You should learn how to quote messages properly, it would make your posts much easier to read…
Anyway, the study that seemingly everyone posts about when discussing oly lifters vs sprinters in the first 10-20 metres (or oly lifters vs highjumpers and bballers in the vertical) seems to have first been cited by Fred Hatfield in one of his articles at drsquat.com.
Here is the quote
Pound for pound, Olympic weightlifters have a greater level of speed-strength than any other class of athletes in all of sport. This fact was made very clear during a massive scientific expedition carried out on the athletes at the Mexico City Olympics in 1964. Sports scientists found that Olympic lifters were able to both vertical jump higher than any class of athletes (including the high jumpers), and run a 25 yard dash faster than any class of athletes (including the sprinters).
Now there are two problems… 1) the mexico olympics were in 1968 NOT 1964 2) after a whole lot of searching i can not find the study and it has been asked on his forum several times where he saw the study and he has never to my knowledge replied.
If you can find any more data on this infamous study that would be cool.
Annecdotally, I have a friend who was the 4th best javelin thrower in the world for under 17 or 19 years of age or something a couple of years ago, and he raced an olympic level sprinter (he qualified but was faaar from elite - I dont even remember the guys name) over 30 metres and won Ive heard some coaches talk about the shot putters beating the sprinters over the first several steps (once again these guys werent internationally elite so its hard to tell it might have been a mediocre runner vs a good shotputter).
I wouldnt say that its impossible but currently its all conjecture. I will say though that the shorter the race the better chance the non runner has
[QUOTE=James Smith]Frit, I agree that the joint angles are similar, however, (personal opinion) I would opt to utilize different/simpler/more effective means of developing eccentric strength and ‘specific’ reactive ability at these joint angles.
For example: A reactive front or back 1/4 squat allows for greater loads to be lifted than what one is capable of powercleaning, especially for younger athletes. I favor the part whole approach.[QUOTE=James Smith]
James,
what do you mean by reactive squat/1/2 squat? Like DB Hammer type of reactive squat or a timed amount of squats at say 50% for 6 sec?
Very true indeed james. I was just saying that you “can” develop the eccentric strength at the joint angle as another benefit of the lift, because it is often overlooked or not even realized by some coaches. There are probably better ways to achive the results rather than utilizing a high catch(like the excercises you mentioned) but for me I can develop a number of different strength with one lift, that saves me time that I can utilize to bring up other weaknesses.
Like always we trying to get to the same mountain top, just on different paths.
i believe that the velocity attained with the spotter is greater than that which could be atained with weight releasers. the speed attained with the given muscle tension is greater than what can be accomplished without a properly trained spotter.
Ok let’s go through this step by step. You’re holding a supramaximal load. That means it’s a load that is too heavy for you to lift concentrically on your own. You lower that load slowly. It reaches your chest. You try to press it up but it doesn’t move. Why doesn’t it move? Probably because it’s a supramaximal load and it’s too heavy. Your spotter grabs the bar and upright rows it up. It moves. Why does it move? Becuase your spotter pulled up on the bar and lightened the load enogh for you to press it up or he pulled it up himself while you did nothing. What does a weight releaser do?? Remove or lighten the load so that you can press it up.
Now let’s say your spotter really pulled up on the bar quickly and “outran” your ability to apply force. Does that mean you “voluntarily” lifted the load and increased voluntary muscle recruitment or does it mean that your spotter did all the work while you did nothing but engaged in a pseudo-scientific form of “overspeed” training? Just because the load is moving fast what good does that do if the spotter is the one lifting the weight. Let’s say the lifter “is” applying some tension. What are the benefits of overspeed training for a lifter anyway? If overspeed training doesn’t work for a sprinter why would you expect it to work for a lifter? How do you measure how much work the spotter does and how much work you do? Do you measure it by what the spotter says?? I had no idea I was actually observing a cutting edge technique when I see all these spotters in the gym screaming “It’s all you man!!!”
My experiences with spotters when doing negatives is exactly that, NEGATIVE. Use a rack with safety bars. Do the static hold. Use the Kowalcyk weight releasers. I was sick and tired of watching people do X in the gym, but in competition they did X-45. They had a bad day!!! Their buddy was puffing up their ego to much. It tends to cause the elbows to rotate away from the body in the BP. Opening the door to injury. Also promoting bad form. Unfortunately, that same mind set is prevalent in NCAA weight rooms today. That “it’s all you man” is a farce.
Frit 17 or James Smith,
I’ve been experimenting with speed squats on a box. I’m responsible for 44-52 freshman football players. They have been doing 5 reps in 7 seconds. I have them use a pad and hammer them on technique. Sometimes, hey they are freshman. What are ya gonna do? I wanted to experiment with drop squats, but was scared to death with the form breakdown they may not , but will experience. Any caveats on this? I love the speed squats. I have a few kids doing over their bodyweight, including one kid who weighs 195. We are starting our last 6 week cycle. I’m increasing it to 6 reps in 7 seconds. The goal is to match the 6 rep weight they did with the 5 rep max in the same time.
acudave, I would refrain from introducing the types of methods which yield high load/high force eccentric loading on athletes with lower levels of preparedness. As you know, younger high school athletes have most probably not experienced any marked levels of strength development to the supportive and elastic structural components which provide a more prepared environment for intensive demands.
Low intensity plyometric jumps/landings would be more appropriate, in my view, to develop reactive ability/force absorption/SSC etc.
I personally do not employ speed squats with any of my high schoolers. I have found the following drills to be more appropriate for developing the ‘awareness’ of speed strength, reactive ability, and compensatory acceleration:
box jumps/landings
power shrugs
explosive medicine ball throws
scissor squats
high speed running in place high knees
SLJ will be employed in upcomming blocks as well
James Smith,
Thanks. I’ve used everything you outlined except the scissor squat. There is a monkey see, monkey do mentality, and I would be apprehensive with some of my lineman doing the scissor squats. I use med balls twice a week. Once vert, once horiz. I do tests on SLJ, three hop, 5 hop, VJ, and the standard lifts. We have a kid going to Stanford, as a walk-on, with a 113 SLJ. I have 5 freshman over 90". 4 kids at 24+ on the VJ. I do this to justify the bands, chains, and boxes. Otherwise they would be out the door. The Archuleta video has made the rounds on the team. Do you ever feel like you have to hype things a bit to generate motivation in the kids? I admit I have to ocassionally throw in exercise just to hype them. Thanks for the time.
Holy Snikeys, This means that I could potentially bench press 605lbs! This 600lb bench press seems impressive now doesn’t it? :rolleyes:
This is why I think bench/squat suit should not be allowed by weightlifters! I guess the suit must have been invented to give taller people a better chance to compete with the shorter lifters; alternatively, it was probably introduced to put up some big numbers so the spotter wouldn’t have to yell “Its all you man!”.
Super,
I agree with the “puffy” effect that the suits give. Buy a suit, not an expensive one, and go for a balls to the wall single. You will see your life pass in front of your eyes. It is a very nasty experience. I squated 545 at 198 in the mid 80’s with the thin ply suits of the day. The bench shirts of then only added 15-25 pounds on my bench. Some of my friends still lifting say 25-200 also. But, some people have broken there arms. Not a good thing. I’m glad Louie brought that to light in a recent PL Usa article.
I’m actual a little more disgusted on squat depth than suits. But that topic has already been discussed.
Louie wrote an article comparing lifting equipment to a variety of equipment being used in other sports. It is somewhere on his site.
How about 100m races on dirt tracks, with the wind blowing dirt in your face. How about the poles in Pole Vaulting. The aluminum bats.How about Red Grange type football. Modernization will always have its good/bad. There are Power meets where no equipment is used. They are referred to as “raw” meets. 2cents.
Suits have good points and bad points. Safety etc and you can argue the point till the cows come home - so I won’t join the discussion on that point.
The one thing I quite like about some of the PL organisations is that they don’t have too many rules regarding equipment, supplementation etc. This is nice because you don’t have any excuses. If someone beat you because they had a better bench shirt then thats your hard luck - go buy a better shirt! It evens out the playing field and everyone knows where they stand. At the end of the day the superior athletes, with the superior training win and everyone knows the playing field was fair.
Seeing people like Shroeder, CP, JD making way more money then people with actual Degrees seems kinda sad but it is the reality in today’s world. So with that in mind I want everybody’s opinion on the thread below,
Supervenom, I suggest that you reconsider your perception as to the validity of a ‘degree’.
Most would agree, that a ‘degree’ or any other piece of accredited paper is meaningless to someone who does not possess the skill set to practically and intelligently apply the learned information.
Additionally, we must not forget that the academic pipeline in western society, specifically in regards to S&C, is often tragically misinformed.
When we consider the act of satisfying a certain curriculum vs possessing the skills to effectively develop athletes we must recognize the fact that the former is certainly not synonymous with the latter.
A ‘degree’ may certainly prove to be useful in conjunction with an intelligent and tactical approach to training. Unfortunately, however, this same ‘degree’ opens many professional doors for many incompetents to walk through and occupy higher level positions.
I recommend that all perform a search on “The Peter Principle”. You should all find it quite amusing and terrifically appropriate for defining western society.
James you majored in Music Performance? Do you play an insturment? You got a good site man! Love the articles too! James you bring up good point and the Peter principle got me thinking, which is tough to do, alot of metal grinding sounds and rust being broken. One thing I see in college is that it is KIND of easy toeek through courses in a certain major say Kinesiology, if you just pass stuff like physics, biomechanics ect,and you just memorize or cheat on tests in bio and anatomy like so many people here do, you still get the degree, then you get out in the real world and teach people, in order to not look stupid you make shit up (ie.: programs) and then sell ideas like hard work, “no pain no gain” crap like that, and people eat it up…it sucks but it is life I guess???:eek:
…SVS, this is kind of irrelevant but I think Schroder graduated from Baker University in BaldwinCity Kansas, with a degree in Kinesiology, not that it matters but thought I would type more studid tidbits, that is all I am good for! Does anyone know where Tony Little went to school? I think he double majored in kinesiology and fashion (focus on hair and nails)
PEACE
here is kinda an overview of the peter principle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle
[QUOTE=Supervenomsuperman]Seeing people like Shroeder, CP, JD making way more money then people with actual Degrees seems kinda sad but it is the reality in today’s world. So with that in mind I want everybody’s opinion on the thread below,
[QUOTE]
well that is not entirely true. i know that schroeder has a bachelors in physical education and though i am not a big fan of uncle chuck i thought i read somewhere that he has a masters degree in ex.phys. i personally have a bachelors of science in physiology (at the time i was enrolled msu’s exercise science program was more exercise than science). jd on the other hand strikes me as more salesman than scientist. so as long as the public buys into the load of shit he is selling his credentials seem to become irrelevant. so then the question seems to become is the “sell” more important than the “substance” or is the other way around?
IMO the public (and some athletes) esp. in the U.S want to be dazzled by quick fixes slick marketing and results they can see regardless of quality or appropriateness of the adaption.
also on the continum of substance<----------->crap i find cf and schroeder on the far left side and davis on the far right with uncle chuck being fairly right of center.
this may already be in another thread but what about the question of quality versus the glitz/trendy/and glam.
i heard (emphasize heard) that Pavel clears near six figures per speaking engagement plus gets something off of kettlebells sold; davies well hell he would market his mothers “hot water bottle” as a stability device if it would generate sales and verstegen has built an empire on the image versus the substance. so do you then hate the player…hate the game…or the hate client for needing to be deprogrammed before you can do the right thing for them.
In some respects I have seen education get in the way of education. No I haven’t been drinking! Much of education today is about jumping through hoops. Whatever, your professor teaches you better reference him or her for those extra marks.
Question those profesors forge your own education don’t let them/it forge you.
Steve I agree 100%, just off the top of my head in a fitness development class I have if I do not write down what he belives is the proper way to train for most things??? (ie:lift till failure, muscle fatigue all the time???) then I am wrong on his tests and fail the class…many teachers and courses take this approach in my opinion, they have their ideas and they are right no matter what, if you dis agree you do not get a degree!!! , for those who choose just to educate themselves via these teachers and their recommended readings for the class, they may truely never see other perspectives and other ways to do things which may be better??? Just my thoughts on the topic…
, for those who choose just to educate themselves via these teachers and their recommended readings for the class, they may truely never see other perspectives and other ways to do things which may be better??? Just my thoughts on the topic… 