Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
coolcolj
New member
powerclean thread at tmag that turned out some good discussion
http://www.t-nation.com/readTopic.do?id=972974
-----
some good quotes from Jumanji -
Also to add to the Devil's advocate side:
Cleans do offer one advantage over Maximal efforts. The RFD is higher... plus they offer eccentric RFD which squats and deads do not... Even with CAT style lifting, the closer to maximal the weight is, I believe that the RFD slope is flatter....no?
What is RFD eccentrically? Well, it is half of the equation when it comes to speed, frankly, and is the half that most everyone misses.
Everyone who talks cleans discusses their excellence due to concentric RFD, but the real beauty comes from the catch.
Eccentric RFD is very closely linked to the stiffness that is displayed by great athletes. We have all seen the guy who can calf raise a house, but sticks to the floor and has huge heel dip when he runs.... no eccentric RFD.... cannot absorb the force quickly....
So even if a huge amount of force can be displayed on the other side, the athlete sticks to the ground due to half of the equation being lost.
Now relative body strength is THE key factor to acceleration, but I beleive that this is due to the sampling of athletes. Take 100 kids and make two groups out of them. With all things being equal, both groups will have about the same number of reactive / non reactive athletes.
This is where Peter Weyand's study is amazingly accurate, but also flawed..... and Barry Ross's book is shortsighted. Guys like Dave Tate can squat and deadlift as much as Alicia Felix (200m elite runner, female), with relation to theri bodyweight, yet they could never run with Alicia Felix.... why is this? Bary alluded to it in the beginning of his book, but failed to delve deeper due to the complexity of the issue. Alicia tested off the charts in every aspect, save for STRENGTH. She was already amazingly reactive. She was a gazelle waiting for some horsepower to kick it up a notch.
So, DE squats are awesome for concentric RFD, but lack eccentric RFD. Even westside uses very fast eccentric descents with catches on their dynamic benches, but from what I understand, don't carry this over to dynamic squats. Of course, I am a skinny pus at only 205, so I am not there (westside). I am only guessing. But, I have never heard Dave or Louie talk about Reactive Squats, but instead, use the box to truly halt eccentric progress.
Eccentric RFD, muscular stiffness.... this is what seperates reactive athletes from the rest.... and cleans, when properly performed, develop these qualities....
So do Drop Absorption Squats, so do reactive squats, so do jump squats of all variations, so do Reactive GHR's, so do reactive back Hypers, so do reactive reverse hypers...all can be done unilaterally, weighted, banded....etc, etc, etc.
If you are a naturally springy athlete, increase your Max Strength through Deads and squats... hell increase it anyway!
But, many, many athletes could benefit from a great strength-speed, and speed-strength exercise that promotes both concentric and eccentric RFD. These are the weightroom warriors who scratch their head wondering why the skinny pus guy runs circles around them. Their explosive strength defecit and reactivity are much better....
And T-Maggers, please don't refer to the Olymic Lifters having amazing sprint times because they could clean so much.... because most all could squat 3x BW without gear... so was it the cleans, or the squats... or both?
Hmmm... the media and CSCS has made us believe it was the cleans... but the absolute strength of these guys was amazing also....
Maybe it was both combined....hmmmm... absolute limit off the charts with very little explosive strength defecit... sounds like a decent combo....
Maybe that was it.
Jumanji
--
Kir Dog~
Yes to the catch question... exactly. Do a block of Cleans from the floor with the catch in a full squat position, and then see how strong you feel in the hole... hmm... because the absoprtion you are doing in the full squat position helps to develop strength so much....
Or, do force drop squats, or oscillatory Isometric squats there... whatever you feel comfortable with...
Want to translate strength to on the field performance:
Build the strength in your weak area (most suck in deep angles which are necessary for great acceleration), so do Iso's and Eccentrics through this range.
Then convert it to Force development (MASS x speed), heavy cleans with full squat catch, OI's in deep squat, Force Drop squats, FD 1-Legged Squats, etc... tons of options. Then move to fully reactive this way....
Then go to Power development (mass x SPEED). I seperate Force into strength-speed, and power into speed-strength. So deep knee bend ballistics and reactive exercises....starting with absorption type exercises, moving to fully reactive.
Now see how well you defend, cut with deep angles, accelerate, etc. (IE, the age old "play low" that all short-bus coaches yell without realizing the athlete has no preparedness to actually do this dynamically).
Finally, enjoy the fruits of your effort.
BTW, you are right that most young kids see the best gains from strength training. My progression goes: BW and movement efficiency until 13 or 14, then work on strength and reactivity... slowly and with perfect form. The biggest jumps in perfromance for me are when my kids start to realize a nice strength to BW ratio.... that is, after the intial jump from movement pattern corrections.... you are very right... most are weak.....stunningly
---
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
---
Unfortunately it isn't that simple. Which is why slow guys who run 5.4 forties, but squat 500 will never make gains from HIT or 99% of CSCS designed programs.
Tell you what Keyser, line up 20 guys who you know to be very strong, and have them run. I don't want you to watch anything except their heals. See who has a huge heal dip when he runs, and who doesn't.
Now, since they are strong, we know that it isn't because they have weak calves. It happens because their muscles don't know how to instantaneously absorb the force, instantaneously lock up. You see, when you lift, you are actually training a recruitment pattern, and a recruitment rate... so slow, heavy eccentrics affect your CNS very differently than do fast explosive movements. A slow eccentric RFD (rate of force development) sucks for an athlete in a strength-speed or speed-strength sport.. period.
It isn't all muscles and bones and tendons and ligaments, you see, some of us have brains and a CNS.... do you?
Back to the discussion at hand: All of athleticism has to do with force absorption, stabilization, and then force display... at amazing rates (rfd). The basis for all of this force talk nonsense is absolute strength, and tendon preparedness.... But, after that, all of this potential must be moved way down the force curve for it to viable on the field...
This is why a powerlifter does not punch as hard as a boxer. The powerlifter is trained to build tension and display this tension over the duration of the lift....slower recruitment, slower release. The boxer trains his CNS to instantly recruit amazing force, and then just as quickly shut it down... so not only does the peak force created max out higher, but the boxer can also throw 3 punches in the time a powerlifter throws one: on,off,on,off,on,off... big guy is bleeding.
But, what the boxer cannot do is to maintain his tension over the course of a bench press... different recruitment ability. So, the boxer only benches 315, while the powerlifter benches 600. The powerlifter has honed his CNS to his sport, the boxer to his...
Now, think about the legs in the same manner....hmmmm.
The funny thing is, many, probably most guys with the same certification as me certification would cry out: get him stronger!!! But, if the powerlifter benched 700 would he be a better puncher? Where does the ignorance end? The strong guy needs to lessen his explosive strength defecit by doing RFD drills. Hell if he did all explosive drills for a year and lost 100 pounds on his bench, he would probably punch harder...way harder.
This is where exercises that stress RFD, force absorption, stabilization, and force display all come into play. Because some people naturally have no deficit when it comes to displaying newfound strength in the form of power production (rate dominant athletes), but some have huge potentials, but lack the proficiency (strength dominant athletes).
Now, if all you ever meet are rate dominant athletes, then you must be Bobby Bowden, because that is all he recruits. He knows where the current state of S&C lies, and that is: Get them stronger!!!! So he recruits the rate dominant kids...good for him.
As for your injuries, you probably have gait issues, as do most people who, when running experience pain. I train an elite level marathoner, who battled sever IT Band issues her whole career. Low and behold she was a heel striker... hmm...can you say absorbing force with your bone structure.... yummy. We fixed that with a progression of drills, she gained 3/4" in her calves in 3 months (note that she was a Big Ten track and cross country girl, not some untrained test subject) due to her new foot strike, and the pain subsided..... miracle.... LOL. Maybe just not ignorance. Maybe just sound coaching. Were you getting that?
Finally Keyser, rude is a term that others label you with, not a term you give to yourself. You were rude, thus you are rude. You cannot exclame afterwards: I am not rude. You must alter your actions to get the label removed...
Thinking that improving athleticism lies in the muscles, and not in the mechanism that controls the muscles (CNS)..... silly at best. That type of 'thinking' may earn you another label... since even your beloved strength is more of a neural factor than anything else... which is why an elite 105 pound gymanst is stronger than most T-Mag readers....
Good luck to you Keyser. I will be pleased when you realize there is far more than Flex Magazine and HIT tell you there is.....
Jumanji
CSCS
---
Coach Sommer replying - gymnastic dude
-----
I would like to broaden the range of this discussion beyond the utility of power cleans in general. First, I believe that we are all in agreement that limit strength is a fundamental necessity for athletic excellence.
However, in my experience, increasing limit strength is not, in and of itself, enough to adequetely prepare the body for maximal performance; except perhaps in sports in which a relatively long term duration of effort is of no consequence (i.e. powerlifting). Most athletics however, as well as the world in general, take place within a ballistic environment and, to operate at maximum efficiency within that environment, the body needs to be able to handle rapid accelerations and decelerations of force as well as force impacts and rebounds. Whether this ability is achieved through plyometric gymnastics elements, rebounding track & field exercises, the 'catch" of a power clean, the bottom of a squat snatch or depth jumps etc. is the personal preference of the coach and/or athlete. Nevertheless it is essential that this training component be addressed.
To my mind the most common error with implementing this type of training, regardless of the specific training avenue pursued, is impatience. Care must be taken to allow the joints and connective tissues to gradually acclimate to the new training parameters being placed upon them. This adaptation is of biological necessity measured in months rather than weeks. In a seasonal school sport, there is often simply not enough time for the necessary adaptations to safely occur.
For example, in my judgement this is why the one young man began to experience joint issues when training the olympic lifts as a high school football player. The danger was not that he had been exposed to ballistic element training (in this case Olympic Lifting) but that he, or more likely his coach, had attempted to train these new elements too hard too soon and had exceeded his joints' ability to sufficiently adapt to the training load being placed upon them. Had the seasonal schedule allowed him to begin and maintain a more gradual training approach with implementing this ballistic training, the end results may well have been dramatically different.
Yours in Fitness,
Coach Sommer
http://www.t-nation.com/readTopic.do?id=512003
http://www.t-nation.com/readTopic.do?id=972974
-----
some good quotes from Jumanji -
Also to add to the Devil's advocate side:
Cleans do offer one advantage over Maximal efforts. The RFD is higher... plus they offer eccentric RFD which squats and deads do not... Even with CAT style lifting, the closer to maximal the weight is, I believe that the RFD slope is flatter....no?
What is RFD eccentrically? Well, it is half of the equation when it comes to speed, frankly, and is the half that most everyone misses.
Everyone who talks cleans discusses their excellence due to concentric RFD, but the real beauty comes from the catch.
Eccentric RFD is very closely linked to the stiffness that is displayed by great athletes. We have all seen the guy who can calf raise a house, but sticks to the floor and has huge heel dip when he runs.... no eccentric RFD.... cannot absorb the force quickly....
So even if a huge amount of force can be displayed on the other side, the athlete sticks to the ground due to half of the equation being lost.
Now relative body strength is THE key factor to acceleration, but I beleive that this is due to the sampling of athletes. Take 100 kids and make two groups out of them. With all things being equal, both groups will have about the same number of reactive / non reactive athletes.
This is where Peter Weyand's study is amazingly accurate, but also flawed..... and Barry Ross's book is shortsighted. Guys like Dave Tate can squat and deadlift as much as Alicia Felix (200m elite runner, female), with relation to theri bodyweight, yet they could never run with Alicia Felix.... why is this? Bary alluded to it in the beginning of his book, but failed to delve deeper due to the complexity of the issue. Alicia tested off the charts in every aspect, save for STRENGTH. She was already amazingly reactive. She was a gazelle waiting for some horsepower to kick it up a notch.
So, DE squats are awesome for concentric RFD, but lack eccentric RFD. Even westside uses very fast eccentric descents with catches on their dynamic benches, but from what I understand, don't carry this over to dynamic squats. Of course, I am a skinny pus at only 205, so I am not there (westside). I am only guessing. But, I have never heard Dave or Louie talk about Reactive Squats, but instead, use the box to truly halt eccentric progress.
Eccentric RFD, muscular stiffness.... this is what seperates reactive athletes from the rest.... and cleans, when properly performed, develop these qualities....
So do Drop Absorption Squats, so do reactive squats, so do jump squats of all variations, so do Reactive GHR's, so do reactive back Hypers, so do reactive reverse hypers...all can be done unilaterally, weighted, banded....etc, etc, etc.
If you are a naturally springy athlete, increase your Max Strength through Deads and squats... hell increase it anyway!
But, many, many athletes could benefit from a great strength-speed, and speed-strength exercise that promotes both concentric and eccentric RFD. These are the weightroom warriors who scratch their head wondering why the skinny pus guy runs circles around them. Their explosive strength defecit and reactivity are much better....
And T-Maggers, please don't refer to the Olymic Lifters having amazing sprint times because they could clean so much.... because most all could squat 3x BW without gear... so was it the cleans, or the squats... or both?
Hmmm... the media and CSCS has made us believe it was the cleans... but the absolute strength of these guys was amazing also....
Maybe it was both combined....hmmmm... absolute limit off the charts with very little explosive strength defecit... sounds like a decent combo....
Maybe that was it.
Jumanji
--
Kir Dog~
Yes to the catch question... exactly. Do a block of Cleans from the floor with the catch in a full squat position, and then see how strong you feel in the hole... hmm... because the absoprtion you are doing in the full squat position helps to develop strength so much....
Or, do force drop squats, or oscillatory Isometric squats there... whatever you feel comfortable with...
Want to translate strength to on the field performance:
Build the strength in your weak area (most suck in deep angles which are necessary for great acceleration), so do Iso's and Eccentrics through this range.
Then convert it to Force development (MASS x speed), heavy cleans with full squat catch, OI's in deep squat, Force Drop squats, FD 1-Legged Squats, etc... tons of options. Then move to fully reactive this way....
Then go to Power development (mass x SPEED). I seperate Force into strength-speed, and power into speed-strength. So deep knee bend ballistics and reactive exercises....starting with absorption type exercises, moving to fully reactive.
Now see how well you defend, cut with deep angles, accelerate, etc. (IE, the age old "play low" that all short-bus coaches yell without realizing the athlete has no preparedness to actually do this dynamically).
Finally, enjoy the fruits of your effort.
BTW, you are right that most young kids see the best gains from strength training. My progression goes: BW and movement efficiency until 13 or 14, then work on strength and reactivity... slowly and with perfect form. The biggest jumps in perfromance for me are when my kids start to realize a nice strength to BW ratio.... that is, after the intial jump from movement pattern corrections.... you are very right... most are weak.....stunningly
---
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
---
Unfortunately it isn't that simple. Which is why slow guys who run 5.4 forties, but squat 500 will never make gains from HIT or 99% of CSCS designed programs.
Tell you what Keyser, line up 20 guys who you know to be very strong, and have them run. I don't want you to watch anything except their heals. See who has a huge heal dip when he runs, and who doesn't.
Now, since they are strong, we know that it isn't because they have weak calves. It happens because their muscles don't know how to instantaneously absorb the force, instantaneously lock up. You see, when you lift, you are actually training a recruitment pattern, and a recruitment rate... so slow, heavy eccentrics affect your CNS very differently than do fast explosive movements. A slow eccentric RFD (rate of force development) sucks for an athlete in a strength-speed or speed-strength sport.. period.
It isn't all muscles and bones and tendons and ligaments, you see, some of us have brains and a CNS.... do you?
Back to the discussion at hand: All of athleticism has to do with force absorption, stabilization, and then force display... at amazing rates (rfd). The basis for all of this force talk nonsense is absolute strength, and tendon preparedness.... But, after that, all of this potential must be moved way down the force curve for it to viable on the field...
This is why a powerlifter does not punch as hard as a boxer. The powerlifter is trained to build tension and display this tension over the duration of the lift....slower recruitment, slower release. The boxer trains his CNS to instantly recruit amazing force, and then just as quickly shut it down... so not only does the peak force created max out higher, but the boxer can also throw 3 punches in the time a powerlifter throws one: on,off,on,off,on,off... big guy is bleeding.
But, what the boxer cannot do is to maintain his tension over the course of a bench press... different recruitment ability. So, the boxer only benches 315, while the powerlifter benches 600. The powerlifter has honed his CNS to his sport, the boxer to his...
Now, think about the legs in the same manner....hmmmm.
The funny thing is, many, probably most guys with the same certification as me certification would cry out: get him stronger!!! But, if the powerlifter benched 700 would he be a better puncher? Where does the ignorance end? The strong guy needs to lessen his explosive strength defecit by doing RFD drills. Hell if he did all explosive drills for a year and lost 100 pounds on his bench, he would probably punch harder...way harder.
This is where exercises that stress RFD, force absorption, stabilization, and force display all come into play. Because some people naturally have no deficit when it comes to displaying newfound strength in the form of power production (rate dominant athletes), but some have huge potentials, but lack the proficiency (strength dominant athletes).
Now, if all you ever meet are rate dominant athletes, then you must be Bobby Bowden, because that is all he recruits. He knows where the current state of S&C lies, and that is: Get them stronger!!!! So he recruits the rate dominant kids...good for him.
As for your injuries, you probably have gait issues, as do most people who, when running experience pain. I train an elite level marathoner, who battled sever IT Band issues her whole career. Low and behold she was a heel striker... hmm...can you say absorbing force with your bone structure.... yummy. We fixed that with a progression of drills, she gained 3/4" in her calves in 3 months (note that she was a Big Ten track and cross country girl, not some untrained test subject) due to her new foot strike, and the pain subsided..... miracle.... LOL. Maybe just not ignorance. Maybe just sound coaching. Were you getting that?
Finally Keyser, rude is a term that others label you with, not a term you give to yourself. You were rude, thus you are rude. You cannot exclame afterwards: I am not rude. You must alter your actions to get the label removed...
Thinking that improving athleticism lies in the muscles, and not in the mechanism that controls the muscles (CNS)..... silly at best. That type of 'thinking' may earn you another label... since even your beloved strength is more of a neural factor than anything else... which is why an elite 105 pound gymanst is stronger than most T-Mag readers....
Good luck to you Keyser. I will be pleased when you realize there is far more than Flex Magazine and HIT tell you there is.....
Jumanji
CSCS
---
Coach Sommer replying - gymnastic dude
-----
I would like to broaden the range of this discussion beyond the utility of power cleans in general. First, I believe that we are all in agreement that limit strength is a fundamental necessity for athletic excellence.
However, in my experience, increasing limit strength is not, in and of itself, enough to adequetely prepare the body for maximal performance; except perhaps in sports in which a relatively long term duration of effort is of no consequence (i.e. powerlifting). Most athletics however, as well as the world in general, take place within a ballistic environment and, to operate at maximum efficiency within that environment, the body needs to be able to handle rapid accelerations and decelerations of force as well as force impacts and rebounds. Whether this ability is achieved through plyometric gymnastics elements, rebounding track & field exercises, the 'catch" of a power clean, the bottom of a squat snatch or depth jumps etc. is the personal preference of the coach and/or athlete. Nevertheless it is essential that this training component be addressed.
To my mind the most common error with implementing this type of training, regardless of the specific training avenue pursued, is impatience. Care must be taken to allow the joints and connective tissues to gradually acclimate to the new training parameters being placed upon them. This adaptation is of biological necessity measured in months rather than weeks. In a seasonal school sport, there is often simply not enough time for the necessary adaptations to safely occur.
For example, in my judgement this is why the one young man began to experience joint issues when training the olympic lifts as a high school football player. The danger was not that he had been exposed to ballistic element training (in this case Olympic Lifting) but that he, or more likely his coach, had attempted to train these new elements too hard too soon and had exceeded his joints' ability to sufficiently adapt to the training load being placed upon them. Had the seasonal schedule allowed him to begin and maintain a more gradual training approach with implementing this ballistic training, the end results may well have been dramatically different.
Yours in Fitness,
Coach Sommer
http://www.t-nation.com/readTopic.do?id=512003
