What are the basic movement patterns?

Question

I prefer functional training with my bodyweight rather than isolated exercises on a machine and recently I heard about basic movement patterns. The concept is convincing but there are different definitions of the patterns. Some say there are six, seven or eight basic patterns but others distinguish even between twelve patterns.

Why is this the case? Do all the resources mean the same basic patterns but put them into different number of groups (i.e. seemingly some count rotation and anti rotation as two patterns, whereas others sum them up to one rotation group)? If so: What are those basic patterns, i.e. how can we refer the twelve patterns to the six, seven or eight others name? Or are there such differences because the concept of basic movement patterns is flawed?

Answer 1

The discrepancy in the number of claimed patterns is because these are no universal groupings of movement patterns, just a huge number of people who have come up with different systems for categorising exercises, usually with the goal of selling you books or training programs, rather than actually simplifying the process of practicing sufficient physical activity to promote or maintain health.

Or are there such differences because the concept of basic movement patterns is flawed?

Perhaps, though there is one benefit to them all, in that someone who subscribes to any one of these systems of exercise categorisation, and aims to practice exercises from all categories in that system, will be much less likely to have insufficient exercise diversity in their training program compared to someone who just picks exercises either at random, or on the basis of whatever they like the most.

Answer 2

They're different because they're just made up by whoever cares to do so. They reflect whatever preferences their creators had about categorization and exercise selection. It's just a lens of abstraction for understanding a wide variety of movements -- use whichever you fancy in a particular context.

I have a vague memory that this proliferation of different categorizations came from some person or organization circa the early 2000s asserting there were four. This dovetailed nicely with the sudden popularity of Starting Strength and strength training, especially the renaissance of barbell training that wasn't bodybuilding. Various trainers then latched onto it as a fun way to extend the idea with their own mark. Dan John added carries, the gymnastics folks split the pushes and pulls by direction, the S&C-for-field-sports trainers insisted that rotation and/or anti-rotation had to have their place. All legitimate dialogue, none have a monopoly on truth.

I like squat/hip hinge/locomote/push/pull/rotation-&-antirotation, because dividing horizontal & vertical pulls & pushes doesn't serve my interests and I feel (based on nothing but pseudo-educated vibes) that "locomote" nicely captures lunges and loaded carries and everything else in that space. I find it's a nice way to orient and systematize my training when I don't have a specific sport to train for.