Starting Strength vs. O Lifts

[Steve Shafley]

I think that the whole linear programming on the "slow" lifts has gotten a bad rap, and, even though I've seen significant slowdown on progress (in the past) on linear programs and jumped towards and more concurrent or conjugate system, I don't think I've eked out all the gains I could have.

Interestingly enough, in one of the early T-Mag articles, someone said that linear periodization will be good enough for you to win most of the PL contests you enter, if you work at it smart and hard.

One problem I do have with the vast majority of linear programs is that they start out too light, and I think that time is wasted. This is really why I lean strongly towards cybernetic periodization systems like the ladder, and other AREG techniques.

One thing that I find bizarro about "Practical Programming" is that basically it tells you the same thing Bill Starr's "Strongest Shall Survive" does.

When the hell did lifters lose sight of that?

[Rick Deckart]

Wasted time... well I think this is the one point where I disagree with Ripptoe, the idea that it is always best to progress as fast as possible and that programming which slows progress down on purpose, or by accident is a waste. Sorry in my experience it can be a very bad mistake to proceed as fast as you can if your frame is not build to the same standard as your muscles are. And I think older trainees especially would probably be well served to make progress slower than they could.

If I remember correct, Zatziorsky stated that in the old days russian lifting coaches followed what he called the golden rule of "three years". Three years of proper preparation before you a ready to start a full force lifting cycle... (I would have to look up this...)

Personally I wasted more than enough time proceeding/progressing faster than I really could (that is all of me, not just my muscles)...

[Elliot Royce]

think this is becuase until you have some proficiency in the classic lifts, you are going aren't going to build strength as fast as you will learnign the basic deadlfit, sqaut and press

Yes, this was really the starting point of my question: advance on strength or advance on technique or try to do both. Ultimately, I think it has to be both if you want explosive strength and/or to be an O lifter.

The total body nature of the O lifts does help fill in the gaps. I thought I had a strong upper body but then the pulls starting working the rear delts and there was certainly accelerated development there. So ultimately the O lifts help on the foundation. They also build confidence.

I've been working back up on the deadlifts gently because of the hips, lower back problems and general lack of flexibility. Yet, here I was today pulling a heavier weight than I normally try deadlifting off the floor without giving my lower back a second thought.

Ultimately I think the two are complementary. What I've done is to develop a modified workout A and B. Workout A is

back squat
jerks
power clean

Workout B is
front squat
overhead squat
pulls

I use these principally when I don't have access to bumpers. Then, at my coach's direction, I'm focusing on hang squat cleans when I have access to bumpers.

[John Alston]

Is it just me or does it seem like a lot of people who integrate olifts into a more general program do a lot more power cleans than full cleans? WHy is this? The squat clean is just to brutal to neglect.

[Yael Grauer]

Originally Posted by John Alston

Is it just me or does it seem like a lot of people who integrate olifts into a more general program do a lot more power cleans than full cleans? WHy is this? The squat clean is just to brutal to neglect.

I can't speak for anyone else but I personally am working through a progression which starts at above the knee, then once my form etc. improves and I get stronger I'll move on to below the knee and then squat cleans.

[John Alston]

Yael
I think I should just admit to myself that I am an oly head. My love for it distorts my perceptions.
If you're talking about progressing from power cleans to lower cleans into the full squat clean, there are some good arguments infavor of the opposite route. Power cleaning first can lead to some difficulty in getting to the full lift. I think Tommy Kono is big on learning the full lift first. I know from exp that doing too many pwr versions of the lifts made me have to relearn a lot of stuff. I had power snatched 77.5kg but it was a long time before I could make a real snatch with 80.
Working from above the knee to the full squat clean is actually a great way to get started on the lift. I have been doing high high hang snatches and cleans lately, and it has really improved my speed at getting under the bar.

[Elliot Royce]

Actually I agree completely with John. I'm pretty good at power cleaning and still learning on the squat clean. My coach doesn't want me to do any power cleans at this point, for the reasons John mentions. I should have written that workout A was hang squat clean instead of power clean. Yesterday, part of the workout with my coach was just doing 40k hang squat cleans, getting lower and lower. I can power clean 95k so 40k shows just how much it's about technique.

Having said that, we started several months ago with the power cleans (or more correctly, "hang barely squatting cleans") in order to get the pulls right.

I have to say that compared to the official CF mantra of doing the Burgener workout until every move is perfect before doing any weight, I prefer my coach's approach. He tolerates some errors but works around them, and then comes back to them when the trainee is ready to learn. Of course, CF is designed for situations where there is no coach, and it would be dangerous to start everyone into heavier weights with only partially good form.

[Yael Grauer]

Yeah, I'm just on the "whatever my coach tells me to do" plan. Since literally everything he's recommended has worked well so far and all of the women he trains have placed in nat'ls and I haven't, I'm not really interested in starting a debate with him about why he should change his progressions. I'm sure he has reasons (backed by experience) for everything... and he modifies everything for individual situations without people even realizing it.

[Steve Shafley]

Well, if you're "high mileage", then maybe you have a limited number of squats in you per session.

Or, perhaps the ballistic nature of the full range lifts bothers your knees or hips.

Or, maybe your skill level on the classical lifts are small, but you want a higher loading.

I don't think there's all that much more benefit to the full lifts than the "power" versions for the vast majority of people.

I, myself, lean towards the camp where I feel the full, classical olympic lifts, while extraordinarily cool, also take a significant time to master, and need to be considered on with a cost-to-benefit ratio.

[Elliot Royce]

"I, myself, lean towards the camp where I feel the full, classical olympic lifts, while extraordinarily cool, also take a significant time to master, and need to be considered on with a cost-to-benefit ratio."

I think you're right. When I first went to the coach, I was trying to get more explosive for hockey and also just develop the technique to do some of the WODs. Then the joys of O lifting hooked me (like John) and I realized that this could be a sport that I could do for years which would build power, strength and flexibility at the same time.

But if you are training to be a football, hockey or rugby player, I suspect it would be better to just do power cleans, presses and front/back squats.