Re: Elite FTS article on overhead olympic lifts. Found this interesting.
I'm wondering about this though: "One is in error to assume that overhead Olympic lift derivatives are the only, or most optimal, means of developing explosiveness in athletes."
I wonder who he is addressing because I have yet to hear of a trainer suggest an athlete exclusively perform Oly lifts. Even Oly lifters do alot of squat variations, DLs, GHRs etc...
And "The perfection of any other sportsman’s skill, however, lies in mastering their respective sport skill, NOT in performing snatches, clean and jerks, bench press, squats, deadlifts, or any other barbell exercise."
I've never heard any trainer suggest substituting lifting for sport specific training, so I wonder where the author is coming from on this.
A bit off the topic but related to combat sports last night I watched a show concerning UFC champ Rich Franklin's training. For his weight workouts it said he normally does 10 sets of 15 reps of 10 exercises with no rest between sets. !?!?!?
And what they showed him doing were bicep curls, leg extentions, leg presses, machine presses and so on. No use of free weights not to mention no Oly lifts.
I'm not sure what to think of it all but I'd love to hear Alwyn and Dos's take on both scenarios.
Re: Elite FTS article on overhead olympic lifts. Found this interesting.
A skilled and trained athlete, particularly if they posses great natural physical gifts, can get by doing a lot of shitty supplemental training. Oftentimes, they are good, and even attribute their sucess to their program, even if their program sucks. I recall seeing what Roger Clemens does for a special training program from some guru trainer. It stunk. He's so good because he's good; he, and possibly Franklin, would be even better with a better program/better training.
I think the article's author is responding to some situations to which he has been exposed, even if they are not the norm. But, maybe they are the norm. I would be better at my martial arts if I practiced them more, even if that meant training with weights less (and it probably would mean that).
I think that I have often compromised my MA training in order to do lifting or running intervals. In the past, when I was making my best progress with lifting, I was sucking at martial arts. OTOH, I was best at my martial arts when I practiced them more and did no other supplemental training. After reassessing my goals, why I was lifting, I settled on the most rational reason: to support my martial arts training and performance. To do more than that means I would be training to be an oly lifter, power lifter or cover model. Training for any of those would mean that I could not train as effectively in the martial arts.
Re: Elite FTS article on overhead olympic lifts. Found this interesting.
I agree with you on the Clemens/Franklin point.
But regarding training nobody would argue to replace skill training with GPP. Or if someone has I haven't seen it.
Doesn't Alwyn say GPP often decides the outcome?
Don't you find that in a long match technique suffers if conditioning is lacking? I've certainly had that happen and lost because I got tired. I've seen a number of MMA fights in which the fighter who wins had less technical skill (but a decent defense) won simply because the other guy gassed.
And honestly if one is training alot of MA then GPP shouldn't take up much of your time anyway. I would think 3 30 min. sessions a week would do the trick. And working the entire body ala Oly lifts would not be a waste of time.
Re: Elite FTS article on overhead olympic lifts. Found this interesting.
Yeah, I agree with everything you've said. The exact thought I was having while reading your post was "balance."
I think the point of the article may have been that more oly lifting won't necessarily make you a better athlete, particularly if it crowds out skills training, or inhibits recovery so skills training suffers. I can see how looking for the secret additional training ingredient (such as more oly lifting) can lead astray.
Re: Elite FTS article on overhead olympic lifts. Found this interesting.
One of the common arguments against O-lifting for athletes(non-weightlifters) is the "skill" required to perform them. Most of it focuses on oppoturnity cost of the time spent teaching the lifts. Combine that time loss with, what I believe to be, a minunderstanding of the dangers and you have an excuse not to do them. I don't think they are a must, demonstrated by the examples listed already. But I do think they have significan carry over of direct strength and power development. I also think that they can be taught without much lost time, from a competent strength coach. You don't have to "waste" time learning with a broomstick, I call that warmup and movement prep. And really, how hard is it to jerk? Some of his points are valid though, there are tons of exercises out there; and there are successful athetes that use them all.
Also, my opinion is that olympic lifting requires less recovery than just about anything else. I usually do heavy jerks on my "rest days" because they alwasys seem like an exercise I can do, and never seem to hamper my recovery.
Elite FTS article on overhead olympic lifts. Found this interesting.
Linear Mode
