Adarq.org
Performance Area => Article & Video Discussion => Topic started by: chrisbro1 on January 17, 2012, 11:21:09 am
-
Just saw this vid posted by Daniel from JumpScience.com. Looks like a good alternative until one learns how to do a snatch properly. Maybe even better for jumping purposes? Has anyone ever tried these before or know what they're called (I doubt this is a new exercise)?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jb2llL7TE8M
-
Just saw this vid posted by Daniel from JumpScience.com. Looks like a good alternative until one learns how to do a snatch properly. Maybe even better for jumping purposes? Has anyone ever tried these before or know what they're called (I doubt this is a new exercise)?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jb2llL7TE8M
It's clear that the individual in the video would be unable to perform a snatch/powersnatch with okay form. That does not mean that the same applies to you though. Just learn how, it works better than what he does and it is a scalable exercise. Therefore snatches and their variations allow training to happen. Jumping around without a clue is not training.
-
Just saw this vid posted by Daniel from JumpScience.com. Looks like a good alternative until one learns how to do a snatch properly. Maybe even better for jumping purposes? Has anyone ever tried these before or know what they're called (I doubt this is a new exercise)?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jb2llL7TE8M
It's clear that the individual in the video would be unable to perform a snatch/powersnatch with okay form. That does not mean that the same applies to you though. Just learn how, it works better than what he does and it is a scalable exercise. Therefore snatches and their variations allow training to happen. Jumping around without a clue is not training.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unIULU43XpY&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
Don't know how to embed video, but Daniel's Power Snatch looks okay. Daniel recommends Hang Snatches, and other oly lifting moves in his jump programs, but I think he uploaded this for people who didn't have equipment. like bumper plates, or for people who have strict gyms that don't allow olympic lifting or stuff like that. I agree that the Hang Snatch is still better, and can be self taught.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unIULU43XpY&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
Don't know how to embed video, but Daniel's Power Snatch looks okay. Daniel recommends Hang Snatches, and other oly lifting moves in his jump programs, but I think he uploaded this for people who didn't have equipment. like bumper plates, or for people who have strict gyms that don't allow olympic lifting or stuff like that. I agree that the Hang Snatch is still better, and can be self taught.
Those are not "okay" and he himself realizes this as well. The fact that he does not know how to do it also puts this "alternative exercise recommendation" into perspective. If your gym does not allow you to train, change the gym. You would not train in a gym that does not allow free weights, would you?
-
You're missing the point ^^^
First off, gyms, in contrary to popular beliefs, don't grow in trees. In my area there are barely 3 gyms with 2 of them being pretty much "health" gyms with no free weights. The 3rd, where I go, has free weights but you won't see anybody doing snatches and cleans and dropping the bar on the floor.
These are perfectly acceptable exercises as clean and snatch replacements^^^
-
You're missing the point ^^^
First off, gyms, in contrary to popular beliefs, don't grow in trees. In my area there are barely 3 gyms with 2 of them being pretty much "health" gyms with no free weights. The 3rd, where I go, has free weights but you won't see anybody doing snatches and cleans and dropping the bar on the floor.
These are perfectly acceptable exercises as clean and snatch replacements^^^
I am not missing the point, it's you that has no clue what he is talking about. Not being able to drop the weights to the floor is not a reason not to snatch and clean. Being able to do so makes training more effective and is, at some point, important for progress. But it is largely irrelevant for any beginner in the o-lifts because those should not drop the weight but learn to be in complete control of it. I powercleaned 100 kg for reps before I ever had to drop a weight in the exercise. And if you think that what is shown in the video is an "acceptable replacement" for clean and snatch variations you suffer from grand delusion.
-
Right, and if by any chance you miss a lift and can't control the bar as it's over your head AND can't drop the bar, what do you do? :uhhhfacepalm:
-
Daballa: you just paste the URL into your post, highlight it, and hit the "youtube" button underneath the "bold" icon. simple. Or you hit the "youtube" icon first, then paste the URL in bewteen the two bracketed things that pop up.
Yes this is probably way better for lower body explosiveness than a jump snatch. DOn't know what y'all are bickering about, this is basically a pchain dominant jump, with weights..? Use a trap bar for more specificity, and high bar for more quad involvement in a jump squat.
ANother benefit to this compared to trap bar or high bar squat jumps is arm positioning, this may enable the athelte to load the pchain better as in an actual jump. Another benefit compared to a jump snatch is that there is greater power coming from the legs in the triple extension since you don' thave to worry about hip flexion into a catch.
Another alternative, is instead of jumping with the weight, just let it fly up as high as possible without any arm involvement. It's basically an explosive deadlift into a shrug, except you are not trying to use your arms or use heavy weight, or shrug..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsDXr65iOXU
SO instead of shrugging your shoulders, just let the power from your hips drive the bar up into the air. Use light weight. I do this with sumo-stiff legged deadlifts. Minimal quad involvment though in those, much more quad involvement in the barbell jumps that he is performing. I think I'm going to try these myself, I wasn't planning on it because I was focusing on high bar squat jumps.
There would be fun to try with some broad jumps mixed in between
-
Right, and if by any chance you miss a lift and can't control the bar as it's over your head AND can't drop the bar, what do you do? :uhhhfacepalm:
What do you do if your squat is too heavy and your gym does not have a rack with safety pins? You can squat with spotters, sure, but who is squatting without them anyways? I am pretty sure I have seen you go heavy without spotters in the squat. Where is the difference to the snatch? Obviously bad training situations demand better planning and caution. That does not mean that the exercise cannot be done (except maybe with the bench press where there should always be a spotter or safety pins).
@Avishek: What makes you think that you have the experience/knowledge to evaluate the usefulness of a snatch variation?
-
@Avishek thanks, I didn't know it was that simple, I'll keep that in mind when I post in the future.
@Steven IMO it's safer for someone who can't drop the weight. Failing/missing a lift with the weight overhead can be worse than failing with it on your upper back. I don't think I've seen Raptor squat heavy without safeties, but without spotters yes. Commercial gyms are more likely to have at least one power rack as opposed to platforms and bumper plates.
It's just an alternative for someone without equipment, it's not better than the snatch and it's variations. You say that you didn't need to drop weights until you hit 100kg in your power clean, but what happens after that? They just keep using 100kg for there power cleans? Eventually you would have to look somewhere else for your strength speed exercises.
-
Well yeah but a squat is more controllable exercise. The bar stays in one place (on your back) and you just move your body. You can also be much more precise in the amount of weight you can safely squat.
In a snatch you can miss a lift with what you'd think is a safe weight because it's much more technical. Plus, the bar flies around and needs to be stabilized by the arms/shoulders which is much harder to do. It's one thing to squat and another to jump with a heavy bar and put it over your head and we both know it.
-
@steven-miller
I just happen to harbor the belief that olympic lifts are not as specific as simple weighted jumps, and not as good for power development compared to weighted jumps. Joe Defranco holds this same opinion, commenting on how the most explosive movement in oly lifts comes form the bar, and the spine (and the study I am about to share shows that jump squats produce a more explosive barbell movement than power cleans).
http://www.defrancostraining.com/ask-joe-test/41-strength-training/180-hang-cleans-vs-weighted-jumps-for-explosive-hip-extension.html
People like power cleans because they're called "POWER" cleans, as if they develop power. Of course they do, but so do jump squats, and the barbell jumps Daniel demonstrates. I think the jumps Daniel demonstrates, trap bar jumps, and high bar squat jumps, innervate the muscles used in vertical jumping more specifically, and more so in general, than oly lifting exercises but I cannot find EMG studies demonstrating this. Using kinesthetic senses, it is clear though that you "feel it" more in your quads in jump squats than hang snatches..
In this study here, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21777152 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21777152), the researchers measured the power of the whole system (bar +body, using a force plate), of the bar only, and the body only, utilizing a single sacral optimal marker (results may have been different if utilizing a single cervical optical marker since the oly lifts require so much spinal extension), in the squat, squat jump, and power clean in 9 male college students with 2+ years of oly lifting.
It was found that BAR peak power was higher in a jump squat than in a powerclean in all the loads used, from 30-90%1RM. Body peak power was significantly lower in the power clean compared to jump squat again in all the loads used. The maximum body power during the jump squat occurred at 0%1RM and was triple that of the maximum power produced during the power clen at 90%1RM. Same story for system peak power (measured using the force plate). Greatest system power was achieved at 0%1RM and was more than double that of the maximum from the power clean.
I have the fulltext access and just read through all of it. I can't find any studies looking at the effects of jump squats versus hang snatches though, or barbell Daniel jumps.
THis does not mean that power cleans won't incrase your vertical jump. This study here (http://people.stfx.ca/x2006/x2006nsx/Challis-2004-EXAMINATION%20OF%20THE%20SCALING%20OF%20HUMAN%20JUMPING.pdf) found that oly lifting improved sprint speed and vert more than complex training of heavy squatting and jumping. However, only the oly training group improved in the squat jump, so this does not prove anything about the topic at hand, whether or not squat jumps are better than oly lifts. In fact this raises the notion that squat jumps are better, since practising them would improve them more than oly lifting and since JS performance improved, as well as vertical, we could expect better sprint times and counter movement jumps in a jump squat program.
Other ways of analyzing this are using the tendo. But I will stop here
Edit: oh yeah, what does this bar power versus body power mean?
From the article:
"Throwers or competitive
weightlifters, for example, may be more concerned
with bar velocity and power and not necessarily body
power, whereas jumpers and sprinters may be more
concerned with body or system velocity and power."
Again, body power was triple in the jump squat versus power clean. The fact that max power occurred at 0% jump squat 1RM though is weird, i don't know if that shows us that training jumps without weight is the best strategy therefore.
This study,( http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Comparison%20of%20four%20different%20methods%20to%20measure%20power%20output%20during%20the%20hang%20power%20clean%20and%20the%20weighted%20jump%20squat.%20) which only looked at bar power and system power, found that bar power was higher in a hang power clean versus a weighted jump squat. Results: system power was slightly higher in the jump squat, but the hang powwerclean was close, variations where huge. Without EMG though it doesn't mean much, we don't know which muscles are invovled and it doesn't answer the specificity question.
-
@Daballa & @Raptor: I have failed a number of snatches and squats and from my experience I can tell you that a fail in the squat can come just as unexpected that it can come in a snatch - and if it occurs it has the potential to mess up a lot more. If you get stuck in the squat under a sufficiently heavy weight without safety pins or spotters, you can kill yourself pretty easily, especially if you are a big guy or the plates you are using are small in diameter. If you get out of position at the bottom of a squat and fall over to the front - meaning that you will be unable to dumb the weight - you will land with your body or head under the bar. I don't have to tell you that this will be very messy even with as little as 100 kg.
What typically happens in a missed snatch is that it lands in front or behind the body. I have missed dozens of them and even with no coaching and no experience there was never a danger of a weight landing on my head. The thing is, that the weight used is typically light enough to lock out. So you will usually miss a snatch with your elbows straight - meaning that it will land away from your body at arm distance - or you will miss it while not getting under the bar in the first place. Both are substantially less dangerous than an unspotted squat is.
What Raptor says about the technicality of the exercise is of course true. It is easier to technically screw up a snatch than it is to screw up a squat. But there is also never a guarantee that you will not screw up eventually, even in a "simple" exercise as the back squat. And if you do and you don't have safety pins or spotters, you are better damn well prepared and practiced at how to dump a weight. Otherwise it might end pretty ugly.
@Avishek: An unexpectedly good answer. I will read what you linked and comment later.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PV6LC9LMl_o
By far the most specific olympic variation for vertical jump at 3:45, speed reverse curl swings w socks.
-
@ Steven I understand your point I guess.
@ Avishek Wow, that's crazy. I've read all that Joe D. stuff on oly lifting, but I always thought of it as defending himself for not using oly lifts, not saying weighted jumps are better for performance. Those studies look interesting, and I agree, most power with 0% 1RM wtf?? Wouldn't that mean that your 2 studies contradict each other? The first study says bodyweight is better, 2nd study says that power cleans are better than heavy squats and bodyweight jumps together. I'll take my time with these studies later.
-
About the links Avishek posted:
@http://www.defrancostraining.com/ask-joe-test/41-strength-training/180-hang-cleans-vs-weighted-jumps-for-explosive-hip-extension.html:
What I deduct from this Q&A is that Defranco is primarily concerned with not injuring his athletes and that he feels that he is unable to teach the o-lifts in a way that an injury is very unlikely. I cannot see any argument being made against the effectiveness of powercleans other than that they are ineffective when done wrong - which is a pretty obvious fact. However, just because most do powercleans wrong, this does not mean that they cannot be taught right or at least to a level of competence, where players don't have to jeopardize the health of their wrists. (That story about the wrist surgeries is, btw., a clear indication that those football players were coached by morons)
@http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21777152:
If you have the full text, then post it. The abstract is gibberish and quite telling of the quality of the paper and the only hint about a result is this sentence: "Results indicate that peak power for the bar, body, and system is differentially affected by load and movement pattern." This is fairly obvious and says nothing about the nature and direction of those findings, nor about the effect sizes and levels of significance.
Other than that I want to comment about what is written in regards to the study design and the examined variables. I am concerned about the following question: When setting up a program to increase vertical jump performance, what is the best combination of explosive exercises to train with, so that this increase occurs. What the authors in this study supposedly looked at was a completely different question, namely: How is the measurement of power affected depending on exercise, load, and measurement method. For those with bad reading comprehension skills: The cited study did not look at the training effect of exercises on the depended variable of VJ height, but a completely different topic, which is unrelated. And if someone comes and claims that it IS related, then this person hopefully does not perform squats to improve VJ - since I can tell you that power-output will be very low for a heavy squat - and hopefully, according to this study, only performs unweighted VJs, since those, according to the presented measurements, are highest in power-output (whatever that means).
@the other studies: I did not look at them since I concluded from your summaries that they were all concerned with measuring power-output. However, this is not a sensible indicator of the usefulness of an exercise (as demonstrated by the squat vs. VJ example above). Furthermore, the results were partly contradicting, which Daballa already mentioned.
-
The cited study did not look at the training effect of exercises on the depended variable of VJ height, but a completely different topic, which is unrelated. And if someone comes and claims that it IS related, then this person hopefully does not perform squats to improve VJ - since I can tell you that power-output will be very low for a heavy squat - and hopefully, according to this study, only performs unweighted VJs, since those, according to the presented measurements, are highest in power-output (whatever that means).
This sums it up perfectly , i was about to type the exact same thing! :highfive:
-
Yeah I agree with you Steven about the dangers of squatting.
The thing with the snatch is that it's much easier to mess up and you're going to need to drop the bar from over your head to who knows where...
At least in my particular case, when I get to 50 kg that's already too much for my shoulders to hadle safely (I can get the bar overhead but in that position I can barely control it) so basically, even though I could use more weight and actually get benefits from that I can't. These exercises are an alternative to using more weight while still getting triple extension, an explosive movement and posterior chain dominant.
-
Interesting argument. I have a somewhat different perspective on the necessity of olympic lifts.
1) First, jumping with weights or snatch grip high pulls DO provide a lot of the same benefits of the olympic lifts, but the lack of scalability is what really ruins them. When you take your clean from 100kg to 200kg you have undoubtedly gotten more powerful. But increasing the weight used in the snatch grip high pull or some weighted jump might just be arrived at by jumping lower or performing a terrible pull. You could make the argument that high pulls are a somewhat acceptable substitute if you have a coach to watch you perform them.... but then again if you have a coach with you all the time then why not just have him teach you the olympic lifts?
2) Second, I agree with Raptor at least about the full snatch. I've performed and taught hang power cleans and hang snatch in commercial gyms, but to really get the groove in the catch portion of the full snatch you need to practice tons and tons of reps where you may fall down, throw the weight behind you, in front of you, etc. That probably won't fly in most commercial gyms.
3) Finally, I think that while there are not great weighted substitutes for the Olympic lifts, I would argue that the necessity of the olympic lifts is somewhat overstated. I think they got a lot of praise for the single anecdote about weightlifter sprint times from the Mexico olympics which was taken to be a factual study by most of the training community. Whether the story is at all true doesn't really matter, I'm quite confident it couldn't be replicated today. This isn't to say that olympic lifters are not extremely powerful, but more that you can get extremely powerful in your sport without performing the oly lifts. Additionally, most sprinters are type IIx dominant and most jumpers are IIb dominant which makes them susceptible to a decent degree of unwanted hypertrophy if they do enough repetition to learn the oly lifts. Experienced sprinters and jumpers usually don't have much problems with triple extension or RFD, that's why the best bang for the buck for them is to usually have them just get their squat variations up. Athletes that do learn the oly lifts correctly usually are limited more by maximal strength then anything else. For example, I was taught how to do hang power cleans somewhat correctly in college. In November I did 3 reps of hang power clean with 275, dropping to about parallel to catch. At the time my front squat max single was 315. If I spent more time working on my hang power clean I may have gotten it up to 285... If I was a competitive oly lifter this would have made sense... but since I'm not my time is best spent focusing on getting my squat up, keeping my bodyweight down and working on technique and RFD exercises more specific to my sport. I'm confident if I could front squat 405 I could get power-clean to ~330 in a month or two.
4) Anyway, sorry to ramble, this is just a topic I've heard a lot of arguments from both sides. As far as who should do olympic lifts other than olympic lifters, I would argue that American football players benefit from them because upper body hypertrophy is actually helpful in their sport, additionally throwers benefit because because they don't really have much negative repercussions from added bodyweight. You could also argue that athletes who are "slow" might benefit more from them than others. For example if you learn proper power clean technique but can still only power clean 135 despite the fact that you squat 315.... Then clearly there's a problem. Additionally, if you LIKE olympic lifts I would say then by all means include them in your training.... Just that they are in no way necessary, especially if you are already a good athlete who is somewhat new to the weight-room. The overemphasis on olympic lifts in football is why you see guys in every college gym cleaning 95 with terrible form and doing quarter squats with 225. Part of me wishes olympic lifts were less popular just so there would be more free olympic bars in the gym!
-
Good post, T0DDAY. I agree with a lot of what you said. My main argument against weighted jumps is always what you wrote under 1). That alone makes o-lifts superior.
About 3): I believe their necessity might not be overstated. It is just that the athletes you talk about might be able to get their max strength up via squats and benefit from it on the field, while that will not apply to average people with less talent. If you are the guy that was always picked last in PE, then you should do something for your explosiveness other than squats - which you will still have to do, because strong beats weak. If you are that genetic freak that jumps 35 without ever training for it, you can probably get away with only squats (although one could debate whether even this person would benefit from explosive lifts).
-
olympic lifts = upper body hypertrophy? seems like an odd thing to be worrying about in the context.
-
I agree ^^^
And yeah, upper body hypertrophy? :-X
The thing is - should you struggle with hang cleans and hang snatches (if you learn them by yourself etc) or should you just go with jump squats and that's it?
-
Good post, T0DDAY. I agree with a lot of what you said. My main argument against weighted jumps is always what you wrote under 1). That alone makes o-lifts superior.
About 3): I believe their necessity might not be overstated. It is just that the athletes you talk about might be able to get their max strength up via squats and benefit from it on the field, while that will not apply to average people with less talent. If you are the guy that was always picked last in PE, then you should do something for your explosiveness other than squats - which you will still have to do, because strong beats weak. If you are that genetic freak that jumps 35 without ever training for it, you can probably get away with only squats (although one could debate whether even this person would benefit from explosive lifts).
Yes, for non-athletes you are definitely right. I was coming at the argument as someone providing training to an athlete who has already had at least moderate success in their sport (preferably track and field). As great of an exercise that squatting is, it's shocking how non-athletes are able to increase their squat steadily without showing ANY ability to express that strength. Olympic lifts are the best way to bridge the two. The only problem I see is that those kind of people tend to have a really really difficult time learning to do Olympic lifts on their own. They seem to always revert to some strange slow reverse curl maneuver. But in theory, your right that the "last kid picked in PE" could def benefit tremendously by getting his olympic lifts up.
What's funny about scalability is how even the squat loses meaning if has really poor form. That's why when I first train a low level athlete who has been in the weight-room I ask how much they can deadlift. I think the squats a superior exercise, but the deadlift still gives the best estimation of total body strength no matter how its performed.
-
Olympic lifts are the best way to bridge the two.
By this you mean the Olympic lifts themselves or you're actually meaning any kind of strength-speed exercise? If so, then you could substitute the O-lifts with jump squats and get the same if not more.
You could bridge that gap with jump squats and depth jumps.
-
olympic lifts = upper body hypertrophy? seems like an odd thing to be worrying about in the context.
You'd be surprised how much muscle heavy power cleans can add to your frame. Probably not a huge problem for most of the people here but if your a triple jumper or a high jumper every pound matters and the upper back hypertrophy is not gonna help much.
(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-A2aU3ccWhLE/Tx3gEGmEMWI/AAAAAAAACr4/sq39yCtYXVQ/w209-h278-k/sept25.jpg)
I didn't have traps before I took my power clean triple from 225 to 275. Never did more than 5 reps but they still blow up.
-
What was the frequency in doing your power cleans?
-
By this you mean the Olympic lifts themselves or you're actually meaning any kind of strength-speed exercise? If so, then you could substitute the O-lifts with jump squats and get the same if not more.
You could bridge that gap with jump squats and depth jumps.
You could do that but....
1) Jump squats are a little bit harder to scale. Unless you have a specific height that you are jumping to, how do you know when you are progressing? Does it really mean anything if you claim "I added 50 pounds to my jump squat!". But adding 50 pounds to your hang snatch certainly does. Also, how long can you add weight? Is it safe to do jump squats with 75% of your squat max? It's safe to do oly lifts with as much weight as you can!
If we are gonna deal with just the archetype steven brought up (ie. last kid picked in PE class, lets call him X), you could also argue that he wouldn't necessarily learn to express his strength better through a jump squat. Remember, X is someone who can add weight to his squat without increasing his standing vertical jump. When, he puts a bar on his back and jumps how do we know he will won't be super slow and jump poorly? The advantage to olympic lifts is once they weight is moderate you absolutely CANNOT do any part of the pull slowly because you are not strong enough to hold the bar in space unless it's been accelerated already. This isn't provided by jump squats. X could squat to parallel and slowly ascend until almost standing and then when almost standing accelerate without any hip drive whatsoever and jump. I recognize this argument is kind of silly because the person X I am describing right now sounds so poorly coordinated that he probably won't learn olympic lifts either and maybe would actually be best suited to do some type of long GPP program with bounding, jumping, stretching, etc so he can use his body before he does anymore strength training...
The thing is - should you struggle with hang cleans and hang snatches (if you learn them by yourself etc) or should you just go with jump squats and that's it?
That's the real question! I would say it depends on a three things, why you struggle with them, how much you hate struggling with them, and how well you express your strength.
Do you have a video of yourself struggling with them?
Whats your olympic style squat max vs your hang clean and snatch PRs?
Is your vertical jump at all tied to your squat/bw ratio?
When you struggle with them does that means your form is decent but your wrists and shoulders hurt because of the rack position for clean and that's annoying?
Do you use straps for snatch and chalk for cleans?
Do you not mind working at them or do you absolutely hate oly lifts and just do them because you think you need to to jump?
Are you 1-footed or two foot jumper, whats your max deadlift?
Do you do full lifts or lifts from the hang or power-versions?
Do you do overhead squats and front squats?
Is your upper-body weak, ie pullups, bench, etc?
Are you good at bounding, sprinting, general coordination?
Those are the questions you have to know before you decide to drop oly lifts. Those and probably some more I forgot! One thing you might consider is doing them as part of your warmup, that way they don't waste much time. For example before I squat I do a set of 3 hang power snatches and then five overhead squats, with 45 pounds, 95 pounds, 115 pounds, and 135 pounds. Then I rack the weight and start squatting. That was I get in some work without wasting time or much effort because if I wasn't doing that warmup I'd have to warmup with light squatting.
-
What was the frequency in doing your power cleans?
Luckily I have everything logged :).
I did cleans on Monday and Snatch on Friday:
It was always 3 sets of what I write, not counting warmup sets. The last sets were just 1 set of heavy reps for a test, it goes Snatches, then cleans:
5x135 5x205
5x145 5x215
5x155 5x225
4x155 4x235
3x155 3x240
3x160 3x245
3x165 3x250
2x170 2x255
---2 week break---
3x160 3x245
4x160 4x250
5x160 5x250
5x160 5x255
4x165 4x260
3x170 3x265
2x175 2x272
-- 3 day break (skip monday), test on wed --
2x185 3x275
-
soo if my front squat is near 320 and my bw is at 170 were do you think my vertical and my snatch should be? i think my vertical is not correlating with my strength at all, im 5 10 and my standing vertical is around 25 inches
-
soo if my front squat is near 320 and my bw is at 170 were do you think my vertical and my snatch should be? i think my vertical is not correlating with my strength at all, im 5 10 and my standing vertical is around 25 inches
(http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lpnuaoGUfJ1qafrh6.gif)
-
soo if my front squat is near 320 and my bw is at 170 were do you think my vertical and my snatch should be? i think my vertical is not correlating with my strength at all, im 5 10 and my standing vertical is around 25 inches
There really is no great relationship where front squat X == vertical jump Y. Honestly, I'd be surprised if somebody who can front squat almost double body weight can only jump 25 inches and I'd assume that 320 pound front squat is a little high.... but stranger things have happened.
What's important is how improvements to your front squat correlate with improvements to your vertical. You might be doing everything right but just have the most awesome leverages for squatting and poor jumping genetics. However, if your front squat was once 250 and you weighed 170 and your vertical was also 25 inches, then something is wrong and you fall into the class of people who are not able to translate their strength in the squat to vertical jumping.
If you really want my guess, I'd assume someone fronting squatting close to 2x bodyweight would jump a minimum of 30+ inches. Snatching is hard to estimate because if you have never done it your won't be very good. However, I'd estimate your full clean should be approximately your 3 rep max in the squat (maybe around 300?) and your hang clean should be around 85% of your full clean (so about 260 lbs?). Again the snatch is around 80% of the clean and jerk so.... If you are technically proficient then somewhere around 200 lbs? All these numbers are just ballpark estimates that coaches use to move between lifts, and I applied ratios from full lifts to hang versions, so no telling how off I am. That said, I think a ball park 200 lb hang snatch doesn't sound too off for someone who front squats 320.
-
I disagree about full clean being ~ max. triple squat. If that is the case, then squat = too weak.
But I agree that the range of these relationships is quite huge. It heavily depends on the individual and training methodology (for example the above ratio, which is one that surely exists in the real world, even if it should not).
@rusi: You really front squat 320?
-
I disagree about full clean being ~ max. triple squat. If that is the case, then squat = too weak.
But I agree that the range of these relationships is quite huge. It heavily depends on the individual and training methodology (for example the above ratio, which is one that surely exists in the real world, even if it should not).
@rusi: You really front squat 320?
I also thought cleaning your max triple was a little aggressive, but I assumed it was closer to being true for olympic lifters
who have extremely efficient second pulls and bounce out of the whole really well. I actually got the triple front squat == clean rule from Dan Johns book.
He talks about it in this article, a good read:
http://danjohn.net/2009/12/the-front-squat/
-
You people scare me with these %s. I can back squat low bar 150 kg and my best hang power clean is 77.5 kg (but I can't catch on the shoulders so that's a big limiting thing).
-
Good discussion
@Todday
It's a good point about tracking barbell jumps of squat jumps. With jump squats I can fairly easily tell if I have improved by the ease at which I amortize in the 1/2 squat position. Videos also help. With the barbell jumps daniel demonstrates, I agree though it is not easy to track improvement. But with power cleans and snatches, it's also tricky, you can flex at the hip more and go deeper into a squat in order to hit a new PR for instance, this is analogous to jumping lower in a jump squat and calling it a PR.
@steven-miller
The abstract was vague indeed. But it had to be because to explain their results would have taken up a few extra sentences. Although the authors are not concerned with what we are concerned with, you can interpret the study differently than they do, and conclude the jump squats result in more power output than the power cleans do.
A note on the isolated body power: the reason it was triple with the unweighted jumps is because they looked at the sacrum, obviously the sacrum will have the highest velocity during a jump with no external resistance. It's not to conclude that body weight jumps are the best way to go I agree. But it does tell us that heavy squats do are not a power exercise, but one to improve force production. If you only perform squats in your jump training you won't optimize your success.
If we lok at just bar power though, the jump squat peak bar power occurred at 80%1RM, with 2527W, and 2145W at 90%1RM in the power clean. So not as much of a difference there.
The other study I referenced found similar values in power output int he jump squat and hang clean, slightly higher in the jump squat. Still measuring power output does not tell us everything. The EMG studies would. I would suspect that jump squats would have more quad involvment.
-
I disagree about full clean being ~ max. triple squat. If that is the case, then squat = too weak.
But I agree that the range of these relationships is quite huge. It heavily depends on the individual and training methodology (for example the above ratio, which is one that surely exists in the real world, even if it should not).
@rusi: You really front squat 320?
i have done a serie of 7x 122kgs wich give me 146kg (320) estimation. generally estimations have been pretty acurate for me.
i have always trained with front squat, they feel much better on my lower back, so i guess i have a lot of efficiency on the movement.
on march last year i could only lift 5 x 120kg but my SV was 27-28. then shit happened and i rupture an achilles.
so the lack of jump could be for two reasons, becouse of lack of strength on my calve, or becouse untrained power and plyos ability.
-
What about back squatting or a more posterior chain dominant exercise like low bar back squats or deadlifts?
-
@T0dday: I was under the impression that you meant back squat triples, not front squat *lol*. Front squat triple might be a much better estimate.
@Avishek: You hit the nail in the head, the studies do not tell us anything. And I would agree that jump squats would be more quad dominant. But that is irrelevant when you cannot measure progress objectively. And measuring objectively means *not* by your gut feeling. What you say about problems of powercleans and powersnatches is of course right, but you should progress them fast enough that you get in a half-squat position consistently. Much deeper and you will drop into a full clean - which is a miss, if you wanted to perform a powerclean. So the criterion is objective, catch it above parallel and it's fine.
-
After thinking about it, I do not agree anymore that jump squats are more quad-dominant. I do not disagree either, though. I would like someone to explain to me what quad-dominance is, what it means and how it can be measured. I realized that I am not really sure about those things and I would like those who regularly bring/brought this up (AlexV, Avishek, adarq, Raptor,...) to explain this to me. My former agreement was stupid.
-
The hang power snatches are good for that very reason, that theyre not "quad dominant" and help get more aggressive hip extension involved into the jumps.
Thats one of the reason they work so well in complexes with jumps of various sorts, you will see more glute involvement directly after the hang snatches in most cases, with latter being much easier on the knees as well. Its not that they make the jump "glute dominant", its that they help get the hips more involved in an already knee and ankle dominant movement.
-
Right^^^
I've seen increases as much as ~50 cm total in my 3 consecutive 2-leg bounds after doing heavy hang powersnatches.
Without doing the hang powersnatches I was jumping ~7.80m and after doing heavy (for me that was 45-50 kg) hang powersnatches I set a new PR with 8.40m and IT REALLY FELT different as far as movement was concerned (like I was feeling I was jumping more "correctly", with more power coming from the hips/hips moving back to initiate the jumps vs power coming from the quads/knees going forward to load the quads to initiate the movement).
-
After thinking about it, I do not agree anymore that jump squats are more quad-dominant. I do not disagree either, though. I would like someone to explain to me what quad-dominance is, what it means and how it can be measured. I realized that I am not really sure about those things and I would like those who regularly bring/brought this up (AlexV, Avishek, adarq, Raptor,...) to explain this to me. My former agreement was stupid.
i had my cycles of barbell jump squats and yes.. they are quad/glute dominant. hours/days after the workout, you feel that your glutes/quads were hammered. simple as that IMO. ;D
-
Well quad dominance is how much load an exercise TENDS to make your body use as far as the quads are concerned. A high bar squat has the potential to make you use more knee bend/knee going forward than a low bar squat has (also depending on your structure) and will make you kind of "wanting to use the quads/go with knees forward" more. That's my understanding of quad dominance.
You can also feel it in the amount of overload happening in your quads as you perform that exercise.
-
Well quad dominance is how much load an exercise TENDS to make your body use as far as the quads are concerned.
I do not understand this sentence. Can you explain this? I suppose quad dominance is not the same as potential knee flexion in an exercise?
-
Well quad dominance is how much load an exercise TENDS to make your body use as far as the quads are concerned.
I do not understand this sentence. Can you explain this? I suppose quad dominance is not the same as potential knee flexion in an exercise?
Yeah, I think you can say that. At least in my version of the definition. So for me personally, that's pretty much the same - the potential of knee flexion and quad loading of a given exercise. Of course it's more a matter of that knee flexion/quad loading actually occuring than the potential of that since that's what we really care about.
-
Well quad dominance is how much load an exercise TENDS to make your body use as far as the quads are concerned.
I do not understand this sentence. Can you explain this? I suppose quad dominance is not the same as potential knee flexion in an exercise?
Yeah, I think you can say that. At least in my version of the definition. So for me personally, that's pretty much the same - the potential of knee flexion and quad loading of a given exercise. Of course it's more a matter of that knee flexion/quad loading actually occuring than the potential of that since that's what we really care about.
While I said that I supposed quad dominance NOT to be the same as potential knee flexion, your post clears things up nevertheless.
If knee flexion was the definition, then I would disagree about jumps being quad dominant as well as jump squats being quad dominant. It would depend on technique used.
Does someone think differently about the "muscle dominance" issue?
-
Well yeah if you think about it you're going to have different squat styles individually, depending on structure, muscle strength (which generates the body's preference to use more or less different muscles etc) and other factors, but a high bar squat will have more potential to determine a more quad-oriented squat than a low bar squat GENERALLY (regardless of structure).
So obviously you can force a more hip oriented jump squat with a high bar position placement but you're going to have to compensate with your back angle etc so it's going to mess things up a bit.
-
Well quad dominance is how much load an exercise TENDS to make your body use as far as the quads are concerned.
I do not understand this sentence. Can you explain this? I suppose quad dominance is not the same as potential knee flexion in an exercise?
Yeah, I think you can say that. At least in my version of the definition. So for me personally, that's pretty much the same - the potential of knee flexion and quad loading of a given exercise. Of course it's more a matter of that knee flexion/quad loading actually occuring than the potential of that since that's what we really care about.
I honestly don't understand the concept of quad dominance in strength training too well either. In sprinting a common cue is to teach athletes at top speed to "point the knee and get the foot down (ie. Hip extension using the hamstring) rather than lifting the knee and quadricep using hip flexors. Not sure if this is related?
But in squatting... why do you associate knee flexion with quadricep dominance? Knee flexion is performed primarily by the hamstrings in everyone.
-
Yes but in order to extend the knee and straighten back your leg you're going to flex the quad to do it. That's the thing.
Your body, especially in untrained people, will tend to (over)use your quads in everything it does when it comes to leg training. At least in my own experience and what I have observed in people that I have trained. The beginners will always have a bad time calling on the glutes and will always exaggerately bend at the knees when doing squats/deadlifts etc. Sure, one thing is that they have too narrow of a stance initially which is causing this but that's not the issue here.
As an example, when I deadlifted the first time ever years ago, I couldn't even understand the concept of lowering the hips back and keeping the knees stationary (not letting them go forward/down). So when I was deadlifting I was "squatting" down with my knees going forward/down and hips pretty much not doing anything. It was EXTREMELY ugly to see... it was something like a bilateral peterson step-up/sissy squat as far as movement goes.
This same thing will cause knee injuries over time if not immediately and knee "overuse" injuries. Plus the knees going forward takes away tension off the hamstrings so you're missing out on the power of the hamstrings as assistance for the glutes in the extension/hyperextension of the hips. So it does a handful of bad things for you (this quad dominance).
-
Yes but in order to extend the knee and straighten back your leg you're going to flex the quad to do it. That's the thing.
Your body, especially in untrained people, will tend to (over)use your quads in everything it does when it comes to leg training. At least in my own experience and what I have observed in people that I have trained. The beginners will always have a bad time calling on the glutes and will always exaggerately bend at the knees when doing squats/deadlifts etc. Sure, one thing is that they have too narrow of a stance initially which is causing this but that's not the issue here.
As an example, when I deadlifted the first time ever years ago, I couldn't even understand the concept of lowering the hips back and keeping the knees stationary (not letting them go forward/down). So when I was deadlifting I was "squatting" down with my knees going forward/down and hips pretty much not doing anything. It was EXTREMELY ugly to see... it was something like a bilateral peterson step-up/sissy squat as far as movement goes.
This same thing will cause knee injuries over time if not immediately and knee "overuse" injuries. Plus the knees going forward takes away tension off the hamstrings so you're missing out on the power of the hamstrings as assistance for the glutes in the extension/hyperextension of the hips. So it does a handful of bad things for you (this quad dominance).
Ohhh, I see you meant knee flexion in the eccentric. That makes sense.
Are you claiming high-bar squats will cause knee injuries immediately?
I'll give you that a higher degree of knee flexion will result in the quads being called on... But why is this a bad thing?
In a correct full depth high bar squat you are going to use your hamstrings in the eccentric and if it's full depth there will still be hip extension that you will execute with your hamstrings and glutes...
So, the high bar squat will work the hamstrings, quads, glutes and lower back. It's also offers a much better carryover to the front squat and thus the catch position in the clean and the snatch are more similar to high bar squat.
It's probably the eccentric but heavy high bar squats leave me with only hamstring and glute soreness. Of course I come from sprinting so I initially had well developed hamstrings and underdeveloped quads.
If your deadlifting as well and doing low bar squats in an non-quad dominant way... Then do you do direct quad work??
I sorta think there is no such thing as quad dominant people.... just people with weak hamstrings and glutes. It seems a strange solution to switch to a movement where the quads can hardly be used to remedy weak hamstrings. Why not just train the hamstrings in knee flexion and hip extension and get them doing the movement well?
-
I sorta think there is no such thing as quad dominant people.... just people with weak hamstrings and glutes. It seems a strange solution to switch to a movement where the quads can hardly be used to remedy weak hamstrings. Why not just train the hamstrings in knee flexion and hip extension and get them doing the movement well?
I think you have a very solid argument here ^^^, especially if you couple this with tight hip flexors/dormant glutes.
And to answer your question - since I can't do high bar squats and do low bar squats and deadlifts instead, yeah, I'm missing SOME quad activity from my training. But like Lance said, "I'm sure moving the bar 1 inch lower on your back will completely deactivate your quads and they will get weak and small". The point is - the quads still get stimulation from the low bar squats. Especially as I'm a quad dominant guy by nature so... I kind of always call on my quads when doing stuff.
My problem is that I was never able, after years of training, to build my VMOs... and I want HUGE VMOs.
-
Squat-wise I have done nothing but low-bar from 140 kg x 1 up to 200 kg x 5. My quads look pretty similar to kingfish's. So no, I would not say that low-bar squats will cause you to miss out on quad strength. My first real front-squat work-out was 140 kg x 3 with more left in the tank - so low-bar carries over just fine, as will any strength exercise that works hips and legs through a nearly complete ROM.
People always forget how progressing in a given exercise is actually much more important than which variant of the exercise one is performing. And most people will outperform a high-bar progression with a low-bar progression easily, because you can just manage more weight that way, so the ceiling is higher, and you involve more muscle mass. Low-bar squats done correctly are an insanely good exercise for every kind of athlete.
-
Yeah I agree. So wouldn't Kingfish be in a better position going with low bar squats?
-
Squat-wise I have done nothing but low-bar from 140 kg x 1 up to 200 kg x 5. My quads look pretty similar to kingfish's. So no, I would not say that low-bar squats will cause you to miss out on quad strength. My first real front-squat work-out was 140 kg x 3 with more left in the tank - so low-bar carries over just fine, as will any strength exercise that works hips and legs through a nearly complete ROM.
People always forget how progressing in a given exercise is actually much more important than which variant of the exercise one is performing. And most people will outperform a high-bar progression with a low-bar progression easily, because you can just manage more weight that way, so the ceiling is higher, and you involve more muscle mass. Low-bar squats done correctly are an insanely good exercise for every kind of athlete.
I'll give you that specificity is pretty overrated and that even if one "looks" more like jumping that's a silly reason to do it with large loads.
Your front squat ratio (assuming ~140kgx 5 since had more in the tank) is 0.7. Much better than most powerlifters, but I would still expect high bar squatters to have a higher ratio. Myself I maxed at 315 lbs in the front squat when my back squat max was only 370 lbs. Still, a couple people don't make an argument.
The main advantage to high bar squats is that they do translate better to olympic lifts. You just can't catch a clean or snatch without knee flexion. You just get lower with the high bar squat and if you want to do full olympic lifts then I really can't see why you would avoid high bar squats.
Besides, the olympic lifts your argument seems pretty solid. I don't have any REAL reason to dislike low-bar squats......But... I just feel like I have seen many more people have a really impressive low-bar squat while at the same time having poor deadlifts, vertical jumps, speed, etc. I have no data whatsoever to back this up, it could just be a function of the fact that the low bar squat allows everyone to handle more weight, or maybe because powerlifters do it and they have a propensity to be uncoordinated fat slobs.... But in my experience is less likely someone has a good high bar squat and is terrible at everything else. Really, I try and get everyone to at least BE ABLE to do both. ie. If you can't squat a couple plates high bar and low bar somethings wrong. Once you can do that, then I guess it doesn't really matter which you favor.
I'm also very suspicious of the term low bar squat. I've never seen you squat but since I know your an athlete concerned about your vertical I'm sure your low bar squat has a somewhat narrow stance, has some knee flexion, and probably has decent depth. It might be that this kind of low bar squat has a lot of benefits, but powerlifting has created somewhat of a perversion of the low bar squat.
For example heres a low bar squat that I bet would translate pretty well to athleticism:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fivhv5znPg0
This one not so much:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UikcjCBN34Q
-
@TODDAY No, Steven's back squat is very deep. It's the one Mark Rippetoe teaches I believe. Low bar with oly lifting shoes. Not like a geared powerlifting squat barely hitting parallel.
-
^ yes.. steven has a rare low bar that looks like a folding accordion ~ torso and shin angles are in sync. most people who do it like that at my gym will almost always have the buttwink, or will not be able to go hams to calves..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6L-eOdl0LUM
-
^ yes.. steven has a rare low bar that looks like a folding accordion ~ torso and shin angles are in sync. most people who do it like that at my gym will almost always have the buttwink, or will not be able to go hams to calves..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6L-eOdl0LUM
Dang. Very impressive.
-
People always forget how progressing in a given exercise is actually much more important than which variant of the exercise one is performing.
There you go. The correct formula is [correct form deep squat + progressive overloading = win] , everything else is useless overanalyzing.
-
Yeah we've had this conversation some time ago and it will keep on getting back and back into these boards because frankly, it's pretty interesting to discuss. But the bottom line is what vag said.
-
Your front squat ratio (assuming ~140kgx 5 since had more in the tank) is 0.7. Much better than most powerlifters, but I would still expect high bar squatters to have a higher ratio. Myself I maxed at 315 lbs in the front squat when my back squat max was only 370 lbs. Still, a couple people don't make an argument.
As you said, a couple of people don't make a solid argument. But I also want to add that you cannot compare those ratios like that since everyone lifts more weight with a low-bar squat. So you would have to correct the 370 lbs by multiplying it with a factor >1 that takes this into account. But only comparing ratios, measured at one date, are an invalid indicator of transfer anyways (yeah, I realize I started it).
The main advantage to high bar squats is that they do translate better to olympic lifts. You just can't catch a clean or snatch without knee flexion. You just get lower with the high bar squat and if you want to do full olympic lifts then I really can't see why you would avoid high bar squats.
Olympic lifters have to front squat. That is what makes their catch strong enough for the full lifts. Doing high-bar squats in addition is not necessary and one can argue that they would be better off with the squat variant that is more balanced (more hamstring and low-back involvement) and that makes them stronger faster. Low-bar squats have a higher similarity with the back angle at the starting position as well compared to high-bar.
-
ALSO RATIOS ARE LARGELY BULLSHIT EXCEPT IN AN EXTREMELY GENERAL SENSE BECAUSE EVERYONE IS DIFFERENT.
this is wankery of the highest order.
-
ALSO RATIOS ARE LARGELY BULLSHIT EXCEPT IN AN EXTREMELY GENERAL SENSE BECAUSE EVERYONE IS DIFFERENT.
this is wankery of the highest order.
Please explain yourself.
-
Exactly. I mean, if you front squat already, why would you back squat high bar? Why not do a hip dominated (yes, I know) back squat when you already do a quad dominated front squat?
-
About the low bar vs high bar shenanigans, like what others said, it probably doesn't matter as long as you're strong, but I would agree with TODDAY. High bar is more specific and has a little more carry over than low bar for olympic lifts. Olympic lifting is already so "quad dominant" and relying so much on being upright, that one might say high bar IS the p-chain exercise of choice for an olympic lifter. It depends on your dimensions, but I know high bar gets plenty of p-chain for me.
The back angle and the starting position of the low bar squat and the classical lifts(steven brought it up) could be argued, but the first pull usually isn't a problem for a lot of people.
For regular athletes, front squat and high bar back squat might be a little redundant.
-
About the low bar vs high bar shenanigans, like what others said, it probably doesn't matter as long as you're strong, but I would agree with TODDAY. High bar is more specific and has a little more carry over than low bar for olympic lifts. Olympic lifting is already so "quad dominant" and relying so much on being upright, that one might say high bar IS the p-chain exercise of choice for an olympic lifter. It depends on your dimensions, but I know high bar gets plenty of p-chain for me.
The back angle and the starting position of the low bar squat and the classical lifts(steven brought it up) could be argued, but the first pull usually isn't a problem for a lot of people.
For regular athletes, front squat and high bar back squat might be a little redundant.
Are you an o-lifter? Where do you get the information from that o-lifting is about "being upright"? This could not be further from the truth. Also, standing up after you made the catch is not where most of the difficulty is either for the majority of lifters.
-
About the low bar vs high bar shenanigans, like what others said, it probably doesn't matter as long as you're strong, but I would agree with TODDAY. High bar is more specific and has a little more carry over than low bar for olympic lifts. Olympic lifting is already so "quad dominant" and relying so much on being upright, that one might say high bar IS the p-chain exercise of choice for an olympic lifter. It depends on your dimensions, but I know high bar gets plenty of p-chain for me.
The back angle and the starting position of the low bar squat and the classical lifts(steven brought it up) could be argued, but the first pull usually isn't a problem for a lot of people.
For regular athletes, front squat and high bar back squat might be a little redundant.
Are you an o-lifter? Where do you get the information from that o-lifting is about "being upright"? This could not be further from the truth. Also, standing up after you made the catch is not where most of the difficulty is either for the majority of lifters.
Nah, I'm not an olympic lifter. What do you mean about by, "further from the truth?" By upright I meant the catch position. If you're an olympic lifter, I would like to hear your opinion.
Edit: I would like your opinion regardless, but it would be nice to know if you're an o-lifter.
-
About the low bar vs high bar shenanigans, like what others said, it probably doesn't matter as long as you're strong, but I would agree with TODDAY. High bar is more specific and has a little more carry over than low bar for olympic lifts. Olympic lifting is already so "quad dominant" and relying so much on being upright, that one might say high bar IS the p-chain exercise of choice for an olympic lifter. It depends on your dimensions, but I know high bar gets plenty of p-chain for me.
The back angle and the starting position of the low bar squat and the classical lifts(steven brought it up) could be argued, but the first pull usually isn't a problem for a lot of people.
For regular athletes, front squat and high bar back squat might be a little redundant.
Are you an o-lifter? Where do you get the information from that o-lifting is about "being upright"? This could not be further from the truth. Also, standing up after you made the catch is not where most of the difficulty is either for the majority of lifters.
Nah, I'm not an olympic lifter. What do you mean about by, "further from the truth?" By upright I meant the catch position. If you're an olympic lifter, I would like to hear your opinion.
No, I am not a weightlifter. And regarding the catch you are right. But again, that's what you front-squat for. As long as you do them and any kind of back squat you will probably be fine and this is not going to limit your clean&jerk. And the back-squat that strengthens the most muscle mass is obviously favorable - and that is low-bar. Getting up after the catch is not the only part of a clean&jerk / snatch that requires strength...
-
Ratios have nothing to do with this discussion LBSS. But since you brought it up, yes they are bullshit in some ways
They don't take RFD or GRFs into account.
THe higher the GRFs in a given movement, the more bullshit a squat or deadlift ratio is. A standing vertical jump has the lower GRF compared to the step phase in a triple jump, a large squat will correlate with better success int he former, and will not in a triple jmp or a long jump.
-
Yeah low bar squat sucks, it's overly hip dominant.
For VJ high bar is way better. Steven, if you could high bar 440lbs, you'd be jumping way higher.
We haven't finished defining dominance I guess.. gotta find some studies but it has to do with the amount of force a muscle produces to lift the weight, not the joint angle.
In a sit up, you can have your knee flexed, this does not mean sit ups are hamstring dominant. In a deadlift you can have considerable knee flexion, or in a hack squat, but they are both glute dominant exercises. Has to do with lever arms as well.
Power cleans are nowhere near being as quad dominant as a squat jump because the barbell is not aligned to place stress on the quads in the same fashion in a powerclean compared to a jump squat, or any olympic lift. The bar is too far in front of the body. n a jump squat the weight is right above the center of mass.
-
Yeah low bar squat sucks, it's overly hip dominant.
For VJ high bar is way better. Steven, if you could high bar 440lbs, you'd be jumping way higher.
We haven't finished defining dominance I guess.. gotta find some studies but it has to do with the amount of force a muscle produces to lift the weight, not the joint angle.
In a sit up, you can have your knee flexed, this does not mean sit ups are hamstring dominant. In a deadlift you can have considerable knee flexion, or in a hack squat, but they are both glute dominant exercises. Has to do with lever arms as well.
Power cleans are nowhere near being as quad dominant as a squat jump because the barbell is not aligned to place stress on the quads in the same fashion in a powerclean compared to a jump squat, or any olympic lift. The bar is too far in front of the body. n a jump squat the weight is right above the center of mass.
I would also jump way higher if I could lounge 440 lbs. But that does not mean that the lounge is a superior exercise. Go right ahead and post more irrelevant studies to define quad dominance. Also notice that you are using the phrase without having it defined yet.
-
I just defined it. Let me type it in caps:
QUADRICEP DOMINANCE, AS USED HERE ON THIS FORUM, BY ME, AND OTHERS, AT YOUR REQUEST..
DOMINANCE OF A MUSCLE GROUP REFERS TO THE AMOUNT OF FORCE PRODUCED BY A PARTICULAR MUSCLE OR MUSCLE GROUP OR JOINT EXTENSOR/FLEXOR/STABILIZER/ETC. AND OTHER MOVERS IN THE EXERCISE IN RELATION TO THE AMOUNT OF FORCE PRODUCED BY OTHER MUSCULATURE IN THAT GIVEN EXERCISE. DOMINANCE OF A MUSCLE DOES NOT REFER TO EMG ACTIVITY, IT REFERS TO FORCE PRODUCTION. PERIOD.
IN A POWER CLEAN, NOT AS MUCH FORCE COMES FROM THE QUADRICEPS AS IN A BARBELL JUMP SQUAT. THEREFORE, THE JUMP SQUAT IS MORE QUAD DOMINANT.
DOMINANCE OF A MUSCLE GROUP DOES NOT HAVE TO DO WITH JOINT ANGLES. FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T CARE, IT HAS TO DO WITH WHERE YOU "FEEL IT."
DOMINANCE OF A MUSCLE GROUP IN A GIVEN EXERCISE WILL VARY WITH INDIVIDUAL BIOMECHANICAL DIFFERENCE,S MUSCLE ACTIVATION PATTERNS, AND NERVOUS SYSTEM. WITH ACTIVATION TRAINING, ONE CAN IMPROVE THE FIRING OF A MOTONEURON TO A MSUCLE GROUP BY LEARNING HOW TO CONTRACT IT IN A MOVEMENT, THIS CAN HELP WITH MOVEMENT EFFICIENCY IN RUNNING FOR ISNTANCE, JUMPING/SPRINTING.
DOn't compare a lunge to a squat, that's fucking RETARDED.
And we did not conclude properly on the studies I cited. It showed that power output from a jump squat is HIGHER than olympic lifts poewr cleans and hang snatches, using different measuring methods. It is not completely irrelelvant, I said there is more to the story. Just because you are obsessed with olympic lifts, whiach all suck for power development doesn't mean you know what the fuck you are tlaking about.
Lastly, front squat and high bar back squat are not redundant. they are actually completely different exercises. The way the bar is placed on your back has a HUGE impact on the way weight is displaced on the joints and muscles attached to them. Notice, front squat - quads dominant, high bar back squat - quad/glute, low bar - glute, less quad... see a pattern? hack squat.. glutes...the bar is moving back and back and bck and back.. can't compare deadlift whre bar is in front.
I've PRed heavy back squats the day after heavy front squats because they are just so different. The amortization in the back squat involves much mroe hip musculature whereas the front squat does not.
-
Thank you for the definition, it is sufficient for now. Your operationalization is lacking though, since going by feel might not be a valid measure of force production since you might feel muscle A fire more compared to muscle B, but that might be because B is way stronger than A and still produces more force - just less force compared to it's potential. You might want to think about that again.
About the studies you cited: They do not show anything of relevance to this discussion. The results showed that an unloaded jump-squat is highest in body power production. What shall we conclude from that? Jumping is the best training for jumping?
Btw., I feel my glutes quite well during front-squats compared to quads. By your definition it must be a glute-dominant exercise then.
And you PR'd your back-squat after front-squats not because they are so different, but because you are so weak.
-
Your welcome. Yes front squats do require quite a bit of force productino from the glutes as well, depth of the squat will influence this dominance issue. If you do a font squat to above parallel, it will be more difficult to feel it in your glutes.
Our discussion was originally on hang snatch alternatives, so I mentoined a jump squat, and I cited studies showing that it is more powerful than oly lifts. How is that not relevant? I already said we should not be convinced by body power analysis, in fact that is meaningless since in a power clean we are applying power into the bar, the body doesn't need to move. But bar power peaked at 80% in the jump squat and was higher than bar power in the power clean which peaked at 90%1RM. However the difference was small. bar power, the authors stated, may be important to understand in contact or throwing sports for isntance.
I disagree with you on why ai PRed in heavy back squats the day after heavy front squats as well. They may not be as different as I suggest, but the involvmeent on hips/glute is different.
-
Our discussion was originally on hang snatch alternatives, so I mentoined a jump squat, and I cited studies showing that it is more powerful than oly lifts. How is that not relevant?
It is not relevant because it does not address the question at hand, namely whether training with jump squats at 80% will at least have the same (if not more of an) effect as training with an oly-variation. There are several arguments one could make in favor or against that, all of which are hypothetical unless someone does quality experimentation on it. The studies you cited do tell nothing about this. To conclude that the jump-squat is a better way of training based on these papers demonstrates a misunderstanding of that research and the generalizability of scientific research overall.
So in absence of valid science to back up the olympic lifts vs. alternatives debate, one has to resort to analytical reasoning. T0dday and I already stated the problem of measuring progress, which does not exist in the same magnitude for the olympic lifts. Another thing that needs to be addressed is spinal safety if we are actually discussing using 80% of a back squat max for jump squats. It might not hurt you when your max squat is 100 kg. I will not try what happens when I load 180 on the bar and jump with it though.
-
WTF?
So you guys were actually talking about doing jump squats with 80% of your 1RM?
I think this emoticon " :ninja: " is not enough to express my feelings.
-
WTF?
So you guys were actually talking about doing jump squats with 80% of your 1RM?
I think this emoticon " :ninja: " is not enough to express my feelings.
I did not bring this up. The "research" did.
-
WTF?
So you guys were actually talking about doing jump squats with 80% of your 1RM?
I think this emoticon " :ninja: " is not enough to express my feelings.
But actually, this brings up an interesting question. I would highly doubt that this kind of loading would actually produce the highest peak power, regardless if for body, bar or system. Now I would actually want to have a look at that paper myself.
Avishek, can you post full text of the first paper for people here to see?
-
Yeah it doesn't make too much sense... maybe that % allows you to be explosive enough and at the same time it's still very heavy so the power output is the highest? I don't know.
-
Not sure if I should keep arguing point unrelated to this discussion anymore. Arguing about crayons would be irrelevant. But delving into some research, or discussing the benefit to training with hang snatch alternatives is not irrelevant. I don't understand your logic. Maybe you should read the full paper it may make more sense. The question is: how "powerful" is a jump squat, versus a power clean or ahang snatch. ANd that's what the studies try to answer.
I don't really care about looking at that paper again it doesn't matter. All I know is this, power cleans develop power, hang snatches develop power. SO do jump squats, kettlebell swings, kettlebell jumps... etc. They all work so it really doesn't matter. I choos ejump squats over power cleans anyday cuz they feel better.
-
80%1RM squat for a jump squat is a lot. I don't understand why in the 100% jump squat group, poer development was higher than the squat group with 100%. The values should be less disparate at those values. So don't know if they defined jump squat RM differently, don't care nymore.
Power as measured from a force plate was also much higher in the jump squat so remember that.
-
Thank you for the definition, it is sufficient for now. Your operationalization is lacking though, since going by feel might not be a valid measure of force production since you might feel muscle A fire more compared to muscle B, but that might be because B is way stronger than A and still produces more force - just less force compared to it's potential. You might want to think about that again.
About the studies you cited: They do not show anything of relevance to this discussion. The results showed that an unloaded jump-squat is highest in body power production. What shall we conclude from that? Jumping is the best training for jumping?
Btw., I feel my glutes quite well during front-squats compared to quads. By your definition it must be a glute-dominant exercise then.
And you PR'd your back-squat after front-squats not because they are so different, but because you are so weak.
I've been out of the country for a week so this discussion might be completely dead... but I just wanted to make a few salient points.
1) First of all, your example of feeling front squats in your glutes is precisely why I think classifying exercises as quad or glute dominant doesn't make sense. Not that a definition of "where you FEEL it" makes much sense either... But I once had a coach who made the point that a weak front squat/high bar back squat ratio was usually caused by weak hamstrings/glutes. His point was that while the front squat activates the quadriceps to a greater extent than the back squat, it also also almost completely takes the lower back out of the movement but still requires a high degree of hip flexion. Therefore, to stand up a front squat the load for the hip extension is transferred primarily to the hamstrings. So, the majority of athletes (save for those with really well developed hamstrings) will fail on an exercise which is deemed quad dominant because of weak hamstrings, which really shows the futility of labeling exercises quad/hamstring dominant.
2) This sorta leads to the point I am trying to make about high-bar olympic squat VS low-bar squat. You make a good point about the benefits of the greater load one can handle in low bar squat. My main issue with the low bar squat is the point I was trying to make with the powerlifting video. Well you happen to be able to perform full range low-bar squats to consistent depth with excellent form in the video posted of you.... I find athletes who perform the low-bar squat are more likely to increase the load while sacrificing their form/depth. Obviously, athletes can cheat with the high bar squat too. For this reason when If I start training an athlete who has spent time in the gym but doesn't really know what the are doing I ask how much they can deadlift. While I think the deadlift is far inferior to the squat for most athletic transfer.... without outright lying it's really hard to cheat. Straps or no straps if one athlete can deadlift 200 lbs and the other 400 lbs, the second has a stronger lower body. As far as the hi-bar and low-bar squat. If two untrained athletes spend six months and athlete A gets significantly stronger in hi-bar squat and athlete B gets significantly stronger in low bar squat (by some factor greater than 1 as you stated).... I think the difference in the aid to their athleticism would be somewhat negligible.
However, in my experience if an athlete lifts alone the squat depth will get more sacrificed as the weight goes up for the low bar squat. That's why I actually try to get athletes doing a full ATG olympic pause squat. The advice is just so simple: Go down until you can't go lower.... Wait... Stand up. Getting stronger at this lift is always a function of stronger legs while non-paused max squat and low bar attempts often suffer from less desirable form. This is sorta what killed powerlifting in my mind: the goal to squat as much as possible resulted in high squats, a nebulous definition of parallel, strange squat equipment, the mono-lift, etc. Now, of course you are an example of an athlete who is capable of low-bar squatting with impressive form, so this is not an argument against the lift but rather against what a lot of people turn the lift into.....
3) About your statement about whether oly lifters struggle standing up after you the catch in the clean/snatch. I'm not much of an oly lifter but I think this is dependent on the weight class. Watching the 2011 world championships at the lower weight classes the lifters either couldn't front squat the weight or wasted so much energy grinding out the front squat that they were dead for the jerk.... However, by the time the super heavyweights were up most lifters bounced right up with the weight and all the suspense was dependent on whether they would get the jerk. It seems for heavier lifters it's easy to build up surplus front squat strength for weight's that are really difficult to jerk. Finally, you should check out the jerk of pyrros dimas... It's an overhead squat jerk... and he catches it in a parallel vertical shins squat.... Sorta like your low bar squat, which might be another reason why it's a good idea to be able to handle a bunch of weight in the low bar squat.
4) Finally, the main point here is that weights (for athletes, not power/oly lifters) are about getting stronger. As long as you choose a decent selection of lifts and you attempt to execute them with good bar speed, the goal in one year from today should be to be able to move a greater load in a somewhat equal time in: The hi-bar squat, the low bar squat, parallel hi-bar squats, quarter squats, front squats, deadlifts, push-press, hang-cleans, power-snatch, hang snatch... etc, etc. Some of these exercises activate different muscles to a different extent, but you won't be able to do get overall stronger in lower-body compound lifts unless your quads, hamstrings, glutes, ALL get stronger. Weight training just isn't that specific. Whether or not you feel squats in your back, quads, hamstrings, or in your brain (Dizziness might be where I FEEL it most), adding significant weight to compound-lower body movements makes your lower body stronger, period. Your specificity will come in to play during your sport training and your sport season, ie 200m sprinters will have larger left the right hamstrings (running the turn), jumpers must spend A LOT of time jumping, bounding, etc, etc. Lifting for athleticism is about executing compound movements that cannot be executed if any of the links are weak. Save the quad-dominance and single muscle focus for the bodybuilders!
Just my two cents. A good discussion nonetheless.
-
A good post and I agree with a lot of it. The front-squat analysis I find a bit troublesome though. IMO there won't be as much hamstring contribution because the very acute knee angle will cause the hamstrings to shorten from the distal end which means that there won't be as much force production from this muscle group. I think the hip extension in the front-squat is primarily glutes.
That is one of the reasons as well why I prefer low-bar squats and also why I think my squat is just a tiny bit too deep. I think for a top set at 200 kg x 5 it was not terrible, but there are still many form errors in there (primarily neck position and tightness at the bottom). A squat should be full, without a doubt, but you don't want to let the knees come forward at the bottom (hamstring relaxation), which happened in my squat for a little bit at least.
Interesting observation regarding the lighter oly-lifters though. Quite possible that getting stronger becomes is more difficult for the lower weight-classes. Good argument in 4) as well, albeit one must understand that small differences in exercise execution will still be likely to make a difference in training success. The reason is not because movements like low- and high-bar-squats are drastically different, but they are different enough that they will effect things long-term because small effects have the chance to accumulate. I am pretty sure that differences will exist for a guy squatting 2-3 times a week with one style or the other. If those differences will be in jump performance? I do not know.