all posts post new thread

Barbell Some Notes in the Specificity Of Barbell Training

Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)

IoannisDyonisos

Level 1 Valued Member
Some lifters like Simon Kolecki of Poland who could clean and jerk 232.5kg in 2000 and claimed he could not back squat more than 235kg are quite simply very good at the Olympic Lifts while numerous others like Serge Reding of Belgium who could full squat 455kg (about 1,000 pounds) in the late 60s have inadvertently broken the all time raw squat record for their class in any PL fed without giving a care whether that was the case or not as all they cared about was winning the Olympics or IWF World Championships.


Worth mentioning is that I know of one lifter who had the privilege of training under Abijeev (the 'inventor' of the "Bulgarian system") himself in Bulgaria for years who claims that while the minimum poundage he used for singles in the front squat (the Bulgarians did singles in Snatch, Clean and Jerk, and Front Squat at the time exclusively), which he would invariably hit six days a week multiple times daily, was 225kg or 496 pounds he was completely unable to even budge 500 pounds off the floor much less Dead Lift it. After leaving the tutelage of Abejeev and switching to Powerlifting because he apparently lacked the potential to compete at a high level in OL this lifter could not manage one single with 500 pounds in the Dead Lift until he had improved his back squat (which he also had never really done before) to 680 pounds despite training both very seriously.


Examining the usefulness of Squatting strength in Olympic Lifting specifically Anatoly Pisarenko of the Soviet Union, who never used much more than 260kg done for relatively high reps in Back Squat and never used Front Squats, seemingly easily managed the first 265kg Clean and Jerk in 1984 and never got pinned under a clean while his closest Bulgarian Rival Antonio Krastev, who would go on to set the all time snatch record of 216kg, never managed to stand from the squat clean in competition with more than 255kg getting pinned all of the numerous times he attempted 257.5kg despite being the 'unofficial world record holder' in the front squat at the time having done over 800 pounds in that lift on many occasions and sometimes more than once in a single lifting session.


While squats for instance are universally accepted as being helpful for Olympic lifters in general and more often than not are the primary choice for assistance work there is no clear correlation whatsoever with ability in the squat and a given lifter’s ability to stand from the clean or even to pull a given weight to the shoulder. There are moreover clearly documented albeit extremely rare instances of world class Olympic lifters actually being more 'one-dimensional' than Kolecki in that they are literally able to Clean and Jerk in excess of their best back squat and typically with a fast and seamless recovery from the squat clean at that; lifters cleaning in excess of their best front squats but not quite their back squats, such as Kolecki, are much more commonplace than these most extreme cases however and still these themselves only amount to a very small minority among world class lifters. Not being able to front squat all that much more than is Clean and Jerk however is actually just as common as doing significantly more.



Curiously enough some old school 20s-50s lifters, in contrast with the lifter I mentioned unable to pull 500 while capable of front squatting it easy (that one could jerk a little over 350 in case you are curious), had very impressive Dead Lifts without any training on the lift whatsoever such as John Davis who managed an over 700 Dead Lift (which was his first ever time doing Dead Lifts) before he made his first successful 400 pound Clean and Jerk at which time in his career he had not incorporated squatting whatsoever and spent most of his training doing heavy Presses, sets of multiple reps in the Split Clean, Bench Press and Snatches.


Norbert Schemansky, another early American lifter very easily did a Dead Lift with over 600 pounds (trying it for the first time also) around the same time in the late 1940s at 90kg at which time he would not use more than 450 for reps in the back squat, which, unlike Davis at that time, he did frequently. By the time Shemansky retired in 1964 after winning four Olympic medals he was squatting with over 600 regularly but never bothered Dead Lifting again unfortunately. Both lifters agreed that the Dead lift was completely useless for improving the Olympic Lifts and only tried it to amuse the curiosity of others possibly in response to fascination with Bob Peoples who pulled 728 at 185 in 1947


Different training styles seem to cause weightlifters to have very different abilities regarding the power lifts and I would assume other unrelated lifts/abilities of this type or that anyway. Much like bodybuilders who use completely different lifting routines end up with very similar results regarding the aspects of what they are competing in but have much different abilities in other aspects the weightlifters competing together will Clean and Jerk and Snatch similar numbers in competition but can otherwise have very little in common regarding their various other physical abilities.


As an interesting side note I suppose it is entirely possible that training the Press, which was discontinued in 1972, might be responsible for the difference between impressive Dead Lifts of those such as Davis whose 700+ Dead Lift which was very impressive for anyone in the late 1940s and altogether more or less unheard of for a first time lifter specializing in OL who cannot clean and jerk over 400 pounds as many highly specialized lifters today capable of 350 Jerks often cannot even Dead Lift 500 pounds.


Many experts actually theorize that heavy squatting is actually a much more helpful assistance exercise for maximizing performance in the discontinued Press than for the Clean and Jerk with some suggesting that it is absolutely essential to be competitive with the weights the top lifters were handling in the late 60s and early 70s in contrast to the lighter presses done in the 1930s to around the 1952 Olympics whose winner John Davis in any event had finally adopted a very serious program of heavy squatting finally convinced that it was necessary for him to continue improving in his lifts...


Anyway the sometimes surprising lack of carryover from one lift to another in Barbell training underscores the importance of consistency in a lifting program and highlights the potentially significant consequences of program hopping regarding strength gains such as abandoning working on the Clean and Jerk to work on Dead Lifts or Bench Press to improve one’s Press. This lack of congruence between the effects of different lifting regimens can result in a lifter trading a very good lift in one barbell exercise for a more mediocre ability in another as the lifter loses his strength on the first lift to pursue results in another while basically starting from scratch on the new lift. Conversely this situation might simply encourage one to incorporate a more eclectic collection of exercises altogether so as to develop better-rounded lifting abilities
 
This is fascinating stuff (as have been your other recent posts). Welcome to the Forum!

Different training styles seem to cause weightlifters to have very different abilities regarding the power lifts and I would assume other unrelated lifts/abilities of this type or that anyway. Much like bodybuilders who use completely different lifting routines end up with very similar results regarding the aspects of what they are competing in but have much different abilities in other aspects the weightlifters competing together will Clean and Jerk and Snatch similar numbers in competition but can otherwise have very little in common regarding their various other physical abilities.

This reminds me of convergent evolution, in which nature repeatedly, in separate lineages, develops solutions the end up very similar from very different starting points. I'm curious do weightlifters tend to look the same, regardless of varied training methods and abilities in the power lifts?

Many experts actually theorize that heavy squatting is actually a much more helpful assistance exercise for maximizing performance in the discontinued Press

I'd be curious about the line of reasoning. Is it related to directly building necessary structures? or perhaps just hormonal?

This lack of congruence between the effects of different lifting regimens can result in a lifter trading a very good lift in one barbell exercise for a more mediocre ability in another as the lifter loses his strength on the first lift to pursue results in another while basically starting from scratch on the new lift. Conversely this situation might simply encourage one to incorporate a more eclectic collection of exercises altogether so as to develop better-rounded lifting abilities

I've had success with both of these strategies. I've had the most success sticking to a small number of movements for time periods closer to years than months. The latter approach contains a lot of room for interpretation. Recently I've seen great success including a lot more movements, but hitting some of them much more frequently than others. That said I'd put myself in the beginner category where many things can work. One thing that did not work for years and years though was wandering into the gym and sitting on whatever machine was open... not the same as strategy two. :p
 
This is fascinating stuff (as have been your other recent posts). Welcome to the Forum!



This reminds me of convergent evolution, in which nature repeatedly, in separate lineages, develops solutions the end up very similar from very different starting points. I'm curious do weightlifters tend to look the same, regardless of varied training methods and abilities in the power lifts?
Some weightlifters definitely seem to have superior upper body development than the others. Other lifters seem to have a skewed lower to upper body ratio giving them a "pear shaped" look. I would say however most generally fall somewhere in between and while there still exist differences among individuals these differences are generally not nearly as noticeable as one would expect considering several hundreds of pounds difference in the weights squatted, some pressing huge weights while others never do any type of pressing exercise whatsoever, or other variables such as the chinese doing very heavy weighted pull-ups and dips while others completely ignore such exercises...


I'd be curious about the line of reasoning. Is it related to directly building necessary structures? or perhaps just hormonal?

The reasoning is that they need a very strong stable base to press from in that the exercise is fundamentally different than Jerk or Snatch as those exercises involve more or less constant fluid movement through the entire range of motion and an associated constant changing of body tension whereas the Press requires a more consistent and uniform high level of tension throughout the body and involves very little movement in comparison with the other two. The body in the press must remain fairly rigid in other words while the other two lifts are completely fluid involving the significant release of tension or relaxing of muscles and transition of tension from one muscle to another in crucial points of the lift such as exploding under the clean, snatch or jerk. The central nature of a combination of momentum and elasticity in Jerk or Snatch is altogether inconsistent with rigidity.
 
Interesting, so if I understand correctly some people probably argue that something like heavy supports, or heavy short range partials in the squat might be as good for better.
 
Interesting, so if I understand correctly some people probably argue that something like heavy supports, or heavy short range partials in the squat might be as good for better.

Heavy Supports and Partials actually work best when used along with some incorporation of the full range of motion and the same goes for negative training. Olympic Lifters for instance sometimes place an extremely heavy weight high in a power rack and support it over head after moving it off the safety bars a couple of inches by standing with their arms already fully extended; this is actually a static exercise and it is intended to improve performance in stabilizing and holding onto the Jerk. Paul Anderson who is credited with a full squat of 1,200 pounds often did quarter squats for very high repetitions with 2,000 pounds and credited these partials with helping significantly in raising his max in the back squat but was very adamant that it was absolutely necessary to include some training in the full range of motion in order to reap the full benefits of such work. Another strategy, progressive range of motion, involves performing high repetitions in a very reduced range of motion and slowly increasing the range of motion and lowering the repetitions until the finally achieving the goal of performing one or two reps in the full range of motion of the exercise with a new personal best weight. Both Paul Anderson and Bob Peoples used this last strategy successfully to increase the max back squat and dead lift respectively however both also suggest always consistently including some work on the full range of motion as an integral part of such training. Some progress can obviously be made doing partial, static, or negative exercises alone but in my opinion the strategy of doing nothing but partials, static training, or negative training has serious limitations and it is quite simply a markedly inferior strategy for maximizing overall strength and power...
 
in my opinion the strategy of doing nothing but partials, static training, or negative training has serious limitations and it is quite simply a markedly inferior strategy for maximizing overall strength and power...
I'm not sure how this is related. We were discussing the use of the back squat as an assistance exercise for the overhead press no? I thought this is about what assistance exercise to add to an existing program. Were you suggesting only doing backsquats?

Heavy Supports and Partials actually work best when used along with some incorporation of the full range of motion and the same goes for negative training.
Work best for what. Paul Anderson, Bob Peoples, Bud Jeffries they all used heavy partial and supports to improve full range lifts, so they needed to do the full range lift. Here we are trying to improve the press, for which ..."they need a very strong stable base to press from". Why would you need to do a full squat when the top of the squat is the relevant piece? Especially since it will force you to use far less weight than you could.

I'm no expert, just trying to understand the reasoning.
 
I think this thread highlights the contribution of the mind with strength. The correlation appears to be with the comfort and intimacy with a weight and intimidation. It makes sense that a OL used to cleaning 200kg can only squat 205kg. In the mind, that 5kg is much heavier than it is physically. Working with really-heavy weights makes heavy weights not so intimidating.
 
I'm not sure how this is related. We were discussing the use of the back squat as an assistance exercise for the overhead press no? I thought this is about what assistance exercise to add to an existing program. Were you suggesting only doing backsquats?


Work best for what. Paul Anderson, Bob Peoples, Bud Jeffries they all used heavy partial and supports to improve full range lifts, so they needed to do the full range lift. Here we are trying to improve the press, for which ..."they need a very strong stable base to press from". Why would you need to do a full squat when the top of the squat is the relevant piece? Especially since it will force you to use far less weight than you could.

I'm no expert, just trying to understand the reasoning.

Quarter squats do not really hit a lot of the crucial muscles such as glutes and hamstrings in the same way that full squats do and these muscles are very important for stability in the Press. The position being similar is somewhat misleading; they are different movements altogether and therefore they utilize different muscles to different extents in a different manner.
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom