Core Stability Training: Are You Wasting Your Time? | Sebastian Sitko interview

Summary

In this insightful discussion, sports scientist and professional cycling coach Sebastian Sitko challenges the effectiveness of core stability training for endurance athletes. Through a unique study comparing cyclists who performed core exercises, conventional strength training, and cycling-only training, the research reveals that core stability training offers no additional performance benefits over cycling alone, while conventional strength training significantly improves power output. The conversation emphasizes the importance of evidence-based training methods and the concept of opportunity cost in athletic development.

Takeaways

• 🚴 Core stability training is often promoted for improving power output and efficiency on the bike, but scientific evidence supporting these claims is lacking.
• 🧐 Sebastian Sitko, a sports scientist, conducted a study to test the effectiveness of core stability training in endurance sports, specifically cycling.
• 🔍 The study compared three groups: cyclists who only did on-bike training, those who added core stability training to their routine, and those who added conventional strength training.
• 🏋️‍♂️ Conventional strength training, including exercises like squats and leg presses, showed significant improvements in power output compared to core stability or on-bike training alone.
• ⏱ The study duration was 12 weeks, which is considered a standard period in sports science research to observe acute responses to training.
• 📊 The study did not measure injury prevention, as it is more complex and requires a longer study duration and larger sample size.
• 🤔 The opportunity cost of training time was highlighted, emphasizing the importance of choosing the most effective training methods within limited time.
• 📉 Core stability training did not show an additional benefit in performance when added to on-bike training, suggesting it may not be the best use of extra training time.
• 🔄 The study's findings suggest that cyclists might consider reallocating time spent on core exercises to endurance or strength training for better performance outcomes.
• 🏁 The results were consistent across various power output measurements, indicating that conventional strength training has a broad positive impact on cycling performance.
• 🚫 The study did not find evidence to support the common claims about the benefits of core stability training for performance enhancement in cycling.

Q & A

What is the main topic of discussion in the talk?

The main topic of discussion is whether core stability training is a worthwhile use of training time for cyclists.

Who is the guest speaking in the talk, and what are his qualifications?

The guest is Sebastian Sitko, a sports scientist, PhD, professional cycling coach, and lecturer at the University of Zaragoza.

What did Sebastian Sitko's recent study aim to investigate?

The study aimed to investigate the effects of core stability training on cyclists' performance compared to conventional strength training and only on-bike training.

How many groups were involved in the study and what were their training protocols?

There were three groups: one group did only cycling training, another group added core stability training, and the third group added conventional strength training.

How long was the intervention period for the study?

The intervention period lasted for 12 weeks.

What was the main finding of the study regarding core stability training?

The study found that core stability training did not provide additional performance benefits compared to only on-bike training. Conventional strength training showed much greater improvements in performance.

What types of exercises did the conventional strength training group perform?

The conventional strength training group performed squats, leg press, cable hip flexion, and ankle plantar flexion exercises.

What types of exercises did the core stability training group perform?

The core stability training group performed glute bridges, abdominal planks, and prone back extensions.

What was a significant limitation mentioned about the study?

A significant limitation mentioned was the difficulty in recruiting a large sample size and not measuring injury prevention due to the complexity and length of the study required.

What was the performance level of the cyclists involved in the study?

The cyclists were quite well-trained, with an average 20-minute power output of around 5 watts per kilogram and a 5-minute power output of 6 watts per kilogram.

Did the study include both male and female participants?

No, the study included only male participants.

How did the study control for participants' prior experience with strength or core work?

Participants were required to have a detraining period of three months without any strength training before the study.

What was one of the reasons given for the popularity of core stability training despite limited evidence of its effectiveness?

One reason given was that core stability training might be a coping mechanism for people who prefer outdoor training and dislike going to the gym.

Outlines

00:00

🚴‍♂️ Core Stability Training Debate

The video script opens with a discussion on the value of core stability training for cyclists. The host, Martin, welcomes sports scientist and professional cycling coach Sebastian Sitko to explore whether core stability exercises are beneficial. Sebastian recently published a study comparing core stability training to on-bike training and conventional strength training. The study's aim was to measure performance outcomes rather than injury prevention due to the complexity and extended timeframe required for the latter. The conversation highlights the importance of evidence-based training methods in endurance sports.

05:03

🔍 Dissecting the Core Stability Study

In this section, the host and Sebastian delve into the specifics of the core stability study. The study involved cyclists split into three groups: one focusing on cycling training only, another adding core stability training to their cycling regimen, and the third incorporating conventional strength training. The intervention lasted for 12 weeks, a period considered sufficient to observe changes in performance. Sebastian explains the methodology, including the exercises and intensity levels for each group, and the rationale behind the study's design, emphasizing the opportunity cost of training time.

10:03

📊 Analyzing the Results of Core Stability vs. Strength Training

The conversation shifts to the results of the study, where Sebastian reveals that core stability training did not yield additional benefits over on-bike training alone. In contrast, conventional strength training showed significant improvements in power output. The study's findings challenge the popular belief in the superiority of core stability training for performance enhancement. Sebastian discusses the implications of these results for cyclists and the importance of evidence-based decision-making in training routines.

15:06

🤔 Contemplating the Role of Core Stability in Cycling Training

Sebastian and Martin consider the broader implications of the study's findings. They discuss the possibility that core stability training might serve as a coping mechanism for those who prefer outdoor training over the discipline of the gym. The conversation also touches on the potential benefits of reallocating the time spent on core exercises to endurance training instead. Sebastian suggests that conventional strength training is well-documented for both performance enhancement and injury prevention, making it a more compelling choice.

20:08

🏋️‍♂️ The Efficacy of Conventional Strength Training

The discussion continues with Sebastian sharing his skepticism about the effectiveness of isolated core stability exercises. He argues that conventional strength training, such as squats and deadlifts, naturally engages the core and may be a more effective approach. Sebastian's personal experience and electromyography studies support the idea that heavy compound lifts recruit core muscles more effectively than isolated core exercises. The conversation underscores the need for a reevaluation of training priorities based on performance outcomes.

25:08

🔚 Wrapping Up the Core Stability Debate

In the final part of the script, Sebastian and Martin summarize the key takeaways from the study and the discussion. They emphasize the importance of opportunity cost in training, opting for proven methods like conventional strength training over unproven approaches. Sebastian shares his future research interests, including torque training, and the conversation concludes with an invitation for further discussions on different topics. The host encourages viewers to follow Sebastian's work on his YouTube channel and Twitter for more insights.

Keywords

💡Core Stability Training

Core stability training refers to exercises designed to strengthen the muscles in the torso, including the abdominals, back, and pelvic floor. These exercises are thought to improve power output, efficiency, and injury prevention in cyclists. The video questions whether this type of training is a worthwhile use of time compared to other training methods.

💡Performance Measurement

Performance measurement in the context of this study refers to assessing the cyclists' power output and other performance metrics before and after the training intervention. The study aimed to determine the effectiveness of core stability training by comparing it to on-bike training and conventional strength training.

💡Conventional Strength Training

Conventional strength training involves exercises that target multiple muscle groups, typically performed in a gym setting with weights. In this study, exercises like squats, leg press, and cable hip flexion were used to compare their effectiveness against core stability training in improving cycling performance.

💡Opportunity Cost

Opportunity cost in this context refers to the trade-off between spending training time on core stability exercises versus other potentially more effective training methods. The video discusses how cyclists should use their limited training time wisely to achieve the best performance outcomes.

💡Scientific Evidence

Scientific evidence refers to the data and findings derived from controlled, systematic research. The video emphasizes the lack of robust scientific evidence supporting the efficacy of core stability training for performance enhancement, contrasting it with the well-documented benefits of conventional strength training.

💡Peak Power Output

Peak power output is a measure of the maximum power a cyclist can produce, often tested using protocols like the Coggan conventional test. The study used peak power output as a key performance indicator to evaluate the effects of different training interventions.

💡Pre-Season Training

Pre-season training refers to the period before the competitive season where athletes focus on building base fitness and strength. The study was conducted during this period, as participants were more willing to incorporate non-traditional training methods like core stability exercises.

💡Cycling Economy

Cycling economy is a measure of how efficiently a cyclist uses energy to maintain a given speed or power output. Although not directly measured in the study, it's mentioned as an important performance factor that some might argue could be influenced by core stability training.

💡Intervention Study

An intervention study is a type of research where participants are assigned to different groups to receive specific interventions, and their effects are measured over time. This study involved three groups: one doing only cycling training, one adding core stability exercises, and one adding conventional strength training.

💡Strength Training

Strength training involves exercises that increase muscle strength and endurance. In the study, it included exercises like squats and leg press. The findings indicated that conventional strength training had a more significant impact on cycling performance compared to core stability training.

Highlights

The discussion questions the value of core stability training for cyclists, comparing it to on-bike training and conventional strength training.

Sebastian Sitko, a sports scientist, professional cycling coach, and lecturer at the University of Zaragoza, shares his expertise on core stability.

A recent study by Sitko challenges common claims about the benefits of core stability training in endurance sports.

The study design compares three groups: cyclists who only train on bikes, those who add core stability training, and those who add conventional strength training.

The study's focus is on performance measurement rather than injury prevention due to the complexity and length required for the latter.

Recruiting a sufficient sample size for sports science intervention studies is identified as a significant challenge.

The study's intervention period lasted 12 weeks, chosen for its alignment with the typical time frame for observing training effects.

Conventional strength training showed a significant improvement in power output compared to core stability or bike-only training.

The study found no additional benefit to core training when added to bike training, suggesting it may not be the best use of time.

The opportunity cost of training time is highlighted, emphasizing the importance of choosing effective training methods.

Participants in the study were well-trained cyclists, including professionals and under-23 riders, ensuring a high average performance level.

The study did not find significant individual differences in improvement among subjects, suggesting a general trend across the groups.

Sitko discusses the practical challenges of measuring core stability and the lack of evidence linking improvements in core exercises to performance gains.

The conversation points out that conventional strength training may naturally enhance core stability through heavy compound lifts.

Sitko expresses his preference for future research to explore other topics such as torque training, rather than further examining core stability.

The importance of evidence-based training methods is underscored, with a call for coaches to utilize proven strategies for performance and injury prevention.

The interview concludes with a summary of the study's findings and a reminder of the opportunity cost associated with training choices.

Transcripts

You probably already know that in order to improve your power output, become more

efficient on the bike and to prevent injuries, you should be doing core

stability exercises.

Or should you?

In today's talk, we ask the question: "is core stability training a worthwhile use

of your training time?"

To help me discuss this topic, I got a guest today who is a sports scientist,

he is a PhD,

he is a professional cycling coach and also a lecturer at the University of Zaragoza,

Sebastian Sitko.

It's such a pleasure having you here for this talk today.

Many thanks for the invitation Martin.

It's always a pleasure to discuss recent scientific findings and also share a

little bit of knowledge if it's useful.

Now I have been looking forward to this talk for...

before I even knew it was going to happen.

And the reason for that is you recently...

published a study that I've been waiting for for years, quite literally.

I didn't know you were doing it, but I was so excited when you let me know.

And you actually did something that surprisingly few scientists have done.

You took some of the claims that people typically make about core stability

training for endurance sport and actually put it to the test to see how much effect

did we actually get.

And especially when we compare it to different alternative methods that we

could be using.

Could you start by telling us a little bit about what you did in this recent core

stability study and why you decided to do it in the first place?

Yeah, if you do a short review of podcasts, blogs, or even cycling

specialized journals, you will see lots of articles talking about the benefits of

core stability training for improving power output, for improving the position

on the bike, and also for reducing the risk of injury.

And it's for me, it's like the same as with torque training, which is like

everybody's talking great stuff about this, but we do not have real scientific

evidence to show that it works.

So with my team, what we did attempt to do was not only compare core stability

training versus doing only on bike training, but also we tried to compare it

to what

for me would be the goal standard, the reference method for strength training,

which would be conventional multi-articular exercises, which we normally

perform in the gym.

So I should point out that the nature of the study was based on performance

measurement and we did not intend to measure injury prevention because

it is...

much more complicated to do and you require... the length of the study

would be increasingly long.

So it will be very difficult to recruit like a large sample.

So that's what we tried to do.

Yes.

So, you did a study where you had cyclists and you split them into three groups.

From what I can recall about your study.

And then, one group did cycling training only.

And another group added core stability training on top of the cycling.

And then the third group added conventional strength training.

Yes, I knew I was able to recruit like between 30 and 40

participants.

And I think that it's important to point out that when we are doing sports science

research and we are doing interventional studies, it's very difficult to get a

huge sample, because at the end of the day, you will

need the participant to do what you... that's like the same training for

everybody know so it's not necessarily the best training for that particular person

so imagine that you're potentially wasting like

one third of their season know so it's very difficult to recruit and you of

course you need like a homogenous, like a very similar subjects so it's quite

difficult to get large samples know and i i potentially knew that

if I split the sample into two, which will be only bike training versus core

training plus bike, I knew that I would lack very important information regarding

conventional training, which is for me the most important thing is to compare to this

method, because there is one concept

I know I'm mixing here science and practical knowledge, which is the

opportunity cost.

Okay, so in training, you have...

8, 10, 12 hours per week, a normal person that's the time they have.

So you need to use your time wisely.

So if you spend two hours on bike, you don't have these two hours to spend it in

the gym or at home doing core exercises, no?

So you need to have the knowledge to use your time correctly.

And that's why you need to know whether...

adding these two hours or three hours or four hours for training would be better

than doing nothing or using these hours on the bike.

So, just for clarity, how long was this intervention period? For how many,

for how long time period did you follow them and measure pre and post?

Yeah, we tested them, like peak power output with the Coggan conventional test

and they trained for three months, 12 weeks.

Which based on previous research, the acute response to trainings occurs mainly

after six to eight weeks.

So 12 weeks was like, I think that's normal time period in sports science

research.

Yes.

I personally haven't read any study on cyclists, and also very few studies on

other enduring sports, surprisingly, that actually does this full intervention study

that actually look at performance as the outcome.

Have you found any studies in your research that actually did that before?

No, my experience is similar to yours.

Basically, no previous studies as far as I know.

We only found a few studies that did perform this conventional core exercises

that are normally shown in the journals, etc. , but included into conventional

training, which include the squat, leg press, etc.

And indeed, we based...

our protocol on the number of sets, repetition, et cetera, that in this

previous studies, they used, they have planned, etc.

Yes.

I've been in this business of rehabilitation and the medical

side of core stability work for quite some time.

And my mind is still blown that we have this million, if not billion

dollar industry built around core stability training, and we don't actually

have a single study, almost,

to show that it actually has a measurable effect on real-life

performance.

So it'll be interesting to discuss what you found.

Can you go a bit more in detail on the two different protocols that you used,

because obviously one group added core stability training and one group added

conventional strength training with bigger loads, heavier lifting and so on.

How often did they train and how many sets and how many reps and what exercises did

they do?

Yes, all participants did 12 hours per week of on-bike training in Zone 2

based on power output.

And apart from that, the conventional strength training group performed squats,

leg press, cable hip flexion, and also ankle plantar flexion, which are commonly

used exercises in previous studies with conventional strength training.

They performed these sessions twice weekly

and performed three sets of each exercise, with six Repetitions Max intensity until failure.

And because of this concept of opportunity cost, we tried to equal the time spent at

the gym with the time spent doing the core exercises.

So the group that performed the core exercises did the glute bridges, abdominal

planks, and...

and prone back extension.

Okay.

They did eight sets of 10 repetitions, which were composed by a little bit of

concentric, eccentric and isometric contractions.

Okay.

That was like a bit of mixture, which was based on previous research with these

exercises.

So in the end, they spend more or less the same time doing either one session or the

other. Okay.

So the investment was the same.

Yeah.

Yeah, that will be it.

Perfect.

And in terms of the cycling training, did you say was it only low intensity training

or was there any moderate high intensity in the mix?

Yeah, because the only time period in which we will be able to recruit that many

participants will be the pre-season.

So people didn't want to incorporate this weird training into their competitive

season.

So they told us, okay, I can participate in the study, but we do it between October

and December, basically.

That was the main reason to say, okay, so let's do it as close as possible to the

training you would perform on preseason.

So that's the reasoning behind it.

Yes.

And these subjects, it's always a good question that people often ask and a very

relevant one when you look at the outcome of any study,

and how it applies to yourself or to someone that you're applying it on -

what can you say about the performance levels of these riders, like novice,

amateur, age groupers, professionals?

Yeah, I will tell you two things.

First, the main requirement to participate in the study was to have a cycling

license, which in Spain would be a pro cycling license, a masters and under 23.

Or even on recreational to participate in second sport is okay.

So we felt like a big mixture of levels.

Let's tell it that way.

But the fact is that the average level once measured in the pre-measurement was

quite good.

The average level was for 20 minutes with five watts per kilo, around five watts per

kilo, and for five minutes with six watts per kilo, which I think that's, you could

classify the average of the sample as,

well trained or very well trained.

Yes.

I think any age grouper who has done an FTP test would agree that if you hit five

watts per kilo, you're pretty decent to say the least.

So we had like four or five pros, but seven or eight under 23 which were white

wood.

So that of course increases the level of the sample.

Yeah.

Pulls it up.

Yes.

Was it all males or any females?

All males.

Yeah.

And did they have any experience or background in strength or core work from

before?

I'm just thinking about how the conditioning that they came into the

experimental period with.

We requested them to have a detraining period for three months, in which they did

not include any kind of strength training.

Yes.

So even if they had done strength training from before, they should be able to see an

effect if it's there.

Yeah.

And...

In terms of results, what did you see?

If I'm remembering correctly, you tested for the entire power curve.

Sprints, neuromuscular efforts, VO2 max, 20 minutes, five minutes, one minute and

sprints.

Yeah.

And in terms of the power outputs from pre to post those three months, what did you

see in the different groups?

Basically,

the people who performed the core training improved, but improved the same as the

people who performed only on-bike training versus the people who performed

the conventional strength training, which improved much more -

plus 0.2 to 0.3 watts per kilo in 5 and 10, 20 minutes, which in

relative power outputs is quite a lot, I would say.

I think I'm looking at the paper now and if I'm...

If I'm seeing it correctly, then the 20 minute power in the conventional strength

group went up from 4.99 to 5.21 watts per kilo, which was considerably more than

in both the other two groups.

And this was quite consistent, wasn't it?

Across all the measurements, 20 minutes, five minutes, 60 seconds, five seconds

even.

So was this surprising to you or was it what you expected when you started out?

I didn't have any kind of expectations, but for me, like the logic behind core

stability training and the improvement, the supposed improvements in performance,

for me it was not consistent, you know, the claims made

behind it and the possibility, you know, and so I was like, let's see what

this brings us.

And in the end, it's not a novel finding

regarding the conventional strength training, because in the end,

there's a huge amount of previous evidence suggesting that this is the case.

But I think that it's important to point out that there was no increased benefit

for the people who performed core training added to the bike.

So the conclusion here will be be careful if you want to spend these extra two

hours per week doing so, because...

doesn't seem to be very beneficial, at least from a performance viewpoint.

As you will remember, I will tell you that we did not assess injury rates here.

So this is the other claim that is brought regarding core training.

Adding to that, that being said, the injury preventative effect of

conventional strength training is so well documented.

So...

I'm just thinking how strong is that argument in the first place

when you got something that you know work really well, both for the cycling

performance, but also for injury prevention?

You know, I think this will be a controversial take here, but I think that

people who resort to core training generally it's a coping mechanism

because they like

outdoor training, the bike, the air on their face, but they do not like going

indoors, going to the gym, etc.

Spending an amount of money on the gym, etc.

So they want the benefits, but without the...what you have to do.

So I think it's a little bit of coping mechanism here.

Yeah, that's a really interesting take.

Do you think...

one also important aspect of this is that they did spend an extra two hours or I

don't know if it was two hours or one hour or one and a half.

Yeah, more or less two hours per week.

Yeah. Per week.

What do you think would have happened if you added those two hours into endurance

training?

I'm quite sure that at this level, at these volumes, which are 12 hours per

week, if you had two hours extra, which will go to 14 hours per week, the

improvements would be much larger than doing these exercises.

Of course.

Yeah.

It's at least worth considering.

The opportunity cost.

Yeah, definitely.

If I were to play the devil's advocate and there's always someone looking at your

study, trying to pick it to pieces and that's the scientific method.

So it's a part of the game.

And you did mention some things that you could have potentially also done in your

study in terms of the outcomes that you measured and didn't measure.

Do you think, is there anything you...

that you could have done differently, that you believe could have potentially changed

the results that you got?

Well, I think that first of all, we have the problem with the study sample, which I

already said before that it's quite difficult to recruit larger samples in

this kind of studies in sports science.

Of course, I have the opportunity to just do two groups and have more...

subjects in your image group, which would give me more statistical power.

But again, if I compared core versus strength, people would tell me that:

"maybe core improved more than just bike training.

Okay, so there's always something to tell.

I attempted to do the best comparison possible, which for me was, you know,

let's...

reduce a little bit of statistical power, but instead with the sample we have, try

to compare all three groups, which I think all three are relevant.

And of course, some people may argue that we did not assess some relevant

performance factors in cycling, for example, cycling economy.

But still, and this is a practical take -

I have yet to see one case in which cycling economy improves in a noticeable

way -

and this does not reflect in improvements in our outputs.

So for me, like the best predictor of performance is performance itself.

Okay.

So, yeah.

Did you notice any...

I don't know if you analyzed this like formally, but did you notice any, were the

big individual differences in the effect sizes in how big improvements people, the

individual subjects got within the groups?

Yeah, we did assess that, but they didn't report it because the differences, the

inter individual differences were quite small.

So yeah.

Yeah.

In general, all improved.

Some improved a little bit more than others, but in general all improved.

of this margin.

Yeah.

It's interesting talking to you because you're also a cycling coach yourself.

I'm interested in hearing, do you use core stability exercises at all in your, with

your athletes?

Do you see any use of it?

Well, the problem with core stability for me is that first we do not know how to

measure it.

Okay.

So if you do not know how to measure something,

How do you know that you're improving it?

Okay. Yeah.

But for example, we do know that a half squat, improvements in half squat

transform very well to improvements in second power.

So you can measure your one Repetition Max either directly or indirectly with a squat.

But how do you measure your core stability?

The amount of time you can be at a plank position?

That's really a measure.

And for me, I also do my unofficial scientific experiments with my trainees.

And for example, when you assess muscles with electromyography, you

will see that when you're performing a squat or a leg press or a deadlift with

quite a little bit of weight,

you will recruit more the core stabilizers than doing a plank.

So at the end of the day, if I'm going to waste one hour of your time, I will do

these kinds of exercises.

That's my take.

Yeah.

And I think that what you're onto there, what you're saying lastly, there is such a

big takeaway for me because I think a lot of people aren't...

aren't that aware of or consciously thinking about that.

The fact, say if you're loading your shoulders or your upper body with 60

kilos, 80 kilos, 150 kilos, and you're doing a squat and you're pushing with your

feet to move that weight of your shoulders, you need to transfer that

energy and those forces through your torso.

And it's just literally impossible to do that without stabilizing and controlling

your core.

That's such a big thing for me that if you, okay, maybe core stability isn't

necessarily the "evil", if you're going to put it that way.

But the real question is core stability exercises, isolated core stability

exercises, is that necessarily the best method to improve your core stability?

Maybe it's conventional strength training, gets the job done.

I think that there's a little bit of misunderstanding regarding core stability

and I think that the problem began when they presented us with several exercises

which were intended to work this kind of core stability in the most efficient and

effective way.

And I think that the problem is not core stability per se and of course you can

work on your core stability.

But the way they want you to work on your course stability, I think that the error

is there, I think.

Yeah.

Yeah.

And I think up until this point, the only thing I've been able to come

across in terms of literature,

the very typical studies would take athletes from a certain

sport and then they would have them do dead bugs and planks and side planks and

whatever.

And then they would measure to see if they got stronger in doing dead bugs and planks

and side planks.

Without measuring the actual performance in the sport they're supposed to

participate in.

That's why I was so amazed to see that someone that you guys actually did the

work.

I think that if I measured after 12 weeks, if I measured their ability to spend time

on the upper plank position, of course that increased.

That did not transition into increased power output.

That's what matters for me as a coach.

Yeah. Yeah.

Are you planning on following up on this study and doing any more?

I know that's always a hard question to answer sometimes, but...

Well, the fact is that I would love to continue studying this.

This is the preliminary evidence, which is nice because at the end we have the first

study assessing this.

The problem here is that there are lots of topics to study.

For example, for me, what...

Another interesting one is torque training.

And I mainly work with the same sample.

So if I have to choose the next year, I would prefer to doing something different

than continuing on this trend.

Because for me, I know that it's not fair to say that with that limited evidence,

but for me, the topic here is quite simple.

And from what I have seen, I don't need to continue working on this

to prove my point or at least to prove my point for me, which is for me the most

important part.

So I would prefer to do something on torque training because this is a controversial

topic for me.

That would be super interesting as well.

Because there is always the chance that, you know, you hear the arguments that,

"yeah, but coaches are ahead of the science with the lack of evidence isn't

necessarily evidence of lacking effect."

You pretty much answered it, but do you think that applies in this

case of core stability training?

Well, first, I think that if something truly works, it's not that difficult to

prove it works.

I think that it's not that difficult.

So if you were trying to tell me that core stability training works, then I think

that you can prove it.

The same goes for torque training, which there are several coaches in the world too

saying that it works quite well.

So I think it's...

for them, especially, it's not that difficult to, you know, recruit a sample

and prove it.

Until then.

Yeah.

Then we'll have to stick with what we got.

And that's quite, I would say that's quite convincing, especially in terms of the

magnitude of evidence that is within conventional strength training.

Again, and I think that's a good way to finish this talk -

the opportunity cost.

You have something that is proved that it works quite well.

And you have something that to date has not been proven as effective.

And you will have to spend the same amount of time doing both.

So why would we choose the riskier machine?

And it works for your cycling power output.

It works very well for injury prevention, potentially also for the bone density

issue.

Although that hasn't been empirically proven yet.

So there's so many benefits there.

Sebastian, I think that was the perfect way to summarize this brief talk on your

study.

Thank you so much for participating and I hope we can make another one on

another topic sometime soon.

and also you do have a YouTube channel yourself and you're also quite active on

Twitter.

So I'm going to make sure I drop the links to your channels below and I would

encourage everyone to have a look.

Okay, Martin, many thanks again for the invitation and of course count on me for

the next time.

my pleasure.

I look forward to it already.

Bye for now.

Bye bye.