your knee joints is constant and repetitive, however if you lock out, you allow the load to transfer further past your knee's, through your thigh bones and into your hips. Same with benching, if you don't lock out, the stress stays around your elbow and shoulder joints, lockout and you allow the load transfer across your skeleton. One of many functions of the skeleton? Load support and transfer 

Locking out is fine and IMO superior to not locking out, going into a high velocity lockout like you sometimes see with leg pressers, causing momentum transfer across the body is less preferable.

At the end of the day you want to spread the stresses over as great an area as possible from a degeneration point of view. If you keep a joint in a less stable (non-locked out) position, you place more stress through it.

All IMO of course


----------



## phys sam (Jan 11, 2008)

bigbear21 said:


> locking out as far as im concerned actually aids joint health.


I agree with this.

Joints are designed to move through full range (although this might not achieve a bodybuilders goal any more or less than avoiding end range).

I also agree that you can still achieve lock out with control.


----------



## big silver back (Jan 17, 2009)

Im old school, lockout and full range of motion on everything i do. Not saying its right or wrong just the way i've always trained.


----------



## Mikazagreat (Apr 10, 2009)

bigbear21 said:


> not nessacerily if you contract correctly and dont rest in the lock out the load and tension stays on the muscle also better muscular condition around the joint better support. locking out as far as im concerned actually aids joint health.
> 
> the problem is people use the constant tension as an excuse *to do partials try* full range with a hard contraction, youll be shocked


Didn't say so, i say do the full range but don't lock out till the end like twisting the joint or $hit i see ppl do retarted stuff, plus i find lockin out also easier.


----------



## aka (Jun 25, 2010)

interesting what people have to say on this thread I can see both sides but locking upper body movements has no benefit on the muscle is just a resting point ????? comments are welcome as long as they are educational


----------



## Heineken (Feb 6, 2009)

I lock on everything, movement doesn't feel 'complete' if I don't.


----------



## welshflame (May 21, 2009)

Yeah i lock out when i am training  .


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

I vary just about everything in training nowadays including whether I lock out... with presses I lock out fully when training for strength in a particulr movement, but when it comes to bodybuilding and pressing exercises I'll generally only lock out fully on triceps presses, and try to keep the tension on other muscles at other times by not quite locking out.

The stuff posted above on the effects of locking out on the joints is interesting and somethign I'd not considered... reps given guys


----------



## defdaz (Nov 11, 2007)

In terms of triggering a hypertrophic reaction you've got to think about load/stress on the muscles. Depending on the exercises there's either very little or a hell of a lot of load on the muscles in question at lock out. In squats for instance there's almost zero load on the quads at lock out (your quads do not need to tense when standing with locked out knees), so you're not gaining anything other than a bit of a breather, but during leg extensions load on the quads is at maximum.

When there's little load then there's no benefit to the muscles in terms of placing stress upon the muscles but as mentioned can be used to allow mini-rests during your set to push further into 'failure'. When load is high then it's obviously advantageous to use lock-out to place maximum stress on the muscles. I find squeezing the quads at lock-out on leg extensions very effective.

I find it better not to lock out the knees on leg presses etc. as it's just too damn tempting to go all kinetic and fling yourself into lockout as you get more and more tired - it's a relief to get the rep over with and your knees can take it, right? Keeping constant tension helps me focus on keeping my form better and for me this is safer in the long run.


----------



## janitor (Jul 2, 2010)

Hmm this isnt something id ever thought about. I lock out personally. I just thought it was best to complete the full movement. Think il do some more research into this subject.


----------



## gemc1981 (Nov 4, 2010)

I dont lock my elbows because I am double jointed and when locked by elbows bend almost the same angle as the end of an ez bar


----------



## bry1979 (May 2, 2010)

you don't want to lock out on shoulder movements as you bring the tris into play. If doing d/b overhead press you want to bring your arms up in an arc and keep a slight bend in your elbows, locking out on moves like this only takes the stress away from the delts and onto the tris which is not the muscle you want to target.


----------



## Rotsocks (Jan 1, 2010)

Always used to but since I started training again at the end of 2009 now dont lock out on pressing movements and feel I am getting a better pump,joints feel better and growing as well as when I used to lock out.


----------



## Syko (May 18, 2010)

I do lock out

But.... Im at colege at the moment to be a gym instructor and the way we are taught to teach people not to lock out on nothing

Ive been told it can damage our tendons after a long time training. Its also no good for your joints


----------



## Joshua (Aug 21, 2008)

Thank you everyone for voicing your insights on this. My own stance is similar to defdaz - he worded it so well.

Sam mentioned about standing with your knees slightly bent would likely result in faster wear of the joint.

How big would you chaps think the wear from constant tension training during workouts would be compared to not locking out during walking? ie comparison of acute intensity, short duration loading during workouts due to chronic, low intensity bodyweight loading on joint wear.

Thanks,

J


----------



## big_jim_87 (Jul 9, 2009)

i dont lock out on upper only squats really..... no reason other then this is what feels good to me


----------



## anabolic ant (Jun 5, 2008)

i only lock out if she has bad breath,otherwise no!!!


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

defdaz said:


> In terms of triggering a hypertrophic reaction you've got to think about load/stress on the muscles. Depending on the exercises there's either very little or a hell of a lot of load on the muscles in question at lock out. In squats for instance there's almost zero load on the quads at lock out (your quads do not need to tense when standing with locked out knees), so you're not gaining anything other than a bit of a breather, but during leg extensions load on the quads is at maximum.
> 
> When there's little load then there's no benefit to the muscles in terms of placing stress upon the muscles but as mentioned can be used to allow mini-rests during your set to push further into 'failure'. When load is high then it's obviously advantageous to use lock-out to place maximum stress on the muscles. I find squeezing the quads at lock-out on leg extensions very effective.
> 
> I find it better not to lock out the knees on leg presses etc. as it's just too damn tempting to go all kinetic and fling yourself into lockout as you get more and more tired - it's a relief to get the rep over with and your knees can take it, right? Keeping constant tension helps me focus on keeping my form better and for me this is safer in the long run.


Nice post. Just for discussions sake though, in respect of squats there may be little benefit to the quads on the lock out, but the glutes and upper hams could possibly benefit greatly... have often felt that simply changing the emphasis of where you 'squeeze' hardest during an exercise (particularly a compound movement) can considerably effect which muscles within the chain of muscles worked gain the most stimulation.


----------



## Taylor01 (Mar 28, 2008)

I always used to, even though people moaned at me saying on leg press my knees would collapse and i'd end up crushed under several hundred pounds etc, and never had a knee problem. Lately i haven't been doing, been trying to keep tension on the muscles to break through a plateau, and my knees are battered.

Now, that could just be years of abuse mountain biking, or the lads with pipe cleaner legs at the gym telling me squatting ATG would screw my knees were right all along, but i'm gonna use this theory and go back to locking out and see what happens


----------



## Glassback (Jun 18, 2010)

hilly said:


> i will lock out once i feel i cant get any more reps, this allows for a second or 2 break and allows me to get another rep or 2 which i feel is more beneficial than trying to not lock out at all but getting less reps


Exactly this - I always tell my partner not to lock out when its a weight he can handle, locking out is cheating if you ask me. But when you are doing a max effort or a big weight on a bench for example locking out having a breather, composing yourself is sometimes needed to grab the extra couple of reps.


----------



## grantinerfe1436114737 (Oct 29, 2010)

i don't know if it works the same for the arms but in kettlebell lifting it's always recommended to lock the knees, here is an article about it (i couldn't find the original one)

http://russiankettlebellroom.blogspot.com/2007/09/knee-lock-out-advice-from-steve-cotter.html


----------



## dru0111 (Aug 28, 2007)

lifting weight + locking out = resting. I personally think stretching to maintain joint range is important not only for longevity of joint cartilage but also to reduce risk of muscle tear etc. Personally I lift with full relative motion when doing light / warm up sets, but not when lifting heavy. Surely we want all related stresses to be implemented on the muscle and not the joint?!?!


----------



## Bad Alan (Dec 30, 2010)

I have always prefered constant tension with no lockout, hurts the ego at first as fatigue sets in quicker but I have found it to be superior. The leg press when done with no lockout is a different beast than when locking out, probably the most painful excercise for me...


----------

