Topic: 1 rm test protocol

[Patrick Dupont]

I'm not satisfied with the 1 RM test protocols for college lifters currently proposed in academic books. They are completely "out of this world".
I have my own, but I am very interested in what you think would be good examples.
Some suggestions?

[Jim Hooper]

I'm guessing the problem you see with some of those protocols is that they include workup sets in the 5-10 rep range, and things like sets of 3-4 with 80-90%, which don't really fit the Snatch and Jerk.

Here's what we normally do on a "test" type days.  Often this will only push one lift, but there are times (e.g., a test day in the pre-comp month, where we'll do a simulated/practice meet and test both lifts.)

Projected max (the one we are shooting for) is usually 2.5 kgs higher than the prior PR on the CJ and 2 kgs higher than the prior Snatch.  The target numbers are set to be achievable based on prior performance, how the lifter has been doing in training, and their situation that day.

Working down from the projected or target lift, the workup to that attempt will be:

CJ:  Target attempt,  -5/1 or -7.5/1, -10/1, -10/1, -10/1-2, -10/2, . . . -20/2 . . . the number of 10 kg and 20 kg jumps depends on the lifter and how high the target is.  (If we are talking about a younger or newer lifter going for a max at 70 kgs or so, same protocol, but the "10" jumps become 5's, and the 20's become 10's.  Example of a recent workup to PR in the CJ (prior PR was 100):  50/2]2, 70/2, 80/1, 90/1, 97.5.1, 102.5/1 [PR].

SN:  Same, but the increases in the workup sequence are 4 kgs where we'd do 5 in the jerk, 6 where we'd do 7.5, and 8 kgs where we'd jump 10 kgs on the jerk.  Example of a workup to a recent PR (old PR was 80 kgs):  [40/2]2, 48/2, 56/2, 64/1, 72/1, 78/1, 82/m, 82/1 [PR1], 84/m, 84/m, 84/1 [PR2].

The reason for the 2/2.5, 4/5, 6/7.5,and 8/10 relationships for the loading jumps in the SN and JK is simply the normal 80% ratio of snatch to jerk.  So we just load and jump that way all the time -- whether or not its a "test" type session, to keep the loading and relative load increases in balance.  So the protocol for a test day, until we get to within a jump or two of the target lift, is exactly the same sequence that they have done many, many times.

SQT:  Same idea, but the workup is typically doubles in 20 kg jumps up to 25-30 kgs below the target, then a single for two lifts jumping 10 each lift, then the goal attempt.  So that last jump, to the target load, will be a 5-10 kg jump.   The lifter gets there pretty fast; again, we want to do enough warming up, but not waste energy.  I think that is probably far fewer workup repetitions than you will see in some of the protocols, but I think it works just fine for the vast majority of Olympic lifters.  Plenty of ATP left to do what you want to do, get that next PR.  It may be that we squat so much more frequently than ordinary strength-trainers that we just don't need the 10-rep and 5-rep type workup sets that you see in those protocols.  Examples of a couple of workups to PRs in the back squat last month:  (1) 70/2, 90/2, 110/2, 130/2, 145/1, 155/1 [PR].  (2) 50/2, 70/2, 90/2, 110/1, 120/1, 127.5 [PR].



 

[Patrick Dupont]

Thank you, Jim.

I read you twice. It's well thought-out and very informative. Not that far of what I am currently doing, but with some nuances.

I hope that at least one of our armchair "sports specialists" will happen to stumble upon this post one of these days...

The one size fits all protocols designed in academic books are no good, even for brute strength testing. I seriously wonder whether the authors have ever approached an Oly bar or a strength athlete.