CF what do you think about marion strength workouts back in 2001?
mon:
cleans light 4x6
front squat 4x10sec fast
push press 4x10sec fast
bp 4x10sec fast
deadlift 3x8
hip flexor machine 2x10
tue:
db inclines 3x10
flyes 3x10
db press 3x10
db rows 3x10
dips combo 3xfailure
bar curls 3x10
thur:
cleans 4x4
deadlifts 3x8
front squats 4x10
pushpress 4x8
bp 4x8
hip flexors 3x10
fri:
repeat tue:
tue and thur she performs med ball throws then she does bounding 1 leg at time and both together, for distance and bounding up stairs 1 and both at time… she does 4x8 each leg…
From my understanding of that period, she was still lifting before the speed sessions so the weights were pretty moderate. i can’t confirm what she was doing but Tim was lifting heavy and after speed, not before, as had been the case in 2000.
Do you think that switch that Tim made played a significant role in his improvement from 2000 to 2001? What do you see as being the benefits of each method? In lifting heavy you obviously get greater CNS stimulation, but then in doing that you would need to lift after speed I would imagine. I still struggle to see the benefits of lifting prior to speed.
I think Charlie would know. I know gatlin was doing 4 weights sessions a week during GPP and the beginning of SPP. I don’t know the content but there were doing a lot of weights.
From what I understand from Harry’s visit to Sprint Capitol in 2006, the weights workouts they used were fairly secretive. Harry was only allowed to join them on the track I believe.
I wasn’t very impressed with the technique being employed. Cleans were (for lack of a better word) scary looking, and squats were not that deep at all (well above parallel). I assume this was across the board for this group.
Hence, Charlie’s approach to “keeping it simple” in the weightroom very much applied in this case.
Linford and his group used squats that were nowhere near parallel. Dave Lease used the same method. I believe the theory is that you rarely see force being applied from deeper than the quarter squat position, so what is the need to squat deeper than that? I’d be interested to get people’s opinions on this issue. What do you find unimpressive about that NumberTwo?
which is interesting considering there is often criticism that your volumes are too high. Are you able to give an example of the sort of session he had been doing versus what you gave him?
Massive axial loading for little benefit. If you arn’t training the muscle through a full ROM then are you training the fibres you could be? Are you maintaining or improving ROM with this method? Are you recruiting the glutes maximally?
I’d suggest really all you are doing is training the brain to downregulate any protective reflexes that exist with respect to axial loading and strengthening those fibres that are recruited. If this is your goal it is a good exercise.
I attended a very basic S and C course, and they really drilled home not pushing for depth. Once the lumber spine begins to round, they suggested proper depth had been exceeded.
But the counter argument would be your training the muscles through the specific range for the movement no? I agree with you on glute recruitment, all you need to do is do deep squats after having not done them for several weeks, you will feel the effects of recruiting your glutes.
I am not realy an advocate of either method as I don’t really know enough to make an informed decision, but I am putting forward the arguments I have been given and just trying to hear the other side.
Once the lumber spine begins to round, they suggested proper depth had been exceeded.
That’s called lumbo-pelvic rythm. You can have dancers that go full depth in a very wide stance (way harder than the olympic squat) and soccer players that lose it after 15° of knee flexion.
The LPR is one of the factors to consider to assess proper depth at that moment for that athlete, but performance wise quarter squats have a place even for very mobile athletes, at the right time of the season.