What do you guys think to the articles being displayed on this site???.. They totally go against the use of Oly lifts and have some good points to back it up…
At the recent Helsinki games I heard that the Greek running in the 100m was into Oly lifts in a big way and everyone who saw that race know what happened to him…
The Olympic lifts do not keep constant tension on the muscle because momentum takes over the lift.
THis happens in any free weight exercise (Squats, bench etc) because of the mechanical advantage in the outer range. OLs safely permit compensatory acceleration which means maximum possible force can be applied through entire range. This is not possible in the squat or BP!
This type of lifting a very inneficient in terms of training the type IIb fast twitch muscle fiber
After the athlete has trained their muscles properly in the weight room performing slow, constant tension movements it is necessary to go out and practice those skills such as tackling, throwing the shot, sprinting or whatever the skill may be
if the sporting activity sufficiently devlops the RFD then yes, emphasis in the gym should be on improving maximum force. However, the clean is sufficiently close to the limit pull (read deadlift) to improve maximum force potential in the hip extensors.
Olympic lifts are whole body exercises and are therefore a very efficient use of training time. They may also provide sufficient stimulus for the upper body to preclude pressing and pulling movements.
As for the OL not being safe . There are more deaths with the BP per year than the cumulative of every other exercise.
- Hasn’t it been shown that weightlifting, no matter what you do, is not going to be specific to sprinting/hurdling/etc? Why do we constantly beat a dead horse on this subject? It seems like everyone is out there trying to find THE exact thing to do in track like it will be the one and only thing that makes you faster.
Weights are for increasing rate of force development in your sprinting.
- How many people die a year doing the bench press!?
Weights are for increasing rate of force.
No, weights are for increasing maximum force.
Who cares…do what works and laugh at loosers like Kim Wood. I can’t believe he still has a job. What a joke.
Is RFD more important to develop than Maximum strength for lowering 40 Metre times, or vice-versa???..
Please Reply, Cheers…
I would say max strength for lowering 40 meter times (i.e. acceleration).
Max force development for max speed.
This is one of the first sites I went too before cf.com was up and running. Some nice information on here.
Hurdle, So where talking about doing HEAVY squats for max strength in trying to gain better acceleration rather than doing Oly lifts for RFD???..
These guys are all HIT and HIT is a miss…no plyos either with these guys…they say it is too dangerous
Im not sure if you are referring to the site I posted but it goes pretty extensively into upper body and lower body plyometrics and med ball work.
I’m saying early on in the plan, yes heavy squats,etc for max strength development, therefore acceleration development.
Don’t get me wrong, I am not a HIT person. I do believe in plyos/med balls/olympic lifts.
I would say max strength for lowering 40 meter times (i.e. accel. Max force development for max speed.
Maximum force is the same as maximum strength.
One more time:
Power = Force x Velocity
Velocity (RFD) is sufficiently developed through sprinting itself. Use weights primarily to increase maximum force.
That site is ridiculous. It’s disturbing seeing how many major universities and pro teams follow their principles. I could understand a HS with hundreds of athletes and one or two coaches not being able to teach how to SAFELY teach the lifts, but that’s one of the only points they have that is valid. Look at one of their routines, everything worked to failure and sometimes beyond for one set. Pre-exhausting and other bodybuilding BS. I guess they don’t know what the CNS is, or that there is more types of strength than absolute strength, or a thing about RFD, or SSC from plyos, etc. I can’t believe people even try to argue with them. Obviously safety is important, and yes the way they train is “intense”-- although not scientifically, but it seems so much below optimal. Then they tell you to look at genetic freaks like Lavar Arrington (went to PSU/ a HIT school) and say look at him. I think there’s something about oly lifts when you see 300+ lb. guys with 30+ inch. verticals, dunking, having elite level sprints for the first 15 meters, etc.
Exactly. What that site fails to mention is that Arrington could dunk a basketball since the 6th grade.