Snatches

[James_Smith]

@Blinky

Obviously you aren’t going to change your view, so why don’t you continue to use maximum loads while doing full range presses and I’ll see you in the Injury Forum in a few months.

Blinky, don’t hold your breath. I have been using maximal loads on the full range bench press since 1988, and…NO INJURIES TO DATE.

Blinky, sooner or later you are going to have to come to terms with the fact that you are misinformed on this matter.

There is enough information on this site alone to contradict your assertion to the tenth power. Just do a search.

Don’t argue just to argue, accept the fact that you are misinformed- re-educate yourself- and move on.

[David]

I think 90 degrees is a bit high, but whats wrong with a partial range bench press (ie. <2 inches from touching the chest). I have pretty flexible shoulders but they still feel a bit stretched out if I try to touch my chest with each rep. We’re not training for the competition lift (powerlifting), so it wouldn’t really be a big deal to avoid full range?

[system]

David,

Two inches off the chest? Depends on the joint capsule and I test and prescribe different ranges on all of my athletes and even adjust for sport demand and risk to benefit ratio.

[David_W]

Look what I missed…

I thought partial bench press was a great way to hit the biceps?

[tlopo1]

jman I am in 100% agreement with you. I cannot believe anyone could refute the fact that full range of motion is always better than partial reps unless and injury has limited your range ogf motion and even then they should perform exercises to try to restore your ROM. ROM is the first thing that we try to restore so injuried athletes can train the injuried area and aviod the next injury. To purposefully limit ones ROM and could lead to further injuries and decreased performance. Maybe Olympic athletes should train using HIT as well !!!

[James_Smith]

@David_W

Look what I missed…

I thought partial bench press was a great way to hit the biceps?

LOL. David, it is a shame that you didn’t jump in earlier, we haven’t had a good brawl in a while.LOL

[James_Smith]

@tlopo1

jman I am in 100% agreement with you. I cannot believe anyone could refute the fact that full range of motion is always better than partial reps unless and injury has limited your range ogf motion and even then they should perform exercises to try to restore your ROM. ROM is the first thing that we try to restore so injuried athletes can train the injuried area and aviod the next injury. To purposefully limit ones ROM and could lead to further injuries and decreased performance.

I knew it was only a matter of time before the voices of reason would all come and sing a song.LOL

@tlopo1

Maybe Olympic athletes should train using HIT as well !!!

LOL, don’t give the HIT guys any ideas

[nArKeD]

I do most my benching with dumbbells. Since starting that my shoulder has felt a lot better.

[Blinky]

@numba56

as well ive seen over 100 kids, many unprepared, do full range bench press several days a week, no pain, as have i. Its ok to be wrong, its how we all learn.

I stated that the injury risk involved in full bench presses with MAXIMAL LOADS is greater than the injury risk of 90 degree presses do to the susceptibiliy of a rotator cuff injury.

I did not say don’t do full bench presses. I encouraged their use with SUB-MAXIMAL LOADS to strengthen the shoulder. You can do as many as you want with maximal loads too, I’m just saying that the injury risk is greater right at the bottom of the lift when the shoulder is in an awkward position.

And jman, obviously a full rom is greater than a partial rom. That’s not what is being debated. The risk of injury is the debate, more specifically the costs/benefits of dropping the bar all the way to the chest.

[James_Smith]

@Blinky

The risk of injury is the debate, more specifically the costs/benefits of dropping the bar all the way to the chest.

Alright, I give it one more go with you.

Exercising a joint through it’s entire, or majority of, ROM, specifically the glenohumeral joint in the bench press, is the most optimal method for strengthening the soft/connective tissues which are responsible for articulating the joint throughout its entire ROM.

By limiting the ROM ON ALL MAX EFFORT training you predispose the glenohumeral joint, and its respecitive connective tissues, to injury when subjected to high stress/force in a deeply extended/transversely extended shoulder position, which by the way is a position which athletes will find themselves in if they participate in MMA, football, rugby, hockey, throws, wrestling, powerlifting, OL weightlifting, and the list goes on and on…

Again, as part of a rotation of special exercises I am a proponent of partial range bench pressing (eg floor press, board press, pin press, etc). HOWEVER, as a sole means of max effort attempts, the partial range press would ONLY BE SUITABLE for a lifter or athlete who suffers from a particular pathology that inhibits full ROM about the glenohumeral joint in a supine position.

So, infact, your attempt to prohibit injury will more than likely INCREASE the probability for incurring a future injury.

Blinky, I don’t know your history, but I have been lifting for 16 years, and counting, as well as working with various types of athletes of varying abilities. The individuals, and sources which I reference, as well as my own experiences, all support the view of exercising joints through their entire range of motion and, so long as pre-existing/current injury/pathology is not a factor, and to utilize maximum loads specifically with barbell lifts, either within the parameters of percentaged based training or concurrent/conjugate methodology in which max loads are lifted on a weekly basis by way of the rotation of special exercises (some full ROM, some partial ROM).

With respect to a Cost:Benefit, the ONLY COST OF FULL ROM BENCH PRESSING WITH MAX LOADS is if the trainee is battling/suffering from a specific injury/pathology of the glenohumeral joint.

Your exclusion of heavy full ROM bench pressing will more than likely greatly increase the probability of incurring future injury to the exact joint in which you are trying to protect.

[frit17]

Jman,

Sorry ive been away from my computer for a few days, suffered a grade 3 inversion ankle sprain(walking down my stairs=knucklehead). Ive been hit coming across the middle by linebackers, dropped weights on my toe, even crashed in a bobsled once and nothing has come close to the pain i felt when rolled my ankle on Monday. Looks like its OL’s out the window for a while and hello bench press and westide stuff.

frit17

[James_Smith]

Frit, Damn that’s unfortunate. A Grade 3 sprain is no joke.
I guess the bright side is that you will come out of it with some bench PR’s. Let me know if you need any insight on setting up a WSB split for BP.

[xlr8]

Also note that we need to distinguish between full ROM for a barbell bench press and full ROM for the shoulder joint. I know that I personally can get even greater range of motion in the bench press if I used dumbells, whereas with the barbell bench press, the bar hitting my chest limits shoulder ROM. I would imiagine this is the case with many others as well.

[James_Smith]

@xlr8

Also note that we need to distinguish between full ROM for a barbell bench press and full ROM for the shoulder joint. I know that I personally can get even greater range of motion in the bench press if I used dumbells, whereas with the barbell bench press, the bar hitting my chest limits shoulder ROM. I would imiagine this is the case with many others as well.

Yes, I made this distinction between the ROM in the BB vs DB bench press to Blinky.

And, xlr8, as you know, the likelyhood of sustaining/generating high/maximal force, in a deeply extended shoulder posisition, is very high within the context of contact sports. Thus, my view on the importance of utilizing max loads, within a periodized scheme (either percentaged based, or conjugate), in the full ROM barbell bench press.

[firstpull]

@James_Smith

Frit, your opinion is definitely respected on my behalf.

I must say, however, that the vast majority of lifters, especially the lifters who I have seen, who perform OL variations exhibit poor, at best, technique.

There simply are not enough highly qualified OL coaches in the US.

In light of this fact, the cost:benefit results in a negative, in my opinion.

I hold Siff in the highest regard, however, I must disagree with his use of snatches and other over head lifts as tools for strengthening and rehabing the shoulders in contact sport athletes.

I do concede, however, that the positive results that Siff observed may very well be related to his ability to expertly instruct the technique.

I acknowledge that there are no bad exercises, only bad applications.

I maintain my view, however, that contact sport athletes, among others, would be wise to refrain from overhead lifts, especially in season.

I too speak from experience, both personal ( as a lifter) and that which I have practically observed. I have talked to, referenced, and consulted with far too many athletes and strength coaches alike, who all agree that overhead lifts, especially snatches, have little to no place in the training program of contact sport athletes.

I am aware that this a prime subject for debate, especially between proponents of, and those who discriminate against, the NSCA.

Again, the bottom line for me is the outcome of a cost:benefit. Regarding overhead lifts and contact sport athletes, among others, the outcome is negative.

I feel confident in presuming that your positive and injury free experience and observations place you in a minority and are more of an exception, than a standard from which to make determinations.

Maybe we will have to agree to disagree.

James

James,

Having coached a fair number of contact sport athletes (mostly football) I have to say that I’m less worried than you when it comes to overhead lifts. I would like to qualify that though. If I have an opportunity to work one on one with the athlete for an extended time (months on end) I am more likely to teach something like a snatch to this athlete. Typically I don’t go with the snatch though as I feel that in order to do this properly takes a long time. In terms of economy of time I would rather go with the clean as it’s more forgiving in terms of technical errors.

I suspect that where a lot of coaches get into trouble is when they start puting snatches into workouts of athletes who have never done these exercises and then offer no instruction (or just poor instruction).

If designing a program for a group (Something that invariably has shortcommings) I would neve include snatchs, or cleans for that matter.
If you are not there to coach you can’t put in complicated movements.

I also agree that introducing a lift like the snatch during season is not when I would do this. Not just for injury reasons but because during season is not the time to be consolidating new techniques in complicated lifts.

As far as other overhead lifts such as a military press to the front, I feel that the risks associated with this exercise are overstated by most.

Not sure if this contributes to the discussion at all, I just felt like throwing my oppinion out there.

Alex Power
firstpull@hotmail.com