Westside for Olympic Lifting

Training Powerlifting
41

[quote]actionjeff wrote:
Alexeev also used to lift 2-3 times a day every single day for months on end and took a huge amount of anabolics. I don’t think the training of elite Olympic weightlifers, especially someone like Alexeev whose methods are largely unknown even among the Soviets themselves (Taranenko freely admitted this in an interview) should be something to model your training off of.

Also all of this conjugate stuff among weightlifters sounds somewhat speculative and like a generalization of their methods. All of these lifters did the competition lifts pretty much every single day they trained. Maybe they used some other split or progression for their assistance lifting but nearly every training day was DE day and Olympic lifting day and I don’t think there are any exceptions. Increasing the work capacity is more along the lines of the Sheiko theory: that the maximum number of lifts with the highest intensity that can be sustained over the period of a year will yield the best results; the volumetric approach, and this seems far more applicable to weightlifting than any conjugate related training systems, and it is also how many elite lifters train (Bulgarians being the most obvious example nowadays).

And many of the soviets never did plyometric work or any jumps at all. Alexeev just did whatever the hell he felt like because he was an insane freak and never had a coach or trained with anyone. [/quote]

Yeah, this seems pretty much the story i’d say. If you think any lifters get by in o-lifting without doing at least one full lift (power, squat or hang) per training day I would say that that is a stretch. It would not make any sense at all to not train the full lifts as much as possible when the essence of the lifts are technical as much as they are athletic.

Even advanced lifters whose volume is typically quite low, due to the huge ass chunks of recycled tires on the bar, would be spending most of they’re time doing the full lifts for two reasons:

  1. the sport is the two full lifts. you dont get good at a technical sport like soccer by just running, you actually have to play soccer. there are too few reasons not to stick to the 2 full lifts as the backbone of the program. It’s not like you max out on them daily. By varying the weight it prevents to much CNS overload.

  2. If you only have XXX # of kilos worht of volume to work with per week/session/cycle then it makes sense that most of those kilos go towards technique and strength in the form of bang for buck lifts… like the two, and only, O-lifts. the judges only care about your snatch and c&j.

On the other hand if you just happen to like the westside method and want to add o-lifting and stir for the fun of it then go nuts. But it might not get you the best results if competing is in your future. Maxing out on assistance lifts wont help your o-lift totals as much as it does your PL totals.

-chris

42

[quote]FightingScott wrote:
This is the closest thing to an answer in this thread. But I don’t know if it’s right or if it’s just what Kansky thinks is the logical way to set things up. Kansky, do you have a source? I’d like to read more. But if you don’t…

Does ANYONE know what the Dynamo Barbell Club was doing back in the USSR? I can’t find it anywhere. How do Weightlifters use the “conjugate method?” Every program I’ve ever seen is linear periodization.

From what I understand, it was the Eastern Bloc Track & Field athletes who brought the conjugate method, board presses, and box squats over to the Original Westside Barbell in Culver City California. The Dave Draper Website has an article or two on this. I don’t think they were doing speed squats over at the original Westside Barbell Just yet - I believethat was Lou’s contribution. The article I read indicated that they were still doing Power Cleans for developing explosive power.

If you read over at James Smith’s Power Development Inc. Website (he’s the Thinker on EliteFTS Q&A) apparently the conjugate method was used in ALL sports for the USSR. Swimming, Track & Field, Weightlifitng, whatever.

From what I can piece together from the 1 Russian Text I’ve read, which doesn’t say much about the conjugate method other than that it’s “really good” is that…

(1) The Max Effort Work would be maxing out in a lift very similar to a competition lift. You might max out in a snatch off blocks, or a behind the neck jerk, or a power clean, or even a squat. Unlike Westside where you can literally come up with oodles of different Max Effort lifts, I think the russians concentrated on the Power Clean, Power Snatch, and Squat. I forget where I read it, but I think they only used about 6 different Max Effort Exercises.

(2) Squats, Bench Presses, Incline Presses, and Overhead Presses were done as assistance work.

(3) Workouts were not split into upper body or lower body since the max effort lifts and the competition lifts are all full body lifts.

(4) Dynamic Work (What they call speed strength) was either Jump/Depth Jump/what we would call plyometric training or it was Competition Lifts done between 85-95% of one’s max.

Of course, this could all be wrong. But I’d love to know the right answer. What were these guys doing?
[/quote]

I actually know an older guy who got to train with the Dynamo Club years back. He said it was like a “key gym” or more like a hardcore Powerlifting gym that we’d see here in the states except for the fact that they had some coaching.

The Russians were far from Linear Periodization. Their belief was that volume got the lifter stronger, but it was an increase in volume at higher intensities over long periods of time that did it. You’ll find in the training logs of the lifters that they’d plan the month with a Light either prior to the Heavy week (Supercompensation) or follow the Heavy with a Light week (Deload).

Also, they planned their months based on rep counting at specific intensities. I believe this is what defined the Conjugate System for the weightlifters along with the rotation of specific exercise.

There really wasn’t any “maxing” in the Russian system. They had blocks where they would train at or even above 100%, but they didn’t really “max,” that was more of a Bulgarian method.

I think what you may be confused about is the terminology. What Louie calls Conjugate really isn’t Conjugate. The system that Westside does is Concurrent. The Russians were definitely Conjugate and not Concurrent. Their training revolved around training “blocks” where they’d focus on a specific attributes during that training block, and when that specific training attribute was attained, they go to another training block.

IMO, the Bulgarian system is a much better choice for OLing. It based on lifting 90% and above for 5 of the 8 lifts per week with the others being at 80% clip and done Power style. Now, nearly every country is training a version of what Abadjiev created with some slight modifications. It’s hard to argue with his success…it’s produced more Golds than what the Russian’s accomplished.

43

[quote]Dominator wrote:
FightingScott wrote:
This is the closest thing to an answer in this thread. But I don’t know if it’s right or if it’s just what Kansky thinks is the logical way to set things up. Kansky, do you have a source? I’d like to read more. But if you don’t…

Does ANYONE know what the Dynamo Barbell Club was doing back in the USSR? I can’t find it anywhere. How do Weightlifters use the “conjugate method?” Every program I’ve ever seen is linear periodization.

From what I understand, it was the Eastern Bloc Track & Field athletes who brought the conjugate method, board presses, and box squats over to the Original Westside Barbell in Culver City California. The Dave Draper Website has an article or two on this. I don’t think they were doing speed squats over at the original Westside Barbell Just yet - I believethat was Lou’s contribution. The article I read indicated that they were still doing Power Cleans for developing explosive power.

If you read over at James Smith’s Power Development Inc. Website (he’s the Thinker on EliteFTS Q&A) apparently the conjugate method was used in ALL sports for the USSR. Swimming, Track & Field, Weightlifitng, whatever.

From what I can piece together from the 1 Russian Text I’ve read, which doesn’t say much about the conjugate method other than that it’s “really good” is that…

(1) The Max Effort Work would be maxing out in a lift very similar to a competition lift. You might max out in a snatch off blocks, or a behind the neck jerk, or a power clean, or even a squat. Unlike Westside where you can literally come up with oodles of different Max Effort lifts, I think the russians concentrated on the Power Clean, Power Snatch, and Squat. I forget where I read it, but I think they only used about 6 different Max Effort Exercises.

(2) Squats, Bench Presses, Incline Presses, and Overhead Presses were done as assistance work.

(3) Workouts were not split into upper body or lower body since the max effort lifts and the competition lifts are all full body lifts.

(4) Dynamic Work (What they call speed strength) was either Jump/Depth Jump/what we would call plyometric training or it was Competition Lifts done between 85-95% of one’s max.

Of course, this could all be wrong. But I’d love to know the right answer. What were these guys doing?

I actually know an older guy who got to train with the Dynamo Club years back. He said it was like a “key gym” or more like a hardcore Powerlifting gym that we’d see here in the states except for the fact that they had some coaching.

The Russians were far from Linear Periodization. Their belief was that volume got the lifter stronger, but it was an increase in volume at higher intensities over long periods of time that did it. You’ll find in the training logs of the lifters that they’d plan the month with a Light either prior to the Heavy week (Supercompensation) or follow the Heavy with a Light week (Deload).

Also, they planned their months based on rep counting at specific intensities. I believe this is what defined the Conjugate System for the weightlifters along with the rotation of specific exercise.

There really wasn’t any “maxing” in the Russian system. They had blocks where they would train at or even above 100%, but they didn’t really “max,” that was more of a Bulgarian method.

I think what you may be confused about is the terminology. What Louie calls Conjugate really isn’t Conjugate. The system that Westside does is Concurrent. The Russians were definitely Conjugate and not Concurrent. Their training revolved around training “blocks” where they’d focus on a specific attributes during that training block, and when that specific training attribute was attained, they go to another training block.

IMO, the Bulgarian system is a much better choice for OLing. It based on lifting 90% and above for 5 of the 8 lifts per week with the others being at 80% clip and done Power style. Now, nearly every country is training a version of what Abadjiev created with some slight modifications. It’s hard to argue with his success…it’s produced more Golds than what the Russian’s accomplished.
[/quote]

well said.

Word of the week:

“concurrent”

one of those things where you know there is a word to describe the concept and you know you know that word but you can get it into your mind at the time. You can finish my sentences any time.

-chris

44

Also, training bulgarian style is much funner and gives you a nice consistent sense of what your max might “feel” like when its over your head.

-chris

45

True, but I think it was Andrew Charniga who said “with the Bulgarian system, you see the guys up on the podium who are Olympic champions. You don’t see the guys they put in the hospital.”

I realize this can be applied to any sport system, but the Bulgarians especially had a reputation for theirs being a meat grinder, with injured athletes being told they weren’t tough enough or worthy to represent their country. The Russians seemed to take a more patient, developmental approach.

46

true.

I suppose thats why coaches tend to stagger the intensity of the bulgarian style a bit. there are few enough weightlifters as is, let alone healthy ones.

Each system has great points.

Ideally training is tailored to the lifter.

the overall question of “can westside (ie. conjugate periodization, as siad by the op) be used for o-lifting” is really unanswerable. yeah sure why not? but is it optimal as a static template? not for a competitive o lifter id say.

-chris

47

Agreed. I think the conjugate (not concurrent) model is probably being used for most high-level competitive olympic lifters. Looking through the programming in Medvedyev’s “A Program of Multi-Year Training in Weightlifting,” (1986) they seem to adhere to a block model, with blocks ranging in duration from 2-4 weeks, and organized around a relatively high number of competitions per year, as opposed to the linear model which has at most 2-3 peaks per year, and that’s pushing it.

They also delineate between types of preparatory periods, indicating that there are probably different strength qualities being emphasized during these blocks, although I’d have to dig into it a little more to figure out what’s really going on.

I think a better question for all of us is what is the best way to build up to this kind of advanced periodization. Issurin and Bondarchuk are pretty clear that the conjugate method is best employed for very high-level athletes, for whom only very few athletic qualities can be trained in parallel, necessitating the use of specific blocks arranged in sequence for maximal transfer to sport form.

This is not terribly helpful to any of us, I think, unless someone here is competing internationally and has not told us. Medvedyev’s book has a very general outline for the nature of training in the first 2 years, but only really begins to enumerate the specific programming starting in the third year.

Considering that his colleague Roman cites data to the effect that mean totals for high-level lifters (in the 75kg class, for example) at the end of the FIRST year of training are nearly 200kg, and improve over 40kg in the next year, I think we would all benefit greatly from ascertaining what the most basic training means are–not those of international champions, but those of Class 3 and 2 athletes in the Russian system who are just beginning to show results.

Have to go to class right now, but I would like to continue discussing this later if anyone is game.

48

As you said, I wanna know what programs these cats are using. I have nothing useful to add, I’m listening.

SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH, I said be quiet about that!

:-p

49

[quote]Sneaky weasel wrote:
True, but I think it was Andrew Charniga who said “with the Bulgarian system, you see the guys up on the podium who are Olympic champions. You don’t see the guys they put in the hospital.”

I realize this can be applied to any sport system, but the Bulgarians especially had a reputation for theirs being a meat grinder, with injured athletes being told they weren’t tough enough or worthy to represent their country. The Russians seemed to take a more patient, developmental approach.[/quote]

I like Bud’s take for the most part on most things regarding OLing, but this one is straight retarded if you ask me.

Since when was OLIng at the highest level a fun, recreational, and holistic approach to training? The bottom line is who wins and who doesn’t…it’s survival of the fittest, and the Bulgarian’s did their best to find the most qualified lifter to the winners podium!

The same can be said in the NFL…a lot of guys get hurt on the way to being Super Bowl Champs, that’s just how it is.

50

[quote]Sneaky weasel wrote:
Agreed. I think the conjugate (not concurrent) model is probably being used for most high-level competitive olympic lifters. [/quote]

Nearly every country is doing some form of what the Bulgarian’s have been doing.

That said, this past Olympics was the first time that things started to change some.

It’s been documented that both the Russians and Chinese did much more assistive exercises than in years past. The Chinese were said to have been doing a high number of Deadlifts and Presses leading up to the Olympics. The Russians were said to have been doing even Bodybuilding type stuff like Bench Press, Curls, Rows, etc.

The pendulum may be swinging toward the side of increasing general prep again and away from the specificity model of the Bulgarian’s. It’s hard to say because the Bulgarians couldn’t compete, so who knows which system is now superior.

51

[quote]Sneaky weasel wrote:
I think a better question for all of us is what is the best way to build up to this kind of advanced periodization. Issurin and Bondarchuk are pretty clear that the conjugate method is best employed for very high-level athletes, for whom only very few athletic qualities can be trained in parallel, necessitating the use of specific blocks arranged in sequence for maximal transfer to sport form.
[/quote]

There is no right answer here, but from what I can tell, it pretty much sink or swim, or better yet, being thrown out into the middle of the ocean to see whether or not one can swim and fend off the sharks.

You either can or can’t handle this type of training. Training at high intensities repeatedly is not for everyone. You either can or can’t recover and build an adaptation.

This is why the Bulgarian system is very good at identifying the highest qualified lifters. You can tell who adapts and who’s numbers continue to increase. I’ve yet to see a good to great lifter being developed that couldn’t handle this sort of training.

52

I know this is controversial but you also don’t hear about how badly Westside training beats people up. It isn’t the only program and perhaps Simmons didn’t originally exactly understand the conjugate method that he writes about.

What I am saying is that a volumetric approach is going to produce injuries but you also rarely max out except in competition, and in the case of weightlifting the lifts you max out on are basically dynamic effort movements with a very, very short time under tension. There is a training effect and a neurological greasing the groove.

However, continuously cycling lifts and maxing out every week is almost guaranteed to produce more CNS fatigue and worse execution when you are picking from a wide variety of ME lifts. I simply don’t agree that this method of training would produce less injuries unless the other lifters were specifically pushed too hard, ESPECIALLY in weightlifting. The truth is that most of the WSBB guys are destroyed physically. And of course once you bring anabolics into the equation everything changes.

53

^actually I think the destruction of their bodies is from a lack of training other attributes like mobility work and shit.

I’ve used it with great success, and so does Joe Defranco for his athletes and you don’t hear about them being injured from lifting/straining.

Of course they do a shitload more prehab work, they’re younger (being 17-18 is like being on AAS), and they do a lot of GPP stuff. And thats not counting actual practices & other conditioning.

That said, I actually agree with you. Some of the straight up just westside stuff will get you hurt. They use a shitload of overall volume…though they worked up to it AAS or not… But you can still train concurrently very safely.

54

[quote]actionjeff wrote:
I know this is controversial but you also don’t hear about how badly Westside training beats people up. It isn’t the only program and perhaps Simmons didn’t originally exactly understand the conjugate method that he writes about.

What I am saying is that a volumetric approach is going to produce injuries but you also rarely max out except in competition, and in the case of weightlifting the lifts you max out on are basically dynamic effort movements with a very, very short time under tension. There is a training effect and a neurological greasing the groove.

However, continuously cycling lifts and maxing out every week is almost guaranteed to produce more CNS fatigue and worse execution when you are picking from a wide variety of ME lifts. I simply don’t agree that this method of training would produce less injuries unless the other lifters were specifically pushed too hard, ESPECIALLY in weightlifting. The truth is that most of the WSBB guys are destroyed physically. And of course once you bring anabolics into the equation everything changes.
[/quote]

It’s irrelevant whether Westside, Big Iron, The Bulgarian System, etc, causes guys to break down. At the end of the day, the ones that take the 1st place stand are all people will remember, and if those lifters trained under that system, the system is then a good one.

There is no consolation prize that gives credit for the system that doesn’t break guys down. It’s up to the lifter to adapt to the program, or modify the program to their needs so that an adaptation will occur. Not everyone is cut out to be a champion lifter just like not everyone is cut out to be a NFL player or Major League pitcher.

The one commonality that all these great systems have is some form of ME lifting, whether it’s continuous or in the form of blocks. IMO, that’s what makes lifters totals increase, everything else are just assitive measures. If a lifter can’t adapt to repeated ME lifts, they probably aren’t cut out to be a competitive lifter.

55

I’m very interested in reading some (obviously translated) russian texts on the subject. So please, if anyone finds a name of a book, or a good article explaining the training and giving examples please post.

56

[quote]Dominator wrote:
actionjeff wrote:
I know this is controversial but you also don’t hear about how badly Westside training beats people up. It isn’t the only program and perhaps Simmons didn’t originally exactly understand the conjugate method that he writes about.

What I am saying is that a volumetric approach is going to produce injuries but you also rarely max out except in competition, and in the case of weightlifting the lifts you max out on are basically dynamic effort movements with a very, very short time under tension. There is a training effect and a neurological greasing the groove.

However, continuously cycling lifts and maxing out every week is almost guaranteed to produce more CNS fatigue and worse execution when you are picking from a wide variety of ME lifts. I simply don’t agree that this method of training would produce less injuries unless the other lifters were specifically pushed too hard, ESPECIALLY in weightlifting. The truth is that most of the WSBB guys are destroyed physically. And of course once you bring anabolics into the equation everything changes.

It’s irrelevant whether Westside, Big Iron, The Bulgarian System, etc, causes guys to break down. At the end of the day, the ones that take the 1st place stand are all people will remember, and if those lifters trained under that system, the system is then a good one.

There is no consolation prize that gives credit for the system that doesn’t break guys down. It’s up to the lifter to adapt to the program, or modify the program to their needs so that an adaptation will occur. Not everyone is cut out to be a champion lifter just like not everyone is cut out to be a NFL player or Major League pitcher.

The one commonality that all these great systems have is some form of ME lifting, whether it’s continuous or in the form of blocks. IMO, that’s what makes lifters totals increase, everything else are just assitive measures. If a lifter can’t adapt to repeated ME lifts, they probably aren’t cut out to be a competitive lifter.

[/quote]

I’m definitely not saying the system doesn’t produce results, nor would I be anywhere near qualified to make such an assessment. Just an observation.

As far as your last paragraph I think it depends on how you define ME lifting… but it’s true that even the volume oriented programs are going to have some heavier lifts as least 90% nearing the competition. That’s a lot different from constant max effort work as defined by westside though, in my opinion.

57

[quote]Xen Nova wrote:
^actually I think the destruction of their bodies is from a lack of training other attributes like mobility work and shit.
[/quote]

I was going to write up a long response, but then I saw this thread so I am just going to quote from lyle at bodyrecomposition:

"lylemcd: I disagree, most of the WSBB guys are pretty beaten up and I can pretty much guarantee you that they use good form.

Working to 1RM 52 weeks per year will do that and it’s not an issue of form. it’s an issue that the human body can’t take that level of pounding week in week out without problems occurring."

there is some other interesting commentary on westisde but I don’t want to link or paste too much or w/e since it probably isn’t allowed. Just check out the site and search westside if you are interested. I think he makes some good points about the westside ME execution, Metal Militia, etc

58

All the Russian manuals on elitefts are really good. I have both Medvedyev’s texts, Roman’s “The Training of the Weightlifter,” and Verkhoshansky’s “Fundamentals of Special Strength-Training in Sport” and “Programming and Organization of Training.” However, I’d say I truly “get” maybe 10% of the information in these books. It’s VERY dense, very jargon-ey, and extremely theoretical, i.e. hard to construct a practical training strategy without a great deal of analysis. I fully expect to be reading and rereading them for years, just like Supertraining, absorbing a little more each time.

Dominator, I totally agree that it’s irrelevant how much a given system beats lifters up, at least with respect to who places well in high-level competition. Unfortunately, I don’t think many of us will EVER reach that level (sad, but true). If a given system destroys everyone but the genetic elite, then those of us who want to reach our potential, but don’t belong to that class of athletes are not served well by imitating their methods. I DON’T think the Russian system is as sink-or-swim as the Bulgarians’. Maybe it is at the higher levels, but they seem to take their time developing athletic attributes and cultivating their younger candidate athletes, and so I think (and feel free to disagree) if we can figure out what these lower-class athletes were doing on their way up, it might serve as a more effective template for our own training than those programs of the people medaling at the olympics, etc.

SO, that being said, I’ll offer some things I’m picking out of Medvedyev’s books as I page through it right now.

He divides an athlete’s career into two discrete stages. The first stage constitutes the athlete’s adaptation to increasing volume and intensity, over the course of approximately 6 years (maybe up to the acquisition of Master of Sport status?). Monthly volumes in terms of number of lifts for novices, Class 3, and class 2-1 lifters are ~700, 900, 1,000, and 1,100 lifts per month, respectively.

The second stage is characterized by a stabilization of volume and a gradual increase in average intensity, as this increase is most closely correlated with increased totals.

The number of lifts at and above 90% increases yearly, from 100-200 in the first 2 years of training to 200-400 by the conclusion of the fifth year, and still upwards after that.

Training stages are based on developing specific abilities in sequence, in a long-term, yearly plan. The first block focuses mainly on explosion as a whole (characterized by lifts from above the knee level) and on final acceleration. Block 2 also emphasizes this attribute, but now with the bar below the knees (from blocks and from the floor), allowing for emphasis on the first pull. Block 3 again focuses on the second pull from above the knees, but as it is a “pre-competition” block, I think we can assume that volume is generally lower and intensity is higher, along with more exercises specific to the snatch and clean & jerk. Block 4 is also a pre-competition phase, again focusing on the lift as a whole initiated from below the knees. 5,6, and 7 are intended as transitional restoration blocks during the summer months, where OL training is attenuated in favor of more GPP (in the form of track and field exercises: sprints, jumps, shot put, discus, etc.), and the cycle basically repeats, but with a trend toward lower volume and higher intensity.

What bugs me is that Medvedyev gives us the exercise selection and total number of lifts for the first two years of training (5 and 6,000 respectively–there are 38 exercises, so I’m not going to list them all), even the individual exercises for every workout, but he doesn’t give us anything about the distribution of volume and intensity in that period. He only starts prescribing loading and volume specifically by the third year. This to me doesn’t make any sense. Wouldn’t it be more beneficial to have a system that loosens its prescriptions as an athlete develops and shows proclivities toward certain volumes/intensities/exercises? You could potentially just use the workouts in the book for the third year of training as your program–it’s that specific, but you’d be jumping in without the two previous YEARS of preparatory training.

This is making me want to go back and reread all of these texts to see if there’s something I’m missing. Sorry for the dissertation; I just really geek out on this stuff.

59

I dont have much of a clue about weightlifting, but this thread is really interesting.

60

[quote]Sneaky weasel wrote:
What bugs me is that Medvedyev gives us the exercise selection and total number of lifts for the first two years of training (5 and 6,000 respectively–there are 38 exercises, so I’m not going to list them all), even the individual exercises for every workout, but he doesn’t give us anything about the distribution of volume and intensity in that period. He only starts prescribing loading and volume specifically by the third year. This to me doesn’t make any sense. Wouldn’t it be more beneficial to have a system that loosens its prescriptions as an athlete develops and shows proclivities toward certain volumes/intensities/exercises? You could potentially just use the workouts in the book for the third year of training as your program–it’s that specific, but you’d be jumping in without the two previous YEARS of preparatory training.

This is making me want to go back and reread all of these texts to see if there’s something I’m missing. Sorry for the dissertation; I just really geek out on this stuff.[/quote]

While it would be cool to see the exact breakdown of workouts for the first two years of training, I’m not sure how relative it would be considering the lifters using those programs are probably between the ages of 14-16 (maybe younger).