I think everyone here understands that just lifting isn’t going to improve performance. Skills matter most, but developing strength, speed (which ever method you choose) help to develop your general athleticism. Just like a boxer who strength trains, performs sprints of varying distances, etc…still has to develop the boxing skills.
[quote]Ryu13 wrote:
Ross Hunt wrote:
or…
C) The guy who wants to compete in the only internationally recognized strength sport.
Failed Powerlifter, cant get his fame in the US so he goes to other countries.
rather than gear and the technique to master that.
Failed powerlifter.
E) The guy who wants to do his part to help take back the sport that was once dominated by Americans on the international level and upon the shoulders of which bodybuilding, powerlifting, and athletics training as we know it today, stand.
So… pretty much, failed bodybuilders and failed powerlifters, thanks for clearing that up.[/quote]
So tell me, what do Paul Anderson and Shane Hamman have in common?
Let me give you a hint–it’s not that they’re FAILED powerlifters.
What drove Leonid Taranenko into the backwater of olympic weightlifting? Was an ass-to-grass, 380 kilo back squat with a two-second pause at the bottom just not enough for him to make it in powerlifting?
[quote]AZMojo wrote:
mdragon wrote:
Also remember that weight lifting is a tool and often the best weight room numbers belong to the bench warmers. I’m opening a can of worms here I know that. I don’t believe it should be that way. I think that in general the “better” athletes don’t feel they need the weight room work. Just think if they did work as hard?
The guys who do work very hard probably don’t do any running or stretching so they get stiff watching the other players from the sidelines and the new found strength never becomes useful. Am I making sense? Probably not.
Or, maybe the best athletes are doing what they need to in the weight room and spending the rest of their time practicing. Meanwhile, Joe the bench warmer is convinced that a new team record in the power clean is his ticket to Starterville.
It seems that S&C is becoming overemphasized in athletics, to the detriment of skill development. It’s great to be stronger, but you skill have to have “the goods” to play the game. I don’t see any Olympic lifters playing in the NFL, or any other pro sport for that matter(unless I’m wrong:).
If the skills are transferable, then why not both ways? Surely some of these elite lifters would move on to the greener pastures of the NFL. They can’t all be that passionate about weightlifting(even if they were, they could still do plenty of it in the NFL).
I wonder what Poliquin et al. would have to say about that.[/quote]
I’m sure if you read the rest of my posts you’ll find that I agree with your first paragraph. If not then I’m being misunderstood. Like I said we should not specialize in the weight room. Our specialization is on the field. The O’lifts can help improve that specialization. The bench warmer specializes in the weight room, he forgets it is a tool.
As far as the rest I don’t think that it is relevant but there are many people that are extremely passionate about O’ly lifting. They lift all year round and if they liked football I doubt they could compete internationally and still play football. Football would cause them to loose strength… That is kind of a silly argument.
[quote]Ryu13 wrote:
It will help you gain the weight that scouts look for, idiot.
It will help you gain the speed that scouts look for, idiot.
[/quote]
Nothing like teaching to the test to produce solid, skillful individuals.
Ah, it is clear now. I’m a nerd. But you haven’t made a claim about my stance on cleans. Good, glad that’s resolved.
Ah yes, we should only have successful NFL players serving as football coaches. And strength coaches. Hell, they should coach ping-pong as well!
Now this is funny. It’s not mocking my screen name, but it mocked my mocking nicely.
Look, there is a “classical” position that cleans are a good solid lift that serves many purposes (in athletic development). I suppose a “modern” position is that speed squats/deads can serve the same purpose (as cleans). The “hypermodern” position is that you should do reactive/plyometric work for these purposes. There are positions on mixing and matching them to various degrees.
I agree that people (you, myself, others) shouldn’t be one-lift wonders. But to exclude single (classical, time tested) lifts seems fairly silly as well.
Regards,
Mark
The negative on cleans is not so much whether they actually contribute to explosiveness but what damage they do to the body in the long run. People are starting to recognize that running (jogging, sprinting) on hard surfaces creates aggravated knees, hips, and lower backs because of impact forces. Power Cleans even when done properly have much higher impact forces than sprinting and jogging. The forces are imparted on the muscles, ligaments, tendons, and bones. So the theory is that if running or jogging can create such physical misery, especially to those who are past a certain age what is to stop power cleans and all plyometrics from pretty much destroying your muscle tissue and bones? What do I think?
I think that since it is your training program you should do what ever works, but if I was a personal trainer and was responsible for the well being of my client I sure as shit wouldn’t let them do Olympic lifts of any kind. I don’t see what you can gain from plyometrics that you couldn’t gain from specializing on the squat, deadlift, overhead or chest press and than specializing on the sport that you play.
To the people saying power cleans are useless. Why are many coaches (football, track, other sports) making their athletes do them? Not only on the highschool but the college and professional level?
Because they (the coaches / trainers) think that there is a carry over affect that since the clean and press and the power clean are similar to some football movements that it will help their players. I don’t know what some of these people are talking about how the clean is used through a full range of motion. Momentum is used through quite a bit of the motion since you are literally throwing the weight up and than catching it. Your muscles are not being worked through quite a bit of the exercise.
I think the HIT guys are actually right on this topic though. Work the muscles that are involved in the sport intensely and safely and then practice the sport with a vengeance. To whoever was going to be having their kids do these, you are a dumbass.
[quote]Tyler Durdan wrote:
I think the HIT guys are actually right on this topic though. Work the muscles that are involved in the sport intensely and safely and then practice the sport with a vengeance. [/quote]
HIT guys had it right the whole time. Yeah, sure [/eye rolling]
I am not even going to waste my time except to say that no, YOU are the dumbass.
Ouch dude, that hurt. You raised some nice topics of debate. Oh wait you didn’t you just attacked him personally. Waiting for you to prove how plyometrics are more effective than squats, deadlifts, overhead press, dips and bench press for stimulating muscular gains in the hips and lower back along with shoulder girdle and triceps which are the main muscles used for linemen and linebackers, yawn (eyes rolling).
I would definitely use deadlifts and squats as my main exercises for highschool football players. I would definitely also do power cleans, as long as the function of each of these exercises is understood, there should be no problem.
[quote]Keyzer Soze1 wrote:
The negative on cleans is not so much whether they actually contribute to explosiveness but what damage they do to the body in the long run. People are starting to recognize that running (jogging, sprinting) on hard surfaces creates aggravated knees, hips, and lower backs because of impact forces. Power Cleans even when done properly have much higher impact forces than sprinting and jogging. The forces are imparted on the muscles, ligaments, tendons, and bones. So the theory is that if running or jogging can create such physical misery, especially to those who are past a certain age what is to stop power cleans and all plyometrics from pretty much destroying your muscle tissue and bones? What do I think?
I think that since it is your training program you should do what ever works, but if I was a personal trainer and was responsible for the well being of my client I sure as shit wouldn’t let them do Olympic lifts of any kind. I don’t see what you can gain from plyometrics that you couldn’t gain from specializing on the squat, deadlift, overhead or chest press and than specializing on the sport that you play. [/quote]
what do you think the impact force is playing basketball and jumping 20+ inches off the floor and landing on a hardwood surface repeatedly. Higher or lower peak forces than cleans? Definitely if you factor in the volume of playing basketball it is much more destructive than cleans I would think…
[quote]Tyler Durdan wrote:
Because they (the coaches / trainers) think that there is a carry over affect that since the clean and press and the power clean are similar to some football movements that it will help their players. I don’t know what some of these people are talking about how the clean is used through a full range of motion. Momentum is used through quite a bit of the motion since you are literally throwing the weight up and than catching it. Your muscles are not being worked through quite a bit of the exercise.
I think the HIT guys are actually right on this topic though. Work the muscles that are involved in the sport intensely and safely and then practice the sport with a vengeance. To whoever was going to be having their kids do these, you are a dumbass.[/quote]
Do you happen to have any experience in the olympic lifts? I understand that not everyone wants to include them in a program… but I don’t think someone skilled in them is going to bash them this much.
Of course there is momentum involved. There is momentum involved in just about every sport maneuver from jumping to throwing. Also, there is a bit more to the lifts than just “throwing the weight up and catching it”. Now if you aren’t skilled in the Oly lifts I guess I shouldn’t expect you to understand.
I think calling someone a dumbass because they are introducing Oly lifting to a youngster is a bit much. While I certainly wouldn’t try to have a kid maxing out or going heavy, they can learn the techniques and positions so as they get older they know what they are doing. This is how Olympic champions are made.
Do you think gymnastics coaches are dumbasses for teaching twisting flips or balance beam routines to children?
Let’s keep perspective here. There seems to be a consensus that the power clean is not the One True Exercise of football. But to dismiss the effectiveness of oly lifting as a general training program is without precedent, scientifically or practically speaking. The effectiveness of oly lifting as compared to other intelligent trainings systems (powerlifting Westside style) is certainly open to debate, and this is a very interseting debate.
But to denigrate oly lifting–even sloppy power cleans–in favor of a program where strength training consists of a circuit of machine exercise performed one set to failure? We have entered the Twilight Zone…
[quote]Keyzer Soze1 wrote:
I don’t see what you can gain from plyometrics that you couldn’t gain from specializing on the squat, deadlift, overhead or chest press and than specializing on the sport that you play. [/quote]
Do you understand what the purpose of plyometrics is?
By the way, plyometrics aren’t to be used in place of squat, deads, etc., but along with.
[quote]Keyzer Soze1 wrote:
Waiting for you to prove how plyometrics are more effective than squats, deadlifts, overhead press, dips and bench press for stimulating muscular gains in the hips and lower back along with shoulder girdle and triceps which are the main muscles used for linemen and linebackers, yawn (eyes rolling). [/quote]
Uh, the purpose of plyometrics isn’t to stimulate muscular gains.
[quote]Ross Hunt wrote:
Let’s keep perspective here. There seems to be a consensus that the power clean is not the One True Exercise of football. But to dismiss the effectiveness of oly lifting as a general training program is without precedent, scientifically or practically speaking. The effectiveness of oly lifting as compared to other intelligent trainings systems (powerlifting Westside style) is certainly open to debate, and this is a very interseting debate.
But to denigrate oly lifting–even sloppy power cleans–in favor of a program where strength training consists of a circuit of machine exercise performed one set to failure? We have entered the Twilight Zone…[/quote]
du du du du, du du du du
Since Keyser Soze1 doesn’t realize that the deadlift, squat, overhead press, etc all lie on the exact opposite side of the time/force and force/rate curve that plyometrics do, I am not sure any of you should worry about his views.
Plyometrics address force absorption, coupling, and force display needs, where the other lifts address strength duration needs. And yes, all strength is completely rate dominant, so the speed of the movement is hugely important. Yes, CAT training is better than bodybuilding type training, but it affects the force/rate curve differently than ballistics do…
So, bench press 500, check. Squat 700, check. Look the part, check. Get to the point of attack, no check. Well, we could do some of those plyometric thingies, or fancy lifts to improve our explosive strength defecit and muscular stiffness, but Keyser Soze1 says they suck, so we are just relegated to the bench and will never start because we cannot get to the point of attack… the bench in a living room with a cold beer and chips.
I know hundreds of guys who can play a ball perfectly in the air at “its highest point”, but cannot jump high enough… who can tackle with perfect form, squat and bench a ton, but are too slow to get to the point of attack… who never drop a ball that is thrown to them, but again are too slow…hmmm.
I guess they all just need to squat more…LOL.
Good plan.
The swearing, mocking, and deriding don’t hide your being incorrect.
J
[quote]Keyzer Soze1 wrote:
Ouch dude, that hurt. You raised some nice topics of debate. Oh wait you didn’t you just attacked him personally. Waiting for you to prove how plyometrics are more effective than squats, deadlifts, overhead press, dips and bench press for stimulating muscular gains in the hips and lower back along with shoulder girdle and triceps which are the main muscles used for linemen and linebackers, yawn (eyes rolling). [/quote]
If this was addressed to me, then I WOULDNT push plyos over squats, deads, et al. Nowhere did I say that. My issue was with the OP’s saying that the HIT peopel have it right. I WOULD say that there are MANY other programs besides HIT training that are WAY more effective in their applications on the football field.
I COMPLETELY agree with you on the list of exercises you provided for football players - I would say for athletes in general. I completely DISAGREE with the idea that someone who writes
"To whoever was going to be having their kids do these, you are a dumbass. "
doesnt deserve to be attacked personally. This was an exceedingly civil debate until Ryu13 and Tyler Durdan got into it.
I think what Tyler and Ryu are trying to say is that Power Cleans and the Clean and Jerk/Press are specific only to the sport of Olympic lifting and not specific to the sport of Football. I agree that you should strengthen the muscles that you use in your sport in a relatively safe manner and to their maximum strength and then train on how you use those muscles in your sport by actually practicing your sport. I remember Larry Bird saying in a Boston newspaper that all the running and jumping up and down the court was the reason for his aggravated lower back. I played quarterback and linebacker in high school and remember that the wrestling coach was our strength coach. He put me on a program of Clean and Press’ along with many of the remaining powerlifts and the typical bodybuilding lifts. When the Olympic lifts were trained I always started to get irritated elbows and shoulders (especially my rotator cuffs)which really prevented me from throwing the football as well as I should have. After about a month of these lifts we had two starting football players have injuries with the Clean and Jerk, one dislocated his arm and the other hurt his lower back, and our football coach stepped in and haulted all Olympic lifting at the request of our principal. I resumed a program dedicated to Squats, Stiff Legged Deadlifts, Dips, Chins, and Overhead Press’ and didn’t see my playing on either offense or defense suffer. In fact the shoulder irritation went away completely. That was proof to me that the Olympic lifts weren’t especially suited for me, which is something that people need to be aware of when offering their advice to others on exercise. What works for you may totally mess up someone else’s body.
I really don’t know what CAT training is so I’ll shut up until someone tells me what it is. You don’t need training to absorb force. Your muscles and bones will gladly take all the impact for you with or without any training experience or not. Force absorbtion training, I don’t know what to say to that except what are you training for? A fall from a large building or cliff? I don’t like being rude so please don’t think that I am. I just think that a lot of the basic lifts for your specific muscles, being worked will take you where you want to get to and then great coaching on the specifics of your sport will get you even further towards yours goals in your chosen sport. As for the curve of the Olympic lifts your actual muscles aren’t involved throughout the majority of the lift since you are literally throwing a weight through the air and catching it. So I don’t think the topic of the force curve is really all that relevant except to say that your body will be on the receiving end of the force when you catch the weight. After all I thought this forum was to build a better body not destroy it. Sorry guys I had to steal that line from Arnold. Good debate non the less.