Read the Article here, and discuss it below.
ELITETRACK Founder
Developing Hip Power for High Performance Athletics
-
-
Keymaster -
Keymaster
A well written article mike I loved it answered so many questions I have been pondering. I will defiantly save this and read for future reference.
Thanks. I almost didn’t post it here because it’s kinda short and general in nature. I’ve been writing for an Australian magazine and it’s more of a fitness magazine than a sport performance magazine so the audience is a little different. Glad you found it useful.
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Keymaster
How do you suggest to implement both types of squat?
To be honest I stick with a high bar, close stance squat for about 85% of the year. I generally will have squatting in the program 1x/week for about 48 weeks of the year and 2x/week for about 20-36 weeks of the year depending on the athlete. I don’t really do too many cycles where we go wide-stance, low bar position exclusively however it depends a little on the athlete. If there’s a serious glute deficiency that might be a better solution. When I do low bar squats (or other variants), they are typically accompanied by high bar, close stance squats on another day that week.
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Participant
Good article. Simple and to the point. Im a little surprised that you didn’t mention the hip thrust or other hip hyperextension movements. I have found the barbell hip thrust to be the mussing link in my glute recruitment. I have moved into a power cycle and getting carryover in my bounds that I at least partially attribute to hyperextension movements.
What kind of feedback are you getting from your athletes who have implemented the hip thrusts?
-
Participant
I think its where you lie on the floor and place a barbell with weight across your pelvis, then thrust up into a glute bridge – I use these and find them quite useful.
-
Participant
Start with the single leg version. As a sprinter you should have no problem banging out 15-20 reps. Then move up to 135 lbs on the hip thrust. Focus on squeezing hard at the top of each rep. The results should come quick. I paired mine in the same session with Bulgarian split squats to really hit the glutes and to have a loaded stretch of the hip flexors which will help in ROM for the hip thrusts.
I went from working with 135 for 8 to 275 for 6 in only a few weeks. WARNING! Once you get above 225, make sure you have some serious padding.
-
Participant
Well if you do the Bulgarian split squat with full ROM then you will get a loaded stretch of the hip flexor. I prefer dynamic stretching and full movement through ROM to manage mobility. So just set up and perform BSS where you feel a stretch in your hip flexors.
-
ParticipantDamn, i’ve been doing hip thrusters with like 25 lbs! that dude had over 300 lbs on there…jeeeZ!
-
Participant
How can the glutes & hamstrings be the engine/generator, since those muscles don’t fire first?.
If there was any truth in this article, surely powerlifters housing the biggest ‘engines’ on earth would be the fastest guys if they included sprint training?.
-
Keymaster
How can the glutes & hamstrings be the engine/generator?. They don’t fire first.
If there was any truth in this article, powerlifters would be the fastest guys on earth if they included sprint training in there training.
Not only are you wrong but your logic regarding powerlifers is flawed on multiple levels. Powerlifters not being the fastest people on the planet is a poor and often misused analogy. Sprinting is obviously not as simple as being very strong. I don’t think the article ever states that. The contraction times (in some cases more than 125x as long in powerlifting) and types (no eccentric phase of significance in powerlifting compared to sprinting), limb movement speeds, coordination patterns, and forces generated are very different. Also, the forces generated in sprinting are significantly higher than anything ever observed in sprinting. And how can you say what “fires first” in a cyclic motion? The glutes and hamstrings are completely active through ground contact.
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Participant
[quote author="JC Cooper" date="1305635263"]How can the glutes & hamstrings be the engine/generator?. They don’t fire first.
If there was any truth in this article, powerlifters would be the fastest guys on earth if they included sprint training in there training.
Not only are you wrong but your logic regarding powerlifers is flawed on multiple levels. Powerlifters not being the fastest people on the planet is a poor and often misused analogy. The contraction times (in some cases more than 125x as long in powerlifting) and types (no eccentric phase of significance in powerlifting compared to sprinting), limb movement speeds, coordination patterns, and forces generated are very different. Also, the forces generated in sprinting are significantly higher than anything ever observed in sprinting. And how can you say what “fires first” in a cyclic motion? The glutes and hamstrings are completely active through ground contact.[/quote]
If movement starts from the center, how can the glutes & hamstrings be the engine?. What I mean by “fire first” is, extremities don’t contract first.
-
Participant
[quote author="Mike Young" date="1305679484"][quote author="JC Cooper" date="1305635263"]How can the glutes & hamstrings be the engine/generator?. They don’t fire first.
If there was any truth in this article, powerlifters would be the fastest guys on earth if they included sprint training in there training.
Not only are you wrong but your logic regarding powerlifers is flawed on multiple levels. Powerlifters not being the fastest people on the planet is a poor and often misused analogy. The contraction times (in some cases more than 125x as long in powerlifting) and types (no eccentric phase of significance in powerlifting compared to sprinting), limb movement speeds, coordination patterns, and forces generated are very different. Also, the forces generated in sprinting are significantly higher than anything ever observed in sprinting. And how can you say what “fires first” in a cyclic motion? The glutes and hamstrings are completely active through ground contact.[/quote]
If movement starts from the center, how can the glutes & hamstrings be the engine?. What I mean by “fire first” is, extremities don’t contract first.
Sprinting is obviously not as simple as being very strong. I don’t think the article ever states that.
I for one certainly got that impression.
You state, that I call the glutes & hamstrings the ‘engine for athletic performance’.
That is massive. THE ENGINE. Which athletes on earth would have the V12 turbo engines if they included sprint training into there programs?. Powerlifters. Nobody on earth could compete with there “engines”. Powerlifting sprinters would power down the track with the greater engine.
You have placed massive significance on the hamstrings & glutes, referring to them as the engine. A powerlifter then, that included sprint training would surely blast by Carl Lewis & his 0lb squat/deadlift & very underdeveloped hamstring/glute complex. They would have the formidable horsepower (the greater engine).
The engine has to be most important aspect of locomotion, in your case (hamstrings/glutes). Keep the engine in mind. We have sprinters that don’t lift, we have powerlifters who can push/pull 3-4x bodyweight/include sprint training (500-700lbs of strength/power going into there engines) & easily getting beaten on the track. Surely they can’t be the engine.
When I hear of Carl Lewis not lifting for hamstring & glute development, he’s proven to me there not the true engine.[/quote]
You’ve missed the point, and missed it hard. Even if we continue using the engine analogy, Mike’s writing still makes perfect sense. It wouldn’t be accurate to say a powerlifter has a big engine, it would be more accurate to say they have a big hydraulic jack. A hydraulic jack can lift heavy things, but it certainly couldn’t run a car at high speeds. However, horsepower, even by a physics standpoint, is dependent not only on the force, but at the rate it is generated. Horsepower IS actually torque (force) x RPM (rate at which force is generated). So while some powerlifting exercises are optimal to develop muscles most used in sprinting, they are not in fact the end all be all to developing speed. We all know that and Mike was getting at the first part of the last sentence. I hope that helps.
-
Keymaster
[quote author="Mike Young" date="1305679484"][quote author="JC Cooper" date="1305635263"]How can the glutes & hamstrings be the engine/generator?. They don’t fire first.
If there was any truth in this article, powerlifters would be the fastest guys on earth if they included sprint training in there training.
Not only are you wrong but your logic regarding powerlifers is flawed on multiple levels. Powerlifters not being the fastest people on the planet is a poor and often misused analogy. The contraction times (in some cases more than 125x as long in powerlifting) and types (no eccentric phase of significance in powerlifting compared to sprinting), limb movement speeds, coordination patterns, and forces generated are very different. Also, the forces generated in sprinting are significantly higher than anything ever observed in sprinting. And how can you say what “fires first” in a cyclic motion? The glutes and hamstrings are completely active through ground contact.[/quote]
If movement starts from the center, how can the glutes & hamstrings be the engine?. What I mean by “fire first” is, extremities don’t contract first.
Sprinting is obviously not as simple as being very strong. I don’t think the article ever states that.
I for one certainly got that impression.
You state, that I call the glutes & hamstrings the ‘engine for athletic performance’.
That is massive. THE ENGINE. Which athletes on earth would have the V12 turbo engines if they included sprint training into there programs?. Powerlifters. Nobody on earth could compete with there “engines”. Powerlifting sprinters would power down the track with the greater engine.
You have placed massive significance on the hamstrings & glutes, referring to them as the engine. A powerlifter then, that included sprint training would surely blast by Carl Lewis & his 0lb squat/deadlift & very underdeveloped hamstring/glute complex. They would have the formidable horsepower (the greater engine).
The engine has to be most important aspect of locomotion, in your case (hamstrings/glutes). Keep the engine in mind. We have sprinters that don’t lift, we have powerlifters who can push/pull 3-4x bodyweight/include sprint training (500-700lbs of strength/power going into there engines) & easily getting beaten on the track. Surely they can’t be the engine.
When I hear of Carl Lewis not lifting for hamstring & glute development, he’s proven to me there not the true engine.[/quote]As Derrick pointed out your analogy is flawed all over the place. You’re reading in to something what you want to hear and even that argument (that weights are unimportant) is flawed.
The ability to apply large forces fast (with the glutes and hamstrings amongst other muscles) is what determines who sprints the fastest. The ability to apply large forces without regard to time has much less impact on sprint performance. Does the Bugatti Veyron Super Sport[/url], capable of a top speed of 252 mph, not have a powerful engine because it can’t tow a 2 ton load?
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Participant
You’ve missed the point, and missed it hard.
I didn’t miss the point.
If the Hamstrings & glutes were the engine, these muscles would fire up first before anything else.
-
Participant
[quote author="sizerp" date="1238372555"]How do you suggest to implement both types of squat?
To be honest I stick with a high bar, close stance squat for about 85% of the year. I generally will have squatting in the program 1x/week for about 48 weeks of the year and 2x/week for about 20-36 weeks of the year depending on the athlete. I don’t really do too many cycles where we go wide-stance, low bar position exclusively however it depends a little on the athlete. If there’s a serious glute deficiency that might be a better solution. When I do low bar squats (or other variants), they are typically accompanied by high bar, close stance squats on another day that week.[/quote]
Low bar vs. high bar squat hip angles are very close, most often high bar have greatest hip flexion and knee flexion. Low bar less hip and alot less knee flexion. Also frontal plan movement is greatest (abduktion). The big question is where do we see highest activation…
In relation to length tension relationsships in the muscle i predict the following for most people:
High bar:
++ Gluts
++ Vastus (lat+medialis)
+ adductor (magnus)
+ hamstringsLow bar:
+ Gluts
– vastus
++ adductor
++ hamstrings++ = outer range
+ = mid range
– = inner rangeto help the reasoning process the length tension relationship for RDL
++ hamstring
+ gluts
– vastus
– adductorwhat is working hardest in these excercises? Do RDLs work gluts or hamstrings… and those low squat following this reasoning process increase glut strength better than high bar squats???
-
Keymaster
No I didn’t miss the point.
Mike stated that: [i]I call the glutes & hamstrings [b]THE[/b] ‘engine for athletic performance’.[/i] Then you correctly state: [i]“So while some powerlifting exercises are optimal to develop muscles most used in sprinting, [b]they are not in fact the end all be all to developing speed[/b]“.[/i]
Wait a minute?.
What produces the speed?. The engine. The hamstring/glutes [i]“are the engine”.[/i]
So it’s wrong.
No, the glutes & hamstrings can’t be [b]THE[/b] ‘engine for athletic performance’.
If we are discussing the engine (hamstrings/glutes). Well, powerlifters have the strongest hamstrings/glutes on the planet. [i]The “hamstrings/glutes” are the engine.[/i] The ‘engine’ puts the object (the sprinter)/or car into locomotion. The engine produces the speed.
If this was the case, a powerlifter which sprints would have the massive advantage.
[/quote]3 big problems….
1) You are basing every point of your argument around an analogy in a single statement used to emphasize the importance of the posterior chain in sprint speed.
2) You are wrongly assuming that engines are capable of only one thing….low end power. Please address the issue of engines in high powered sport cars. Does the engine not make the sport car move fast? The engine of a sport car is built for speed rather than low end power (which would be useful for moving things and carrying heavy loads…ala your flawed powerlifting analogy)….does this make the sport car engine any less an engine than those used in tow trucks and other heavy vehicles?
3) You are wrongly associating strength with speed. No where in the article do I assert that strength = speed. Check out the err in your logic:If we are discussing the engine (hamstrings/glutes). Well, powerlifters have the strongest hamstrings/glutes on the planet. [i]The “hamstrings/glutes” are the engine.[/i] The ‘engine’ puts the object (the sprinter)/or car into locomotion. The engine produces the speed.
If this was the case, a powerlifter which sprints would have the massive advantage.
Strength doesn’t equal speed. Where in the world are you making that jump from what I’ve written. Just as heavy machinery will never win an Indy race, the power lifters will never win a sprint race.
[quote author="Mike Young" date="1305705284"]As Derrick pointed out your analogy is flawed all over the place. You’re reading in to something what you want to hear and even that argument (that weights are unimportant) is flawed.
The ability to apply large forces fast (with the glutes and hamstrings amongst other muscles) is what determines who sprints the fastest. The ability to apply large forces without regard to time has much less impact on sprint performance. Does the [url=https://www.fastestcar.net/]Bugatti Veyron Super Sport[/url], capable of a top speed of 252 mph, not have a powerful engine because it can’t tow a 2 ton load?
Now where changing it up. “The ability to apply large forces fast (with the glutes and hamstrings amongst other muscles) is what determines who sprints the fastest”.
Other muscles of course. Look at the arms during acceleration. Isn’t that an engine?. What about the hip flexors?. The inner core which contracts first?. Aren’t those all included in the engine?. Wouldn’t the muscles that actually put the legs into locomotion be the engine?.[/quote]Of course there are other muscles at play. Assuming I’m saying otherwise would be absurd. Since you insist on trying to beat up on my engine analogy I’ll flog you right back with it on this point….does an engine block of any kind move without wheels? tires? transmission? The engine is what is primarily responsible for movement but cannot do so without a means of transferring that power. This is no different in the sprinter.
^ Just not the case. The guys with the strongest glutes & hamstrings would have the biggest engine, hence produce the greatest speed.
Can you repeat this a couple more times? I love hearing your misattribution that someone said strong = speed.
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Member
I don’t understand how JC Cooper can’t realize how wrong he is.
I think mike mentioned it earlier about time under tension.
I also like the hydraulic jack analogy. If you watch a power lifter on a heavy squat they move it very slowly. It gets up there but incredibly slow.i like engine analogies because i love cars.
Sprinter = f1 car (fast, couldn’t pull and aeroplane)
Power lifter = Aeroplane tug lorry (slow, couldn’t outrun an f1 car)its quite simple, really isn’t it. I think what Mike was trying to highlight to people was when it comes to weight training what is the most important for the athlete.
-
Member
To elaborate on the engine analogy. A powerlifter has the engine of a diesel semi-track. The engine is monstrous. It produces huge amounts of low end torque. This is required to move heavy objects like a tractor trailer or 1000 lb squat. It’s max RPM can be be around 1,000 which is very slow like a powerlifting movement. It does not produce much horsepower in relation to the torque produced. Opposite that is the Indy car. It doesnt have very high torque in relation to it’s horsepower. The engine is much smaller but reaches max power at 10,000 RPM. Piston speed is much greater to create the high top end speed just like a sprinters limb speed is high to create high top end speed.
-
Participant
Before the analogies get out of hand, power lifters, by definition, don’t necessarily have to be the diesel truck. There is no reason a powerlifter can’t have a very high RFD and be a good sprinter. For example, if Ben Johnson had decided to go into powerlifting, he might have been very successful. He would have had both a strong and powerful “engine”. It is correct that powerlifters don’t really need to be powerful or have great RFD, but that is not so important because they are not limited to fractions of a second; they just need to be able to express high levels of force within the few seconds that their sport allows.
Sprinters, who may also be able to produce much higher levels of force in the gym than they will ever express on the track, must be able to produce a great deal of that force in a very short period of time, fractions of a second. However, they may not actually be able to produce truly high levels of force, such as a powerlifter might produce, over longer durations lasting seconds. The fact that they may not be able to produce extremely high forces like a powerlifter isn’t important, however, because they are working with fractions of a second, not several seconds like a powerlifter.
To get faster, you need to be able to produce higher and higher levels of force over shorter and shorter durations, and simply ‘making your engine bigger’ so that you can produce more force over long durations (several seconds) may have little or no impact at this point.
The comparisons to engines can get out of hand when thing like RFD start being compared to torque and and force to horsepower and sprinters to sports cars and powerlifters to diesels. The actual explanation is probably easier to understand at some point.
-
Participant
Further to the use of engnes as an analogy;
Think of a bank of engines; say 3 banks of engines for a person. One engine can reach peak force in 180 milliseconds (such as slow twitch muscle fibers) one bank can reach peak force in 120 milliseconds (such as medium twitch muscle fibers for simplicity)and one bank can reach peak force in 80 milliseconds (fast twitch fibers). A powerlifter or anyone lifting weights in the gym will use all engine banks (slow, medium, fast in that order). Except for the first few steps of a race, a sprinter will use only the engine bank equivalent to fast twitch fibers (that can produce peak forces in about 80 milliseconds). Some of those sprinters will have an engine bank that will fire all cylinders at once or in very close firing proximity and may be able to produce force in shorter periods of time thereby negating the need for any great strength for that particular engine bank.
Hope that helps the conversation.
-
Participant
I don’t understand how JC Cooper can’t realize how wrong he is.
All I’m saying is, I disagree with Mike’s statement: “I call the glutes & hamstrings THE ‘engine for athletic performance”.
The engine has to be at the centre of what puts those propulsors (legs) into locomotion.
Some people speculate Usains engine & key to his speed lies directly in his plantarflexion strength, well maybe, but even that fires later on down the chain.
Carl Lewis proved you didn’t need to strengthen the hamstring/glutes massively.
Carl must have emphasised other parts of the body other than what Mike refers to as the bodies main engine (hamstrings/glutes) in the production of what made him go, since he did no lifting in the prime of his career.
-
Participant
35 posts and you’re trying to take down the Mod who has a PhD in Biomechanics… Good start bro!
-
Participant
All I’m saying is, I disagree with Mike’s statement: “I call the glutes & hamstrings THE ‘engine for athletic performance”.
There not. The engine has to be at the centre of what puts those propulsors (legs) into locomotion.
Some people speculate Usain’s engine & key to his speed lies directly in his platarflexion strength, well maybe, but it all means absolutely nothing if you can’t put it all into locomotion. Can you see, his platarflexion strength is not his CENTRAL engine. It’s the same with quads, hams, glutes etc which Mike refers too.
Carl Lewis proved you didn’t need to strengthen the hamstring/glutes massively. Everybody strengthens to produce a greater engine. But they are what Mike refers to as the engine.
People can’t see where I’m coming from. Carl must have put far greater emphasis on different parts of the body other than what Mike refers to as the engine (pretty much the be all/end all) in the production of locomotion. The engine is almost everything, that means then, the guy with most powerful glutes & hamstrings will be victorious OR the guy who can apply the greatest force with those will win BECAUSE, there the engine .
People can speculate what they like about what is the key to Usain Bolt’s success. I doubt Usain has any great muscular strengths; he is most likely someone that has the learned ability to fire (recruit) his fast twitch muscle fibres in close succession/synchronisation. And more importantly for this debate, that recruitment allows him to quickly extend his hips and quickly flex his knees albeit through a smaller range of movement which implies that the glutes and hamstrings are critical for world class sprinting.
I’ve attached a small document explaining whose evidence I used to draw my conclusions. -
Member
So because carl lewis didn’t train his posterior chain that is all the proof you need?!
He may well have been gifted with strong glutes and hamstrings naturally. did you work with him?
If your arguement is so strong, why is it that virtually every sprint coach believes that strengthening the glutes and hamstrings are the way to go? amongst other things.“The engine has to be at the centre of what puts those propulsors (legs) into locomotion”
The glutes and hamstrings cause hip extenstion, this causes the leg to swing backwards…..is that not locomotion of the leg? are they not central to bringing the leg backwards?
I would argue that usain bolt hasnt got a stronger plantarflexion, but a stiffer ankle maybe to allow more force to be utilised from the achilles.
Michael Johnson had insanely strong glutes and hamstrings which allowed him to use a much longer stride than most. His stride done by someone with weak glutes and hamstrings wouldn’t work for them.
-
Viewing 34 reply threads
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.