|
10 Comments
|
|
Will
|
1 | 2010-02-23
|
I'd like to know people's opinion on the argument that lifting shoes while doing barbedll lifts such as squat unfairly allows you to obtain artificial depth by raising the heel so much.
I ask this respectfully and am seeking opinions, I'm not being disrespectful or attacking anyone.
I can only find literature where it was originally designed or ankle safety in lifts such as the split jerk where heels came off the ground and contributed to injury. However, the design seems like it is being abused by being used to more easily get that hip crease below the knee.
I look forward to some educational perspectives that differ from mine.
Thoughts? |
|
|
Michael
|
2 | 2010-02-23
|
|
If they allow it in competition where they try to limit any I guess distint advantages you know steroids, certain wraps belts then I think it is fine. I know that is not a super eductaed or long winded response but I mean the name of the game is competition right, and if the shoes are allowed then you should probably lift in them. |
|
|
Greg Everett
|
3 | 2010-02-23
|
Will -
It's not really about ankle safety, but improving ankle ROM to allow reaching a full depth squat with an upright posture. We're not talking about "crease of the hip below the knee" - that's not a full-depth squat. We're talking about a fully-close knee joint and nearly vertical torso. Very few people have the ankle flexibility to achieve that position.
Now, if you have someone who is doing a squat variation that does not place them in such a bottom position, there is no need for a lifted heel - if someone is that inflexible, there is serious trouble, because that is pretty minimal dorsi-flexion of the ankle. However, there IS a need for a flat, hard-soled shoe, and weightlifting shoes fit this criterion. |
|
|
TeddyB_SC
|
4 | 2010-02-23
|
Will,
This link should help you.
http://www.dynamic-eleiko.com/sportivny/library/farticles015.html
Cl&Jerk--100
Snatch---77
B. Squat-129 |
|
|
Rice Owls Catalysts
|
5 | 2010-02-23
|
C:C&J:205#,Sn:160#,BS:285#,WOD:135#row,GHR
BG:C&J=squatclean PR at 170#, Sn:injured,BS:195#,WOD:135#row,hip extension |
|
|
Will
|
6 | 2010-02-23
|
Thanks for clearing that up Greg. I fully embrace the need for a flat, hard-soled shoe for weightlifting.
However, just to be clear, in the purposes of a CrossFit ROM squat where they want only hip crease below the knee, and not a fully-closed knee joint, would the raised heel of a lifting shoe be considered an unfair advantage to reach this ROM in your opinion? In other words, if you're not looking for a fully-clsed knee, then the raised heel of the lifting shoes has very little purpose other than to give the illusion of full ROM.
I find some folks' squat numbers going up with the lifting shoes and I"m considering only allowing lifting shoes for a FULL squat, and flat shoes for a "CrossFit" squat.
Last question guys, honest. Thanks for the great info. Longtime fan of the site and have my people regularly refer to the OLY lifting book that I have available to my athletes. |
|
|
Greg Everett
|
7 | 2010-02-23
|
Will -
You could argue that it makes that type of squat harder if you wanted. Tends to shift the knees forward more, which is counter to the efforts in that squat. Ultimately I'd rather see people squatting in weightlifting shoes no matter how they're squatting than something like those silly toe shoes or barefoot. Something like Vans or Chuck Taylors would be acceptable though. |
|
|
Brian Reckdenwald
|
8 | 2010-02-23
|
Clean & jerk - 90% x 1 x 3
225 lbs x 1 x 3
Snatch - 90% x 1 x 3
180 x 1 x 3
Back squat - 85% x 3 x 3
300 x 3 x 3
3 sets:
A1. Reverse hyper x 10 - 50 lb DB
A2. Barbell bent row x 10 - 135 lbs |
|
|
Mark Gleason
|
9 | 2010-02-24
|
C&J 90 x 1 x 3
SN 65 x 1 x 3
BS 120 x 3 x 3
SI pain again...c'est la vie! |
|
|
Gordo
|
10 | 2010-02-25
|
C&J 185lb
Snatch 130lb
Jumped in on the local CF metcon for the rest of the work.
4 rounds
15 OHS 95lb
40 double unders
7:05 |
|
Leave a Comment
|
