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 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?
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.
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.