Great thanks for the advice I think it might be my hip flexibility in particular but doing the wide stance really makes a difference on my knee (I injured it pretty bad) do you think having a slightly wider stance will limit me much in how much I can lift? Do any competitive lifters catch with a somewhat wider stance?
Some catch wide, some catch narrow, it comes down to personal preference and your body type. However at both extremes you will compromise depth and/or stability so you have to find one that fits you.
Just to clarify my previous post, I wasn’t saying that a wide stance is wrong, I was saying that your stance for for a squat or power variation shouldn’t change very much.
[quote]MUthrows94 wrote:
elih8er wrote:
Alffi wrote:
Not trying to be a smart ass but I think that’s a useless exercise unless you’re in that sport. If you look at these strength charts out there, they have most of the major muscles covered by powerlifts but some add olys,which let people down due to technique issues.
They don’t strictly introduce any new muscles,it’s just a lottery about what gets hit and how much,depending on form. Might get laid down for days due to trap DOMS with nothing else to show for efforts.
End of rant.
What a horrible thought process you have. And, that chart is ridiculous if you knew anything about Olympic lifting the numbers claiming to be “Elite” are far from that.
Maybe if you powerlift, and bodybuild its not ideal (pertaining to the clean). Coming from an Olympic Lifting background an a pretty good division one thrower (shot put, discus etc.) the snatch and clean have a great turnover in athletics.
It’s also a great ex. if dieting because it incorporates a large amount of muscle groups. It also is a great indicator of someone?s strength. Whenever a sloppy football player in high school would ask me how much I benched i would ask them how much they cleaned. Shut them up pretty quick.
[/quote]
Can you explain why they are better than explosive (cheat) dumbbell raises,curls and such? If you think so that is. Because I don’t see what’s original about the contest lifts,other than the media exposure they have received over the years over being dreamed up as tests of strength for the olympics a century ago. They had to pick something back then.
[quote]sig805 wrote:
Great thanks for the advice I think it might be my hip flexibility in particular but doing the wide stance really makes a difference on my knee (I injured it pretty bad) do you think having a slightly wider stance will limit me much in how much I can lift? Do any competitive lifters catch with a somewhat wider stance?[/quote]
No problem, if you are having knee issues, again this could possibly be fixed by working on force couples and hip flexibility (ankle too). Read some of the articles on here by Mike Robertson he is brilliant, more specifically you should read “Hips Don’t Lie: Fixing your force couples”.
I too had issues with my knees and alot of the irritation went away after really working on hip mobility and flexibility. As far as limits with wider stances and which competitive lifter’s I can not really think of any that catch really wide except maybe a few superheavys.
A majority of the lifters at the elite level catch with a shoulder width toes slightly turned out stance. At the elite level they are ridiculously flexible, I once saw Cheryl Hayworth do a split, no lie (google her).
I would assume that your set up during a front squat would really dictate your feet placement during a clean. After all the front squat is a tool used to help blast out of the bottom during the catch. Obviously when you front squat with one particular stance you are working a more specific muscle group.
Doesn’t it make the most sense to be positioned in the catch the same as your front squat?!?!?! I would say absolutely. And as mentioned before it ultimately is a preference.
[quote]Alffi wrote:
Can you explain why they are better than explosive (cheat) dumbbell raises,curls and such? If you think so that is. Because I don’t see what’s original about the contest lifts,other than the media exposure they have received over the years over being dreamed up as tests of strength for the Olympics a century ago. They had to pick something back then. [/quote]
I am not trying to be a dick here, but wtf are you serious with this question? First of all a dumbbell raise what exactly constitutes a dumbbell raise I have never heard of just a “Dumbbell raise” hell grabbing the fuckin dumbbell from the rack is a “raise” from its previous position. Are you talking a lateral raise, posterior raise, anterior…??? And curls holy shit man you are fucking mislead or dumb.
This is pretty easy to explain really. A curl is an EXTREMELY isolated movement compared to a clean. The primary muscle group in use here is obviously the biceps brachii, which is a medium size muscle group. The secondary muscle groups would be your forearms, and possibly your anterior delt, traps and lats if you are REALLY cheating.
Since they are the secondary movers here they really are not being stimulated (not many motor units are being recruited within these muscles) during this exercise. Now a clean recruits muscle groups in your traps, quads, hamstrings, glutes, abs, rhombiods, erector spinae and you could make a great case for the entire back period.
Pretty much all of these muscle groups are bigger than the bicep thus, more motor units will be recruited and more muscles will be involved. Think about how far you have to move the bar, from the floor to your clavicle, compared to that of a curl and how much fucking effort it is to even complete this lift. HAVE YOU EVER preformed a clean in your life.
I mean shit every fuckin writer on this website must be wrong if we used your logic, they should be prescribing cheat curls to world class athletes instead of cleans.
(
What’s original about a fuckin curl anyway (not that I don’t use them but, orinality of a curl to a clean come on??? 
HA )anyone can do a curl but, how many people in a gym clean , I’ll tell you little to none.
The media does not even push resistance exercise really let alone the clean whatsoever, shit people don’t even know the difference between powerlifting and Olympic lifting. Every single pencil neck fool i have met when Olympic lifting has said “hows powerlifting going” these idiots have no idea how night and day they are. The bench press if any lift is pushed by the media.
Hopefully I have helped educate you in some way with this post so your ignorance doesn’t spread any longer. Any more questions?
[quote]MUthrows94 wrote:
sig805 wrote:
Great thanks for the advice I think it might be my hip flexibility in particular but doing the wide stance really makes a difference on my knee (I injured it pretty bad) do you think having a slightly wider stance will limit me much in how much I can lift? Do any competitive lifters catch with a somewhat wider stance?
No problem, if you are having knee issues, again this could possibly be fixed by working on force couples and hip flexibility (ankle too). Read some of the articles on here by Mike Robertson he is brilliant, more specifically you should read “Hips Don’t Lie: Fixing your force couples”.
I too had issues with my knees and alot of the irritation went away after really working on hip mobility and flexibility. As far as limits with wider stances and which competitive lifter’s I can not really think of any that catch really wide except maybe a few superheavys.
A majority of the lifters at the elite level catch with a shoulder width toes slightly turned out stance. At the elite level they are ridiculously flexible, I once saw Cheryl Hayworth do a split, no lie (google her).
I would assume that your set up during a front squat would really dictate your feet placement during a clean. After all the front squat is a tool used to help blast out of the bottom during the catch.
Obviously when you front squat with one particular stance you are working a more specific muscle group. Doesn’t it make the most sense to be positioned in the catch the same as your front squat?!?!?! I would say absolutely. And as mentioned before it ultimately is a preference.
Alffi wrote:
Can you explain why they are better than explosive (cheat) dumbbell raises,curls and such? If you think so that is. Because I don’t see what’s original about the contest lifts,other than the media exposure they have received over the years over being dreamed up as tests of strength for the Olympics a century ago. They had to pick something back then.
I am not trying to be a dick here, but wtf are you serious with this question? First of all a dumbbell raise what exactly constitutes a dumbbell raise I have never heard of just a “Dumbbell raise” hell grabbing the fuckin dumbbell from the rack is a “raise” from its previous position.
Are you talking a lateral raise, posterior raise, anterior…??? And curls holy shit man you are fucking mislead or dumb.
This is pretty easy to explain really. A curl is an EXTREMELY isolated movement compared to a clean. The primary muscle group in use here is obviously the biceps brachii, which is a medium size muscle group.
The secondary muscle groups would be your forearms, and possibly your anterior delt, traps and lats if you are REALLY cheating. Since they are the secondary movers here they really are not being stimulated (not many motor units are being recruited within these muscles) during this exercise.
Now a clean recruits muscle groups in your traps, quads, hamstrings, glutes, abs, rhombiods, erector spinae and you could make a great case for the entire back period. Pretty much all of these muscle groups are bigger than the bicep thus, more motor units will be recruited and more muscles will be involved.
Think about how far you have to move the bar, from the floor to your clavicle, compared to that of a curl and how much fucking effort it is to even complete this lift. HAVE YOU EVER preformed a clean in your life.
I mean shit every fuckin writer on this website must be wrong if we used your logic, they should be prescribing cheat curls to world class athletes instead of cleans.
(
What’s original about a fuckin curl anyway (not that I don’t use them but, orinality of a curl to a clean come on??? HA )anyone can do a curl but, how many people in a gym clean , I’ll tell you little to none.
The media does not even push resistance exercise really let alone the clean whatsoever, shit people don’t even know the difference between powerlifting and Olympic lifting. Every single pencil neck fool i have met when Olympic lifting has said “hows powerlifting going” these idiots have no idea how night and day they are. The bench press if any lift is pushed by the media.
Hopefully I have helped educate you in some way with this post so your ignorance doesn’t spread any longer. Any more questions?
[/quote]
I was thinking of front raises,side raises,maybe different kind of rows for the rear. A lot of posterior chain activation with ridiculous weights. Have you ever tried doing raises with weight that is far too large for you without major body english?
Some small PL federations arrange curl contests and they cheat. Then look at average people training and they’re basically doing cleans except they’re pulling with their arms. How much you recruit depends on the amount of weight and associated swing.
Just like with cleans or snatch it’s a little bit of a hodgepodge. And that’s why I think it’s reasonable to argue that unless you’re doing total body maybe then you’re arranging yourself a rocky road to progress trying to do these lifts that perhaps were never meant to be primary training lifts but contest techniques.
Of course then there’s the argument about rate of force development which is cast doubt on by some studies. Officially,oly results are supposed to be correlated with lower body strength but since the average person is unfamiliar with the elaborate leverage juggling required to make full use of it,it will not be reflected in their results.
Either way,what that suggests is that cleans are supposed to be a measure of quad power to a fair extent,but the average trainee will rather experience a cluster of random back and a bit of arm recruitment without being able to tell what got hit the most and when.
And nobody would suggest cleans for quad hypetrophy or strength anymore than jumps so they are more a test of that strength (or would be if it was not so technical) rather than a means to develop it.
The weight that is suitable for cleans is going to be a babyweight off the floor so I don’t think that matters,regarding your suggestion to have me thinking about how much is recruited.
I would like to note that I do not want to imply absolute faith in this argument. I’m just presenting it for review.
in all fairness Alfie, you cant relate peoples poor form in the exercises when saying that they may not be great tests of this or that…they are good tests…some people just dont know how to do them properly (which many would say is their biggest downfall)
i think them forcing you to use many muscles at once and to move explosively, keep the body tight, devolopment acceleration and deceleration are all good factors,
Along with the tripple extension which i’m sure you are aware of all of this and playing devils advocate as many people spout them off because thats what their told (and on the flip side people saying typical powerlifting dynamic work will do the same thing deeming them unecessary, because that is who that group of followers chooses to believe)
as far as baby weight, any athelete SHOULD be able to clean their bodyweight atleast (as a starting point, up from there)…and with the speed you should be able to snap that up…it is definitly not baby weight for an athelete (assuming ones opponants will be a similar bodyweight to their own)…
As you used the “athletic” standpoint, and has a very real impact on performance…most people who i have talked to who have gotten strong in them agree it has helped them atheletically, even if there is more than one way to skin a cat
a couple more factors that may come into play…#1, stigma, and i think this is what you’re trying to get at - everyone says that everyone whos anyone should do them…
So people feel its a must… #2, to be honest, its fun and rewarding, and it really carry’s over and is rewarding outside of the gym also if you play a sport #3, you feel like a badass throwing heavy weights overhead…and hey, thats what its all about haha
[quote]Alffi wrote:
I was thinking of front raises,side raises,maybe different kind of rows for the rear. A lot of posterior chain activation with ridiculous weights. Have you ever tried doing raises with weight that is far too large for you without major body english?
[/quote]
Front raises (Anterior raises), side raises (lateral raises), recruit smaller muscles in terms of muscle recruitment. Now rows you can make a case for posterior chain, however, you are not really recruiting the entire posterior chain rather the back and muscles associated (rhomboids, rear delt, erector spinae, lats, brachiradialis) I see minimal recruitment elsewhere.
The prime reason for doing cheat style movements is to overload the eccentric portion. These are good but, also are dangerous and again the recruitment will be more localized.
I am not familiar with PL but, after googleing “cheat curl contest” I got nothing I will take your word for it. Even, if they do obviously it is not very popular and is more for shits and grins. I do agree with you about the average person training the clean or atleast a newb.
But, what is average are we talking about walking into any gym and picking a random guy to perform a clean, or the average serious lifter that knows the basics of the clean? Kind of a broad statement. I was referring to people that had half a clue on how to perform the lift.
The amount of weight and motor units recruited go hand in hand on any exercise. The heavier you go the more units you recruit with the associated working muscles.
Another broad statement what are you referring to when you say “training”. Like i had stated before these lifts have their purposes. Obviously a bodybuilder wouldn’t do these lifts.
Cleans are a great training tool for athletes in any sport really (except maybe cross country ha). How can building fast twitch muscles create a “rocky road to progress” just about every athlete is pursuing to increase fast twitch fibers.
Not sure what “leverage juggling” is…??
You are right in the fact that a person with shitty clean technique obviously will not recruit more motor units, but I would like to see these studies regarding force development.
Because Shane Hammond was tested for his force development pulling from the floor and he was pushing through the floor with 1,000lbs of force (I think it was around this amount not to certain). Yes, he is a freak of nature but 1,000lbs of force shows just how powerful you have to be from the floor when cleaning.
I would say that it is a measure of pulling power, a hip dominant movement, more so than quad power. Speed off the floor to the power position helps to really generate the momentum initiating that second pull.
Again you are referring to “average” not sure what this consist’s of we here at the NATION are not average.
I never said it should be used for quad hypertrophy and I have never heard anyone suggest it. You are referring to hypertrophy and strength testing in the same sentence, when they are different.
And nobody uses cleans to develop quad strength solely. Usually the pull is the hindering segment of the clean, not the quads, so essentially the quads will not be worked to their full capacity if using in training.
[quote]
The weight that is suitable for cleans is going to be a babyweight off the floor so I don’t think that matters,regarding your suggestion to have me thinking about how much is recruited.
I would like to note that I do not want to imply absolute faith in this argument. I’m just presenting it for review. [/quote]
IT maybe a baby weight for a newb, but like i said we are talking about people with decent form atleast that is what i was assuming.
[quote]brian.m wrote:
#3, you feel like a badass throwing heavy weights overhead…and hey, thats what its all about haha[/quote]
Yea, going to an average gym and power cleaning 3 plates you will draw the attention of the entire weight room and its great knowing that nobody in their can touch that haha.
Edit: unless you walk into an olympic lifting facility 
[quote]Alffi wrote:
Not trying to be a smart ass but I think that’s a useless exercise unless you’re in that sport.If you look at these strength charts out there, they have most of the major muscles covered by powerlifts but some add olys,which let people down due to technique issues. They don’t strictly introduce any new muscles,it’s just a lottery about what gets hit and how much,depending on form. Might get laid down for days due to trap DOMS with nothing else to show for efforts.
End of rant.
http://www.exrx.net/Testing/WeightLifting/CleanStandards.html[/quote]
Cleans are not an exercise one should do to work certain muscles.
Do you have any experience in oly lifts?
85kg weight class (187 lbs)
334 lb full clean (152 kg)
297 lb power clean (135 kg)
[quote]Alffi wrote:
Can you explain why they are better than explosive (cheat) dumbbell raises,curls and such? If you think so that is. Because I don’t see what’s original about the contest lifts,other than the media exposure they have received over the years over being dreamed up as tests of strength for the olympics a century ago. They had to pick something back then. [/quote]
Wow man, the snatch and clean and jerk don’t really involve the biceps. The biceps are not a “powerful” muscle. It is clear you don’t understand the lifts, but at least you understand the contribution of the hips/legs in a cheat curl. However, a clean and a cheat curl are NOT the same movements!
good arguments yesterday…
this is what needs to happen between olympic lifters and powerlifters…
its like Pakistan and India…
Alffi, you really have no understanding of the mechanics of the lifts or the raw strength involved. Please let us know how much you can clean and jerk.
[quote]Krollmonster wrote:
Alffi wrote:
Not trying to be a smart ass but I think that’s a useless exercise unless you’re in that sport.If you look at these strength charts out there, they have most of the major muscles covered by powerlifts but some add olys,which let people down due to technique issues.
They don’t strictly introduce any new muscles,it’s just a lottery about what gets hit and how much,depending on form. Might get laid down for days due to trap DOMS with nothing else to show for efforts.
End of rant.
Cleans are not an exercise one should do to work certain muscles.
Do you have any experience in oly lifts?[/quote]
When I first posted in this thread,I did so assuming that the OP might be interested in real strength as opposed to strength and skill, as is the case with oly lifting or javelin throwing for example. Maybe my contribution was irrelevant but it seemed to spur some worthy discussion.
For reference,some time ago I started a thread on snatch deadlifts and it seemed to be like I was getting bad rep for implying that training lifts should not or do not need to seek optimal leverages and elastic energy use in powerlifting. So it seems like even PL types may be turned off by the thought of targeting muscles.
I don’t have any formal experience. I was going to join a club once but I happened to move.
[quote]Krollmonster wrote:
Alffi wrote:
Can you explain why they are better than explosive (cheat) dumbbell raises,curls and such? If you think so that is. Because I don’t see what’s original about the contest lifts,other than the media exposure they have received over the years over being dreamed up as tests of strength for the olympics a century ago. They had to pick something back then.
Wow man, the snatch and clean and jerk don’t really involve the biceps. The biceps are not a “powerful” muscle. It is clear you don’t understand the lifts, but at least you understand the contribution of the hips/legs in a cheat curl. However, a clean and a cheat curl are NOT the same movements!
[/quote]
If I may elaborate.
-The history of C&J and snatch are shrouded in the dust.
-A potential reason for the inclusion of these specific exercises in track and field athletics for example may have more to do with them being the most widespread and famous lifts in history,at least until later during the 20th century with the relative rise of PL/BB and decline of oly.
They are associated with power because olylifters are supposed to be powerful. Yet Antonio Krastev (snatch WR) allegedly barely left the ground when it came to jumping.
Since oly lifters are or used to be the biggest lifting crowd, it was bound to happen that a fair few would show up overall strong and powerful,though they might be that way despite doing oly lifting rather than because of it.
-People have a hard time explaining why olympic lifts are special relative to other explosive lifts,or more appropriately why they are necessary.
-Oly lifters themselves build strength for the lifts using slow limit strength training. Studies suggesting only subtle differences in power generation between slow training and fast training athletes suggests that the oly crowd may not be converting limit strength to explosiveness as much as they’re polishing skill.
Given all the monotonous skill work,how do you know? So instead of squatting and then trying to learn oly form,some thrower or jumper might be better off squatting and then learning to jump and throw.
I don’t pretend to be an expert. I just have questions.
[quote]elih8er wrote:
Alffi, you really have no understanding of the mechanics of the lifts or the raw strength involved. Please let us know how much you can clean and jerk.[/quote]
Since you already called me an idiot, to you my clean and jerk will be 650 pounds.
Edit:I’m sorry I responded. I perceive this to be off-topic.
[quote]Alffi wrote:
Yet Antonio Krastev (snatch WR) allegedly barely left the ground when it came to jumping.
[/quote]
ignore the heavy weights in olympic lifts for jumping measurements because they have adipose tissue too weighing them down…
you must know the study where the Olympic Lifters had the highest vertical jumps at the Olympics of any sport and fastest 20 meter sprint times…
[quote]Alffi wrote:
elih8er wrote:
Alffi, you really have no understanding of the mechanics of the lifts or the raw strength involved. Please let us know how much you can clean and jerk.
Since you already called me an idiot, to you my clean and jerk will be 650 pounds.
Edit:I’m sorry I responded. I perceive this to be off-topic.[/quote]
If you claim a power curl is equivalent to a power clean that would be idiotic, hence you be called an idiot. Anyone who has experience with the olympic lifts would find this statement to be ridiculous, calling into question your actual training experiences with the lifts.
According to you, learning the power clean is an impossible task not meant for the average athlete. But, did you notice the last word of the sentence? If an athlete cannot perform a power clean, they are not much of athlete to begin with.
It takes most athletes a week or less to become proficient in the power clean. This has been my personal experience training people with ZERO experience with the lifts.
The lifts are valuable training tools for any athlete because they teach an individual to become explosive. You simply cannot perform a clean and jerk or snatch slow, while other lifts such as bench press, PL lifter-esque squats, and deadlifts can be ground out.
They can be performed explosively, BUT success of the lift is not dependent on the speed of force generation. Further, powerlifting lifts are not POWER lifts they are strength lifts. The force generation required to jerk 150 kg for a single compared to benching 150 kg for reps are not even remotely comparable.
Throwers focus on the lifts because throwing events are dependent on rapid maximal force generation. Lineman focus on them because dominating the person across from you is wholly dependent on the power you can generate in milliseconds.
Combat sport athletes use them because beating the shit out of the guy in front of you is dependent on how much force you can punch someone with.
Does that make sense to you?
The olympic style movements require high amounts of recruitment, large amounts of power applied relatively quickly. Something most sports require.
He said it.