Another important note is that the O-lifts are not useful as a means of developing explosive strength until the lifter is cabable of lifting a large amount of weight. So again, while one lifter is grinding their way towards cleaning or jerking a weight equal to or far in excess of their own bodymass (without looking like a trainwreck) I can teach and subsequently have another lifter execute a thro
Glasnost
-
-
Participant -
Participant
Hello Carl, I figured it would be appropriate and appreciated by your readers that I submit a response.
I was directed here by an individual who alerted me to your post.
I just registered to elite track and this is my first post.
To the point, I respect your work and I must congratulate you on possessing the capacity to discuss an opposing viewpoint void of the harsh criticism that is so frequently demonstrated amidst the naive and misdirected sport training community in North America.
As two professionals, there is no problem in us agreeing to not agree.
I think, however, that my involvement with EFS has pigeonholed me as a coach whose concept of strength development is rooted in the fundamentals of powerlifting- this is not correct.
As a self-proclaimed physical preparation coach the means that I draw upon are simply physical prepatory in nature and I chose not to limit myself to any particular school of thought.
The biodynamic and bioenergetic particularities of the sport that I am primarily involved with (American football) dictate the nature of the physical prepatory efforts I instruct to my athletes.
I certainly agree with you in stating that those of us in who possess an influential role to other coaches must assume the responsibility in properly informing them.
Consequently, here is where you and I must disagree Carl.
So I state this for you readers consideration:
The training means used by any athlete, regardless of discipline, must support the development of the basic biomotor abilities, recovery/regeneration, as well as the more specific demand of specialized prepatory and specialized developmental exercises that more positively transfer to the improved performance of the competitive event.
As it stands, there is no debate to the following:
There is no one training means more important or directly linked to the improved performance of world class sprinters than…sprinting
There is no one training means more important or directly linked to the improved performance of world class jumpers than…jumping
There is no one training means more important or directly linked to the improved performance of world class throwers than…throwing
There is no one training means more important or directly linked to the improved performance of world class weightlifters than…weightlifting
There is no one training means more important or directly linked to the improved performance of world class powerlifters than…powerlifting
Thus, the performance of any other training means, to the exclusion of the competitive exercise, for any athlete, serves a rehabilitative, general/supportive, prepatory, or developmental role.
The less the training means transfers to the biodynamic/bioenergetic structure of the competitive exercise the more debatable it becomes in the training of the athlete.
So if we are to compare strength/power exercises in the training of other athletes we know that in order to attain world class results:
Sprinters do not have to perform the weightlifts
Jumpers do not have to perform the weightlifts
Throwers do not have to perform the weightlifts
Powerlifters do not have to perform the weightlifts
and all other non-weightlifters do not have to perform the weightlifts
Additionally:
Sprinters do not have to perform the powerlifts
Jumpers do not have to perform the powerlifts
Throwers do not have to perform the powerlifts
Powerlifters do not have to perform the powerlifts
and all other non-powerlifters do not have to perform the powerlifts
The only need for non-weightlifters and non-powerlifters, from the standpoint of strength/power development, is that strength and power are developed in the requisite musculature and to this end we all have a host of exercises at our disposal.
It is my view that the most rudimentary forms of strength/power development exercises are the wisest course of action for any non-weightlifter and non-powerlifter as I do not think it wise to expend any unnecessary energetic or psychological resources on unnecessary/non-essential means of training.
thus, in the general training, my athletes sprint, jump, throw, and perform basic strength exercises such as squats and bench press.
We would all agree that there is no more precise measure of improvements in sport form other than the critical assessment of competition performance and results.
for the team sport athletes this becomes futile for physical preparation coaches to debate due to the overwhelming significance of tactical and technical element of competition.
thus the industry has selected to popularize and standardize the testing of more readily quantifiable numbers such as sprints, jumps, throws, and various barbell exercises in order to calculate improvements in the athletes physical condition; however, if the tests are not carried out in the context of the appropriate bioenergetic mechanism, relative to the athletes sport, than just how meaningful is the testing…not as much as one might think.
this is because, by in large, most of this types of testing occurs under the bioenergetic condition of alactic power (ergo short sprints, 1-2-3 fold jumps, med ball throws, and single effort barbell lifts). While the results such tests do offer usable information. They in no way offer the degree of reliability and significance with respect to qualitatively demonstrating potential improvements in sport playing ability.
To the point, while there is room for debate, regarding the use of non-essential training means, there is no debate as what is essential and non-essential in the training of athletes whose sport discipline is not weightlifting or powerlifting.
Thus, it is my recommendation to those who will listen, that I, as a coach in position of influence, who
– began his coaching career serving three years at the high school level as an assistant Track and Field coach, head coach of physical preparation for American football, and Physical Education Advisor.
– Who, as a Physical Education Advisor, rewrote an entire PE curriculum and instituted a classification/selection process and piece meal training system.
– who is now in his third season serving as the Assistant Coach of Physical Preparation for a D-1 Collegiate American Football Program.
– Who, as a private consultant of physical preparation has worked with athletes who participate in a wide range of Olympic and Professional sports, to include my recent work with a member of the US Senior National Luge team, as well as with select members of foreign and domestic military special operations forces including work with commandos serving with one of America’s Tier 1 Assets.
– Who is the founder of http://www.powerdevelopmentinc.com and serves as a Q&A staff member for http://www.elitefts.com.
– who is a lecturer in the field of sport training and has spoken alongside esteemed members of the international sport science community to include Dr. Anatoliy Bondarchuk and Dr. Vladimir Issurin Ph.D.
– Who works as the chief editor for selected journal articles and textbooks authored by Dr. Yuri Verkhoshansky
– and who is currently writing a book for Ultimate Fighting Champion Randy Couture…
must impress upon the fact that…these are the facts:
– the use of Olympic weightlifts in the training of non-weightlifters is non-essential.
– world class sprinting, jumping, and throwing ability may be developed in its absence.
– Super Bowls may be won in its absence
– World Series may be won in its absence
– Stanley Cups may be won in its absence
– Wimbledon may be won in its absence
– The PGA tour may be won in its absence
– The NBA championship may be won in its absence
– and gold medals in every existing Olympic discipline, other than weightlifting, may be won in its absence
– and on and on and on
The same holds true for powerlifting
So, to all athletes and coaches of physical preparation, take the information, educate yourself, make your choice…
and choose wisely
-
Participant
Jesus christ you could have just said you think squats are easier to teach, olympic lifts take too much energy and time to teach for them to be useful, and that since nothing besides the specific event is needed, you don’t need any other single exercise (ie Olympics) for maximal success.
-
Participant
This was from the Supertraining forum, nothing new but I thought it was an interesting opinion from Pfaff.
“Why must track athletes do full cleans when it seems just as effective to just do the pull from the ground. I’ve always dreamt of the day that I had enough room to just throw the bar over my head and not have to catch it. I do see how balance, coordination, stabilizing muscles are positively effected by this but it still seems that just a pull would suffice. Could you set me straight please.
Here was his answer:
Early in my career I was fortunate enough to be turned on to a guy by
the name of Roger Enoka,a motor learning researcher at the U of Az.Buried in one of his abstracts was a totally unique classification of motor-strength parameters.They included things such as punching strength,throwing strength,amortization strength,inertial starting strength,planar str.,rotational str.,directional str. and its related values as speed changes,etc…He had very good confirmational statistics,EMG data,Brain wave data, and so on….This really changed my paradigm and caused me to be more critical when evaluating athletes and their problems.Using this format, I see the complete Olympic lift challenging many of the aforementioned sub-class parameters.I have had sprinters and jumpers who could pull the weight room but snatch very little when doing the whole lift.You hit on some key reasons and in addition I feel that the no. one feature is the ability to change directions under extreme loading.The inertial factors are hit on several fronts and at a huge variance in lever moment velocities.It is no accident that the worlds fastest folks know how to change directions of the femur at blinding recruitment speeds and with a coordination the leaves fans saying how effortless they look.I have now had the good fortune to coach seven guys under 10 sec. and two ladies under 11.To a person their sprint times improved in direct correlation to their skill with the full lift.We currently have 3 sub 10 folks over 130 kilos,2 others at 120 kilos, and a female hurdler who weighs in at 109 lbs. who just did 98 kilos for a double.It is also no accident that world class Olympic lifters are very fast sprinters.Mikael Olander,NCAA deca champ in 87,trained with the Swedish Natn.Lift team on many occassions and their big guys often waxed him in 30m runs with most excellent mechanics.In summary learning how to place joints under duress in a position to extend,flex,extend is the basis of running fast.”In addition I believe he mentioned during a recent seminar that EMG analysis showed similar recruitment patterns between OL’s and block starts.
A valuable tool for those proficient enough to exploit the advantages, in my opinion.
-
Participant
what are Dr. Yuri Verkhoshansky views on oly lifts?is he in favour of non weighlifting athletes using them or not
The priority via which Dr. Verkhoshansky places upon what exercises will be included in any complex of means is based upon to what degree the exercise dynamically corresponds to the competitive act.
Hence my reference to transfer, essential/non-essential, etcetera.
Simply put, the more criteria of dynamic correspondence that are satisfied, the higher the transfer. This, of course, is rooted in scientific and evidence based fact.
Alternatively, the lesser criteria of dynamic correspondence that are satisfied, the less the transfer and thus, the discussion lends itself more to debate.
-
Participant
This was from the Supertraining forum, nothing new but I thought it was an interesting opinion from Pfaff.
“Why must track athletes do full cleans when it seems just as effective to just do the pull from the ground. I’ve always dreamt of the day that I had enough room to just throw the bar over my head and not have to catch it. I do see how balance, coordination, stabilizing muscles are positively effected by this but it still seems that just a pull would suffice. Could you set me straight please.
Here was his answer:
Early in my career I was fortunate enough to be turned on to a guy by
the name of Roger Enoka,a motor learning researcher at the U of Az.Buried in one of his abstracts was a totally unique classification of motor-strength parameters.They included things such as punching strength,throwing strength,amortization strength,inertial starting strength,planar str.,rotational str.,directional str. and its related values as speed changes,etc…He had very good confirmational statistics,EMG data,Brain wave data, and so on….This really changed my paradigm and caused me to be more critical when evaluating athletes and their problems.Using this format, I see the complete Olympic lift challenging many of the aforementioned sub-class parameters.I have had sprinters and jumpers who could pull the weight room but snatch very little when doing the whole lift.You hit on some key reasons and in addition I feel that the no. one feature is the ability to change directions under extreme loading.The inertial factors are hit on several fronts and at a huge variance in lever moment velocities.It is no accident that the worlds fastest folks know how to change directions of the femur at blinding recruitment speeds and with a coordination the leaves fans saying how effortless they look.I have now had the good fortune to coach seven guys under 10 sec. and two ladies under 11.To a person their sprint times improved in direct correlation to their skill with the full lift.We currently have 3 sub 10 folks over 130 kilos,2 others at 120 kilos, and a female hurdler who weighs in at 109 lbs. who just did 98 kilos for a double.It is also no accident that world class Olympic lifters are very fast sprinters.Mikael Olander,NCAA deca champ in 87,trained with the Swedish Natn.Lift team on many occassions and their big guys often waxed him in 30m runs with most excellent mechanics.In summary learning how to place joints under duress in a position to extend,flex,extend is the basis of running fast.”In addition I believe he mentioned during a recent seminar that EMG analysis showed similar recruitment patterns between OL’s and block starts.
A valuable tool for those proficient enough to exploit the advantages, in my opinion.
This, with all due respect to Dan Pfaff and the high sports achievements of Pfaff’s athletes, could be very misleading and I will go on to state that other information that Pfaff has published could be similarly misleading and misinterpreted.
In addition to the positive correlation that Pfaff has noted between the Snatch, he has also noted similar correlations to the backward med ball throw and sprinting classification; if I recall. Again, don’t quote me on that; but, I’m nearly certain I reviewed something of that sort.
here’s the problem, when a particular training means is used with regularity in the preparation of an athlete- increased efficiency comes along with it; thus, the performance of that specific exercise improves over time (assuming the regulation of the load is managed wisely).
Additionally, rarely, if ever, does a training program consist of only one means of training separate from the competitive exercise.
Thus, void of satisfying a high degree of dynamic correspondence (which the backward med ball throw and Olympic weightlifts do not in relation to sprinting at +11m/s),it is very difficult to qualitatively or quantitatively describe how one particular training means can be so closely linked with improved sports results.
Simply put, if the weightlifts, or any other non-specific exercise, were to be unequivocally linked to world class 100m sprint results than the possibility of running sub 10sec, while not performing those lifts in the training, would be small to non-existent.
In reality, however, there have been, and will continue to be, a myriad of sub 10sec sprinters whose non-specific weight training varies by a wide margin.
Stating that the performance of any singular training means, that does not satisfy a high degree of dynamic correspondence, to the exclusion of all others with the exception of the competition exercise, is directly linked to improved sport results – is a very slippery slope.
-
Participant
Yes, Thinker, and Pfaff has addressed that not all athletes need the same lifts, training program, or anything else.. You, however, say quite distinctly that olympic lifts do not need to be used, period. You do not indicate that there is a likelihood that many athletes would benefit from the Olympic lifts and that sort of stimulus or anything else. Considering even Charlie says he used Olympic lifts with most of his athletes (Ben being an exception only because he had such a hard time learning them), how can you deny the very real advantages of a program using them versus one that specifically avoids them?
You say there is no relation between sprinting and OHB throw or Olympic lifting, yet there are a number of coaches who have noted the exact opposite. Pfaff talks about how the energetics, recruitment patterns, even joint angles are extremely similar to starts and early acceleration. John Smith talks about changing from lifts from the floor to the hang and going from cleans to snatches based upon time of the season and focus (acceleration/top speed/se/etc.) within his program. Vince Anderson talks about using them to teach people complete extension. I mean, the evidence is pretty overwhelming for their inclusion, if it is possible.
And if your efficiency hypothesis has much validity, why isn’t there a significant positive correlation with squats or deadlifts? Why is it power variations of olympic lifts and throws? Surely they are squatting and with it being such a basic movement, their efficiency and proficiency would go up in line like it does in the other exercises?
-
Participant
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.
Training is efficient if the highest sport result is achieved with the least expense of time and energy- Kurz
I’m not disputing the sport results achieved by the athletes of the coaches who include weightlifts in the training- I’m disputing the efficiency of 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 have nothing against the Olympic lifts and I will go on to state that I am confident that I have a greater understanding and appreciation of the sport of weightlifting than the majority of the coaches who include them in the training of their athletes.
I also have a decidedly keen advantage and position of objectivity when discussing this matter as I have had the opportunity to question one of the most celebrated weightlifting coaches in the history of the sport- Ivan Abadjiev (former national team coach for Bulgaria)
When a weightlifter who I was coaching, who was studying under Abadjiev at the time, conveyed my question to Abadjiev as to what his thoughts were on snatches and C&J in the training of non-weightlifters his response was as follows:
“Leave weightlifting to weightlifters. As long as the athletes understand how to squat and pull I see no need for them to weightlift”
Furthermore, I made the acquaintance with a former weightlifting national team member for Albania and after a brief discussion on training he said THE EXACT SAME THING- “its only important that the athletes understand how to squat and pull”
I share all of this with the aim that training will become as efficient as possible.
-
Participant
All this training complexity when most of the athletes in America eat EasyMac, Frosted Flakes, Pepsi, sleep 5 hours per day, take random weeks off from training, etc… I think the content of the other 98% of their life far outweighs training design intricacies. This is a partial reason why schools who do intensive tempo programs still dominate (on average) “intelligent programming”. What we like to write on paper or type on the computer and what actually happens in reality is usually quite disparate.
-
Participant
Wait, so those in the know (being… you? since many successful elite coaches disagree) say that those exercises transfer better over to starting and acceleration, yet there are a number who have said the Olympic lifts and OHB throws have been irreplaceable in teaching and improving these skills?
Weightlifts transfer only over to acceleration? Well, considering many use them in ways you seem to be unable to imagine, I’d have to disagree. Dan Pfaff and others use a variety protocols to use them to develop improved work capacity and alactic abilities, which is going to affect many things besides just acceleration.
And acceleration has the least amount of transfer? Well, last I recall, the elites are accelerating to 60m and sometimes beyond, so acceleration is making up most of the race. Not to mention, top speed and SE can only be developed upon acceleration. If you can’t accelerate well, you can’t maximize top speed and you can’t have the best possible SE. The gold and silver medalists went 3.78 and 3.77 to 30m respectively, so I think most of us have some work to do. Oh yeah, they do olympic lifts :).
You talk about people training as efficiently as possible–what is inefficient about using the Olympic lifts? Are the gains that one can make utilizing them outweight the supposed “inefficiencies” in training? Many seem to think so. I can name multiple dozens of coaches who have DEVELOPED numerous elites in sprinting and derivative events (hurdles, jumps, etc.) that utilize olympic lifts and find great value in them for most athletes. They find enough value to de-emphasize squats and other pulls. What does that tell you?
Again, if the transference is only to acceleration and only because of improved efficiency within movement, why isn’t there the same association with squatting? Oh yeah, the guys Dan Pfaff was talking about weren’t exactly known for fast 30s, but for their top speed, so I don’t think your argument really holds.
-
Participant
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.
-
Participant
Wait, so those in the know (being… you? since many successful elite coaches disagree) say that those exercises transfer better over to starting and acceleration, yet there are a number who have said the Olympic lifts and OHB throws have been irreplaceable in teaching and improving these skills?
I apologize if I haven’t been as specific as I should; I should have clarified initial acceleration- meaning the first 10m or so and not much beyond that.
And again, I listed training means that transfer much more positively to the start, initial, and later acceleration.
Weightlifts transfer only over to acceleration? Well, considering many use them in ways you seem to be unable to imagine, I’d have to disagree. Dan Pfaff and others use a variety protocols to use them to develop improved work capacity and alactic abilities, which is going to affect many things besides just acceleration.
No need to speculate what I can imagine. You’ve gone from defending the lifts based upon transfer to start and acceleration to more general qualities such as work capacity and other alactic qualities. Thus, again, I must caution others to understand, once again, that there are far more efficient means to accomplish these objectives as well.
If you tell which aspects of work capacity or other alactic qualities you’d like to address I’ll provide examples.
And acceleration has the least amount of transfer? Well, last I recall, the elites are accelerating to 60m and sometimes beyond, so acceleration is making up most of the race. Not to mention, top speed and SE can only be developed upon acceleration. If you can’t accelerate well, you can’t maximize top speed and you can’t have the best possible SE. The gold and silver medalists went 3.78 and 3.77 to 30m respectively, so I think most of us have some work to do. Oh yeah, they do olympic lifts :).
Again, I should have stated initial acceleration; however, neither the lifts, nor the throws, even begin to approach the same galaxy of speed of contraction, elastic response, coupling times, etcetera as the distances approach max V range.
You talk about people training as efficiently as possible–what is inefficient about using the Olympic lifts? Are the gains that one can make utilizing them outweight the supposed “inefficiencies” in training? Many seem to think so. I can name multiple dozens of coaches who have DEVELOPED numerous elites in sprinting and derivative events (hurdles, jumps, etc.) that utilize olympic lifts and find great value in them for most athletes. They find enough value to de-emphasize squats and other pulls. What does that tell you?
It tells me that this entire topic is debatable and that, as far as the question goes as to whether or not any particular non-specific exercise should be used, there is no on right answer.
Again, if the transference is only to acceleration and only because of improved efficiency within movement, why isn’t there the same association with squatting? Oh yeah, the guys Dan Pfaff was talking about weren’t exactly known for fast 30s, but for their top speed, so I don’t think your argument really holds.
Davan, I seem to be unsuccessfully conveying what is fact; either that, or you are uninterested in listening, so I think this will be my last run on this topic as I have plenty of work I need to do.
When you bounce back and forth, regarding the transfer comment, to defending one end more specific and the other less specific, it is making it quite challenging for me to understand what is confusing you.
Regarding the top speed comment, if you or Dan Pfaff, or any other coach thinks that barbell exercises have any direct correlation to top speed you and the rest of the coaches are simply mistaken; and if you fall back upon the indirect transfer than, again, we’ve drifted into debatable territory and the discussion must be opened up to a host of other means that offer just as much indirect transfer.
Again, I’m not interested in debating and this feels like a debate so I’d rather just stick to question and answer.
-
Participant
I think Olympic lifts can transfer in many ways and I elucidated only a few of them. I do not pigeonhole the olympic lifts and derivatives or even strength training in general to improvements in initial acceleration since many coaches and elite athletes have noted the improvements in the middle and later stages of the race through lifting, along with some theoretical models for how this could happen. If this was the case (lifts only influenced the first 10-15m), I don’t know why anybody other than 60/100m sprinters would want to utilize lifting at all or how it could have any significant influence.
I think sticking to Q&A only works when you have legitimate answers. Simply saying other methods always transfer over better, without any empirical basis and lots of evidence and experiences stating otherwise, is pretty insane.
I don’t think any specific exercise (other than the competitive activity) is absolutely necessary 100% of the time, but I do think there are exercises that tend to help more than others and there is a significant empirical basis with which to derive that from. Ignoring the mounds of evidence or simply writing it off as “inefficient at best” is a good way to not maximize results.
-
ParticipantI am going to make a guess that TheThinker is really someone called Bompa!
-
Participant
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.
Right, your assertion that the lifts can be used to benefit is correct; however, even based upon that statement, we’ve now drifted into debatable territory and this is futile.
In my opinion, in order to develop a sprinter to world champion status you must:
– be fortunate enough to work with an individual with the requisite morpho-biomechanical traits and motivation,
– have access to the necessary physiotherapy,
– have sufficient funding/sponsorship,
– have access to suitable training facilities,
– have sufficient knowledge of training programming,
– have sufficient knowledge/coaching, instructional skills specific to the sprints
– have the athlete sprint
– utilize specialized developmental exercises
– utilize specialized prepatory exercises
– utilize general prepatory exercisesDue to the characteristics of the last two, only that which is constituted by the last two regimes of exercise are debatable. All other points are essential and not open to debate.
-
Participant
I think Olympic lifts can transfer in many ways and I elucidated only a few of them. I do not pigeonhole the olympic lifts and derivatives or even strength training in general to improvements in initial acceleration since many coaches and elite athletes have noted the improvements in the middle and later stages of the race through lifting, along with some theoretical models for how this could happen. If this was the case (lifts only influenced the first 10-15m), I don’t know why anybody other than 60/100m sprinters would want to utilize lifting at all or how it could have any significant influence.
The exchange is now becoming more productive. Any transfer towards the middle and later stages of the race is indirect as the benefits of any strength or power exercises performed with barbells are too distant to the specific dynamic characteristics of sprinting at near 12m/s. So, because the realm of exercises that share this same level of indirect transfer is of galactic proportions we now must broaden the discussion to a myriad of exercises.
I think sticking to Q&A only works when you have legitimate answers. Simply saying other methods always transfer over better, without any empirical basis and lots of evidence and experiences stating otherwise, is pretty insane.
Not insane Davan, none of what I am stating is ‘just saying’. The empirical basis, evidence, fact, objectivity, is firmly rooted in bioenergetics and biodynamics; both of which are concrete sciences. Again, what the others, meaning coaches of world class sprinters, are saying is simply debatable.
As I stated earlier, never can one means, to the exclusion of the competitive exercise, ever be directly linked to improved contest results as there is always a complex of means and other factors that lead to cumulative results.
I don’t think any specific exercise (other than the competitive activity) is absolutely necessary 100% of the time, but I do think there are exercises that tend to help more than others and there is a significant empirical basis with which to derive that from. Ignoring the mounds of evidence or simply writing it off as “inefficient at best” is a good way to not maximize results.
Well then, this is where the nature of debatable subject matter comes into play and we agree to disagree. There is no right or wrong in the context of the use of non-competitive exercises towards the aim of attaining world class results.
Only one thing is certain, in the context of this discussion, sprinters must sprint. Everything else is debatable and any two of us will either agree or disagree on what all this consists of.
-
Participant
I am going to make a guess that TheThinker is really someone called Bompa!
My name is James Smith. I decided to use the same screen name as I do on http://www.elitefts.com to be consistent with the piece that Carl used to formulate his counterpoint.
-
Participant
Oh, nice to meet you. I had long emails with Tudor Bompa regarding OL’s a few years ago. Your thoughts are very simular to his.
-
Participant
Oh, nice to meet you. I had long emails with Tudor Bompa regarding OL’s a few years ago. Your thoughts are very simular to his.
Glad to have made your acquaintance as well. I wasn’t sure if you were being sarcastic or not in questioning whether I was Bompa because of the the aspects of my coaching history I listed in bullet points in my first post in this thread.
Interesting to know that he and I share similar views.
-
Participant
Yeah i’ve always been a fan of his…
Personally i love the clean and do not like any other Olympic lift. Much prefer doing jump and sprint type exercises on the track.
-
Participant
Yeah i’ve always been a fan of his…
Personally i love the clean and do not like any other Olympic lift. Much prefer doing jump and sprint type exercises on the track.
I actually have an immense appreciation for all Olympic lift derivatives and, depending on how busy I am with work, I have bouts of being a very dedicated fan of the sport and its competitors.
All version of snatches, cleans, jerks, presses, pulls, and squats are beautiful movements to observe being performed with mechanical efficiency and high loads.
-
Participant
I personally lost a lot of what I thought I thought of James when he felt it necessary to mention guys with foreign names and/or accents but did not feel as though Dan Pfaff or many others were worth recognition. Mladen’s a great guy but to put him on a list and leave so many off is very transparent.
-
KeymasterAlso 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.
Power output on single leg Olympic lifts are significantly less (by leg) than double leg lifts. And since static balance doesn’t carry over to dynamic stability (what we see in locomotive activities), why not choose the one with more horses in the engine?
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Keymaster
James-
Welcome to ET.Carl-
Another nice blog.This is a great thread. Really some great discussion here and I’m not sure where to start. I incorporate the squats and OLs quite a bit in my program. In fact, as someone from the Pfaffian family tree there are many similarities in our program. I have over the past 2 years occasionally taken Olympic lifts out of the program for a couple of my athletes but for those athletes who know how to do them with above average competency I don’t see much benefit in doing so other than for the sake of variety (which is kind of a moot point since the varieties are endless).
I respect James viewpoints but for James and anyone who uses the efficiency argument to exclude exercises from a program (this includes Barry Ross, Ken Jalaksi, “DB Hammer”, etc) I would like to know what makes the Olympic lifts less efficient. I’ve found the exact opposite to be true. If I have 20 minutes for strength training a week I am going to do either squats or cleans…maybe both. They are different training stimuli that have some crossover but can both bring equally important stimuli to the session.
I will agree that athletes can achieve world class levels without a wide range of exercises and methods but why not look at the commonalities of champions and their coaches (especially those who do not have a long list of drug busts)? Why limit the number of tools you have in your tool box if you don’t have to?
3 Other random points:
1) There are at least 2 papers that I have read that indicate athletes trained with the Olympic lifts were superior to those trained with the powerlifts for improving sprint and jump tests. I am flailing myself for not knowing where to find them.
2) Mort’s points are spot on. This is why despite my disagreements with the bearpowered group I actually think their training programs can work well. They are simple, organized, progressive, and include regular doses of what you need to compete which is more than what can be said for 95% of the other systems out there.
3) If we’re talking about increasing the likelihood that a talented sprinter will move from national to international class though I think that’s where we need to start slicing the cheese very thin and either doing a lot of things right or using pharmaceutical coverups. In such cases, I think well-organized but exclusionary protocols start to show their weakness.
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Participant
1) There are at least 2 papers that I have read that indicate athletes trained with the Olympic lifts were superior to those trained with the powerlifts for improving sprint and jump tests. I am flailing myself for not knowing where to find them.
Here are 2:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18714236
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14971971 -
Participant
James-
Welcome to ET.If I have 20 minutes for strength training a week I am going to do either squats or cleans…maybe both. They are different training stimuli that have some crossover but can both bring equally important stimuli to the session.
1) There are at least 2 papers that I have read that indicate athletes trained with the Olympic lifts were superior to those trained with the powerlifts for improving sprint and jump tests. I am flailing myself for not knowing where to find them.
Yo! Check out wiki for information about Olympic lifts. The studies are disclosed there.
As for Olympic lifts I’ll put my own thoughts forward here: (i.e. no studies to help me out)
I was kinda joking about the balloon snatch. Heavy or optimum Olympic lifting requires a heck of a lot of brain power to activate and co-ordinate the amount of muscle to move the weight at great velocity. My own experience is that there are better ways to achieve explosiveness but the benefits of increasing the capacity of the brain to produce that much power can only be estimated. I often wondered about the efficacy of Ben Johnson doing massive bench press lifting during the Charlie Francis 10 day taper and I put down the benefits to brain power maintenance. This may transcend into a wide variety of athletic movements or be a great foundation for any type of strength/power training. To summarise: the OL may be a maximal brain lift. Wish I has studies to prove it.Other than that I like the emphasis on hip extension during an OL and without trying to take the steam out of a separate thread of this website, the production of increased rotation peak velocity about the knee (albeit only slightly better) compared to squats.
Otherwise, the single leg balloon snatch (please use a 10kg balloon) is a more velocity specific extension exercise for sprinting and great fun to boot.
-
Participant
I personally lost a lot of what I thought I thought of James when he felt it necessary to mention guys with foreign names and/or accents but did not feel as though Dan Pfaff or many others were worth recognition. Mladen’s a great guy but to put him on a list and leave so many off is very transparent.
If by transparent you are referring to my ability to see directly through the B.S. that infects the North American sport training academic and coaching institution that you are correct sir.
Regarding me not mentioning Pfaff on my list of authors, if he has published any papers or text books would you please alert me to where I may find them.
I’ve only found audio files, DVDs, and one internet article.
To be clear, however, from what I have been able to gather from the rather brief amount of information I’ve reviewed, Pfaff is a brilliant coach and I have the utmost respect for him and his athletes.
-
Participant
James-
Welcome to ET.Carl-
Another nice blog.This is a great thread. Really some great discussion here and I’m not sure where to start. I incorporate the squats and OLs quite a bit in my program. In fact, as someone from the Pfaffian family tree there are many similarities in our program. I have over the past 2 years occasionally taken Olympic lifts out of the program for a couple of my athletes but for those athletes who know how to do them with above average competency I don’t see much benefit in doing so other than for the sake of variety (which is kind of a moot point since the varieties are endless).
I respect James viewpoints but for James and anyone who uses the efficiency argument to exclude exercises from a program (this includes Barry Ross, Ken Jalaksi, “DB Hammer”, etc) I would like to know what makes the Olympic lifts less efficient. I’ve found the exact opposite to be true. If I have 20 minutes for strength training a week I am going to do either squats or cleans…maybe both. They are different training stimuli that have some crossover but can both bring equally important stimuli to the session.
I will agree that athletes can achieve world class levels without a wide range of exercises and methods but why not look at the commonalities of champions and their coaches (especially those who do not have a long list of drug busts)? Why limit the number of tools you have in your tool box if you don’t have to?
3 Other random points:
1) There are at least 2 papers that I have read that indicate athletes trained with the Olympic lifts were superior to those trained with the powerlifts for improving sprint and jump tests. I am flailing myself for not knowing where to find them.
2) Mort’s points are spot on. This is why despite my disagreements with the bearpowered group I actually think their training programs can work well. They are simple, organized, progressive, and include regular doses of what you need to compete which is more than what can be said for 95% of the other systems out there.
3) If we’re talking about increasing the likelihood that a talented sprinter will move from national to international class though I think that’s where we need to start slicing the cheese very thin and either doing a lot of things right or using pharmaceutical coverups. In such cases, I think well-organized but exclusionary protocols start to show their weakness.
Thanks very much Mike,
I have great respect for your accelerated accomplishments in the field and I’m very impressed with your level of instructional prowess that equals your pedagogical knowledge.
To your points/questions:
I use the term efficiency in order to rationalize my non-use of the weightlifts in the training because of:
1. in my experience the weightlifts are simply unnecessary in order to develop very high levels of sprint speed, jumping ability, and maximal strength.
2. the learning curve/time necessary to develop what I deem to be sufficient mechanics under what I determine to be sufficient enough load to develop any meaningful amount explosive strength
3. the requisite mobility that is required in the wrists, regarding the clean, in order to properly rack the barbell which most athletes do not initially have (and I’ve trained hundreds). The stress to the shoulder labrum, cuff, and glenohumeral joint in general associated with the snatch in relation to the extraordinary abuse that is already sustained by the shoulders in the sport of American football (although I’d still rather not introduce the shoulder abuse and time:process:learning curve, for the same reasons as the clean, to non-contact athletes)
I agree that it is a coaching handicap to have a limited sense of knowledge and/or instruction skills. What I have determined in my time coaching/learning is that the actual training means required for athletes to attain high sports results is galactically lesser in number than the requisite methodological approaches that one must have in order to adjust to the dynamic state of the human organism throughout the training process.
Thus, I very well possess the capacity to instruct the weightlifts, I’ve even worked with a weightlifter who was training for the national team; I simply deem them unnecessary in the training of non-weightlifters.
1)Again, please don’t think that I am a ‘powerlifting’ coach. I certainly don’t need a paper, and I’m sure you don’t either Mike, to tell me that if we localize the training to the singular means of either weightlifts or powerlifts there will be very few powerlift only trained athletes that will out sprint or out jump the weightlifting trained athletes. It is for this reason why I must utilize sprints, varied loaded and unloaded jump exercises, throws, and shock means (where appropriate) in the absence of the weightlifts in order to develop the requisite biomotor abilities.
2)makes sense to me; although I’m not that familiar with Ross’ approach
3)I would encourage you Mike, and any other readers who might either disagree with my points or maybe misinterpret my points, to remember that the sense of ‘exclusion’ that you are getting from my words comes as a result of me finding no need; as opposed for me looking to find a reason(s) why I, or anyone else, should omit a training means from the plan.
To be clear, in my training of hundreds of athletes who participate in disciplines ranging from T&F to Navy SEALS, including my 3 years here with my D-1 American footballers, I just haven’t found a reason why I SHOULDinclude the weightlifts in the training.
Thanks again for the welcome and intelligent discussion.
-
Participant
I personally lost a lot of what I thought I thought of James when he felt it necessary to mention guys with foreign names and/or accents but did not feel as though Dan Pfaff or many others were worth recognition. Mladen’s a great guy but to put him on a list and leave so many off is very transparent.
Another thing I should note is that I wouldn’t, nor would Mladen, place his level of accomplishment, experience, coaching know how on the same level of a coach such as Pfaff, for example; however, my list is a recommended READINGlist and as I stated, I’ve been unable to find much in the terms of written/published information from Pfaff.
Alternatively, a fellow such a Mladen, has written quite a bit and the literary sources and sports science professionals he has drawn from are ones who I, by in large, have much respect for and perhaps most importantly I think that Mladen does a great job at inspiring and the reader to think critically for themselves; which is something that I cannot say regarding the majority of sport training literature published by North American authors.
Dmartinez, perhaps what you are unaware of is that I possess an extraordinary amount of literature that has been translated from overseas authors. I’ve been collecting this over time and I’ve been assisted by great colleagues I’ve developed over the years from former Soviet Union, Bulgaria, Romania, Serbia, and Italy. As a result, with very few, and I mean very few exceptions, in 10 years I have yet to have reviewed a western sport training publication that wasn’t already addressed, and much more thoroughly investigated, decades ago in the former communist bloc countries.
-
Participant
A little off topic but,
I’ve been collecting this over time and I’ve been assisted by great colleagues I’ve developed over the years from former Soviet Union, Bulgaria, Romania, Serbia, and Italy. As a result, with very few, and I mean very few exceptions, in 10 years I have yet to have reviewed a western sport training publication that wasn’t already addressed, and much more thoroughly investigated, decades ago in the former communist bloc countries.
As you have clearly read more than I and from a wider variety of source material, should there be any concern about previous investigations/studies being superseded by more current work?
I have sometimes shied away from work that is 10, 15, 20, 25 years old thinking that it was “outdated”, regardless of source (Soviet bloc or Western) but at the same time I have also found articles that I view as perhaps the “root” of what we still do today.
I guess part of what I am asking is how do you separate the wheat from the chafe?
One could spend a lifetime just reading and analyzing and trying to decide between somewhat seemingly contradictory work. Without the “colleagues”, how does one even get to see some of this undoubtedly valuable information?mortac8: All this training complexity when most of the athletes in America eat EasyMac, Frosted Flakes, Pepsi, sleep 5 hours per day, take random weeks off from training, etc… I think the content of the other 98% of their life far outweighs training design intricacies. This is a partial reason why schools who do intensive tempo programs still dominate (on average) “intelligent programming”. What we like to write on paper or type on the computer and what actually happens in reality is usually quite disparate.
HERE, HERE! 100% agreement.
-
Participant
Since lifting in general, specifically olympic lifts, are being said to only directly improve initial acceleration (0-15m, with only minor indirect benefits after that), why should one lift at all, if that is the theory?
Ray Stewart has or had that fastest 10m ever and Kim Collins is up there as well. Faster than even BJ and they not doing significant resistance training. Why even bother lifting at all if the fastest 10m can be done without even getting into the weight room and it isn’t going to have any significant contribution to other stages of the race? Surely, we could all just spend time and efforts training just the sprinting activity itself since there isn’t anything else that can have transference over to sprinting?
-
Participant
A little off topic but,
As you have clearly read more than I and from a wider variety of source material, should there be any concern about previous investigations/studies being superseded by more current work?
In most cases, absolutely not. Due to my good fortune of having developed personal correspondences and relationships with Dr. Verkhoshansky and Dr. Issurin I have been able to gain first hand information as to ‘how’ things actually were in the former USSR.
Not only is the majority of past research, from the former communist bloc countries, conducted on national and international caliber athletes; but, the in vitro environments were far less ‘restrictive’. thus, in some cases there were procedures done that would be considered to be medieval according to western standards- yet none the less, extraordinarily beneficial to coach practitioners.
I have sometimes shied away from work that is 10, 15, 20, 25 years old thinking that it was “outdated”, regardless of source (Soviet bloc or Western) but at the same time I have also found articles that I view as perhaps the “root” of what we still do today.
Read my statement above. Additionally, keep in mind that what was done over 25 years ago overseas, in many cases, is still far in advance of what is being done in North America.
I’ve attached the image I constructed for the front page of my website in which I illustrate the ‘why’.
I guess part of what I am asking is how do you separate the wheat from the chafe?
One could spend a lifetime just reading and analyzing and trying to decide between somewhat seemingly contradictory work. Without the “colleagues”, how does one even get to see some of this undoubtedly valuable information?I am fortunate to have such colleagues; and, as someone who has spent the better part of 10 years entrenched in the training/coaching process, exposed to the overseas literature, and 10 more before that beginning my own training process, I have a great deal of my own objective and critical thinking ability to impart upon these endeavors.
-
Participant
Since lifting in general, specifically olympic lifts, are being said to only directly improve initial acceleration (0-15m, with only minor indirect benefits after that), why should one lift at all, if that is the theory?
Ray Stewart has or had that fastest 10m ever and Kim Collins is up there as well. Faster than even BJ and they not doing significant resistance training. Why even bother lifting at all if the fastest 10m can be done without even getting into the weight room and it isn’t going to have any significant contribution to other stages of the race? Surely, we could all just spend time and efforts training just the sprinting activity itself since there isn’t anything else that can have transference over to sprinting?
Well, in certain cases your question has already been proven valid. Take Carl Lewis for example. The shared information has indicated that weight training, to any meaningful margin, played a nearly non-existent role in his training during the most competitive stage of his career; additionally, it appears as if, while it seems to be included in the training based upon what I’ve gathered, the work load presented by the weight training, specfically leg/hip dominant movements, in the training of Asafa Powell and Usain Bolt, who have different coaches, is extremely minimal. I have yet to hear or read of any significant loads being used in clean variations or squat variations.
My approach to the actual training means of primary emphasis is minimal. no doubt; but not via subractionism.
My perception is NOT to start with a broad scope and shave away what I deem to be unnecessary. My aim is to first assess the needs and then begin the process with as little as necessary and build from there.
It is for this reason why I have made the determination that the Olympic lifts, as one example, are simply unnecessary. I never sought to exclude them, or any other training means, from an initial complex of means. I’ve simply never found the need to include them in the training.
The same could be said for many other means.
The question/point you bring up is a very good one; however, and one that coaches should take under very serious consideration.
This may sound cliche, however, the reality is that- all that is necessary in the training… is only that which is necessary.
No more, no less.
-
Participant
I have yet to hear or read of any significant loads being used in clean variations or squat variations.
I have now had the good fortune to coach seven guys under 10 sec. and two ladies under 11.To a person their sprint times improved in direct correlation to their skill with the full lift.[b]We currently have 3 sub 10 folks over 130 kilos,2 others at 120 kilos, and a female hurdler who weighs in at 109 lbs. who just did 98 kilos for a double.[/b]It is also no accident that world class Olympic lifters are very fast sprinters.Mikael Olander,NCAA deca champ in 87,trained with the Swedish Natn.Lift team on many occassions and their big guys often waxed him in 30m runs with most excellent mechanics.In summary learning how to place joints under duress in a position to extend,flex,extend is the basis of running fast.
Maybe you missed that part.
Alternatively, a fellow such a Mladen, has written quite a bit and the literary sources and sports science professionals he has drawn from are ones who I, by in large, have much respect for and perhaps most importantly I think that Mladen does a great job at inspiring and the reader to think critically for themselves; which is something that I cannot say regarding the majority of sport training literature published by North American authors.
Alternatively, Mladen is willing to acknowledge American authors when appropriate, including Rippetoe and Kilgore, without a majority bias based on the pronunciation of one’s name. To exclude an entire part of physical and sport culture because they are taking from insights published in the developmental stages of physical preparation, at least in the formal sense of the term, seems too ridiculous to stomach.
None said better than Newton but we move forward…
My former weightlifting coach Oleg Kechko, an International Master of Sport from the former Soviet Union and now Belarus, would say differently of his experience and of the benefits to athletes from the Olympic lifts and their variations. I’m sure your experience with his culture tells a very different story so what do ya do…
-
Participant
[quote author="TheThinker" date="1238884786"] I have yet to hear or read of any significant loads being used in clean variations or squat variations.
[/quote]
Dmartinez, please don’t scavenge my words to suit your agenda. As a result of doing this you diminish the seriousness by which I, and I suspect other readers, will interpret your words.
If you had properly quoted me you would have included the rest of the paragraph which specifically referenced Asafa Powell and Usain Bolt, to my knowledge, not using significant loads in those lifts.
I have now had the good fortune to coach seven guys under 10 sec. and two ladies under 11.To a person their sprint times improved in direct correlation to their skill with the full lift.[b]We currently have 3 sub 10 folks over 130 kilos,2 others at 120 kilos, and a female hurdler who weighs in at 109 lbs. who just did 98 kilos for a double.[/b]It is also no accident that world class Olympic lifters are very fast sprinters.Mikael Olander,NCAA deca champ in 87,trained with the Swedish Natn.Lift team on many occassions and their big guys often waxed him in 30m runs with most excellent mechanics.In summary learning how to place joints under duress in a position to extend,flex,extend is the basis of running fast.
I would expect that you are aware of the fact that Powell and Bolt have different coaches; neither of which are the author of the quote above.
Maybe you missed that part.
No, clearly, not maybe, you are the one who is off base.
Alternatively, Mladen is willing to acknowledge American authors when appropriate, including Rippetoe and Kilgore, without a majority bias based on the pronunciation of one’s name. To exclude an entire part of physical and sport culture because they are taking from insights published in the developmental stages of physical preparation, at least in the formal sense of the term, seems too ridiculous to stomach.
You continue to diminish the validity of your posts by drawing assumptions such as I having an affinity for the pronunciation of one’s name or the country to which they are native. The reality is that the majority of the most profound and impactful sport science literature was/is published in continents other than North America.
Out of curiosity, how old are you Dmartinez?
None said better than Newton but we move forward…
My former weightlifting coach Oleg Kechko, an International Master of Sport from the former Soviet Union and now Belarus, would say differently of his experience and of the benefits to athletes from the Olympic lifts and their variations. I’m sure your experience with [i]his[/i] culture tells a very different story so what do ya do…
That’s fine. To quote you Dmartinez, what ‘seems to ridiculous to stomach’ for me is the notion that an entire population of coaches/sport scientists, regardless of where they are from, would agree on all points.
you, as a weightlifter, should know that Abadjiev, as an example, was considered to be very much a non-conventionalist. Thus, it should be no surprise to you that his particular opinion, if only with respect to this subject matter, might be different from another international level coach.
Regardless, I’m simply sharing his opinion because his thoughts surely carry a great deal of weight and are sure to come as a surprise to the community of coaches who might have thought otherwise.
To that end, it should also be pointed out that Dr. Verkhoshansky, Dr. Issurin, and Bondarchuk, to name a few, are all considered to be somewhat of renegade/outcasts amongst many of their peers in Russia as none of their models are consistent or based upon the Matveyev model that is still considered to be fundamental to many contemporary Russian sport scientists and coaches.
-
Participant
I read this thread and immediately remembered this video with Michael Johnson:
They say that Allan Wells didn’t do any weights training. Watch from 13 min forward.
https://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5990708646448731478Obviously the degree of isolation and control over the athletes that existed in the eastern bloc countries enabled them to evolve greatly in their knowledge, but that doesn’t mean it’s the holy grail and everyone else is wrong.
Personally, I always felt more explosive when I performed O. Lifts followed by speed work. But I can’t prove one thing is consequence of the other, so I will refrain from going to the streets shouting that everyone should do O. Lifts.
I think we should celebrate the fact that there are so many different ways to increase athletic performance with general/non-specific methods and acknowledge that the rate of transference from each of these methods to the actual specific performance is dependent on many variables, some of them uncontrollable by the coach. The cultural and genetic differences between the athletes of those countries and those in the Americas are just examples of such variables.
I find these discussions very interesting, although I would like to see a more open-minded position from both sides.
-
Participant
If you had properly quoted me you would have included the rest of the paragraph which specifically referenced Asafa Powell and Usain Bolt, to my knowledge, not using significant loads in those lifts.
No, clearly, not maybe, you are the one who is off base.
As to this specific point, you are correct, I was off base. I took that quote and misread it as a general statement regarding the preparation of sprinters and their loads in lifting.
Past that, regarding the post from Dan Pfaff I was referencing, are you willing to acknowledge that in that specific case there was:
1-An Internationally Competitive Result
2-Significant loads in the Olympic lift variation that said coach attributes in part to the inclusion of this methodic
3-A “General” problem with your conclusion as to the necessity of the lifts (with this case as an extremely specific example of what the lifts have helped accomplish at the international level)? This can be argued for or against, with no end in sight, but I doubt that you have the arrogance to tell Dan Pfaff he should completely disregard the competitive results achieved?There can still be a specific argument against the inclusion of the lifts, one that any rational coach should be willing to evaluate on a regular basis (I don’t use them in training most athletes away from the University team I train and I know Carl has specific cases where he limits or excludes them). However, casting the lifts off as unnecessary seems like just as big of a stretch as referring to them as a requirement.
Also, can you please make a specific point regarding what exercises and/or activities satisfy a high degree of dynamic correspondence? The Supertraining text (6th ed) only has resisted running and various isolated hip flexor activities to demonstrate? My Western mind can’t seem to process this and since your points are so clearly over my head I am getting dizzy.
And I’m 28. How old are you?
-
Participant
Hello,
I happen to have known Ben Tabachnick (if any one has heard of him). He was supposedly in
charge of an experimental group that travelled the USSR to meet various coaches and expand their understanding of “special” exercices for the sprint in order to in his words
“expand the funnel” at the end of a sprinters preparation(career). He told that the jerk and snatch(and derivatives) were used for sprinters as well as other athletes but they were “modified” according to the sport and individual needs(including level of the athlete).
Brandon Green -
Participant
As to this specific point, you are correct, I was off base. I took that quote and misread it as a general statement regarding the preparation of sprinters and their loads in lifting.
Past that, regarding the post from Dan Pfaff I was referencing, are you willing to acknowledge that in that specific case there was:
1-An Internationally Competitive Result
2-Significant loads in the Olympic lift variation that said coach attributes in part to the inclusion of this [i]methodic[/i]
3-A “General” problem with your conclusion as to the necessity of the lifts (with this case as an extremely specific example of what the lifts have helped accomplish at the international level)? This can be argued for or against, with no end in sight, but I doubt that you have the arrogance to tell Dan Pfaff he should completely disregard the competitive results achieved?There can still be a specific argument against the inclusion of the lifts, one that any rational coach should be willing to evaluate on a regular basis (I don’t use them in training most athletes away from the University team I train and I know Carl has specific cases where he limits or excludes them). However, casting the lifts off as unnecessary seems like just as big of a stretch as referring to them as a requirement.
Also, can you please make a specific point regarding what exercises and/or activities satisfy a high degree of dynamic correspondence? The Supertraining text (6th ed) only has resisted running and various isolated hip flexor activities to demonstrate? My Western mind can’t seem to process this and since your points are so clearly over my head I am getting dizzy.
And I’m 28. How old are you?
Ok, I just had a productive phone call with Davan; part of which, reminded me how these words on a computer screen may be interpreted many different ways.
It is my objective to be as objective and remain as objective as possible.
My aim is simply to share what I know to be useful perspective and information for coaches and athletes.
I could not rationally deny the results of Dan Pfaff’s athletes, as an example; however, what I can rationally postulate is how necessary a certain means is within the scope of the complex of means.
My argument, as I stated in one of my last posts, is not to imply reductionism as a universally effective rule; but rather, to begin minimalistically and only add what is necessary to further results.
You are absolutely correct regarding the ‘no end in site’ nature of this type of ‘debate’ which is why I’d rather not continue it. What’s important to me is that I’ve successfully conveyed my point; beyond that, I’d rather not debate it.
Regarding the criteria of dynamic correspondence, here they are:
– accentuated regions of force production (where in the amplitude/range of motion are the greatest forces produced/incurred)
– amplitude and direction of movement (range of motion and direction in which resistance must be overcome)
– dynamics of effort (the nature of the motion specific to the exercise with and without consideration of the forces involved)
– rate and time of maximum force production (how fast and for how long is the maximum force generated)
– regime of muscular work (type of muscular activity ergo overcoming, yielding, sustaining, ballistic, etcetera)One can add additionally factors; however, these cover the important points.
The greater the amount of criteria that are satisfied, to a high degree of certainty, the greater the transfer of training.
The criteria of dynamic correspondence are universally effective/meaningful; regardless of methodological approach. This is why I am inspired to share it with a broad audience.
I am 35. I asked how old you are because, due to my interpretation or perhaps misinterpretation of your words, I felt as if I was speaking to an immature teenager. I ask you to disregard that; however, because I am resolving within myself to economize the nature in which I read words on a screen. I find that any stream of words that can in any way be construed as combative/defensive/harshly critical/immature and so on often invokes a less than positive disposition from myself.
I’m much more interested in productive discussion.
-
Participant
Hello,
I happen to have known Ben Tabachnick (if any one has heard of him). He was supposedly in
charge of an experimental group that travelled the USSR to meet various coaches and expand their understanding of “special” exercices for the sprint in order to in his words
“expand the funnel” at the end of a sprinters preparation(career). He told that the jerk and snatch(and derivatives) were used for sprinters as well as other athletes but they were “modified” according to the sport and individual needs(including level of the athlete).
Brandon GreenYes, I have met Tabachnick.
Again, we’ll have to speak to specific camps; because, as I stated earlier, it is to be expected that different methodological approaches will be shared by coaches of the same nationality.
remember what I stated regarding the ‘non-traditionalist’ tag that most of my correspondences have earned.
-
Participant
Hello,
If i am not mistaken there was a hammer thrower that Bondarchuk trained that in the Olympic year did not “lift weights”! I would imagine that if the theory of “specificity” is correct
(and i believe that it is)the bar speed in any lift cannot approach that of the hammer or forces applied in running speed during any phase. That as one “matures” as an athlete(PASM)
Jerks,snatches and squats over time become “non-specific” and can even hurt results. Tabachnick stated that someone with a 3x bodyweight squat would “destroy” their speed. Hope i don’t sound too ignorant.
Brandon Green -
Participant
Hello,
If i am not mistaken there was a hammer thrower that Bondarchuk trained that in the Olympic year did not “lift weights”! I would imagine that if the theory of “specificity” is correct
(and i believe that it is)the bar speed in any lift cannot approach that of the hammer or forces applied in running speed during any phase. That as one “matures” as an athlete(PASM)
Jerks,snatches and squats over time become “non-specific” and can even hurt results. Tabachnick stated that someone with a 3x bodyweight squat would “destroy” their speed. Hope i don’t sound too ignorant.
Brandon GreenI don’t recall the specifics of the Bondarchuk example; however, you are correct with respect to the latter portion of your post.
The reasoning deserves some explanation, however.
The closer the athlete is to the novice stage the more sensitive and responsive their organism is to a wide variety of stimuli. Hence the justification for a more dispersed and general training load earlier in the long term cycle. As sport and physical preparation levels rise; however, the closer ones biomotor potential nears its pinnacle and, consequently, the more directed and intensive the training must become in order to reach the apex of the organism’s performance limits.
Invariably, the training becomes more intensive as a result of increased sports performance as the increased sports results, in the context of alactic disciplines, for example, are associated with higher speeds, high/longer jumps, farther throws, and heavier weights and, thus, greater neuromuscular intensities.
The overall volume of training, then, must yield to the higher intensities and, as I’ve mentioned, in order to squeeze out those last bits of the organisms performance limits the training must register very high in transference.
Important to note, however, is that the methodological approach to training programming will determine how the nature of the training transfer is managed over time in terms of indirect to direct.
-
Keymaster
Regarding me not mentioning Pfaff on my list of authors, if he has published any papers or text books would you please alert me to where I may find them.
I’ve only found audio files, DVDs, and one internet article.
To be clear, however, from what I have been able to gather from the rather brief amount of information I’ve reviewed, Pfaff is a brilliant coach and I have the utmost respect for him and his athletes.
He has several articles in the somewhat obscure NSA Journal. Also, we have several articles of his on the site HERE.[/url]
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Keymaster
Heavy or optimum Olympic lifting requires a heck of a lot of brain power to activate and co-ordinate the amount of muscle to move the weight at great velocity. My own experience is that there are better ways to achieve explosiveness but the benefits of increasing the capacity of the brain to produce that much power can only be estimated.
What would these other ways be?
I often wondered about the efficacy of Ben Johnson doing massive bench press lifting during the Charlie Francis 10 day taper and I put down the benefits to brain power maintenance. This may transcend into a wide variety of athletic movements or be a great foundation for any type of strength/power training. To summarise: the OL may be a maximal brain lift. Wish I has studies to prove it.
Wouldn’t all high-intensity activities fall under this category?
Otherwise, the single leg balloon snatch (please use a 10kg balloon) is a more velocity specific extension exercise for sprinting and great fun to boot.
If we are going the specificity argument route, velocity is only one of the many possibilities ‘specific’ variables that can be applied. It might be more specific in velocity but less so in force. And to continue to be the devil’s advocate, wouldn’t assisted band jumps then be super specific?
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Keymaster
I’m actually largely in agreement with what’s being said by many people here. I think it’s safe to say that:
1) loaded resistance training is not absolutely necessary to be an elite sprinter
2) by extension, olympic lifts are not necessary to be an elite sprinterI don’t work with VERY large groups. The biggest groups I’ve worked with by myself are 30 people with only 8-10 who were lifting newbies. With this in mind I think I could summarize my viewpoint on this issue as follows:
1) A strength-speed-power stimulus MUST be in place on a relatively frequent basis to run at the elite level in the short sprints. This stimulus can come from a variety of source. It could be from lots of plyos (ala Wells), higher sprint volumes (ala Lewis), or any combination of loaded strength work, plyometrics, and sprinting.
2) I haven’t had a problem teaching the Olympic lifts to a a level I found to be safe and and effective within a 3 week (6-9 sessions) period to newbies.
3) During that learning time period, we are able to use a teaching progression that is addresses physical and skill development so we’re not ‘wasting’ time during that period with training that is solely skill oriented.
4) I personally am a firm believer that the Olympic lifts have some benefits that are worth any efforts in teaching them. Some of these are less obvious than others as Davan alluded to. In the grand scheme of a well-designed training program that includes a variety of other similar exercises (say squatting and pulling for example) that this could be as little as 1%. Or maybe only 0.05%. Who knows? But there is enough of a combination of anecdotal (commonalities in the training plans of sub 10s) and empirical (peer-reviewed research) evidence supporting their efficacy that I would personally rather not give them up and sacrifice the benefit that they provide even if it’s only 0.05% (or whatever).
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Participant
He has several articles in the somewhat obscure NSA Journal. Also, we have several articles of his on the site [url=https://elitetrack.com/articles/category/pfaff-dan/]HERE.[/url]
Thanks Mike
-
Keymaster
A question for TheThinker-
Aren’t Soviets largely credited with developing and taking to extreme lengths special and specific strength? These were touted as the bridge over the gap between general means (like squatting and olympic lifts) to the actual sport. Were the advocates of these methods different practitioners than those you follow or ha’ve found to be most successful? If not, how does this get reconciled with the points you’ve made about non-specificity of weight room exercises?I’ve read quite a bit of Eastern Bloc literature but I don’t think anywhere near as much as you and this was actually something that popped in to my head a while back. On the surface, it seems some people use Soviet research to say that nothing can be specific other than the actual activity; while others (mostly old school guys) talk about how Soviet research indicated that everything needs to be specific and athletes should do all kinds of loaded variations of their actual sporting activity or loaded portions of a specific portion of the movement.
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Participant
A question for TheThinker-
Aren’t Soviets largely credited with developing and taking to extreme lengths special and specific strength? These were touted as the bridge over the gap between general means (like squatting and olympic lifts) to the actual sport. Were the advocates of these methods different practitioners than those you follow or ha’ve found to be most successful? If not, how does this get reconciled with the points you’ve made about non-specificity of weight room exercises?I’ve read quite a bit of Eastern Bloc literature but I don’t think anywhere near as much as you and this was actually something that popped in to my head a while back. On the surface, it seems some people use Soviet research to say that nothing can be specific other than the actual activity; while others (mostly old school guys) talk about how Soviet research indicated that everything needs to be specific and athletes should do all kinds of loaded variations of their actual sporting activity or loaded portions of a specific portion of the movement.
You are correct Mike; and to state that the Soviets and Eastern Europeans undertook extreme lengths in this regard, or any for that matter that pertain to investigative sport training research, is an understatement.
You’ve seen me utilize terms such as transfer, correspondence, specialized prepatory, and specialized developmental, so far in this thread and all these terms refer to the degree in which a training means positively impacts the improved performance of the competitive exercise.
In an earlier post I listed the criteria of Dynamic Correspondence. This postulates that the more criteria a training means fulfills, relative to the bioenergetic/biodynamic structure of the sport act/competition exercise, the greater the transfer to improved sport results.
All of my esteemed mentors are certainly advocates of the use of this methodological approach in the training.
The degree to which this is reconciled in the training, with respect to how I’ve discussed how few a criteria of dynamic correspondence are satisfied by means such as the Olympic lifts or other basic barbell lifts, is as follows:
Transfer may be positive, neutral, or negative as well as indirect or direct.
Positive, neutral, and negative transfer are self-explanatory; and thus do not require clarification.
Indirect and direct transfer, however, characterize what I think will provide you with a much clearer understanding of where I’m coming from; as the criteria for how meaningful a training means transfers is not only limited to its bioenergetic/biodynamic similarity to the sport act; but also depends greatly upon the preparation level of the athlete as well as the morpho-biomechanical traits of each individual athlete.
This is actually an enormous topic for discussion Mike. If what I’ve stated so far hasn’t sufficiently addressed your question perhaps you’d consider asking me a more specific one.
I should also note that I am going to be putting together a series of either video downloads or DVDs in which I provide a lecture with the use of a white board. with your permission, I will make a post here at elite track as soon as the first one is available for purchase.
-
Participant
OK, so now I’ve got reading to do for the next few years… 😉
Has anyone come close to a “Prilepin’s Table” for something other than strength training?
Should something similar be possible for say speed work, or any of the other categories we like to define?
Is anyone using the Omegawave? And, if so, is it as useful yet still easy to learn/understand as it sounds? It seems to have evolved largely based around soccer/futbol but that could just be those European pro teams having lots of money.
-
Participant
Is anyone using the Omegawave? And, if so, is it as useful yet still easy to learn/understand as it sounds? It seems to have evolved largely based around soccer/futbol but that could just be those European pro teams having lots of money.
I will bite my tongue here (ok, I just bit it off). I have an Omegawave Star+ machine (not sure what the equivalent model is nowadays) that I don’t even use any more (if that tells you anything). If you do a little digging, you can get hardware/software that does the pretty much same thing as the Omegawave for about 10% of the cost. $35,000 for the full system makes me cry. Kinda like buying a Bentley when you just need a schoolbus to take kids to a meet.
I sit in waiting for the Omegawave proponent tornado.
-
Participant
The Thinker-
You are a welcome addition to the board. -
Participant
The Thinker-
You are a welcome addition to the board.Thanks
-
Participant
Thinker- I have read much of your work, and I am glad you are here as well. My question is that based on the stuff you were saying on loading sport movements, (perhaps I am not good at reading in between the lines) you do or do not feel that things like weighted vest change of directions or jumps, sleds, and things like that have value in the training process? My friend, a soccer coach, recently traveled to spain to watch the training of Barcelona FC and he said they dont even touch weights and everything is done on the field with bands, sleds, medballs in high velocity game-like patterns. Makes sense to me, although obviously having good strength to bodyweight ratio is of importance for accelerating and deccelerating. Are off in their approach?
-
Participant
[quote author="Jeremy Richmond" date="1238831913"]
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.
Right, your assertion that the lifts can be used to benefit is correct; however, even based upon that statement, we’ve now drifted into debatable territory and this is futile.
In my opinion, in order to develop a sprinter to world champion status you must:
– be fortunate enough to work with an individual with the requisite morpho-biomechanical traits and motivation,
– have access to the necessary physiotherapy,
– have sufficient funding/sponsorship,
– have access to suitable training facilities,
– have sufficient knowledge of training programming,
– have sufficient knowledge/coaching, instructional skills specific to the sprints
– have the athlete sprint
– utilize specialized developmental exercises
– utilize specialized prepatory exercises
– utilize general prepatory exercisesDue to the characteristics of the last two, only that which is constituted by the last two regimes of exercise are debatable. All other points are essential and not open to debate.[/quote]
Your posts have certainly been insightful. This one in particular because it clearly details all that is needed to ensure high level performance, not only in sprinting, but in most sports. It makes it much easier to grasp the concept that Olympic variations aren’t a necessity.
For what it’s worth, I’ve seen more than one athlete make it to the NBA without performing an olympic lift.
I’d like to hear more about the Tabachnik notion that squatting 3x BW would destroy speed, given what we know about Ben Johnson.
-
Participant
Thinker- I have read much of your work, and I am glad you are here as well. My question is that based on the stuff you were saying on loading sport movements, (perhaps I am not good at reading in between the lines) you do or do not feel that things like weighted vest change of directions or jumps, sleds, and things like that have value in the training process? My friend, a soccer coach, recently traveled to spain to watch the training of Barcelona FC and he said they dont even touch weights and everything is done on the field with bands, sleds, medballs in high velocity game-like patterns. Makes sense to me, although obviously having good strength to bodyweight ratio is of importance for accelerating and deccelerating. Are off in their approach?
I am very much a proponent of special physical preparation training that is constructed and supervised by myself as a prepatory mechanism for training camps (both during spring and summer)
These drills do incorporate the use of weighted vests (10-14lbs) as well as movement patterns that fall under both the specialized developmental and competitive exercise conditions (RE Bondarchuk)
In addition we surely jump and throw medballs.
I have created a block sequence model that, instead of introducing the sequential superimposition of priority motor tasks, is based upoon the sequential introduction of priority bioenergetic training and ensuring that all motor task training is compatible with the bioenergetic priority.
I will be presenting on this at a seminar in New Jersey next month. There will be a DVD made of the entire seminar as well as my lecture only.
-
Participant
I was talking to a really successful throws coach today and he was saying that cleans and squats are not needed to develop great hammer throwers.
He called specific strength development the key. He said this was done by throwing very heavy balls…16 and 20 pounds. Cleans and squats were general strength is his opinion which were not needed in elite development.
-
Participant
I’d like to hear more about the Tabachnik notion that squatting 3x BW would destroy speed, given what we know about Ben Johnson.
My question is: how many sprinters can also lift 3x BW but not run sub 10? I have never seen a study peer-reviewed or not that can quantify how much one needs to lift to run faster. It seems that a few of the community are now sharing information that may well contain such data but until I read them my stance remains that lifting must be more specific to produce significant gains.
My answer is another question: is it possible that heavy lifting was not the principal reason for Ben Johnson’s improvement but likely Ben had a sprint technique variation (which he did not understand) that provided him with an advantage? If I can offer a clue, take a good look at his starting block mechanics.
Further, I will state that Usain Bolt also has a unique technique although I would prefer more data/pictures/measurements before revealing what I think they are.
-
Participant
[quote author="mr glove" date="1239148084"]
I’d like to hear more about the Tabachnik notion that squatting 3x BW would destroy speed, given what we know about Ben Johnson.
My question is: how many sprinters can also lift 3x BW but not run sub 10? I have never seen a study peer-reviewed or not that can quantify how much one needs to lift to run faster. It seems that a few of the community are now sharing information that may well contain such data but until I read them my stance remains that lifting must be more specific to produce significant gains.
My answer is another question: is it possible that heavy lifting was not the principal reason for Ben Johnson’s improvement but likely Ben had a sprint technique variation (which he did not understand) that provided him with an advantage? If I can offer a clue, take a good look at his starting block mechanics.
Further, I will state that Usain Bolt also has a unique technique although I would prefer more data/pictures/measurements before revealing what I think they are.[/quote]
I agree that max squat values aren’t a good predictor. Why is 3xBW the magic number? If I take a 175lb athlete from 1.5xBW to 2xBW, which is reasonable, are we that much closer to destroying speed? How many sub 10 guys did this Russian system produce?
Ben’s start was unique to him and there have been more sub 10.00 guys that didn’t employ this “variation” than those who may have.
-
Member
Guys, you’re missing the point with the 3x BW squat.
Tabachnik is not saying that having a 3x BW squat will kill speed, but that the training required to achieve one most likely will. In truth, there’s probably a good deal of veracity to that statement, at least as far as 99.999% of the population is concerned.
Think about how heavy a 3x BW squat actually is. How many people do you think could realistically accomplish such a feat? Over how many years? With how much volume? For most of the athletic population, such a huge squat is a long shot, and will take many years of hard training to accomplish, probably with the forced exclusion of other training means. So, for Joe Blow off the street, or even off the basketball court to squat triple bodyweight, it would kill speed as it would take too much volume and time away from sports training.
Now, people like Ben Johnson (and most other top sprinters) are that 0.001% of the population for whom this statement does not hold true. As evidenced by their sprint times, these men have tremendously powerful nervous systems, naturally impressive muscular development, sky high testosterone levels, and more fast twitch fiber than they know what to do with. Whereas most people would need to devote years of their lives to squat triple BW, top level sprinters are born with so many of the necessary characteristics in place that developing the same level of strength is a walk in the park. Because of their superior genetics, all things involving strength and power come much more easily to them, and as such, much less volume is needed to develop strength.
To recap, for the untalented athlete, the workload necessary to get to 3x BW will leave little room for speed training, thus killing their speed. For the genetically gifted, strength will come much easier, with less volume, and will allow other means to stay in place.
-
Member
[quote author="mr glove" date="1239148084"]
I’d like to hear more about the Tabachnik notion that squatting 3x BW would destroy speed, given what we know about Ben Johnson.
My question is: how many sprinters can also lift 3x BW but not run sub 10? I have never seen a study peer-reviewed or not that can quantify how much one needs to lift to run faster. It seems that a few of the community are now sharing information that may well contain such data but until I read them my stance remains that lifting must be more specific to produce significant gains.
My answer is another question: is it possible that heavy lifting was not the principal reason for Ben Johnson’s improvement but likely Ben had a sprint technique variation (which he did not understand) that provided him with an advantage? If I can offer a clue, take a good look at his starting block mechanics.
Further, I will state that Usain Bolt also has a unique technique although I would prefer more data/pictures/measurements before revealing what I think they are.[/quote]
Great RFD. If you can apply all your strength in very little time you can outperform someone much stronger.
Stupid but valid example:
200 J / 1s = 200 W
100 J / 0.5s = 200 W -
Participant
Great RFD. If you can apply all your strength in very little time you can outperform someone much stronger.
Stupid but valid example:
200 J / 1s = 200 W
100 J / 0.5s = 200 WI agree that max squat values aren’t a good predictor. Why is 3xBW the magic number? If I take a 175lb athlete from 1.5xBW to 2xBW, which is reasonable, are we that much closer to destroying speed? How many sub 10 guys did this Russian system produce?
Ben’s start was unique to him and there have been more sub 10.00 guys that didn’t employ this “variation” than those who may have.
During Ben’s time he was one of very few that could do sub 10’s. Yes he probably had great RFD and had to focus exclusively on lifting very heavy because he didn’t like some more efficient methods but…
He may have naturally employed a technical variation that gave him an advantage which he forgot or was corrected out of on his comeback. Have a look at his lead arm and compare its position as he stands up in the blocks to all the other sprinters around him. -
Keymaster
Post uncontrolled doping (yes I know doping still goes on but it’s not like 70s, 80s, 90s) I think the days of track sprinters or jumpers with 3x BW full squats is pretty much gone. Lift numbers in the throws are WAAAY down from those days too. I think that’s why the spin has become the much more viable option to throw equally far (because it doesn’t require the same strength).
With all that said, I don’t think it would hurt sprint performance to have a 3x bodyweight squat max. I think making that an objective of training at all costs could certainly hinder sprint development. Strength gains for sprinting are a means to an end and that end should not be the strength gains themselves.
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Keymaster
He called specific strength development the key. He said this was done by throwing very heavy balls…16 and 20 pounds. Cleans and squats were general strength is his opinion which were not needed in elite development.
This is a very common viewpoint in the hammer throw and javelin. Because of the very unique movements of these events I think this may be more valid than for other events. I will say that the heavy lifting protocols likely don’t HURT these events. My friend Larry Judge is arguably the most successful hammer and weight throw coach in NCAA history and his girls are OBSCENELY strong in the olympic lifts, squats, pulls, etc.
Curious to know what he would say about training an athlete in the developmental stages. It seems most of the coaches I’m aware of with this viewpoint for these two events still believe that general strength levels in squats, pulls, etc need to reach certain benchmarks before moving to the specific strength format.
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Member
Curious to know what he would say about training an athlete in the developmental stages. It seems most of the coaches I’m aware of with this viewpoint for these two events still believe that general strength levels in squats, pulls, etc need to reach certain benchmarks before moving to the specific strength format.
This is something that has always bothered me. I keep thinking that single-leg deadlifts are a superior exercise to squats because they hit the posterior chain harder, but part of me thinks that I need to get my squat up to a certain weight before I even worry about that. In a more general sense do you think it’s better to establish strength in a less specific exercise (such as a squat) before moving on to more specific movements? My guess is that you’re going to say yes.
-
Keymaster
I do think so. Also, I think there are traits of heavily loaded squats which are more ‘specific’ to sprinting than single leg deadlifts…just as the opposite is true. In light of this, I’d prefer to use squats as the primary exercise as I think the overall benefits (outside of specificity argument) of heavy squats is greater than single leg deadlifts.
Squats more specific:
*greater loads are possible
*more similar joint angles and movements observed in sprinting and jumpingSingle leg deadlifts more specific:
*unilateral
*greater posterior chain emphasisELITETRACK Founder
-
Participant
Good stuff. Great to hear various opinions.
I’d pick Olympic lifts for its emphasis on explosiveness and multi-joint actions. The squats (as well as other simpler exercises) are for general conditioning, to build a sound strength base to enable the athlete to maximize Olympic lifts to the fullest.
-
Participant
Does anyone happen to know the numbers what Carl Lewis was squatting & Oly lifting?.
-
Participant
Does anyone happen to know the numbers what Carl Lewis was squatting & Oly lifting?.
-
Participant
I know his times and people were beating his times with it!
-
Participant
/
-
Participant
/
-
Viewing 72 reply threads
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.