just curious what you guys think about heavy overhead lifts, because i was speaking to a strength and conditioning coach today and he said he don't perform any heavy overhead lifts (jerk, snatches) he perfer to keep them in the 30-50% for the snatch and 50-70% for the jerks to avoid any shoulder injuries etc?
overhead lifts
-
-
Participant
-
Participant
I think it is important to have an open line of communicate during sessions with your athletes and educate them. My athletes know that I would like them to tell me if any exercise causes them pain or discomfort. Instead of being scared and going through the motions on a particular exercise or causing themself discomfort and doing the exercise since I'm the boss and I perscribed it they know not every exercise is for everbody and there are many other options to accomplish the same thing.
With that being said I agree with what Eric Cressey has said in his Shoulder Saver Part 1 Article on t-nation. In summary he said…Full Article https://www.t-nation.com/readTopic.do?id=1053531
Shoulder Saver #1: Avoid what hurts.
It seems logical, but we all know how tough it is to resist the exercises we've grown to love. Face the facts; you just might not be able to overhead press or bench with the straight bar.
Not all bodies are created equal in the first place; a good example would be the different types of acromions, a portion of the scapula. Those with type III acromions are more likely to suffer from subacromial impingement due to the shape of this end of the scapula:
These are the 3 types:
Type I Acromion: flat, minimal impingement risk, normal subacromial space
Type II Acromion: curved, higher rate of impingement, slight decrease in subacromial space
Type III Acromion: beaked, highest rate of impingement, marked decrease in subacromial space
Now, ask yourself this: when someone universally recommends overhead pressing, how often do you think they're consulting x-rays to determine if it might not be the best thing for you?
Moreover, not all bodies are equal down the road, either. If you're a type I or type II acromion process, you can "acquire" a type III morphology due to reactive changes. These changes may be related to a specific activity (e.g. weight-training) or just a case of chronically poor movement patterns (think of a hunchbacked desk jockey who's always reaching overhead).
There's almost always going to be something else you can do to achieve a comparable training effect without making things worse. So, the next time your shoulder starts to act up in the middle of a training session, put down the weights, take a deep breath, and walk over to the water fountain.
Use this stroll as an opportunity to recognize that something is out of whack and determine an appropriate course of action ??? including an alternative exercise. You might need to experiment a bit, but it'll come to you.
-
KeymasterI think many improperly load overhead lifts. Because the muscles surrounding the shoulder joint are often stronger than the present stability of the joint (due to copious amounts of flat pressing exercises) athletes are capable of handling significantly higher loads than they probably should without first following a normal progression leading up to the heavier loads. As indicated above, the 'avoid what hurts' philosophy is always helpful.
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Participant
I think many improperly load overhead lifts. Because the muscles surrounding the shoulder joint are often stronger than the present stability of the joint (due to copious amounts of flat pressing exercises) athletes are capable of handling significantly higher loads than they probably should without first following a normal progression leading up to the heavier loads. As indicated above, the 'avoid what hurts' philosophy is always helpful.
i understand that, but since we are not training weightlifters do u think the risk is worth them doing snatch and jerk with 80-95% i think i have some of the shoulder problems i have now from doing behind the neck spilt jerk with 315+ in my younger days, thats just one example.
-
Participant
I never have anyone really load up on Oly. lifts since so technique becomes a big issue and to move heavy weight they lose technique in an effort to get more weight. Doing a wide split jumping jack to get under a clean they cannot fully pull is one example that comes to mind. Same thing kid of happens with overhead oly. lifts as well. Not locking out the arms during the jerk or snatch rather getting the weight above the head and then locking it out is one example of what I do not want that comes to mind. I keep the loads moderate. As soon as technique falls off its too heavy and they know this. As far as push press and military presses I am a bit more lenient.
-
Keymaster
i understand that, but since we are not training weightlifters do u think the risk is worth them doing snatch and jerk with 80-95% i think i have some of the shoulder problems i have now from doing behind the neck spilt jerk with 315+ in my younger days, thats just one example.
I tend to not do either except with some advance throwers. My reasoning isn't so much shoulder problems as it is technique related. The reason I WOULD use those exercises under 80+% loads is because at that % they have the highest power outputs of any two weightlifting exercises. That however is only when the athlete's technique in those lifts permit them to lift heavy enough to move weights equivalent (in performance not absolute number) to their clean. In most cases, this isn't possible and I don't feel the slight benefits really warrants extra technique work. So I pretty much don't do use them under heavy loads. Also, heavy jerks and squats frequently lead to missed lifts which poses training and logistical problems. For example, on jerks, you've got to get the bar back to the boxes or racks after the lift gets dumped (unless you've got very nice boxes that accept a dumped weight).
I do use overhead lifts though. I like OH stepups, OH squats, and OH lunges from time to time. On these I typically keep the loads in the medium range.
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Participant
[quote author="utfootball4" date="1164603347"]
i understand that, but since we are not training weightlifters do u think the risk is worth them doing snatch and jerk with 80-95% i think i have some of the shoulder problems i have now from doing behind the neck spilt jerk with 315+ in my younger days, thats just one example.I tend to not do either except with some advance throwers. My reasoning isn't so much shoulder problems as it is technique related. The reason I WOULD use those exercises under 80+% loads is because at that % they have the highest power outputs of any two weightlifting exercises. That however is only when the athlete's technique in those lifts permit them to lift heavy enough to move weights equivalent (in performance not absolute number) to their clean. In most cases, this isn't possible and I don't feel the slight benefits really warrants extra technique work. So I pretty much don't do use them under heavy loads. Also, heavy jerks and squats frequently lead to missed lifts which poses training and logistical problems. For example, on jerks, you've got to get the bar back to the boxes or racks after the lift gets dumped (unless you've got very nice boxes that accept a dumped weight).
I do use overhead lifts though. I like OH stepups, OH squats, and OH lunges from time to time. On these I typically keep the loads in the medium range.
[/quote]"The reason I WOULD use those exercises under 80+% loads is because at that % they have the highest power outputs of any two weightlifting exercises".
i thought we agreed that the ol's are best at 80%+ for max benefits? -
Keymaster
i thought we agreed that the ol's are best at 80%+ for max benefits?
Exactly but ONLY if your technique permits you to lift 80% of what you are actually capable of lifting. This isn't often the case with the overhead lifts. For example, I know many athletes who can clean 120kg but can only snatch 85kg and jerk 90kg. If they were technically proficient, there technique should permit them to snatch around 100kg and jerk at least 100kg. Because they're technique is lacking their expression of maximal power is never seen.
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Participant
[quote author="utfootball4" date="1164606947"]
i thought we agreed that the ol's are best at 80%+ for max benefits?Exactly but ONLY if your technique permits you to lift 80% of what you are actually capable of lifting. This isn't often the case with the overhead lifts. For example, I know many athletes who can clean 120kg but can only snatch 85kg and jerk 90kg. If they were technically proficient, there technique should permit them to snatch around 100kg and jerk at least 100kg. Because they're technique is lacking their expression of maximal power is never seen.
[/quote]i understand, so lets say if u have a athlete who pc 330 and ps 230, would you ever have him work over 80% of the 230 ps max?
-
Keymaster
i understand, so lets say if u have a athlete who pc 330 and ps 230, would you ever have him work over 80% of the 230 ps max?
Probably not. My guideline for snatch technical proficiency is around 80% of clean max. In an athlete like you mentioned, I'd prefer to use cleans with a moderate weight or jump squats.
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Participant
[quote author="utfootball4" date="1164607733"]
i understand, so lets say if u have a athlete who pc 330 and ps 230, would you ever have him work over 80% of the 230 ps max?Probably not. My guideline for snatch technical proficiency is around 80% of clean max. In an athlete like you mentioned, I'd prefer to use cleans with a moderate weight or jump squats.
[/quote]just to make sure we are on the same page, if that athlete pc 330 and ps 275, u would then have him ps over 80%.
-
Keymaster
I wouldn't rule it out like I would with the other athlete who I'd feel couldn't get much out of heavily loaded snatches that he couldn't get from moderate load cleans emphasizing speed of the final pull.
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Participant
I wouldn't rule it out like I would with the other athlete who I'd feel couldn't get much out of heavily loaded snatches that he couldn't get from moderate load cleans emphasizing speed of the final pull.
ok, i just didnt think there were much benefit from doing ol's with such low %'s but now i see why we did in college.
-
Keymaster
Remember, load doesn't necessarily limit the amount of force that one can apply. In fact you could feasibly apply greater force to a 70% load than you would to an 85% load if the emphasis was on speed of movement at the lighter load (but not on the heavier one). What heavier loads do is ensure (to some extent at least) that the force you want the athlete to exert is actually exerted because if they don't they'll miss the lift.
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Participant
Remember, load doesn't necessarily limit the amount of force that one can apply. In fact you could feasibly apply greater force to a 70% load than you would to an 85% load if the emphasis was on speed of movement at the lighter load (but not on the heavier one). What heavier loads do is ensure (to some extent at least) that the force you want the athlete to exert is actually exerted because if they don't they'll miss the lift.
if u r talking bout force i think ol's for the hang allow for force development then the power position, do u agree?
-
Keymaster
if u r talking bout force i think ol's for the hang allow for force development then the power position, do u agree?
Only under two circumstances:
1. If you look at the average power output for the lift rather than the peak power output a pull from the hang is considerably higher. If you look at peak power output though, a technically proficient athlete should actually have a very slightly higher peak power output on the full version of the lift.2. When athletes aren't as technically efficient or lack the starting / static strength necessary to properly execute pulls from the floor this is definitely true.
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Participant
[quote author="utfootball4" date="1164610382"]
if u r talking bout force i think ol's for the hang allow for force development then the power position, do u agree?Only under two circumstances:
1. If you look at the average power output for the lift rather than the peak power output a pull from the hang is considerably higher. If you look at peak power output though, a technically proficient athlete should actually have a very slightly higher peak power output on the full version of the lift.2. When athletes aren't as technically efficient or lack the starting / static strength necessary to properly execute pulls from the floor this is definitely true.
[/quote]i pc alot more then i hc, but it feel like i can generate alot more speed on the hc, and im talking about if i use the same % for both lifts. for example if i did pc 4x3x60% and hc 4x3x60 then hc would feel soo much faster.
-
Keymaster
How much greater is your hang clean than your power clean?
This is leading somewhere…
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Participant
How much greater is your hang clean than your power clean?
This is leading somewhere…
to be real with you, i never tested my hang clean have always done est max or use 80% of pc max.
these numbers are pretty close, will have a much accurate number this week after testing.
pc: 330-350
hc: 275-295 -
Keymaster
Whenever I see discrepancies that big it's almost always because they:
1. Aren't very good at the double knee bend or don't execute the first pull to put themselves in a position to do the double knee bend effectively. A lot of times, these athletes just pull the bar straight up with little differentiation between the first and second pulls of the lift.
2. Use a countermovement to start their hang cleans. I actually like to have my athletes do this most of the time too.Does this sound like you?
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Participant
Whenever I see discrepancies that big it's almost always because they:
1. Aren't very good at the double knee bend or don't execute the first pull to put themselves in a position to do the double knee bend effectively. A lot of times, these athletes just pull the bar straight up with little differentiation between the first and second pulls of the lift.
2. Use a countermovement to start their hang cleans. I actually like to have my athletes do this most of the time too.Does this sound like you?
i thought the pc was suppose to much higher then pc?
ok number 2 would only be valid if the athlete hc was more then his pc??? i would have to say no to both, i think the reason why there is such a big gap bc the pc is what i really foucs on %'s wise, before i went off to college the only thing i did was hang clean and my hang clean was up but pc was low, then once i got to college it flip flop. i think it would be diffcult for me to power as much if i could execute the double bend?? -
Participant
awesome thread because I am looking at the nsca manual and dont really understand how they are teaching the power clean: the questions is: The correct order of the movement phases used in a power clean is? answer: beginning position, first pull, scoop, second pull, catch.
can someone please explain the first pull, scoop, second pull??
Thanks,
-
Keymaster
i thought the pc was suppose to much higher then pc?
You're right.
these numbers are pretty close, will have a much accurate number this week after testing.
pc: 330-350
hc: 275-295I misread this post and flip-flopped the numbers. You're numbers are where they should be (IMO).
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Keymaster
UT-
So now, given that under my criteria you are an efficient power cleaner (with roughly equivalent level in the hang clean), are you saying that if you use the same % (not load but % of each lift's max) you feel faster in the hang clean? This seems to be a fairly common notion. If this is the case, I'd be curious to see what your actual power output / speed of movement (measured either by a movement analysis software or tendo) is for each lift. Also, what about if you used equivalent loads (not %)….do you still feel faster at the hang clean?ELITETRACK Founder
-
Participant
awesome thread because I am looking at the nsca manual and dont really understand how they are teaching the power clean: the questions is: The correct order of the movement phases used in a power clean is? answer: beginning position, first pull, scoop, second pull, catch.
can someone please explain the first pull, scoop, second pull??
Thanks,
scooping = double knee bend
-
Participant
UT-
So now, given that under my criteria you are an efficient power cleaner (with roughly equivalent level in the hang clean), are you saying that if you use the same % (not load but % of each lift's max) you feel faster in the hang clean? This seems to be a fairly common notion. If this is the case, I'd be curious to see what your actual power output / speed of movement (measured either by a movement analysis software or tendo) is for each lift. Also, what about if you used equivalent loads (not %)….do you still feel faster at the hang clean?1: if i use the same %, for example 6x3x60% for both lifts the hc feel faster.
2: if i use the same load, for load 6x3x205 the hc still feel faster.
its weird bc i have some friends who pc and hc are just as fast, but with me u can see the difference. question: do u teach ur athlete to jump/stomp the platform when during hc, bc i know in college they really emphasize that and i could do it will with low-med hc weight but not at all with pc.
-
Participant
anything mike???
-
Keymaster
Don't have an explanation other than it's just a matter of quirky proprioception / perception. Assuming you're catching your power cleans and hang cleans at the same depth (knee bend, etc.) the fact that you can power clean considerably more indicates that your bar speed is actually considerably higher on the power clean….otherwise you couldn't power clean that much more.
ELITETRACK Founder
-
Viewing 27 reply threads
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.