Alexeyev was one of the lifters who used a great variety of different exercises in his program. See below
preparing for the 1974 World Championship in Manila.
Competitive Period
am
Hyperextensions 60/6 (3) 75/6 (2)
Pow Sn + BNP + OS 60/1+3+3 80/1+3+3
100/1+1+3
Pow Sn + OS 120/1+3 130/1+3 135/1+3 140/1
145/1 150/1
Pow Sn 140/1 145/1 150/1
Sn Pull 150/3 160/3 (3) 180/2 (2)
Sn Pull (w/straps) 180/3 (5)
Pow Sn + Snatch (w/straps) 130/2+1 140/2+1 (3)
pm
Hyperextensions 60/6 (5)
Back Squats 170/3 220/3 (6)
Pow Sn w/pull through 80/5 (6)
Pow Sn 100/2 120/2 130/2 (5)
Vasily includes a great variety of exercises in his training. “Besides
exercises in the• snatch, jerk, or press, pull and squats, I have used many
other exercises with the barbell and weights. Bends with the barbell on the
shoulders; bends with the barbell on the shoulders while lying on the ‘horse’
bracing one’s hips, with the legs secured; jumps with the barbell on your
shoulders; press on crossbars with weights; bending and unbending the arms in
the elbow joints; squats on one leg; throwing the bar upward and behind; and
other exercises. In addition, in the first year of the time span analyzed,
these exercises consisted of, on the average, 360 lifts in the preparatory
period and 158 lifts during the competition period. In the second year,
correspondingly 841 and 506 lifts, and in the third 880 lifts a month.”
we know that the GPP period becomes shortened as the years press forward because that end of the development becomes more than sufficient to push/support the improvement of the specific end for the higher qualified trainees
The problem here is that there has been a shift of meaning and methodology of GP over the years.
What was called GP in the 60’s by Matveyev is not what is practiced in GP nowdays by most coaches (I hope).
Nowdays GP is general motor capacities training with specific parameters (which concour at improving what Verkhoshanskij calls the special physical preparedness). For this reason I believe that the old Mateevyan GP must be eliminated (sprinters running for miles in the wood during winter) while the modern version of GP (strength focus, technical elements and Tempo OR strength, Tempo & short speed, depending on the preferred approach) MUST NOT be reduced for the advanced athlete, but the contrary.
Note how the progressive understanding of GPP still transfers positively to the competitive event. Thus while kinematic, kinetic, and neuromuscular degrees of specificity may vary (between the strength and power means, work capacity means, and competitive event) we know that the transference of all means is positive towards the competitive event via pathways both direct and indirect depending upon the perspective from which they are scrutinized.
An athlete can never squat or dl and have a 300 power clean but they damn sure will also have a high squat and deadlift.
The only way I see somebody increasing their clean by just cleaning is if they fail the lift after the catch phase. That is, they don’t have a problem getting the bar to their chest but rather getting it out of the squat position. Which in effect the lift becomes a front squat = limit strength exercise! At least concentrically it is…
Too many factors to say if one increases their PC then their squat will go up. What if their technique just got better? What if they just learned to catch the bar lower? (Which could EASILY add many pounds to ones clean.) What if their is a huge gap between their squat and PC? If your clean is 50% of your squat is lifting 50% of your squat really going to increase your squat? etc.
I’m having trouble understanding this. After a certain point, isn’t the only way to improve performance, whether it be sprinting, lifting or whatever sport form, is by improving general capabilities? If we are talking about elite athletes, how much faster is an elite sprinter going to get by only sprinting? Their technique is about perfect, they utilize just about all of their strength rapidly in their sport form, etc. what’s left to improve SPP wise? Same for a weightlifter. Or a football player. Is a wide receiver like Marvin Harrison really going to become a better receiver by focusing on SPP even more? He already catches everything, he already runs perfect routes, what improvements are left to be made but in GPP, that is, get stronger/bigger/faster?
We know from practical experience that an athlete cannot deadlift at heavy weights as regularly as they can squat. Similarly an athlete cannot squat as regularly as they can clean. The reason for this is that the increased loads has a bigger impact on the nervous system which necessitates a longer recovery. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that most track athletes do half (or even quarter) squats so the loads massively greater than they could full clean. Cleans can be more easily tolerated by the nervous system and theoretically would leave more available adaptation energy for the specific speed work.
The power clean uses a higher proportion of motor units than does the squat and also utilises a higher number of muscle groups. It is therefore a much more efficient use of time in the gym and can remove the need for several less complex exercises.
The time under tension is reduced hence there is less physiological fatigue and minimal hypertrophy. The former means less detriment to speed work and the latter helps maximise power to weight ratio
Little off topic, but I totally agree with making the pc a primary lift depending on the athlete and his sport. If we are talking about a sprinter/jumper no doubt but if the athlete is ol/dl/shotputter maybe not. I think for a high level sprinter/jumper the pc would make a great primary lift but only if the athlete is high level and not beginner status. The pc may be a great primary lift for some athletes, athletes like Carl Lewis who didn’t depend a lot on his max strength ability it would work great but for athletes like BJ there max strength abilities had a major impact on there high levels of performance making the pc primary may not help them so much.
This is something I was wondering about too. David or others, do you feel that this is something that would only work for athletes with cleans that are very close to the weight they squat? If so, how close do you think they would have to be, and if not would this be a progression where you would gradually phase out squats? Or would you just start this immediately and continue until the athlete’s clean gets up to the point where cleans in and of themselves could potentially increase strength along with rate of force development? I understand we are having a mostly hypothetical discussion, but I would still be interested in hearing what you have to say.
I think the 1.5 multiplier is a good guideline. How you squat is also important when giving ratios. My best power clean was 150kg against a best full squat of only 182. Of course I could probably could have half squatted much more!
Understood. But for 1. I’d argue load is the most important factor regarding how often one can perform a lift whether it is a clean or squat. 2. why not leave the high mu recruitment work to sprinting itself and really I only see the traps as being an extra muscle group involved compared to the squat. 3. we need to remember diet is the most important factor regarding hypertrophy. Also for number 3, there may be less muscular fatigue but what about neurological?
Now we must specify if there was a long term developmental system set in motion during the youth stage.
We don’t have one in America.
As a result, the US is an example in which ‘general’ training continues to well serve athletes of already high qualification.
Far too many athletes specialize too early in life with no concurrent and systematic physical preparation training. So the skills that are not directly dependent upon physical preparation continue to develop over the years while all else leaves vast rooms for improvement.
this is why the general strength/power/speed training is so successful amongst many of our professional athletes and why so many ‘trainers’ are able to make a living in the private sector conducting the most rudimentary form of training to athletes all the way up to the professional level.
So what’s important to understand is that there’s nothing novel or extraordinary about the effect that general strength/power/speed training has upon an NFL athlete, for example, but rather; what’s important to understand is that the only reason why an athlete already in the NFL can possibly improve sport form from simply improving general strength/power/speed is because the physical preparation training leading up to that point was the absolute shits.
So no one’s debating what works; but let’s not forget why.
General training is well covered playing a multitude of sports also…maybe the reason for supermen in the NFL is also beacuse they’ve spent nights shooting throws to the basket, playing littel league and running track for 10 years ( and in the HS also…college lots of them too).
IMO GPP is a red herring in the weight room. I rarely (if ever) see weightlifters doing high reps low intensity lifts following a lay off. Simply estimate current maximums and periodise as normal in short macrocycles. Due to muscle memory, within 3 or 4 cycles, the athlete will usually be within 5% of his bests. Just more dogma… don’t buy into it folks.
… In recent years, GPP has been (very successfully) championed by Louie Simmons. It suited powerlifting for two reasons. Firstly, the nature of the sport is that even an elite lifter really only needs 4 sessions per week (2 squat; 2 bench). This left the enthusiastic athlete with an abundance of spare time and excess energy… Hey presto GPP! GPP is never an issue in Olympic weightlifting because the top athletes can and do train multiple times DAILY.
Secondly, with the American attitude that ‘bigger is better’ many more powerlifters fall into the higher weight categories and so predictably their health and general fitness suffers. For athletes using resistance training to improve performance in another sport there is self evidently no need to ‘get fit’ to lift.
