[QUOTE=Cosimo]Injuries tend to come down to lack of strength - especially hamstrings. Maybe the strength training is not great?
[
balance and lack of flexability are the more likely causes of a hamstring injury.
A muscle imbalance means the strong muscles cause the weak ones to injure, not the other way around. You can never be too strong. I shouldn't have singled out hamstrings, though, Apparently groin injuries are more prevalent in football. But the same principle applies.
You are correct and in the case of the hamstrings and the quads it is the later that is usually stronger by a large margin hence the stronger they are in relation to the hamstrings the more likely to injure.
your hamstrings should be stronger than your quads if you train correctly. Quad dominance is the main problem in hamstring injuries, so my original point stands - you should have strong as f**k hamstrings to help avoid injury. How often do athletes who run a lot get quad injuries compared with hamstrings?
The optimum quad-hamstring strength ratio is around 60-80% i.e your hamstrings should be around 60-80% as strong as your quads. You are very unlikely ever to get stronger Hamstrings than Quads, remember you have 4 Quad muscles (rectus femoris, Vastus Lateralis, Vastus medialis & Vastus intermedius) to the 3 hamstrings (semitendinosus, semimembranosus & biceps femoris). So if you get the ratio right i.e. don't have a muscle imbalance and have good flexability then you should reduce the likelyhood of an injury, although as others have said sometimes things just break.
You also have lots of muscles in your face, but that doesn't mean your face is stronger than your ass.
Anyway, I think we mean the same thing, don't we? Strong hamstrings are good?
I like tautologies because I like them.