Adarq.org

Quote from: tychver on July 11, 2011, 11:00:59 pm

Quote from: JC on July 11, 2011, 10:18:25 pm

Quote from: Clarence on July 11, 2011, 02:54:19 am

It's a shame this thread disintegrated so quickly without any substantial debate.  It had potential to be interesting.

There's not much to debate

Bullshit. Human metabolism is still extremely poorly understood even after 70 years of research.

Explain what is poorly understood about it. I bet you state some facts. Facts cannot be debated, so therefore, there is not much to debate. You can't debate something that is either right or wrong. There is no opinion.

Off the top of my head: gut flora and hormonal and gene expression responses.

Oh, and:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science

http://cdn.stronglifts.com/wp-content/uploads/smolov.stronglifts.zip

I put in my 145 squat and by the end of the second phase (week three in that phase) it has me doing 10x3 with 155. ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?

10 sets of 3 reps with 155?

It should be 138.25kg

10x3 @ 85% of original 1RM plus 15kg. 0.85*145+15=138.25

Monday 4x9 70%
Wednesday 5x7 75%
Friday 7x5 80%
Saturday 10x3 85%

Add 10kg in the second week. Add 5kg in the third week. That's the Smolov base cycle. Don't forget to eat an immense amount of food and sleep plenty!

600mg/week a LOT of testosterone. From what I understand 200mg of enanthate/cypionate will typically bring a mid 20s male into high-normal levels and 300mg is definitely supraphisological. In the SCU study (Performance enhancement and urinary detection after short-term testosterone enanthate use) the subjects had significant gains in lean mass on 3.5mg/kg.

Supraphisiological doses of testosterone may inhibit collagen synthesis or it might not. W're still really not sure on that one. The winstrol brittle tendon theory is complete broscience. It's entire basis comes from one unconfirmed study in rats. LanceSTS knows more about that particular bit of bullshit than I do.

The truly frightening thing about the SCU study is that half the participants still had a T/E ratio < 4:1 while taking 300mg/week i.e. did not fail the WADA drug testing standard while taking a significant PED.

tl;dw

Short version?

Quote from: tychver on June 26, 2011, 07:11:11 pm

Quote from: BMully on June 25, 2011, 03:03:25 am

DAT DEPTH!! HOLY SHIT

I'm guessing he just does a KF and squats like that while keeping everything else basically the same..damn what strength

Depth? It's below parallel and fucking heavy but it's not even ass to grass really.

This is ridiculous depth with ridiculous weight:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK7m6I5m6gY&feature=related

ridiculous depth -->                        <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_ki721pSso" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_ki721pSso</a>

Shankle is awesome.

I do not mean any discredit to Zatsiorsky's accomplishments at all. I however feel that the book I have read of him and Kraemer lacks a lot of things, first and foremost solid argumentation instead of just observation. I do not doubt that it has influenced many practitioners and that good things have come from it. That does not mean however that the things written in the book itself are particularly applicable or more than mere observation what eastern European countries did in the 70s. The books name suggested otherwise and I had hoped for more than what it delivered.

It might be that I am a terrible reader though.

@tychver: What are your thoughts on the book?

Carefully avoided my trolling eh?

I don't think the book is as good as it could be. There was a lot of congitive dissonance between the more abstract scientific theory and the observed practical training reigimes without much attempt to reconcile the two but I don't think that was really the goal. The book seemed to be more of an introduction to the science of strength training rather than attempting to be the bible of the subject. However, a lot of the research to reconcile the two either hasn't been done or is infeasable. Mark's made a good attempt at it using deduction and empirical observation in his books. Lon Kilgore and Kyle Pierce are trying. Glenn Pendlay was doing a fair bit before he got really busy with other stuff. His masters thesis is worth a read.

A few other things you might want to read:
Principles and Practice of Reistance Training - similar book by Stone et al
Anything by Hartman, Kilgore, Pierce and any combination of!
Anything by Simon Gandevia on CNS and motor fatigue
Most of the stuff on here: http://weightliftingexchange.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=54&Itemid=62
Tim Noakes ideas on fatigue and the "central governor"
Cytokine hypothesis of overtraining (probably bullshit but worth googling)

same, all of my best jumping has come during/after concentrated loading blocks... linear periodization is bad bad bad, i wrote some simple blog article for people, "the ratio method", which is supposed to help get people out of that mindset, introduces more of a concurrent system in simpler terms.

concentrate/high frequency blocks are the best ways to put on serious strength imo.. brozknowz is a great example of it... this forum has plenty of success stories from high frequency training, including myself/arowe/lance/dreyth/tychver/damienz etc list goes on.

High frequency training is awesome. There's a couple of really successful clubs produced a lot of good junior weightlifters in NZ based on russian/german programming and high frequency. They have the kids doing double sessions 3-4 days a week (5-6 days in total) in the school holidays after a few months training.

great, don't be one of those people to take out "impact work".. you need impacts in order to be good at, well, impacts... just keep them mostly low intensity for now, ie light rebounding exercises like jump rope, lateral barrier jumps (MR), MR halftucks, and definitely sprints... some good unilateral rebounding work comes from "light single leg sprints", any time you go real vertical, ie uni-tucks, you're going to experience alot of force so, just be careful to do it when you feel like you're firing properly, you don't want any "shutdown" occurring while trying to stabilize unilaterally, you can get away with it with bilateral rebounds though.

With Smolov, don't do any high intensity stuff beyond a a few decent SVJ/RVJ attempts on the off days. However, low impact explosive work in the warmup is absolutely essential if you're not just a lifter. Hell, for the powerlifters Feduleyev prescribed high catch powersnatches and low impact explosive work as warmup.

]
Are there any other recommendations? Other drills that I could be doing now? Input on what should happen during the switching phase is also welcome.

Lots of submax jumping and explosive lifting. Once you've bounced back a bit get some more serious jump training in and move into shock training.

i like to split them into multiple sessions if im going to get actual jumping in, for example:

day 1: session 1: jumping, submax or max whatever.. quality session, not quantity
day 1: session 2: rebounding/light sprint warmup etc, low level reactive work is done here, quantity and to break that sweat........ then lifting

Yah it's often split like that in weightlifting too. Or a lighter session in the morning to loosen up slash prime for a later bigger session.

so ya those exercises i mentioned before are good, just use alot of variety to keep yourself from feeling stale etc.. mix it up and have fun, but i'd always warmup with some impact work before the smolov sessions.. it loosens you up, reduces risk of injury, but also wakes you up better for a more productive smolov session.

Yup. I basically did random jumping drills, mostly RFI stuff, quick dynamic warmup, an oly lift up to a submax single, SMOLOV SETS, puke

---

You need to eat something every like three hours or so when going balls out with a high frequency  and high volume lifting routine. PWO nutrition is more impotant. The window for rapid absorbtion after training is something like 30-60 minutes long. Take food or a shake with carbs in to the gym unless you're ABSOUTELY sure you're going to be able to eat when you get home. A lot of serious lifters end up snacking between exercises!

I was getting pretty smooth with my snatches at around the three month mark, but the best I ever did was 94% of bodyweight. Best clean was 88 kg at 80 kg bodyweight. Meanwhile, high school kids were putting up double bodyweight with ugly "football" cleans. I was just plain weak and very slow by comparison.

If we're honest, once you're using straps, whipping/bouncing the bar (it's significant even when you can't really see it) and taking an excessively wide catch to get as low as possible then you're really looking at a completely different movement. One that for a lot of people ends up with them lifting far more weight than they can actually strict high catch powerclean and sometimes exceeds what they could perform a full clean off the floor with. Lanky and explosive guys can often end up end up high catch powercleaning more than they can full clean. If they spent a huge amount of time working on full cleans and front squats then it would likely go up a lot and exceed their powerclean, but not by much. There are guys in weightlifting who can powerclean almost as much as they can clean and jerk. Pablo Lara did 195kg powerclean and 205 clean and jerk.

There's a lot of talk about efficiency, or being able to snatch or clean a target percentage of front and back squat weight. I guess I wasn't all that weak (back squat near 2xBW and front squat about 75-80% of that), but I was slow. My vertical at the time was 22" with the occasional 23". I am very curious to see how much better I would do now with about the same squat strength but a much higher vertical (27" usually with the occasional 28"). I just started Smolov and don't want to mess around with max snatch attempts right now, but I am very tempted. Of course I could just wait till Smolov+Feduleyev ups my squat strength and I get my vertical up another 3-4 inches and then see.


345 BS x 22" SVJ = 74 kilo snatch
405 BS x 32" SVJ = ?????

Ratio of classical lifts to squat strength varies on bodytype anyway. Think about Syzmon Kolecki doing 232.5kg at 94kg with a 240ish front squat and back squatting only a tiny bit higher, and Kakiashvilis doing 235 at 90kg and 99kg with front squat likely nearing 300kg.

If you're unexplosive at everything you're going to suck at weightlifting. If you're lanky and struggle with technique and don't really feel comfortable or explosive when performing the classic or power versions then they're probably not going to make you any more explosive anyway.

I used working up to a moderate-heavy single alternating between snatch and clean and jerk as warmup for my Smolov base cycle. Worked really well. I saw zero gains in snatch/clean and jerk and SVJ until weeks later though. Slowed down during such intense devotion to squatting.

Sorry to keep on with this, but I was banging my head against the same snatch and clean numbers for months and I would be thrilled if my current training actually improved my classic lifts. The classic lifts themselves are often pushed as ways to get stronger and more powerful, but I'm more and more convinced that for a lot of people, the classic lifts are a demonstration of strength and power and that squatting and plyometrics are superior for improving strength and power.

How could explosively lifting heavy weights not get you stronger? If you suck at the classical lifts and can't lift much realtive to your strength (related, but not interchangeable with squat numbers) then you're not going to get a great strength stimulus out of it. For almost every athlete the classical lifts aren't appropriate and the power versions are probably not going to be a fantastic max strength stiumulus but they are great for improving explosive strength as part of a program including strength work. For weightlifters it's a different story.

Given your build I would say you should use explosive/reactive squats and jump squats, short sprints and low box depth jumps to work on explosive power. Keep working on the powersnatch and powerclean and see if you can get to the point where it feels effective. Forget the classical lifts unless you really, really want to do them.