Sorry Chris
I didn’t read you properly…I think I need more sleep!
I think pulls are even better
^^Bump.
Anyone feel they short change themselves not including deadlifts in the program? As there are better alternatives?.
What do you mean?
no doubt that over training can elicit undesirable effects however most studies by Kraemer used repeat 1 rep max work on consecutive days or 1rm work with limited rest days between sessions.
alternatively power cleans place excessive loads on the wrist and the AC joint, most sprinters have terrible execution of this lift. Snatch pulls or clean pulls can be a safer alternative.
I just got through reading Barry Ross’s e-book when I wrote that. He ain’t no Charlie Francis, but I do like basic lifts/exercises etc.
A few key points I took from it:
• The lift that helps the runner’s acceleration is the one that recruits the larger motor units: The DL.
• The lift that prolongs “speed endurance” is the one that recruits the larger motor units: The DL
• The deadlift works a significantly greater percentage of the muscles, motor units and involves multiple joints.
Basic Barry Ross template:
• Deadlift every session, 2-3 sets of 2-3 reps @ 85-95% 1RM, TIMED.
• Plyometrics at the end of each set, within 1 minute of set completion. The focus is on delivering maximum strength in minimum time.
• Plyos follow each set of deadlifts within 90 seconds. As our plyometric exercise we do 6 double leg box jumps to start with. As we progress we change to 6 to 10 stationary one leg jumps depending upon the athletes level of fitness. You can also use stationary rope jumping…double or single legs as a plyometric exercise.
EMG analysis study; Squat Vs Deadlift.
The study looked at eight different muscle sites calf, two quadriceps, two hamstrings, glutes, lower back and abs. Seven weightlifters took part in the study and where randomly assigned to either perform an olympic squat (full squat high bar position) or conventional deadlift first (3 reps of their 6 repetition maximum (R.M.)). After a five minuite rest they perfromed the protocol on the other exercise.
EMG data was collected during each exercise for all eight of the selected muscle groups.
What follows are graphs showing the magnitude in activation (using the root mean squared technique) comparing both exercises.
Click the link for full graph.
http://www.charliefrancis.com/community/showpost.php?p=236830&postcount=108
The deadlift showed a markedly greater level of activation in 5 out of the 8 muscles sampled. The deadlift also showed greater levels of activation in the VM which is counter-intuitive to say the least.
Conversely the squat showed higher levels of activation in the ST muscle which is also somewhat surprising since variations of the deadlift (namely stiff legged deadlifts have been shown to have up to 2x higher levels of activation in all hamstring musculature.).
These graphs are a better barometer of total EMG data and not a good indicator of the timing of motor unit firing.
If you look at the GN the reason it comes out with a much larger RMS value is due to a prolonged time under tension and since the level of activation in both exercises is almost identical.
As far as lower back and abs are concerned the deadlift blew away the squat in the lowerback and edged it out in the abs department. Prior EMG studies have shown that squats and deadlift are superior to conventional abs exercises and instability training for the activation of the mid-section musculature.
Cliff notes:
Deadlift superior in five out of eight muscles studied.
Calf muscles show higher levels of activation in the squat due to a higher time under tension.
Squat shows higher levels of activation in one quad and one hamstring studied and vice versa for the deadlift.
Deadlift shows far greater levels of activation in the glutes (3-4x plus). WTF?.
Deadlifts show higher levels of activation in the midsection.
The thing is, at the end of a deadlift, I squeeze the $hit out of my glutes.
The guy in that study can’t have squeezed his glutes at the top.
I’m not into all those damn studies but I will say I’m going back to my old school lifting this fall, deadlifts in gpp and snatch grip dl in spp.
I think there generally a safer exercise (especially with a trap bar). No need for spotters. Part of the thesis is that the deadlift is a better tool for knee rehab due to the ease of coaching and that the majority of force is born through the ankle.
They can murder your back though, if you don’t get your form down.
Yeah, take the studies with a pinch of salt.
Sumos show larger quad activity over conventional deads from 13 collegiate football players.
http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=13597710
eliminates some rear chain stress. It kinda become a little like a squat due to hand placement. I work with mostly football players and I only have line and big skill dead in gpp. Seems when they get to far into intensification, backs start getting real sore.
That’s weird you guys experience back issues with the deadlifts. I have done deadlifts in gpp and snatch deadlifts off a 4in block in spp with zero issues. I kept the volume lower in both blocks gpp 3x5-8 and spp 3x3-5. First 10 was off the chains…
they are always pushing too hard. Most of them have no issues, some sore backs when the weight gets up over 405. I have 4 or 5 high school kids who can do 495+ deadlift without issue. I just worry about the risk of a tweak. We follow 531 template on core lifts and trust me, the 531 days scare me toward end of max strength. Even doing everything tight and controlled, there is always the risk of injury. Glad we are pushing speed at max and reducing weight work. Everyone is healthy and strong as hell. Now, just hone speed until camp and then all the good work wil get thrown out the window when the college and high school coaches run them into the ground.
Yeah, numbers mean nothing to me. Two of the fastest guys I ran against in HS were 0lb’s in the squat, dead or squat with heavy emphasis on great core strength, bodyweight exercises, jump rope & genetics & (THEY were fast).
I certainly ain’t gonna start training like Jim Wendler in the weight room. Until guys at westside are blazin’ past me, I ain’t taking note.
In fact even though he gets criticized heavily on these forums, I prefer Barry Ross’s program.
different with footbal from track though. You just can’t emphasize speed. Strength is a very real part of their game. Speed only gets you so far. In your sport, speed is all that matters, so I agree with you on that. In football you need to be strong and capable of taking a pounding game after game. We have had one major injury in the past 15 years, that was a non contact ACL. I like what we do, great results, no injuries. One of my kids just got a handwritten letter from UCLA, got invitied to throw at Purdue’s camp, was being watched by MSU and was getting a lot of love from Michigan QB coach at their camp. He is going to be a sophomore next season. Already rated the best frosh QB in Michigan. Ran 4.63 at U of M, can put it out there about 60 yds. At 6’2" and 185, he needs to get bigger and stronger and he will be fine.
That’s fair enough.
My favorite football player of all time was Primetime. Was he ‘strong’?. Most corners I’ve seen don’t look particular strong but look blazin’.
Looking strong and being strong is totally different.
Well said RB34. The kid who holds the deadlift record for my facility is 6’3" 215lb safety. He deadlifted 560, squatted 500+ and benched 300+ during max testing. I have kids who are 6’7" 325 and can’t touch him. He runs 4.5 and hits like a truck, just doesn’t look like the monster he is.
Send him to Mississippi State. Those other schools don’t want him.
Having reviewed the discussion here, I see that it is important to clarify something:
‘Strength’ must be assigned context because strength itself is absolutely specific to the means by which it is manifested.
A deadlift, a squat, a bench press, a powerclean, and so on, are only assured to demonstrate how much load an individual can overcome in those exact exercises. Any transfer to movements other than those exercises will vary from one individual to the next based upon a host factors; most of which are encompassed by morphobiomechanics.
In order to be assured more and more transfer the exercise itself must begin to approximate the dynamics of the competition exercise.
This is why Charlie’s general organism strength principle is genius. Charlie left the specific work to sprints, resisted sprints (sled, hills) and drills themselves (as specific as it gets) and the rest to general organism strength.
What most don’t realize is that it demands incredible ‘strength’ to sprint very fast; however, this strength is often not demonstrated on barbell exercises because there are no barbell exercises that closely transfer to sprinting at or near +12m/s at max V.
Rest assured, Tommy Smith, Carl Lewis, Bolt, and all the other taller sprinters, who were/are not known for their focus or ability to lift large barbell loads, were/are extremely ‘strong’.
How do we quantify this ‘strength’ you might ask…
By using our stop watch.
Sprinting IS specific strength- strength specific to mobilizing oneself down the track at the highest possible speed.
So as far as the training for speed goes, trust me in that the ‘strength’ training MUST be individualized to each sprinter. It is for this reason why a group of sprinters may all run 12m/s with Ben Johnson lifting massive barbell loads, Carl Lewis not lifting barbells much at all, Asafa Powell conservatively, by comparison, weight training, Gay doing whatever he does with his personal trainer (certainly doesn’t appear to be any heavy lifting involved) and Bolt using mostly machines with low loads.
While my fastest guys are obviously not at the level of 12m/s they are fast within the context of American football distances and I have a handful of players who run high 4.3/low 4.4 (hand timed) some of who squat, some leg press, some split squat with dumbbells, and so on. It only matters that the individual is sufficiently stimulated optimally relative to no one other than themselves.
Put simply, do only what you must do to improve the result.
As speed coach notes, there is a substantially greater ‘strength’ requirement for American football. In this case the ‘strength’ is not only demonstrated in mobilizing the players around the field but also in overcoming and resisting the inertia from their opponents.
But again, this ‘strength’ doesn’t necessarily rely upon the use of barbell exercise. I have seen over and over again the use of technical-tactical maneuvering and leveraging/positioning win the battle over an opponent who can lift heavier barbells.
Resistance training is what assists in improving strength (don’t be concerned with EMS at the moment). Lifting weights is only one small, albeit common, means of resistance training.
Use your imagine and you’ll note just how free one is to become ‘stronger’ via resistance training even if they have no access to the conventional apparatus.
We must only become ‘specific’ when we discuss specific objectives. Hence, there is no arguments against the fact that, at the very least:
- sprinters must sprint
- Olympic weightlifters must snatch and C&J
- powerlifters must squat, bench, deadlift
- hammer throwers must throw the hammer
- shot putters must put the shot
- discus throwers must throw the disc
- javelin throwers must throw the javelin
- high jumper must high jump
- long jumpers must long jump
- triple jumpers must triple jump
- pole vaulters must pole vault
- strongmen must overcome their implements
and so on and so forth.
Any other training exercises must ultimately be used on an case by case basis in order to support the increase of the competition exercise for that individual, prevent against injury, support mobility, suppleness and the rest of the general preparatory needs.
To make blanket statements, regarding the efficacy of an exercise other than the competition exercise, to any group of participants in the same sport discipline is irresponsible.
We are only responsible in emphasizing the importance of exercises, other than the competition exercise, if we know that it positively transfers to the competition exercise across a broad population. For this to happen, the exercise must satisfy more and more criteria of dynamic correspondence.
It’s not what most want to hear, because it requires more time and effort; however, the reality is that each and every athlete deserves an individualized program. The degree to which this is logistically feasible is ultimately a question of the coach’s commitment and, in the case of team sports, the athletes trainability and work habits.
I lead by example in this case as the only exercises that I require my players to perform are those that I know directly transfer to improved sport form.