all posts post new thread

Barbell Can you get the benefit of the power of the powerclean from a rack pull?

Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
As I stated, I am sure you can provide greater insight and demonstrate to Garhammer where he went wrong.

You have no idea is spot on.
Well, one of us is fixated. If you know so much, why haven't you answered a single question? All you did was provide data that looks suspect and then hide behind a name that think everyone will tremble in fear of. That is less than useful and does not inspire confidence in what you have to say. I've been around a long time and talked to a lot of guys. I've discovered that many of these "Names" are wrong about many things, and no one should fail to investigate or ask questions. Especially when information appears patently flawed.
 
As I stated, I am sure you can provide greater insight and demonstrate to Garhammer where he went wrong.

You have no idea is spot on.
I don't know if Garhammer is wrong, I do know that the information presented appears factually incorrect on it's face. The presenter could in fact be totally misrepresenting Garhammer. That's really up to the presenter to clarify when he's called out on it, not the rest of the world.
 
I had a quick read of the article (I haven't dinished it yet). The numbers referenced in the article for power measured during the clean refer only to the complete pulling phase of the clean (the point from which the bar first leaves the platform to the point where it reaches its maximum elevation prior to the lifter receiving it in a squat), excluding the squat and recovery phase of the lift.

The power measured is averaged out across the entire pull, which is why the measurement for the second pull is considerably higher as it only measures power output from when the bar makes contact with the lifter's body - typically at the hips - to the point of maximum elevation, as before.

The article specifies that the duration of the entire pull in their example is .72s whereas the duration of the second pull alone is only .12s so, while the second pull certainly creates a significantly higher average power, it's over a much shorter duration.

Generating an average power of 33.5W/kg for .72s equals more work done than 55.8W/kg for .12s (and that's if you can even move that fast!) so that's how those numbers work.

That's how I'm interpreting the numbers anyway; I haven't studied science since high school and that was a long time ago so it's entirely possible my interpretation is somewhat oversimplified.

@Anatoly As far as the implications for structuring your training go, I don't think that isolating the second pull in a clean in order to maximise your power output necessarily is the way to go. If short-duration, small ROM movements are your bag then it's possible that barbell jump squats with a shallow dip might be a better choice.
 
Last edited:
I had a quick read of the article (I haven't dinished it yet). The numbers referenced in the article for power measured during the clean refer only to the complete pulling phase of the clean (the point from which the bar first leaves the platform to the point where it reaches its maximum elevation prior to the lifter receiving it in a squat), excluding the squat and recovery phase of the lift.

The power measured is averaged out across the entire pull, which is why the measurement for the second pull is considerably higher as it only measures power output from when the bar makes contact with the lifter's body - typically at the hips - to the point of maximum elevation, as before.

The article specifies that the duration of the entire pull in their example is .72s whereas the duration of the second pull alone is only .12s so, while the second pull certainly creates a significantly higher average power, it's over a much shorter duration.

Generating an average power of 33.5W/kg for .72s equals more work done than 55.8W/kg for .12s (and that's if you can even move that fast!) so that's how those numbers work.

That's how I'm interpreting the numbers anyway; I haven't studied science since high school and that was a long time ago so it's entirely possible my interpretation is somewhat oversimplified.

@Anatoly As far as the implications for structuring your training go, I don't think that isolating the second pull in a clean in order to maximise your power output necessarily is the way to go. If short-duration, small ROM movements are your bag then it's possible that barbell jump squats with a shallow dip might be a better choice.
Part of the reason the second pull creates more power is in fact in partly because of the short duration. Power = work/time thus the more distance you cover in shorter time, the more power is there. I’d reckon the distance of the first pull and second pull are similar or at least close in distance (guessing).

I think it’s bizarre about previous comments where someone stated Olympic pullers can clean more from blocks then the floor. To me this is like saying someone can standing broad jump further then they can long jump with a running start. Unless there are technical/mobility issues, I don’t see how this would be the case.
 
I think it’s bizarre about previous comments where someone stated Olympic pullers can clean more from blocks then the floor. To me this is like saying someone can standing broad jump further then they can long jump with a running start. Unless there are technical/mobility issues, I don’t see how this would be the case.

Yeah, that makes no sense to me, but then I'm a newbie lifter who still has a lot to learn about the Olympic lifts.

Its quite common for Olympic Weightlifters to be able to clean and snatch the same or even MORE from the blocks (bar at or above knee)
THAN their lifts from the floor. So the same "work" in about half the range of motion ("distance").

I understand lifters who can do heavier jerks from blocks because then there's no fatigue from the clean. Some lifters are stronger when performing lifts from the hang position but that's because they can utilise the stretch reflex and build tension as they lower the bar to the hang position. Being stronger off blocks with no momentum only really makes sense to me if your positions in the pull from the floor are way off relative to the start position off the blocks.

I'll have to look for some examples of this and see if I can figure it out. I've noticed that, even among the elite, there are a lot of weightlifters who get excellent (if not world class) results with techniques that no coach would teach and I'm fully prepared to believe that some people might be just insanely explosive but fatigue very quickly from the first pull, which might explain being able to snatch/clean more off blocks.

I'd like to sincerely thank all at the StrongFirst forum for giving me a place where I can talk endlessly about this kind of thing without losing friends or boring anyone into a coma. ?
 
Well, that's certainly not true for me.

I'm also not sure it's "quite common". I'd be curious to see some data to back up how common that it is with experienced lifters because, well...physics.

My full snatch / clean is heavier than from blocks, because I already have momentum built up from the 1st pull.

The 2nd pull is additive to that momentum, as opposed to having to overcome dead stop inertia from blocks or from the hang.

I can empirically measure the difference in bar velocity using the Push system, and I get higher peak bar speed with the full lifts.

But as Greg Everett notes:

"Some lifters will be able to clean more from certain block heights than they can from the floor—this is not necessarily a problem, although it can be an indicator of technical or strength issues in the pull from the floor."

So if one can pull more from a block, that's not necessarily a great thing.
Actually you see it more commonly with elites.
There are countless examples, world champions etc WHO HAVE GREAT FORM AND TECHNIQUE.

All that said, even when can not clean/snatch more (101-105%) or same from the blocks;
most people, even novices can lift about 85-90% from blocks. So all that "momentum" generated in the first pull isn't that big of a contributor as it would seem (sure its not meaningless). Being in the right positions at the critical time (above knee aound the power position) with good balance is more important that the speed of the 1st pull.

Also, the leverages when the bar is around the knee, or just above, that are insanely advantageous.
Some simpler ways to think of it:
- a guy can rack pull from the knee more than a deadlift from the floor.
- you can 1/4 squat more than ATG.
- going too deep in the dip of the jerk is not effective .... they don't do a deep front squat for the jerk, they do a shallow 1/4-front-squat movement.
 
Actually you see it more commonly with elites.
There are countless examples, world champions etc WHO HAVE GREAT FORM AND TECHNIQUE.

Well...this is a claim and an assertion, but I'd need to see actual data that backs it up.

And, again, read what Greg Everett wrote..for *some* lifters its true. And it's not considered a good thing to be weaker from the floor.

So given the lack of evidence we'll just have to disagree on this one in terms of how common it is among the snatch and clean.

All that said, even when can not clean/snatch more (101-105%) or same from the blocks;
most people, even novices can lift about 85-90% from blocks. So all that "momentum" generated in the first pull isn't that big of a contributor as it would seem (sure its not meaningless). Being in the right positions at the critical time (above knee aound the power position) with good balance is more important that the speed of the 1st pull.

Also, the leverages when the bar is around the knee, or just above, that are insanely advantageous.
Some simpler ways to think of it:
- a guy can rack pull from the knee more than a deadlift from the floor.
- you can 1/4 squat more than ATG.
- going too deep in the dip of the jerk is not effective .... they don't do a deep front squat for the jerk, they do a shallow 1/4-front-squat movement.

Deadlifts and squats aren't ballistics; so that's a bit of a red herring. Jerks are also a different topic entirely and no claims were made about them.

Also, your assertion that momentum "isn't that big of a contributor" doesn't match velocity training system bar speed graphs I've taken myself nor those publicly available elsewhere.

This is a squat clean graph. By the time the 2nd pull begins, at about timestamp 3.8s, the bar already has about 1/3 of its peak speed; 1/3 is a pretty decent chunk.

tumblr_inline_p7gy7ek8Vs1swqs6j_500.jpg


And, again...the physics makes it obvious as to why.

So I'll be sticking to this POV until I see empirical data that contradicts it.
 
Last edited:
I think it’s bizarre about previous comments where someone stated Olympic pullers can clean more from blocks then the floor. To me this is like saying someone can standing broad jump further then they can long jump with a running start. Unless there are technical/mobility issues, I don’t see how this would be the case.

That's a great analogy.

See graph above which matches your understanding of a 'running start'.

And, as Greg Everett notes in the article upthread, weakness from the floor can often be a symptom of some other issue.
 
Yeah, that makes no sense to me, but then I'm a newbie lifter who still has a lot to learn about the Olympic lifts.

Newbie or not, your current instincts and experience match the data and science. ;)

Again, nobody is saying some lifters, from some positions, can't have stronger blocks pulls form *some* heights due to the particulars of a given person's leverage arms, but saying it's *common* seems like a huge stretch that lacks supporting evidence.

The few times I've seen it in person has been with half height blocks and superheavy weightclass lifters (>109 kg men / > 89 kg women) . But they didn't have the same odd discrepancy with full height blocks.
 
Last edited:
Ok, maybe we're getting lost in the weeds of "common"; I guess I should've used "not un-common".

The over arching point, is lifter's block clean or block snatch are anywhere from 85 to 105% of the floor lifts.
So, think about it, we've COMPLETELY reduced the momentum from the 1st pull/(half of the total pulling phase) to ZERO,
yet we're not cutting the completed lift/load in HALF.

I know its counter intuitive, but yeah, its a thing.

From just above the knee (bar just above knee), if you start pulling from there, within about 3-4" you'll reach ABOUT the same speed as the entire 1st pull from the floor (floor to knee).....all due to the advantageous leverages from that "blocks"-posisiton, compared to the crappy leverages starting from the floor.

Also, many times/certain lifter's bar speeds will either plateau , or actually slow down a tiny bit, thru the DBK phase.

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

The running long jump analogy?
Yeah, let me fix that:
Instead of comparing a standing long jump to a jump with a 20 meter run-up.....
Its like saying a long jumper could use half of their approach run and still jump 90% of their best jump from the full distance.
(this would never happen, because of the foot/stride/pace timing...long jumpers would never practice this).
AND/OR taking a longer faster run-up (full 100% speed sprint) definitely does NOT yield longer jump distances.

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

All this,
*makes waving motion to thread after post 1*
and everyone is having a problem those published force plate numbers where the 2nd pull blows the 1st pull away, and greater than or the complete full-lift, away.
 
This is a squat clean graph. By the time the 2nd pull begins, at about timestamp 3.8s, the bar already has about 1/3 of its peak speed; 1/3 is a pretty decent chunk.

tumblr_inline_p7gy7ek8Vs1swqs6j_500.jpg


And, again...the physics makes it obvious as to why.

So I'll be sticking to this POV until I see empirical data that contradicts it.

Here, let this sink in:
According to the data and studies on competing weightlifters (R.A.Roman etal)
the peak velocity in the snatch is ONLY 1.65m/s to 2.05m/s .....
and the clean ONLY 1.20m/s - 1.6m/s.
The faster end of those^ ranges are for taller athletes.
Look what you posted: 2.95m/s?
Ask yourself why are you moving the bar so fast?

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

Getting back to the blocks.
Keep in mind to that a block lift from the knee, is just an accessory b.s. ancillary lift one does through the course of training....
...fatigued state, middle of training cycle, etc....
....they are not doing those day in day out, with the ultimate goal of improving their block-lifts....like they are with the competition lift.
And yet, those block-lift-loads are still 85%-105% of their competition bests (w/ getting no contribution 1st pull what-so-ever).
 
Ok, maybe we're getting lost in the weeds of "common"; I guess I should've used "not un-common".

The over arching point, is lifter's block clean or block snatch are anywhere from 85 to 105% of the floor lifts.
So, think about it, we've COMPLETELY reduced the momentum from the 1st pull/(half of the total pulling phase) to ZERO,
yet we're not cutting the completed lift/load in HALF.

I know its counter intuitive, but yeah, its a thing.

From just above the knee (bar just above knee), if you start pulling from there, within about 3-4" you'll reach ABOUT the same speed as the entire 1st pull from the floor (floor to knee).....all due to the advantageous leverages from that "blocks"-posisiton, compared to the crappy leverages starting from the floor.

Also, many times/certain lifter's bar speeds will either plateau , or actually slow down a tiny bit, thru the DBK phase.

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

The running long jump analogy?
Yeah, let me fix that:
Instead of comparing a standing long jump to a jump with a 20 meter run-up.....
Its like saying a long jumper could use half of their approach run and still jump 90% of their best jump from the full distance.
(this would never happen, because of the foot/stride/pace timing...long jumpers would never practice this).
AND/OR taking a longer faster run-up (full 100% speed sprint) definitely does NOT yield longer jump distances.

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

All this,
*makes waving motion to thread after post 1*
and everyone is having a problem those published force plate numbers where the 2nd pull blows the 1st pull away, and greater than or the complete full-lift, away.
Ok this now makes sense to me. I was presuming the block pull pretty much placed the bar right around the second pull (meaning you’d just initiate the second pull from a dead start).
 
Much as I am genuinely really enjoying the back and forth in this thread, I feel like we've drifted a long way from the original poster's question.

Bearing everything we've discussed in mind, are there any benefits to training just the second-pull phase of the clean if one's aim is to train for speed/power and not necessarily to improve performance of the Olympic lifts? My initial reaction was 'no' but now I'm wondering if there might be something in it.

Presuming that an athlete builds raw strength through heavy back squats and/or deadlifts, could the inclusion of the slower first pull when training power cleans be redundant?

The 'piecemeal' approach to training the snatch and clean are applied for reasons of addressing specific positional/technical issues when training weightlifters (for the most part) but could they serve a purpose in general power training for athletics or would the athlete merely be short-changing themself in terms of the training effect of the full lift?
 
Bearing everything we've discussed in mind, are there any benefits to training just the second-pull phase of the clean if one's aim is to train for speed/power and not necessarily to improve performance of the Olympic lifts? My initial reaction was 'no' but now I'm wondering if there might be something in it.

Presuming that an athlete builds raw strength through heavy back squats and/or deadlifts, could the inclusion of the slower first pull when training power cleans be
Second Pull Training

Performing Second Pulls from my knee area increased my Competition Deadlift. I based it on Bill Starr's "A Different Approach To The Deadlift". That is credited to Starr in, "The No Deadlift, Deadlift Training" article in a previous post.

Bill Starr's American Deadlift Record Training Program

It revolved around Heavy Good Mornings and Power Cleans.

I modified Starr's Power Cleans off the floor; performing them in the knee area.

That because, like most Conventional Deadlifters, I blow the weight off the floor; my sticking point is in the knee area.

Thus, preformed Power Cleans and High Pulls increased my Pulling Power in that knee area.

I continue to preform Second Pulls from the knee area.

Heavy Swings

However, I found the Heavy Kettlebell Swings and Heavy Dumbbell Swings (holding the Dumbbells out to the side of the legs) elicited a similar training response.

Research has demonstrated that Heavy Swings elicit and produce Power Output that is similar to the Olympic Pulls.
...could they serve a purpose in general power training for athletics or would the athlete merely be short-changing themself in terms of the training effect of the full lift?
No

Not based on my training results and Phil Rivera (another Powerlifter) who slight modified Starr and my No Deadlift Training approach.

Phil's modification was to perform Good Mornings and Power Cleans for three weeks. On the fourth week, Phil Deadlifted.

Phil's Deadlift and Power increased with that approach.

With that said, I am a huge proponent of...

Olympic High Pulls

For athletes interested with increasing Power, Olympic High Pulls are very effective and quickly learned.

1) Allen Hedrick: The Clean High Pull

The majority of the power developed in either the clean or the snatch occurs during the second pull phase (the movement from just above the knee until the bar reaches approximately sternum height).

In both the clean and snatch, once the bar reaches sternum height the lifter normally drops under the bar. However, this catch phase doesn't contribute to the power developed in these movements.

As discussed, one advantage of the clean high pull over the full clean is that the athlete doesn't have to catch the bar. As a result, you can typically use heavier loads.




2) Is It Time to Dump the Catch with the Power Clean? - SimpliFaster

If economy of time and effect is the intent, along with creating more power and speed at different intensities with a total body movement, the clean high pull just might be your movemet.

Trap Bar Jumps

Research shows that Trap Bar Jumps evoke approximately the same Power Output as Olympic Pulls. Dumbbell Dump Jumps would work in a similar way to the Trap Bar.

Take Home Message

Research shows that any of these method will increase Power Output, when preformed correctly.

Partial Plyometric Good Mornings

This is a novel approach for increasing Strength for many Conventional Deadlifters with a sticking point in the knee area.

Another topic for another time.
 
Last edited:
Olympic High Pulls

For athletes interested with increasing Power, Olympic High Pulls are very effective and quickly learned.

1) Allen Hedrick: The Clean High Pull

The majority of the power developed in either the clean or the snatch occurs during the second pull phase (the movement from just above the knee until the bar reaches approximately sternum height).

In both the clean and snatch, once the bar reaches sternum height the lifter normally drops under the bar. However, this catch phase doesn't contribute to the power developed in these movements.

As discussed, one advantage of the clean high pull over the full clean is that the athlete doesn't have to catch the bar. As a result, you can typically use heavier loads.



#1 - That video is horrible.
A- She almost stops half way through.
B- She'd be better off just extending and staying that trying to do the panda-pull drop movement there.
C-The Jason Bourne fight scene shaky cam is quite irritating.

#2- The highlighted part about the "sternum" is incorrect if this is to translate to power of the leg, hip, and back extensors. The ("majority of" ) POWER would end at the high-thigh or hip height....everything else upward from there is either momentum/coast ... and/or arm pull. (if arm pull, "power" would be significantly diminished due to the tiny muscles of the upper extremities).

You have to wonder about a person/org. putting this out there....

Otherwise I totally agree pulls, or block pull variants, are 'better' for court, field, track athletes for various reasons.
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom