Olympic weightlifting is a sport, but it’s not a sport like basketball, in which you can get away with learning and practicing the parts you enjoy without incurring any risks to your health. It’s more akin to skiing, in which you have to learn the entire sport before you can develop basic competence and enjoy some of the benefits. That requires some serious time and effort.But what are the benef
Myth Busted
-
-
Participant -
Member
I agree with the original author. I think the olympic lifts are a myth. There’s no skill transfer, and if cleans help a person jump better, then jumping should help cleans. TRack runners are supposed to use cleans to enhance their jumping and running. Well, then what do Olympic lifters do to enhance their explosiveness? Cleans? Why is it that Olympic lifting is the only sport that helps itself, where you can train the actual sport to improve yourself in it — with no other options for improving with alternate exercise — yet a triple jumper can’t just hop and bound to improve his ability? And if you can find competitive lifters who do bounding and jumping to better their lifting, then that means bounding works. If bounding works, then why shouldn’t jumpers BOUND instead of doing clean and jerks?
Even the idea of muscle fiber recruitment is skewed. Fibers are recruited according to amount of resistance, not on speed of movement. The type I fibers can move limbs at higher speeds than anyone seems to want to acknowledge. Type II b fibers are usually used when resistance is high-and therefore movement is slow. You can’t throw your max in the bench press up and down in rapid motion, because the resistance is high. You are only able to push it slowly, and barely make it. You also can only push a near max maybe twice or three times, since the fibers you are predominantly using are low on oxygen (type II), hence low on endurance. Put lighter weight on the bar, and you will be able to throw it up for a much longer set — because you are using smaller fibers with more endurance capacities.
I’m still trying to figure out how a clean is supposed to make a person better at things that have no similarities. I think there are something like six factors for motor learning transferability that have to be met in order for a SKILL benefit to occur from one activity to another. The clean has none of them when compared to track events.
-
Participant
I will agree that it would be tough to really do the lifts to any decent percentage in a commercial gym. But as far as learning how to do them, they just are not THAT hard to learn how to do. Especially if you make up your mind that you are going to learn them and then put in some decent work you can learn a decent power clean in a couple weeks, really less actually. I taught MYSELF how to FULL clean and FULL snatch. I don’t have world class technique but mine is definitely ok.
There are world class lifters who jump, even once they reach world class level. There are many who jump and probably sprint at the junior national level which overseas is probably equivalent to the US senior national level.
Ivane Grikurovi – arguably the greatest PERSONAL weightlifting coach had/has his guys do jumps. He has been the PERSONAL developer/trainer of Kakhi – Oly Gold, Asanidze – Oly Gold, Kolecki – Oly Silver, Kasabiev – 4th Beijing
-
Member
Fibers are recruited according to amount of resistance, not on speed of movement? Please take the time to educate yourself before making absurd statements. Reference Digby Sale or any P.V Komi research if you can lend yourself from the elitefts website for a while.
If fibers are recruited according to amount of resistance, then is body weight enough resistance to recruit type IIX fibers? If not then sprinters must not recruit these fibers while sprinting since it depends on amount of resistance.
To improve power you must train across a loading spectrum. That is why Olympic lifter do lifts at lower percentages and move the weight faster, even the Snatch movement is essentially training at a lighter load. Pulls are some times loaded even more so than their max. They will do lighter days and work on speed of movement as well. Again the olympic lifts are always tried to be moved fast as possible, thus recruiting higher treshold MU, again see the research. Most Olympic lifters DO jumps and other jumps, IE the Chinese. If triple jumper only bonds and leaps he can make improvements but only to certain point to where other factors that allow him to express his jumping ability come into play like his strength and power levels. Improve his strength-speed abilities and you may continue to see improvements.
-
Participant
I agree with the original author. I think the olympic lifts are a myth. There’s no skill transfer, and if cleans help a person jump better, then jumping should help cleans. TRack runners are supposed to use cleans to enhance their jumping and running. Well, then what do Olympic lifters do to enhance their explosiveness? Cleans? Why is it that Olympic lifting is the only sport that helps itself, where you can train the actual sport to improve yourself in it — with no other options for improving with alternate exercise — yet a triple jumper can’t just hop and bound to improve his ability? And if you can find competitive lifters who do bounding and jumping to better their lifting, then that means bounding works. If bounding works, then why shouldn’t jumpers BOUND instead of doing clean and jerks?
I hope you realize there are a great number of successful olympic lifting programs that utilize some sort of combination of jumps, short sprints, and medball throws as a part of their training.
Even the idea of muscle fiber recruitment is skewed. Fibers are recruited according to amount of resistance, not on speed of movement.
False. It is not limited to resistance.
The type I fibers can move limbs at higher speeds than anyone seems to want to acknowledge. Type II b fibers are usually used when resistance is high-and therefore movement is slow. You can’t throw your max in the bench press up and down in rapid motion, because the resistance is high. You are only able to push it slowly, and barely make it. You also can only push a near max maybe twice or three times, since the fibers you are predominantly using are low on oxygen (type II), hence low on endurance. Put lighter weight on the bar, and you will be able to throw it up for a much longer set — because you are using smaller fibers with more endurance capacities.
I’m still trying to figure out how a clean is supposed to make a person better at things that have no similarities. I think there are something like six factors for motor learning transferability that have to be met in order for a SKILL benefit to occur from one activity to another. The clean has none of them when compared to track events.
How are there no similarities or that the transference would be to improve skill versus numerous other qualities?
-
ParticipantI agree with the original author. I think the olympic lifts are a myth. There’s no skill transfer, and if cleans help a person jump better, then jumping should help cleans. TRack runners are supposed to use cleans to enhance their jumping and running. Well, then what do Olympic lifters do to enhance their explosiveness? Cleans? Why is it that Olympic lifting is the only sport that helps itself, where you can train the actual sport to improve yourself in it — with no other options for improving with alternate exercise — yet a triple jumper can’t just hop and bound to improve his ability? And if you can find competitive lifters who do bounding and jumping to better their lifting, then that means bounding works. If bounding works, then why shouldn’t jumpers BOUND instead of doing clean and jerks?
Even the idea of muscle fiber recruitment is skewed. Fibers are recruited according to amount of resistance, not on speed of movement. The type I fibers can move limbs at higher speeds than anyone seems to want to acknowledge. Type II b fibers are usually used when resistance is high-and therefore movement is slow. You can’t throw your max in the bench press up and down in rapid motion, because the resistance is high. You are only able to push it slowly, and barely make it. You also can only push a near max maybe twice or three times, since the fibers you are predominantly using are low on oxygen (type II), hence low on endurance. Put lighter weight on the bar, and you will be able to throw it up for a much longer set — because you are using smaller fibers with more endurance capacities.
I’m still trying to figure out how a clean is supposed to make a person better at things that have no similarities. I think there are something like six factors for motor learning transferability that have to be met in order for a SKILL benefit to occur from one activity to another. The clean has none of them when compared to track events.
Your off on a number of points here…
You muscle recruiting theory is bogus. There are many studies which totally prove that. Why don’t you do some research before stating your far out, non proven ideas.
And your last point about how a clean can help other movements? Your thinking of the clean as strictly a movement. Your not thinking of what training with the clean actually does physiologically to the body and how THAT transfers to other athletic movements…
-
Member
I guess I don’t Get it. Is he suggesting that only Olympic lifters should do Olympic lifts. That’s stupid. And 99.99% of guys that workout at gyms without platforms are not looking for functional movement anyway….just bulk.
I have always used Olympic lifts to teach energy transfer, acceleration, and the culmination of forces. Not to increase verticals or punching power. Not that any coach’s first suggestion would be olympic lifts for any of these.
And why can’t Olympic lifters in regular gyms (without platforms) practice their trade. The whole-part practice idea. Why can’t that do the initial shrug, high pulls, cleans, front squats, and push jerks. I mean I have never head of a “sport” that the only way you improve is to practice the entire movement or skill all the way through….Unless we are talking about poker which apparently ESPN finds a sport.
I may have missed the full point of this article but some of the original authors statements seem incorrect.
FYI ANY GYM THAT DOESN’T HAVE PLATFORMS WILL LIKELY NOT HAVE MEDBALLS EITHER
-
Participant
Unless we are talking about poker which apparently ESPN finds a sport.
HAHA!
Maybe a wrist curl exercise would help a poker player…
-
Participant
I guess I don’t Get it. Is he suggesting that only Olympic lifters should do Olympic lifts. That’s stupid. And 99.99% of guys that workout at gyms without platforms are not looking for functional movement anyway….just bulk.
I have always used Olympic lifts to teach energy transfer, acceleration, and the culmination of forces. Not to increase verticals or punching power. Not that any coach’s first suggestion would be olympic lifts for any of these.
And why can’t Olympic lifters in regular gyms (without platforms) practice their trade. The whole-part practice idea. Why can’t that do the initial shrug, high pulls, cleans, front squats, and push jerks. I mean I have never head of a “sport” that the only way you improve is to practice the entire movement or skill all the way through….Unless we are talking about poker which apparently ESPN finds a sport.
I may have missed the full point of this article but some of the original authors statements seem incorrect.
FYI ANY GYM THAT DOESN’T HAVE PLATFORMS WILL LIKELY NOT HAVE MEDBALLS EITHER
Most gyms have MB balls these days..
-
Participant
But those medballs are not for throwing are they? You start throwing a medball against the wall in 24 hour fitness and see what happens!
-
KeymasterI agree with the original author. I think the olympic lifts are a myth.
Olympic lifts are not a myth. I have actually witnessed them before. Unlike unicorns and mermaids they do exist.
There’s no skill transfer, and if cleans help a person jump better, then jumping should help cleans.
As already pointed out, most of the top Olympic weightlifitng coaches in the world do a considerable amount of plyometric work because of the transfer. There are also numerous studies (some of which are available on this very site) which show that Olympic lifting will generally produce better vertical jump performances than other lifts.
TRack runners are supposed to use cleans to enhance their jumping and running. Well, then what do Olympic lifters do to enhance their explosiveness? Cleans? Why is it that Olympic lifting is the only sport that helps itself, where you can train the actual sport to improve yourself in it — with no other options for improving with alternate exercise — yet a triple jumper can’t just hop and bound to improve his ability? And if you can find competitive lifters who do bounding and jumping to better their lifting, then that means bounding works. If bounding works, then why shouldn’t jumpers BOUND instead of doing clean and jerks?
Why should we have to be exclusionary. I’m having a hard time grasping this viewpoint. If two things help why not do both. Even if there’s crossover of training stimulus why not still use both for the sake of variety. I just don’t understand the viewpoint.
Even the idea of muscle fiber recruitment is skewed. Fibers are recruited according to amount of resistance, not on speed of movement. The type I fibers can move limbs at higher speeds than anyone seems to want to acknowledge. Type II b fibers are usually used when resistance is high-and therefore movement is slow. You can’t throw your max in the bench press up and down in rapid motion, because the resistance is high. You are only able to push it slowly, and barely make it. You also can only push a near max maybe twice or three times, since the fibers you are predominantly using are low on oxygen (type II), hence low on endurance. Put lighter weight on the bar, and you will be able to throw it up for a much longer set — because you are using smaller fibers with more endurance capacities.
As mentioned, load is not the only factor in muscle recruitment. In fact, you can produce greater power outputs and see greater motor unit recruitment with lower loads that are moved for speed. In fact, at intermediate loads (80%) that are moved as fast as possible you’ll actually get higher force output as well.
I’m still trying to figure out how a clean is supposed to make a person better at things that have no similarities. I think there are something like six factors for motor learning transferability that have to be met in order for a SKILL benefit to occur from one activity to another. The clean has none of them when compared to track events.
I think if we use SKILL transfer in the strictest meaning of the word then you may be correct. But in that case, what are we to do? Just bound and sprint? How do we address training on the entire spectrum of the force-velocity curve? How do we address work-capacity or general strength qualities?
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Keymaster
I have found more rubber plates in gyms then a full range of medballs. 5lb, 8lb, and 10lb medballs and what they use in those step and dance classes don’t classify as medballs in my dictionary.
Correct. Most of the time when you see these types of medballs in fitness centers they’re actually not used in any fashion that a weight plate or dumbbell couldn’t be used.
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Participant
I agree with the original author. I think the olympic lifts are a myth. There’s no skill transfer, and if cleans help a person jump better, then jumping should help cleans. TRack runners are supposed to use cleans to enhance their jumping and running. Well, then what do Olympic lifters do to enhance their explosiveness? Cleans? Why is it that Olympic lifting is the only sport that helps itself, where you can train the actual sport to improve yourself in it — with no other options for improving with alternate exercise — yet a triple jumper can’t just hop and bound to improve his ability? And if you can find competitive lifters who do bounding and jumping to better their lifting, then that means bounding works. If bounding works, then why shouldn’t jumpers BOUND instead of doing clean and jerks?
Even the idea of muscle fiber recruitment is skewed. Fibers are recruited according to amount of resistance, not on speed of movement. The type I fibers can move limbs at higher speeds than anyone seems to want to acknowledge. Type II b fibers are usually used when resistance is high-and therefore movement is slow. You can’t throw your max in the bench press up and down in rapid motion, because the resistance is high. You are only able to push it slowly, and barely make it. You also can only push a near max maybe twice or three times, since the fibers you are predominantly using are low on oxygen (type II), hence low on endurance. Put lighter weight on the bar, and you will be able to throw it up for a much longer set — because you are using smaller fibers with more endurance capacities.
I’m still trying to figure out how a clean is supposed to make a person better at things that have no similarities. I think there are something like six factors for motor learning transferability that have to be met in order for a SKILL benefit to occur from one activity to another. The clean has none of them when compared to track events.
I have tried to stay off posting on the boards for a while, but can’t resist this one…
I think everyone else has already covered great point as far as MU activation, skill transfer or any other ridiculous “conclusions” that Robert_2009 has made.
My only question would be that if Olympic movements have no to transfer of training affect, then how would squats, dead lifts, jumps or medicine ball throws be any different in regards to transfer of training and developing track athletes??
Olympic lifting in it’s simplest evaluation is essential jumping with weights and anyone who has an intimate knowledge of the lifts knows that well instructed athletes performing the Olympic lifts from the floor actually create a SSC cycle type of response with similar actualization times in comparison to the jumps, throws and acceleration phase of the sprints.
In my opinion lack of transfer of training would be due to an athlete performing the lifts incorrectly. At the end of the day you can continue not doing the Olympic lifts and I will continue to have the option available to develop strength-speed through this valuable modality.
-
Keymaster
[b]My only question would be that if Olympic movements have no to transfer of training affect, then how would squats, dead lifts, jumps or medicine ball throws be any different in regards to transfer of training and developing track athletes?? [/b]
Olympic lifting in it’s simplest evaluation is essential jumping with weights and anyone who has an intimate knowledge of the lifts knows that well instructed athletes performing the Olympic lifts from the floor actually create a SSC cycle type of response with similar actualization times in comparison to the jumps, throws and acceleration phase of the sprints.
In my opinion lack of transfer of training would be due to an athlete performing the lifts incorrectly. At the end of the day you can continue not doing the Olympic lifts and I will continue to have the option available to develop strength-speed through this valuable modality.
Welcome back to the boards. Awesome post. Especially like the part in bold.
Although some purists will disagree strongly, I actually think there’s some benefit when the technique is below average. Potentially dangerous? Slightly, if inappropriate loads are used…but still potentially beneficial. I think it’s good to strive for perfect technique while realizing it will take 1000s of reps to get it. And waiting until you have perfect technique to wait to use an exercise is something that isn’t applied to too many other activities and when it is applied you lose out on a lot of potentially beneficial training (and likely never get to the point where the exercise can be perfected). Note this wasn’t directed towards Damon…just some random thoughts that came up from his post.
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Participant
Olympic lifts are not a myth. I have actually witnessed them before. Unlike unicorns and mermaids they do exist.
I think if we use SKILL transfer in the strictest meaning of the word then you may be correct. But in that case, what are we to do? Just bound and sprint? How do we address training on the entire spectrum of the force-velocity curve? How do we address work-capacity or general strength qualities?
Hey mermaids are not a myth! It is a weekend and I also saw a few on St. Patricks day too.
Training the entire spectrum of the force-velocity curve is without doubt the best program (IMO). In fact, with some of the newer methods that emphasise increased velocity of movement beyond the specific requirement of the event being trained for (compromising force production at least at the beginning of training with the said method) I think we’ll see a whole new level of performance.
In support of the force-velocity spectrum and Olympic lifts, one unpublished thesis shows a 4% improvement to 30m sprint speed for a program involving squats, deadlifts, power cleans and mainly vertical plyometric exercise. However, there was no disclosure about randomisation and blindness with the lack of peer-reviewed publishing leaving me a little skeptical as to the reliablity and rigouressness of the study. Likewise, Tricoli et al. (2005) reports an extra 1% improvement (3.07% in total)in 10m performance for an Olympic lift program compared to a depth jump and hurdle hop plyometric program.
-
Viewing 15 reply threads
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.