Programming for the Olympic Lifts

[Yuen Sohn]

To piggyback off of Dave's recommendations, here's some of Glenn's thoughts that I found particularly enlightening:

http://glennpendlay.wordpress.com/20...e-hole-part-1/
http://glennpendlay.wordpress.com/20...e-hole-part-2/

[Gregory L. Johnson]

Originally Posted by Dave Van Skike

Films like the Lone Wolf and Cub series inspire filmwork in 70's Spagetti Westerns

This is a hijacking...yes...I'm turning this into Kurosawa thread...the Spaghetti Westerns were inspired by Kurosawa...the director of Seven Samurai...he also directed a film called Yojimbo...Sergio Leon called his adaptation A Fistfull of Dollars...you may now return to your Practical Programming...

[Neill Smith]

Originally Posted by michael cooley

Here. On a discussion board. Devoted to weightlifting.

A gem of sarcasm...well played.

[Dave Van Skike]

Originally Posted by Gregory L. Johnson

This is a hijacking...yes...I'm turning this into Kurosawa thread...the Spaghetti Westerns were inspired by Kurosawa...the director of Seven Samurai...he also directed a film called Yojimbo...Sergio Leon called his adaptation A Fistfull of Dollars...you may now return to your Practical Programming...

Kurosawa makes Yojimbo...which becomes Fistful of $ but what context does Kurosawa come out of?

never bought into the "great man" theory of history, and so I'm not so lineal in my assumptions. Kurosawa is just one element of a larger movement in Japanese film, albeit a big one.

[Arien Malec]

OK, let me articulate what I think is one of the key issues that makes straightforward application of the principles of PP to weightlifting programming difficult. I would like to do so without:

1) Accusations that all I'm looking for are templates or sample programs
2) Condecending implications that I don't understand what PP is all about
3) Reference to templates for advanced/elite powerlifters as example templates for weightlifting

Further references to Japanese cinema masters or Italian classic spaghetti western masters is optional.

PP provides a framework for programming based on the two factor model, under which a stressor produces both an adaptation and fatigue, and a continuum model of athlete response to stressors based on how far the athlete is from his or her theoretical performance limit (the closer the athlete, the larger the stessor, the greater the fatigue, and the longer the adaptation).

The PP framework works well for strength training, and is generalizable to other domains (cardiovascular training, for example).

There are athletic endeavors where the PP dual factor framework does not apply. There is, for example, a skill based model or framework. If one is training for table tennis at an intermediate level, for example, one does not play a bunch of hard game, go rest, then play a few medium games, then play a really hard game. Instead, one plays a large number of games with skilled but not overmatched opponents, and practices key aspects of the game a lot. As the game improves, one needs even more skill development and practice against even more skilled opponents.

The analogue to weightlifting training would be to snatch and C&J a lot at weights between 70-90% of max. Looks like the Bulgarian or Joe Mills approach.

Another model that works for strength training in some cases is a CNS development model, where the goal is recruiting more muscle at a given strength base. An example of a programming template for such a model is the GTG template. The weightlifting approach here would be either the snatch, c&j and front squat Bulgarian model or alternatively one focused on lots of heavier pulls and power movements to develop explosiveness (power development requires both physiological adaptations and CNS development).

I'd argue that weightlifting programming requires all three models -- it is a sport of skill requiring strength and CNS development.

The programming problem that one then faces is that the programming approaches for strength development leads to a persistant level of fatigue that interfere with skill development, and that a focus on skill development may leave little room for strength development.

The CA WOD/Burgener template tries to solve this by alternating strength and CNS development cyles with skill development cycles (Bulgarian cycles). The Glenn Pendlay programming model referenced above focuses on strength development when the C&J approaches the max fs, and focuses on skill development at other times. The Joe Dube template tries to mix a primary focus on skill development with a secondary focus on strength training. The Bulgarian model focuses on skill with enough front squatting to develop strength -- there is a question as to whether that approach works in the absence of chemical aids to assist recovery.

The basic question is when should one apply each of those approaches, or use other approaches for situations such as the following:

1) Beginning weightlifter with a strong strength base
2) Beginning weightlifter with a weak strength base
3) Intermediate weightlifter who could be stronger and more skilled

And, as a bonus question, 38 year old beginning-intermediate weightlifter with a weak strength base and a terrible recovery capacity.

I prefer Ran -- that's Kurosawa at the top of his game.

[Gant Grimes]

Michael, you're less than 2.5 hours away from Rip and Glenn. It might be time well spent.

[Dave Van Skike]

Originally Posted by Arien Malec

OK, let me articulate what I think is one of the key issues that makes straightforward application of the principles of PP to weightlifting programming difficult. I would like to do so without:

1) Accusations that all I'm looking for are templates or sample programs
2) Condecending implications that I don't understand what PP is all about
3) Reference to templates for advanced/elite powerlifters as example templates for weightlifting

Further references to Japanese cinema masters or Italian classic spaghetti western masters is optional.

PP provides a framework for programming based on the two factor model, under which a stressor produces both an adaptation and fatigue, and a continuum model of athlete response to stressors based on how far the athlete is from his or her theoretical performance limit (the closer the athlete, the larger the stessor, the greater the fatigue, and the longer the adaptation).

The PP framework works well for strength training, and is generalizable to other domains (cardiovascular training, for example).

There are athletic endeavors where the PP dual factor framework does not apply. There is, for example, a skill based model or framework. If one is training for table tennis at an intermediate level, for example, one does not play a bunch of hard game, go rest, then play a few medium games, then play a really hard game. Instead, one plays a large number of games with skilled but not overmatched opponents, and practices key aspects of the game a lot. As the game improves, one needs even more skill development and practice against even more skilled opponents.

The analogue to weightlifting training would be to snatch and C&J a lot at weights between 70-90% of max. Looks like the Bulgarian or Joe Mills approach.

Another model that works for strength training in some cases is a CNS development model, where the goal is recruiting more muscle at a given strength base. An example of a programming template for such a model is the GTG template. The weightlifting approach here would be either the snatch, c&j and front squat Bulgarian model or alternatively one focused on lots of heavier pulls and power movements to develop explosiveness (power development requires both physiological adaptations and CNS development).

I'd argue that weightlifting programming requires all three models -- it is a sport of skill requiring strength and CNS development.

The programming problem that one then faces is that the programming approaches for strength development leads to a persistant level of fatigue that interfere with skill development, and that a focus on skill development may leave little room for strength development.

The CA WOD/Burgener template tries to solve this by alternating strength and CNS development cyles with skill development cycles (Bulgarian cycles). The Glenn Pendlay programming model referenced above focuses on strength development when the C&J approaches the max fs, and focuses on skill development at other times. The Joe Dube template tries to mix a primary focus on skill development with a secondary focus on strength training. The Bulgarian model focuses on skill with enough front squatting to develop strength -- there is a question as to whether that approach works in the absence of chemical aids to assist recovery.

The basic question is when should one apply each of those approaches, or use other approaches for situations such as the following:

1) Beginning weightlifter with a strong strength base
2) Beginning weightlifter with a weak strength base
3) Intermediate weightlifter who could be stronger and more skilled

And, as a bonus question, 38 year old beginning-intermediate weightlifter with a weak strength base and a terrible recovery capacity.

I prefer Ran -- that's Kurosawa at the top of his game.

Nicely played.

[Allen Yeh]

Wow nice post Arien.

[Greg Everett]

I've only skimmed this thread, but Arien makes some good points.

I don't believe PP applies well to weightlifting, although from the few brief discussions I've had with Rippetoe, I think he might disagree because he tends to place a much greater emphasis on strength development and less on loaded skill work.

The WSB stuff has never interested me, largely because I've always thought it to be taking very basic notions from the world of weightlifting and making them seem complex and revolutionary. As Arien said, the issue with weightlifting is the fact that the thing we're trying to improve is a fairly complex motor skill, but one that demands great power. So the trouble comes in trying to reconcile vastly disparate approaches to training these characteristics.

As an aside at this point, I'd like to state I have no idea what the original topic/question/point of this thread is.... So I may be contributing nothing of value.

In my opinion, the simple answer is that the weightlifter has to do it all. He has to rely on good ol' strength training basics like heavy squatting, DLing, pressing etc.; and he has to get in a lot of HEAVY snatching and clean & jerking - not just technique work. The differences between snatching 85% and 100% are HUGE. If you're not handling heavy, heavy weights in the classic lifts a good portion of your training career, you're simply not going to be as successful as you could be.

You can try to mix these things in a given cycle, but it doesn't work well. The WSB thing with max effort, dynamic, etc. is different - snatching a light weight super fast may be valuable in a lot of respects, but it will not produce the response you get from gnarly heavy singles. If you squat and DL heavy with any kind of volume, you can't snatch/CJ heavy, and vice versa.

The rationale of alternating strength emphasis cycles with heavy classic lift emphasis cycles is very simple - create a strength base, then apply that strength base to the snatch and CJ. Sticking with either for too long compromises the other, but not sticking with either long enough doesn't produce any measurable gains.

But of course, all that said, you stil have to consider the individual and adjust for his/her needs. No novice weightlifter needs to be doiing nothing but sn/CJ/FS at only 80%+ for weeks on end - it won't do them any good. But more advanced lifters do need to train that way some of the time to get that speed and accuracy with heavy weights.

There's no simple answer, and honestly, there's so much disagreement among the ranks that you'd think no one has ever been a successful lifter.

[Arien Malec]

Originally Posted by Greg Everett

...

As an aside at this point, I'd like to state I have no idea what the original topic/question/point of this thread is.... So I may be contributing nothing of value.

No danger there -- really valuable information

...

There's no simple answer, and honestly, there's so much disagreement among the ranks that you'd think no one has ever been a successful lifter.

I guess what I'm searching for (and I know the history of fundamental disagreement about weightlifting training) is enough of a framework to be able to program for myself, and to judge what a particular program or template is doing and might be good for.

I think at least acknowledging the different and mutually interfering components of training required for weightlifting is a huge start, allowing one to look at a particular program and at least judge if the emphasis is on technique, skill in handling limit weights, basic strength, power, whatever. It allows us to understand why different systems may work equally well by making different trade offs, and even allows us to look at when and where one approach might be preferred over the other.

By the way, I'm thinking that the two factor model isn't even sufficient for powerlifting/basic strength training. You can't explain even something as simple as the Texas Method intermediate approach (3x weekly with volume [5x5], light [3x3] and heavy [1x3] days) just with two factor model -- you need to allow for skill and (especially) CNS training to explain why the basic model isn't one volume day a week.