Now that I've said that I am passionate about Olympic lifting and my goal is to spread knowledge of the Olympic lifts and not "hate," I will respond to Bill's comments.
Nice drive-by: "Rippetoe coaching the clean. So much wrong....". Aaaaand scene!! Nothing else to say really. None of the "best" Oly coaches coach it that way and they have so much success we don't even qualify for the Olympics any more. Here, let me play: "Rippetoe coaching a guy who's never done a clean. It's PERFECT! FLAWLESS!! Took my breath away!!" No actual argument required.
I agree, Bill. This was a cheap shot. In fact, right after I posted this I thought "Crap, this has nothing to do with the debate as to how best to strengthen the clean." So I agree that the way Ripp teaches the power clean is a separate debate from his recommendations of how to strengthen the clean. Mea culpa on this issue.
Another drive-by with the worst squats ever passed in PL competition- courtesy of the oft quoted around here Mr. Simmons, by the way. If you think any self-respecting lifter would defend that abomination you might be drunk. Equally so if you think those guys aren't actually "strong" because they're just doing..... whatever it is they're doing there with 1,200lbs.
Again I agree. I actually said in my initial post that this was an extreme example of PL style squats. I said in a later post that a better comparison would be a PLer doing a raw PL squat vs. an OL squat.
Also - those Oly lifters doing the butt-to-heels squats with 600+ pounds are hella strong. How many of them are Americans? Are any of them trained by the American coaches who so confidently insist that their lifters would be competitive, but for the doping programs of the successful teams? After everybody and their dog got banned for PEDs last year at Worlds in Anaheim, we got either 7th or 9th among the "unbusted" teams depending upon how you count the medals, getting bested by perennial powerhouses like Chilé and Vietnam. This is like the 2-14 NFL coach insisting his critics are wrong because they've never coached successfully either.
None of the lifters in the videos are US lifters and none are trained by US coaches. As someone who loves the sport weightlifting, I am painfully aware of the fact that the US sucks at weightlifting. No argument there. Now let's look at why this is the case. Ripp says that US lifters are weaker than their international counterparts. Let's apply some critical analysis here. This is a prime example of single factor thinking - the idea that the solution to all our problems is X. The reality is more complicated. X may be
one of the solutions, but is probably not the
only solution. As I mentioned in a post above, I think there is a pool of "strong short guys" who could do quite well in the lower weight classes but who never get noticed because of lack of resources and suboptimal recruiting practices. My problem with Ripp is that he focuses solely on the lack of strength of US lifters. Lack of stength may certainly be
one of the factors for the lack of US success in weightlifting but I do not think it is the
only factor. Furthermore, he thinks that using his training methods is the best way to get weightlifters stronger. He basically says so here:
Is Olympic Weightlifting Strength Training? | Mark Rippetoe I have a problem with that. First, the cynical side of me says he just wants to promote his certification program - take my certification or hire one of my certified coaches and all will be well. But even if he is not solely trying to promote his certified coaches because of financial gain, he is advocating a completely different approach to training our Olympic lifters. He wants a complete change to the way we train our weightlifters, and since we base our training on how other nations train their lifters, he's saying that the current training model for Olympic lifters is wrong. If he wants to implement an entire new way of training weightlifters, the burden of proof is on him to show that his methods are in fact better than current methods. This is hardly the same a losing football coach criticizing another losing football coach. This is more like an armchair quarterback with no coaching experience criticizing a losing football coach.
The argument about the clean is about straight bar path vs an intentionally curved bar path. Here's some data directly comparing both approaches:
https://www.asep.org/asep/asep/JEPonlineJUNE2016_Petrizzo.pdf
I read the article. The article proposes a solution in search of a problem. I realize that in a previous post I made a big deal about the importance of the first pull. That was based on
practical considerations. In
theory, it does not matter how a lifter executes the first pull. The point of the first pull is to put the lifter in the proper power position for the second pull. That's it. Now, there are the rules to consider. The easiest and most efficient way for a lifter to get into the proper position for the second pull is to lift the bar above the knees in any manner that the lifter wants, then drop into the power position. Unfortunately, this is not allowed by the rules. The rules state that once the bar is lifted from the ground the bar must keep moving upward and cannot move downward. This is why the first pull becomes a bit of a big deal. Now, if I had a freak of a lifter who could take a world record weight and, using straight legs and a rounded back, bring the bar to the correct power position and execute a successful lift in compliance with the rules, I'd say have at it, Hoss! If it ain't broke don't fix it. The reality is that most lifters can't do this, so they'll need to develop a first pull that easily and effectively puts them in the ideal position for the second pull. In this sense, the first pull becomes somewhat of a big deal. A first pull that easily and effectively puts them in the ideal position for the second pull will not necessarily be the most
efficient way of pulling the bar, which is what the article discusses. But I don't care about that. For a maximum deadlift, you definitely want all phases of the pull to be efficient. But most lifters can deadlift way more than what they clean, making the first pull relatively light compared to the deadlift. There is no need to make the first pull "efficient" in the sense that "efficient" means the best way to pull a maximal weight simply because a lifter during the first pull will never come near pulling a maximal weight.