The Olympic lift derivatives, and medicine ball throws to the exclusion of subsequent accelerations, only partially satisfy criteria of dynamic correspondence relative to the bioenergetic/biodynamic structure of the 100m sprint and the criteria that are satisfied are, as you and others have mentioned, limited to starting out of the blocks and initial acceleration; again, only partially.
What those of us who are well informed also know is that many other training means that transfer much more positively to those segments of the sprint.
Such as:
– resisted block starts,
– double, single, and alternate leg multiple response bounds/jumps,
– jumps up and off an elevated surface,
– double and single leg bounds up stadium stairs,
– medicine ball squat/chest throw + acceleration,
– push up starts,
– and so on and so forth.ALL of these examples satisfy greater degrees of correspondence than throwing a medicine ball, to the exclusion of subsequent acceleration, or lifting a barbell.
Furthermore, we know that the greatest room for improvement in the 100m lies not in the start, nor in the early stages of acceleration; but in the middle and later stages of the race.
Thus, and to further reinforce my point, it is unnecessary and unwise to expend the bioenergetic resources on a means that only partially transfers to the segments of the race that inherently have less room for improvement and, to boot, don’t even transfer as well as other more rudimentary and more cost effective means such as those that I mentioned in bullet points above.
Again, the weightlifts degree of transfer is only partial, AND, only partial to segments of the 100m. As a result, their role in the training is non-essential and entirely debatable.
This is all that I care to elucidate to readers. I’m not saying don’t do this or don’t do that; for the very reason that what we are discussing is debatable and because it is debatable this is likely to go on and on and on.
I’m interested in sharing factual, scientific, and evidence based information and inspiring others to devote the same critical thinking that I have and streamline the training process.
Many roads lead to Rome- a profound statement, indeed.
It is my aim to encourage coaches and athletes to take the most efficient route.
I share all of this with the aim that training will become as efficient as possible.
The Thinker, I am in agreement. There are many more aspects to sprinting where we can make significantly measurable improvements. However I believe the Olympic lift can also be adapted to be more specific and can still benefit more within its parameters. It seems that the voice of opinion suggest that Olympic lifts are difficult or take a long time for foundation strength to be built in order for the lift to have a major effect on sprint early acceleration. Lets look at the forces.
An 80kg athlete lifts an 80kg bar. That is equivalent to 80kg of force per leg. Compare this to an athlete that does a one legged Olympic lift with a balloon (i.e. no weight). That is 80kg of force per leg. How many athletes would struggle with an 80kg snatch but would be capable fo a 10kg one legged snatch?
Also in terms of specificity, apart from the starting blocks, when did one last see a runner take a few steps with both legs at once? Moral of the story…the one legged balloon snatch is more effective than the 80kg barbell snatch.