Belt or no belt

What's the benefit of belt compared to no belt, apart from being able to pull more weight and/or reduce risk of injury? I pull 300 and squat 250 now and never tried using a belt, should I?

anything about 85% 1RM or more and I use a belt. Everything else I go beltless

Belt it's safer, helps you lift more weight and prevents injury. Why wouldn't you use one if you are lifting heavy weights OP?

>Belt it's safer, helps you lift more weight and prevents injury
>apart from being able to pull more weight and/or reduce risk of injury

I think I'm safe from injuring myself because I play safe and use proper form, never had an injury. And I don't care much about numbers. I was wondering more about how your muscles are worked belted/beltless.

The belt will allow the spinal erectors and psoas to stay weak.

only difference i think would be less mid/lower back and core strain

There's no advantage to not wearing one. They help develop your abs because the belt provides them the ability to work harder, a bit like how pushing someone with your foot against a wall behind you is easier than doing it standing with both feet on the ground.

If you're just bullshitting at a commercial gym you really don't need one.

Belt engages core, and takes away lower back engagement. So if you're very posterior chain dominant I would use a belt to build up core strength

Is this for real? Been trying to think of hacks to build up my core strength, it's definitely not as advanced as my posterior chain strength...but tbf I've always kinda disliked the idea of a belt, would ideally have a balanced core and chain that grows supporting lifts.

You're looking too deeply into it bro.

>Been told I have an excessively curved spine or something
>No, the doctor did not say scoliosis

>Anyway, feel a pinching sensation lately doing squats and OHP

I should put on a belt even though the weight is DYEL-tier, right?

Just think about what a belt does. It supports your lower back. So naturally your body will look to other area to help move the load. That's why your core is activated more when you use a belt.

I'm to autistic for this response. Can you please explain a little further? Am I looking too deeply into the belt thing, or the balanced chain and core thing?

I though it helped the core too by providing a brace for it to push against...isnt that kinda the same thing? How about, since I've never used one, can you tell me if you feel your core getting more of the work when you've worn one?

I have lower back problems (had surgery) so would a belt be in my best interest? I do trap bar and squats

Shouldn't it be the other way around?
Go beltless to help you learn to brace and actually use your core?

Who is this toilet clogger?

You should ask to see a specialist, neurosurgeon or orthopedic depending on the results from MRI/X-ray you should be getting. Don't fuck around with spine shit, I let mine get bad and the surgery was 18 hours of them rethreading the nerves through my spine because they had pulled or stretched out over the time I ignored it.

Jhulia pimentel

kind of true but there certainly are advantages to not wearing one. the belt provides a surface for your rectus abdominus to press against, thereby increasing core stability. however this function is normally assumed by the transverse abdominus. so yes, your rectus abdominus works harder while using a belt, but is that a good thing? not necessarily. if you rely too much on a belt you will develop a muscular imbalance that will leave you more injury prone in situations where you do not have access to a belt. a belt has its place in training but dont be that retard wearing it for curls or to warm up with very submaximal weight.