Topic: A concept that alot of weightlifters don't seem to understand...

[Andy Dick]

This kind of explains it...

"Power is a direct mathematical fucntion of force and velocity.  Therefore, if at any instant, any two of the variables force, velocity, and power are known, the third can be calculated.  If an individual can generate high force or high power at a particular velocity of movement, precisely the same ability is being described, that is, that ability to accelerate a mass at that particular speed.  It is not correct to associate strength with low speed and pwoer with high speed.  Strength is the capacity to exert force at any given speed, and power the mathematical product of force and velocity at whatever the speed.  What is critical is the ability to exert force at speeds characteristic of the sport to overcome gravity and accelerate the body or an implement." (Essentials of Strength Training and Conditioning, second edition, pg. 36)

When you are moving a load there is a scientific principle termed the force velocity relationship.  What this states that as the force increases toward a 1RM the velocity tends to decrease due to the load being at the maximum of the lifter's capability.  (This is why some studies have shown that the peak power intensities are between 60-80%, eventually the load can decrease so much and the lifter can only move so fast that the power will decrease).  When the load is decreased to even 90% on both strength and olympic lifts there is an immediate increase in power production because the lifter is able to move the load faster because it is less.  Now olympic lifting and the olympic lifts capitalize on improving power by moving increasingly heavier weights at top velocity that is the nature of the sport.  (Keep in mind, it has been proven that power can be greatly improved without the full olympic lifts, I was even in a study that showed that power can be improved with less teaching in just a loaded jump shrug as opposed to a full clean because a catch is not needed the athlete need only focus on moving heavy weight at a maximal velocity, not lifting to a point than catching it in the olympic lift).

Now what Chris is saying in regards to base strength (and Chris correct me if this was not want you meant) and the basis for using the classic lifts of squat and deadlift to seek to improve power is this:  The goal of pushing the squat numbers for example is to increase the 1RM in squat (keep in mind the high correlation between squat and olympic movements).  Since the squat is more of a pure strength lift and can be done at lower velocity due to the heavier weight (although I am of the opinion that maximal effort to move the weight up as fast as possible in the squat should be conducted as well) the 1RM can be increased more readily without necessarily worrying about slowing down the olympic movements.  The "base" aspect comes in because since we have to lower the intensity from the 1RM to create more power by moving the weight faster this base will in theory (everything else being equal) make a heavier olympic lift load lighter in order to move it faster.  Squats gives us the ability to increase load and volume without the worry of hurting speed or technique in the olympic lifts due to fatigue.  Which is why we accomplish less reps in the olympic lifts as well. 

I think of it as this: if person A is used to carrying a 50 lb rock 10 meters or person B a 20 lb rock 10 meters, if I have to run with a 20 lb rock 5 meters as fast as possible person A would be able to with more power.

Keep in mind however as I said before a squat or deadlift can never replace the classic olympic lift because due to the specificity principle: the activity that most closely resembles the goal activity will have the greatest effect in improving the goal activity.  That is why the full olympic lift is more important.  But what they can do is help to improve strength in the legs and hips in order to carry over somewhat to aid in the full lifts.  However, as Chris has said there does come a point of diminishing return in the squats because they cannot fully replicate the strength need in the olympic lift, so there will come a point where one can keep pushing the squats but there will be no or very little increase in the olympic lift.

[John Way]

I guess that is why they call it a "powerclean" then? 

[ViKtoricus]

This kind of explains it...

"Power is a direct mathematical fucntion of force and velocity.  Therefore, if at any instant, any two of the variables force, velocity, and power are known, the third can be calculated.  If an individual can generate high force or high power at a particular velocity of movement, precisely the same ability is being described, that is, that ability to accelerate a mass at that particular speed.  It is not correct to associate strength with low speed and pwoer with high speed.  Strength is the capacity to exert force at any given speed, and power the mathematical product of force and velocity at whatever the speed.  What is critical is the ability to exert force at speeds characteristic of the sport to overcome gravity and accelerate the body or an implement." (Essentials of Strength Training and Conditioning, second edition, pg. 36)

When you are moving a load there is a scientific principle termed the force velocity relationship.  What this states that as the force increases toward a 1RM the velocity tends to decrease due to the load being at the maximum of the lifter's capability.  (This is why some studies have shown that the peak power intensities are between 60-80%, eventually the load can decrease so much and the lifter can only move so fast that the power will decrease).  When the load is decreased to even 90% on both strength and olympic lifts there is an immediate increase in power production because the lifter is able to move the load faster because it is less.  Now olympic lifting and the olympic lifts capitalize on improving power by moving increasingly heavier weights at top velocity that is the nature of the sport.  (Keep in mind, it has been proven that power can be greatly improved without the full olympic lifts, I was even in a study that showed that power can be improved with less teaching in just a loaded jump shrug as opposed to a full clean because a catch is not needed the athlete need only focus on moving heavy weight at a maximal velocity, not lifting to a point than catching it in the olympic lift).

Now what Chris is saying in regards to base strength (and Chris correct me if this was not want you meant) and the basis for using the classic lifts of squat and deadlift to seek to improve power is this:  The goal of pushing the squat numbers for example is to increase the 1RM in squat (keep in mind the high correlation between squat and olympic movements).  Since the squat is more of a pure strength lift and can be done at lower velocity due to the heavier weight (although I am of the opinion that maximal effort to move the weight up as fast as possible in the squat should be conducted as well) the 1RM can be increased more readily without necessarily worrying about slowing down the olympic movements.  The "base" aspect comes in because since we have to lower the intensity from the 1RM to create more power by moving the weight faster this base will in theory (everything else being equal) make a heavier olympic lift load lighter in order to move it faster.  Squats gives us the ability to increase load and volume without the worry of hurting speed or technique in the olympic lifts due to fatigue.  Which is why we accomplish less reps in the olympic lifts as well. 

I think of it as this: if person A is used to carrying a 50 lb rock 10 meters or person B a 20 lb rock 10 meters, if I have to run with a 20 lb rock 5 meters as fast as possible person A would be able to with more power.

Keep in mind however as I said before a squat or deadlift can never replace the classic olympic lift because due to the specificity principle: the activity that most closely resembles the goal activity will have the greatest effect in improving the goal activity.  That is why the full olympic lift is more important.  But what they can do is help to improve strength in the legs and hips in order to carry over somewhat to aid in the full lifts.  However, as Chris has said there does come a point of diminishing return in the squats because they cannot fully replicate the strength need in the olympic lift, so there will come a point where one can keep pushing the squats but there will be no or very little increase in the olympic lift.

I see. So this is where the concept of "reserve strength" comes from.

Thanks.

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

There are several interesting concepts relevant to this topic including speed specificity, overload, variation, etc. Squats are an anomaly in many ways in the training of a weightlifter since they are obviously critical to the sport despite usually being done at slower velocities compared to the pull and transitions to catch positions. However, of course, when you stand from the snatch and clean these are done at comparable speeds (especially after cutting weight). Some have said things in the past to me that imply they believe that squats are necessary only to be sure the lifter can rise from a heavy clean and still have enough gas to perform a successful jerk. This is outwardly impossible to refute and somewhat obvious. However, less obvious is the fact that there indeed must be some carry-over to pulling strength from squatting, even at slower velocities. I'm not sure, but I think most veteran lifters and coaches recognize this carryover, distinct from the benefits (if any) from pulls. Of course, this leads to the idea one might be able to indeed train for speed in the pull by doing something like speed-squats or jump-squats. Unfortunately, I think these exercises are too awkward, dangerous, and-or dissimilar to be practical to train in an aggressive, progressive fashion.

[Arturo Gómez]

Some observations:

1) weightlifting requires power, but not only power. If we see the videos, the limitant factor, many times, is not power. Is stability, resistance -articular and organic -, or simple strength.

2) exists a important difference: developed power x consumed power

3) human body is not a simple machine with linear relation. This is partially consequence of (1) and (2)

So, exists (for each person) an optimal point of power development. That point is near of the maximum in explosive exercises, and 70 -80% in the no explosive.

But, as we work with a very complex machine, and we not only are interested in especifically power, but in a integration of different capacities, and the improvement of these capacities does not depends only of numbers, but of biological and psiquical variables, the weightlifting training is today an "open problem".

[Matt Erdman]

I see. So this is where the concept of "reserve strength" comes from.

Thanks.

I don't think that is quite the same. Glenn Pendlay has said it well, but I'm not sure where to find it. Basically if the squat improves, it makes no sense to hold the strength in reserve. The goal would be to improve the classic lifts proportionately. So if the clean is 80% of the back squat and the snatch is 60%, then it makes sense that a lifter should strive to improve the clean by 8kg and the snatch by 6kg for every 10kg increase in the squat.

I'll break from the pack here (for better or for worse) because in my experience there is no improving the classic lifts without first improving on basic strength, of which the back squat is the best indicator. This of course assumes the lifter has achieved a high degree of technical competency in the lifts. I don't believe (and it has not been my experience) that training on the classic lifts will cause a significant increase in the squat. It follows then that training for the squat should be done with the express purpose of improving the results in the squat, so that subsequently the results in the classic lifts will improve.

[Arturo Gómez]

Our experience is exactly as Matt says.

[eli]

Just want to interject that peak power off the ground in the snatch is very high, sometimes in excess of the second pull (depends on the lifter).   So the idea that the second pull or final explosion is the most powerful element of the lift is not necessarily true.  Similarly, squats and deadlifts can have very high peak power, depending on how they are executed.   Nobody likes to admit it, but Olympic lifts are not 'better' or 'more explosive' or whatever.  However, the second pull of the olympic lifts trains power at very useful joint angles.  This is what makes them special.