Controversies in Olympic Weightlifting

[damufunman]

How about the bar moving forward out away from you?

What about it?

[mbasic]

. . . an Argument for not putting the bar at midfoot at the start.

might as well put it where it wanted to go in the first place, or not?

[damufunman]

I think you're saying you want the bar forward of midfoot so you can pull it back to keep it from going forward, right?

The sweeping back only happens below the knee doesn't it? You're still using your lats to keep the bar close after that. Why not just do it from the floor as well, also help to keep tight off the floor, no?

[mbasic]

What I've noticed, and many others have noticed.
Is when you set up with the bar of over midfoot (i.e. "too close" per the dogma),
the bar path tends to sweep OUT away from the lifter in the beginning of the first pull . . . just a little.
This is not always the case, but happens quite a bit.
....but it's common enough to be documented in the literature/dogma.

Either:
A- the shins are pushing it out (the bar away from from you)
B- something else is sending it out. (shoulders too far over the bar).
Either way, [Rippetoe Speak] you are imparting forward momentum onto the bar, which will have to be overcome at some point.

So, in this case, I would posit, why not just put the bar a little more forward than midfoot to correct this?
You could still perhaps even pull it straight up if you believe all that "most efficient path" theory.

All of the above is "An argument for the bar not to start at mid-foot".
Its not THEE argument so many of us are familiar with, but an argument.

[damufunman]

I see. I dunno, to me - and I've read in several places the exact opposite of this - the first pull doesn't seem to be particularly important, it's the second pull that puts the majority of the power into the bar. The speed going into the second pull I can see being beneficial, and maybe I just haven't had to deal with heavy enough weights for the first pull to cause problems. But there's another argument for having a stronger deadlift... but again not what we're talking about right now.

What I've noticed, and many others have noticed.
Is when you set up with the bar of over midfoot (i.e. "too close" per the dogma),
the bar path tends to sweep OUT away from the lifter in the beginning of the first pull . . . just a little.
This is not always the case, but happens quite a bit.
....but it's common enough to be documented in the literature/dogma.

Either:
A- the shins are pushing it out (the bar away from from you)
B- something else is sending it out. (shoulders too far over the bar).
Either way, [Rippetoe Speak] you are imparting forward momentum onto the bar, which will have to be overcome at some point.

So, in this case, I would posit, why not just put the bar a little more forward than midfoot to correct this?
You could still perhaps even pull it straight up if you believe all that "most efficient path" theory.

All of the above is "An argument for the bar not to start at mid-foot".
Its not THEE argument so many of us are familiar with, but an argument.

I get the extra momentum issue, can't the same be said for starting the bar forward and pulling it back? I don't know how it affects stuff further up, but that needs to be reacted if we're trying to get back to a vertical pull past the knees.

But going back to the Three Questions

1. Hip position in clean/snatch
2. Jumping serving as the triple extension
3. The usefulness of low bar squats for WL

I think the first two are addressing different, though probably related things. 1. is horizontal movement 2. is vertical movement. I'm still trying to work out how they affect each other, but I think we can agree that extra horizontal momentum is bad, and extra moment due to horizontal displacement is bad. There may be some benefit to swinging the bar if that allows more power to be generated, but is it worth the difficulty in correcting the path/trying to stabilize it overhead?

[mbasic]

I guess this goes here:

[MattNeilsen]

I guess this goes here:

You know, the more I learn about training the more hesitant I become to comment on weird stuff like this...but damn, it sure sounds like bullshit. I guess I can see a mechanism whereby someone simply learns to use a better motor program through "activation" training, but I'm color me skeptical.

[Murelli]

It's been more than a week since I last lifted weights, hence, my glutes are completely inactive. Obviously enough I'm walking around with bent knees so my hamstrings can compensate for said inactivity.

[OCG]

I guess this goes here:

You know, the more I learn about training the more hesitant I become to comment on weird stuff like this...but damn, it sure sounds like bullshit. I guess I can see a mechanism whereby someone simply learns to use a better motor program through "activation" training, but I'm color me skeptical.

What you're seeing in the clip is this:
Bullshitter: Do like this.
Lifter: *mimes triple extension gently*
Bullshitter: Now really squeeze your ass!
Lifter: *does triple extension properly* *jumps*

Miraculous!

The language used betrays the lack of knowledge. It's not "developing motor patterns to more strongly use the glutes" or "developing a better mind muscle connection" it's "they're not using their glutes at all OMG!". And they have no idea how stupid that sounds.

[ChrisMcCarthy1979]

My guess is Breeze is aware of what's she's saying...it may be a bad choice of words but it does get the point across.

[MPhelps]

I don't think the current senior European champ needs to use a BS cue from a former British lifter and current verbal diarrhea commentator. My guess if Koha's coach even allowed her to use this BS cue she would be missing lifts all over the place.

[mbasic]

Who has Breeze coached?
Anyone of notable success?

I'll give her due: she was a decent lifter (international-level).
Snatched 93 at 58BW at age 35 a few years ago.
...that's about what the US record is currently.
...and about what Koha did at a whole weight class lower.

But the gloot thing is total bullshit.
---------------------------------------------------------

But yeah, this could come off an insulting to Koha's coach.
And that guy is an accomplished lift and coach himself.
It'd be funny to be a fly on the wall back at Team Lativa's training hall when they
talk about this behind the scenes.

[slowmotion]

lol, when you watch Koha lift, her technique isn't exactly lacking. She is way better than anyone else in her weight class. And still only a junior.

[mbasic]

lol, when you watch Koha lift, her technique isn't exactly lacking. She is way better than anyone else in her weight class. And still only a junior.

IMO yes ^, she's very smooth and fluid, but those are fuzzy terms

But depends who you talk to.
She has a couple of technical quirks that people might point out.
If Breeze had said something about those, i.e. an actual legitimate critique of something you can put your finger on,
I'd let it go and give Breeze a pass.
But the gloot thing? come on

[slowmotion]

Sure, but she ( and her coaches ) seems to know what she is doing, and the results are there.

I am no expert on weightlifting technique so I am not the right person to comment on small things.

[Marenghi]

Low bar vs high bar:

High bar has a greater ROM for knee extension with a more acute knee angle. Strength is angle specific. If you need that angle in your comp lifts, it helps training it in your acc. lifts.

Low back stress is another point but could be remedied by pulling a little less.

----------------

Breeze vid: I dont follow; the glutes are hip extensors, the quads are knee extensors (Im putting Lombard in the back seat for now). Rebeka extends her hips and her knees when mimicking the TE (btw, great technician, really a joy to watch her lifting). How can Breeze get so confused?

[damufunman]

Low bar vs high bar:

High bar has a greater ROM for knee extension with a more acute knee angle. Strength is angle specific. If you need that angle in your comp lifts, it helps training it in your acc. lifts.

When is the inne angle this closed? Why are front squats done of high bar squats cover the bottom of the clean (only point I can think of where knee is angle is that acute).

Low back stress is another point but could be remedied by pulling a little less.

I'm thinking of trying one of these alternatives. Turns out I can't low bar squat, deadlift and do snatch and C&Js multiple times per week.

[Marenghi]

First of all, I agree with Greg Nuckol´s analysis of the lb and hb squat being pretty similar: https://www.strongerbyscience.com/high- ... tting-2-0/

So I can definitely see a WL, especially a hobby lifter, doing lb instead of hb with little difference. Of course, by the same argument its clear lb cant be way superior to hb (neither for "general" (whatever that may be) strength, Id like to note).

Then there is some wiggle room how to perform a hb and lb squat: you can use more or less forward knee travel and subsequently less or more back inclination.

For most lifters, knee angle and extension ROM still is noticeably different, and yes, its mostly the C&J recovery position for which that helps. The snatch is submaximal for knee extension strength, but its still preferable imo to have adapted muscles and passive structures even for a submaximal strength requirement.

Then for almost any hobby lifter this is irrelevant (and for 90% of pro lifters, too), but ofc Chinese lifters like Lü and Tian profit from their strength in acute angles in the squat jerk.

What I forgot to mention is that longer ROM generally --> more hypertrophy. And as WLs are not known to get their quads massive by doing leg extensions and leg presses (the Chinese may be different), the hb squat is their primary tool for that, too.

[damufunman]

First of all, I agree with Greg Nuckol´s analysis of the lb and hb squat being pretty similar: https://www.strongerbyscience.com/high- ... tting-2-0/

So I can definitely see a WL, especially a hobby lifter, doing lb instead of hb with little difference. Of course, by the same argument its clear lb cant be way superior to hb (neither for "general" (whatever that may be) strength, Id like to note).

Then there is some wiggle room how to perform a hb and lb squat: you can use more or less forward knee travel and subsequently less or more back inclination.

For most lifters, knee angle and extension ROM still is noticeably different, and yes, its mostly the C&J recovery position for which that helps. The snatch is submaximal for knee extension strength, but its still preferable imo to have adapted muscles and passive structures even for a submaximal strength requirement.

Then for almost any hobby lifter this is irrelevant (and for 90% of pro lifters, too), but ofc Chinese lifters like Lü and Tian profit from their strength in acute angles in the squat jerk.

What I forgot to mention is that longer ROM generally --> more hypertrophy. And as WLs are not known to get their quads massive by doing leg extensions and leg presses (the Chinese may be different), the hb squat is their primary tool for that, too.

All good points. I agree with most if Greg's points as well. I'm still curious if there a noticeable difference in carryover, and one of these days plan on doing an experiment to see if there's a difference in effect between the two. One of these days...

[Marenghi]

Yeah, not enough time! I definitely welcome cloning if its only to find out what would work best for you in a training program.