Topic: Pull Technique Question.

[brian p williams]

Have any of you encountered a lifter who seems to go through the right positions with no thigh/hip brush/contact? The lifter is tall (6'4") with long arms and short torso. When the lifter makes thigh/hip contact on purpose bad things happen. Please advise.

[brian p williams]

John,

He has two distinct styles. One with thigh/hip brush/contact and one without.

The non brush style is faster. When viewed in slow motion, he moves through the correct positions. His knees go under the bar at the correct time. He does a proper double knee bend. His hips move forward and up. And then he jumps and pulls himself into the receiving position. He just doesn't make any thigh or hip contact with the bar.

It is interesting to note that when viewed from front and behind the non brush lift looks great because you can't tell if contact was made or not. The non brush lift only looks strange from the side. When viewed from the side, the bar is about four or five inches from his body at the top of his pull.  

The brush/contact style is hard to describe. During the first pull, his legs straighten out as the bar passes his knees. Then during the transition phase, the bar travels toward his body and makes contact. After contact the bar tends to travel up and away from his body. The bar never stops moving. When viewed in slow motion however, it looks like there is a pause.
   

Brian

[Mike Wittmer]

Brian, to answer your question, yes.  I would not worry about it, either way.  The only problem with brushing the thighs is not really brushing it at all, rather "banging" the thighs.  In that case there is a slowing of the bar and/or a change of bar path and pulling positions.  As long as that does not happen, brushing or touching the thighs is not a problem.

[Steve Gough]

more and more you see evidence of the top of the thigh being bypassed and the actual "second pull" (if you wish) commencing beyond the top of the thigh in what we refer to as the "crease". Then there is very little brushing (or more accurately, real brushing as opposed to banging). The bar path seems to be infinitely closer as a result. Though, I do not know if every body-type can accomodate this style.

[Don Weideman]

So much of an individual's technique is dictated by
the lifter's lever lengths and their interrelationship
with each other. For example, intentionally pulling
with bent arms to get to the crease.

[Steve Gough]

Don,

I could see that being the case, but this was not evident in the examples I have seen. If this can be taught at all, I think that you have to get to the lifter in the very beginning stages of one's career so it becomes engrained in one's motor path. I don't think that I am imagining this. One of my lifters does it beautifully and he really taught himself by watching videos of some great Bulgarian lifters. In the clean, especially, the speed of his rack and the very small drop of the bar according to Mike Karchut is the fastest he's ever seen. And Mike was a lifter very keen on techinque efficientcy.

I think we have taught the so-called "brush" for so long and the appropriate height there of, that we might not have realized that there may be an even better, more efficient way.

Last summer by son, Tom, was visiting me and I watched him do this very same thing to my amazement, really being the first time I ever caught it. Tom was more of a student of our sport than I ever imagined. Why I had overlooked this all these years may be answered by the last sentence in the preceding paragraph. See, you can teach and old dog new tricks. And/or it's never too late to learn.

[Steve Gough]

Don,

One other thing... I would be the last person in the world to claim any kind of scientific prowess. But it makes sense to me, that with this pull from the crease (so to speak) your second pull is shortened (obviously), but your reaction time going under the bar is greater.

Steve

[Don Weideman]

Steve

Could you elaborate on your last point about moving under
the bar. I agree the pull from the "crease" is shorter, but also
stronger i.e. more efficient. I just don't follow your last point.
I'm no scientist either.

Don