What Has Weightlifting Taught You in 2011?

[quote]Swolegasm wrote:

[quote]TheJonty wrote:

[quote]Wrah wrote:

[quote]Drenmi wrote:
Biggest realization: How little strength (as a generalized concept and over used “blame”) correlates with weightlifting performance.[/quote]

Why is it then that when we go up in weightclasses the weights lifted increase steadily although flexibility, swiftness and overall technique all decreases? Why is it then, that a lifter like Chemerkin who looked like he didn’t have a fucking clue about weightlifting could still outlift all but handfull of lifters, all of those being from the same weightclass as him?

Oh and please share us some of your absolute beginner experiences. “I used to front squat 100 kg and jerk 60. Now I front squat 90 kg but jerk 70. Technique rulezzzz” Like someone cares. Piss off.[/quote]

Damn man, who pissed in your cornflakes?[/quote]

That was some serious agro lol
[/quote]

hahaha yeah the statement may have been disagreeable but that was a bit of an overreaction

That its a small pond sport, and haters are gonna hate.

[quote]Wrah wrote:

[quote]Drenmi wrote:
Biggest realization: How little strength (as a generalized concept and over used “blame”) correlates with weightlifting performance.[/quote]

Why is it then that when we go up in weightclasses the weights lifted increase steadily although flexibility, swiftness and overall technique all decreases? Why is it then, that a lifter like Chemerkin who looked like he didn’t have a fucking clue about weightlifting could still outlift all but handfull of lifters, all of those being from the same weightclass as him?

Oh and please share us some of your absolute beginner experiences. “I used to front squat 100 kg and jerk 60. Now I front squat 90 kg but jerk 70. Technique rulezzzz” Like someone cares. Piss off.[/quote]

Sorry if I stepped on some sore toe here. :slight_smile: Maybe I should clarify what I mean.

As far as I’m concerned, you need the right technique, tempo and timing to lift good.

The tempo, of course, comes from the power you can apply to the bar, so strength is not useless. You need to be strong in the right positions though, thus “general” strength is overrated. Strength needs to be specific, as well as technique.

This means that technique would need to be perfected first. (Not neccessarily that it is more important than strength though.)

Also, the benefit of strength will decrease the worse your technique gets. If you have poor technique, you may be able to lift 100kg, but you might actually be applying enough force to the bar to clear 120kg if you had the technique. So you are losing 20% of the potential that your strength gives you. When you reach 200kg, you could have lifted 240kg.

Actually, I don’t think that flexibility, swiftness and technique goes down the heavier the lifter is. It just adapts to the changing center of gravity and levers. As far as it comes to Chemerkin, I haven’t looked much at his technique (mostly since TV is almost always filming from the front), but he does have really crisp timings, like many other heavy lifters.

Of course, there is a possibility that I may be completely wrong, and if that can be proven, I am open to changing my opinion. :slight_smile:

The takeaway lesson from me would be: Keep nailing 9 out of 10 lifts, and let the increase in strength (and weight) come on as a product of this. Train primarily to perfect technique and timing improvements, not to chase weights.

[quote]Drenmi wrote:

[quote]Wrah wrote:

[quote]Drenmi wrote:
Biggest realization: How little strength (as a generalized concept and over used “blame”) correlates with weightlifting performance.[/quote]

Why is it then that when we go up in weightclasses the weights lifted increase steadily although flexibility, swiftness and overall technique all decreases? Why is it then, that a lifter like Chemerkin who looked like he didn’t have a fucking clue about weightlifting could still outlift all but handfull of lifters, all of those being from the same weightclass as him?

Oh and please share us some of your absolute beginner experiences. “I used to front squat 100 kg and jerk 60. Now I front squat 90 kg but jerk 70. Technique rulezzzz” Like someone cares. Piss off.[/quote]

Sorry if I stepped on some sore toe here. :slight_smile: Maybe I should clarify what I mean.

As far as I’m concerned, you need the right technique, tempo and timing to lift good.

The tempo, of course, comes from the power you can apply to the bar, so strength is not useless. You need to be strong in the right positions though, thus “general” strength is overrated. Strength needs to be specific, as well as technique.

This means that technique would need to be perfected first. (Not neccessarily that it is more important than strength though.)

Also, the benefit of strength will decrease the worse your technique gets. If you have poor technique, you may be able to lift 100kg, but you might actually be applying enough force to the bar to clear 120kg if you had the technique. So you are losing 20% of the potential that your strength gives you. When you reach 200kg, you could have lifted 240kg.

Actually, I don’t think that flexibility, swiftness and technique goes down the heavier the lifter is. It just adapts to the changing center of gravity and levers. As far as it comes to Chemerkin, I haven’t looked much at his technique (mostly since TV is almost always filming from the front), but he does have really crisp timings, like many other heavy lifters.

Of course, there is a possibility that I may be completely wrong, and if that can be proven, I am open to changing my opinion. :slight_smile:

The takeaway lesson from me would be: Keep nailing 9 out of 10 lifts, and let the increase in strength (and weight) come on as a product of this. Train primarily to perfect technique and timing improvements, not to chase weights.[/quote]

Also, where I’m coming from, training youngsters, they still live under the impression that being a good weightlifter is about “being strong”, when it’s actually just about being a good weightlifter.

They say stuff like: “if I get stronger in the legs, my clean will go up”.

Which might be true, but most of the time isn’t.

Instead they could say something like: “if I get stronger in the clean, my clean will go up”.

Or even better: “if I get better in the clean, my clean will go up”.

The strength idea draws attention from the very simple SAID principles that enable progression.

[quote]GqArtguy wrote:
That its a small pond sport, and haters are gonna hate.[/quote]

Yeh, and there are some very medium fish (especially in the UK) who think their king of the pond…

[quote]Ed Ache wrote:

[quote]GqArtguy wrote:
That its a small pond sport, and haters are gonna hate.[/quote]

Yeh, and there are some very medium fish (especially in the UK) who think their king of the pond…[/quote]

coughKOINGcough… Joking, joking we all like you koing. well kinda.

[quote]Drenmi wrote:
Sorry if I stepped on some sore toe here. :slight_smile: Maybe I should clarify what I mean.

As far as I’m concerned, you need the right technique, tempo and timing to lift good.

The tempo, of course, comes from the power you can apply to the bar, so strength is not useless. You need to be strong in the right positions though, thus “general” strength is overrated. Strength needs to be specific, as well as technique.

This means that technique would need to be perfected first. (Not neccessarily that it is more important than strength though.)

Also, the benefit of strength will decrease the worse your technique gets. If you have poor technique, you may be able to lift 100kg, but you might actually be applying enough force to the bar to clear 120kg if you had the technique. So you are losing 20% of the potential that your strength gives you. When you reach 200kg, you could have lifted 240kg.

Actually, I don’t think that flexibility, swiftness and technique goes down the heavier the lifter is. It just adapts to the changing center of gravity and levers. As far as it comes to Chemerkin, I haven’t looked much at his technique (mostly since TV is almost always filming from the front), but he does have really crisp timings, like many other heavy lifters.

Of course, there is a possibility that I may be completely wrong, and if that can be proven, I am open to changing my opinion. :slight_smile:

The takeaway lesson from me would be: Keep nailing 9 out of 10 lifts, and let the increase in strength (and weight) come on as a product of this. Train primarily to perfect technique and timing improvements, not to chase weights.[/quote]

The thing is though, I’ve seen guys who probably weighed 180-190, power clean 300+ lbs with completely shit technique simply because they were strong as fuck. They got strong on squats, deads, chins, etc., and maybe doing cleans once every few weeks. So all that is, is “general strength” Granted, if they had any semblance of technique they’d be able to pull a boatload more, but the point remains, they can clean something respectable simply because they are fucking strong as hell, all the while lacking tempo, timing, etc. On the other side, I’ve seen far too many weaklings with “good” technique who can’t clean 90kg. I guess my point is that I think it’s important to build a general strength base as well because it can be helpful. Probably more so if it’s done concurrently, while you master the technique on the lifts and gain the specific strength to do them by doing them.

[quote]ape288 wrote:

[quote]Swolegasm wrote:

[quote]TheJonty wrote:

[quote]Wrah wrote:

[quote]Drenmi wrote:
Biggest realization: How little strength (as a generalized concept and over used “blame”) correlates with weightlifting performance.[/quote]

Why is it then that when we go up in weightclasses the weights lifted increase steadily although flexibility, swiftness and overall technique all decreases? Why is it then, that a lifter like Chemerkin who looked like he didn’t have a fucking clue about weightlifting could still outlift all but handfull of lifters, all of those being from the same weightclass as him?

Oh and please share us some of your absolute beginner experiences. “I used to front squat 100 kg and jerk 60. Now I front squat 90 kg but jerk 70. Technique rulezzzz” Like someone cares. Piss off.[/quote]

Damn man, who pissed in your cornflakes?[/quote]

That was some serious agro lol
[/quote]

hahaha yeah the statement may have been disagreeable but that was a bit of an overreaction
[/quote]

lol I declare post of the day LOL

Koing

[quote]Swolegasm wrote:

[quote]Ed Ache wrote:

[quote]GqArtguy wrote:
That its a small pond sport, and haters are gonna hate.[/quote]

Yeh, and there are some very medium fish (especially in the UK) who think their king of the pond…[/quote]

coughKOINGcough… Joking, joking we all like you koing. well kinda. [/quote]

From what I’ve seen of him on here Koing seems like a decent chap.

[quote]Swolegasm wrote:

[quote]Ed Ache wrote:

[quote]GqArtguy wrote:
That its a small pond sport, and haters are gonna hate.[/quote]

Yeh, and there are some very medium fish (especially in the UK) who think their king of the pond…[/quote]

coughKOINGcough… Joking, joking we all like you koing. well kinda. [/quote]

I’m a 2nd rank National level lifter lol. I got to make a few Euro and Worlds in the next 3-5yrs man…you can’t train for 12-17yrs and not make a f0cking Euro or Worlds man!

Koing

[quote]Drenmi wrote:
Also, where I’m coming from, training youngsters, they still live under the impression that being a good weightlifter is about “being strong”, when it’s actually just about being a good weightlifter.

They say stuff like: “if I get stronger in the legs, my clean will go up”.

Which might be true, but most of the time isn’t.

Instead they could say something like: “if I get stronger in the clean, my clean will go up”.

Or even better: “if I get better in the clean, my clean will go up”.

The strength idea draws attention from the very simple SAID principles that enable progression.[/quote]

If you can’t FS what your trying to CJ by at least 10kg for 3x you probably won’t CJ it…

The FS is really important at your absolute limit in the OLifts. Yes poor technique will lower it further but having a high FS coupled with ‘good’ technique will be better then good technique and not a great FS. I’ve seen loads of lifters that have good technique, but just aren’t very strong and this is why I can lift more. They can’t squat even 130kg let alone 170+ for reps…FS at the expense of not lifting is not good either. You have to FS and lift heavy as well to pull them both up.

Koing

[quote]ape288 wrote:

[quote]Drenmi wrote:
Sorry if I stepped on some sore toe here. :slight_smile: Maybe I should clarify what I mean.

As far as I’m concerned, you need the right technique, tempo and timing to lift good.

The tempo, of course, comes from the power you can apply to the bar, so strength is not useless. You need to be strong in the right positions though, thus “general” strength is overrated. Strength needs to be specific, as well as technique.

This means that technique would need to be perfected first. (Not neccessarily that it is more important than strength though.)

Also, the benefit of strength will decrease the worse your technique gets. If you have poor technique, you may be able to lift 100kg, but you might actually be applying enough force to the bar to clear 120kg if you had the technique. So you are losing 20% of the potential that your strength gives you. When you reach 200kg, you could have lifted 240kg.

Actually, I don’t think that flexibility, swiftness and technique goes down the heavier the lifter is. It just adapts to the changing center of gravity and levers. As far as it comes to Chemerkin, I haven’t looked much at his technique (mostly since TV is almost always filming from the front), but he does have really crisp timings, like many other heavy lifters.

Of course, there is a possibility that I may be completely wrong, and if that can be proven, I am open to changing my opinion. :slight_smile:

The takeaway lesson from me would be: Keep nailing 9 out of 10 lifts, and let the increase in strength (and weight) come on as a product of this. Train primarily to perfect technique and timing improvements, not to chase weights.[/quote]

The thing is though, I’ve seen guys who probably weighed 180-190, power clean 300+ lbs with completely shit technique simply because they were strong as fuck. They got strong on squats, deads, chins, etc., and maybe doing cleans once every few weeks. So all that is, is “general strength” Granted, if they had any semblance of technique they’d be able to pull a boatload more, but the point remains, they can clean something respectable simply because they are fucking strong as hell, all the while lacking tempo, timing, etc. On the other side, I’ve seen far too many weaklings with “good” technique who can’t clean 90kg. I guess my point is that I think it’s important to build a general strength base as well because it can be helpful. Probably more so if it’s done concurrently, while you master the technique on the lifts and gain the specific strength to do them by doing them.[/quote]

Yeah, I’ve seen some pretty strong guys power clean some pretty big weights with some pretty ugly form too. Thing is, I’m not convinced the strength those guys have translates over to a lift performed properly, and you’re going to plateau a helluva lot sooner if you’re muscling up the weight as opposed to actually learning and practicing good technique. The general strength these guys have doesn’t necessarily translate well into the specific and positional strength necessary to snatch and clean and jerk big weights. While I agree it’s good to have a general strength base (which I think most o-lifters in North America should have as it seems a good deal of them start o-lifting later in life and after transitioning from some other athletic endeavour), once you start training I don’t think it’s beneficial to your o-lifts to spend training time working on your general strength unless you have glaring weaknesses or imbalances.

All that being said, I think the best way to proceed is, if your goal is to become a good weightlifter, spend your time working on the strength that directly translates into the olympic lifts, as well as your technique. I believe those are really the 2 factors that will drive your lifts up, and so that’s where the focus should be, however you have to be careful of putting too much emphasis on one at the expense of the other. Kind of like how I think you shouldn’t be spending too much time working your weaknesses or working on specific positions (say, with lifts from the hang/blocks or whatnot) at the expense of the full lifts, and vice versa as well. For those of us who don’t have the time to train and recover like a pro athlete it can be a delicate balancing act.

Weightlifting is the most equal sport of them all. It really does not matter where you are born, if you are talented enough you can be a world champion. Its a beautiful sport, for example Uzbekistan, Armenia, North-Korea produce high level athletes in this sport!!

[quote]hatesmiles wrote:
Weightlifting is the most equal sport of them all. It really does not matter where you are born, if you are talented enough you can be a world champion. Its a beautiful sport, for example Uzbekistan, Armenia, North-Korea produce high level athletes in this sport!![/quote]

I disagree, it can be alot more difficult to be world champion if your say born in a country without much intrest and funding for weightlifting, e.g. china they have pro lifters + good coaches plus other ‘‘stuff’’ whereas lets take england for example have some funding for theirs ifters but most must work day jobs. All thoses countries you named have lifting programs.I believe.

You have a solid point there. National intrest to the sport matters. But from what I understand in US for example the lifters who train in Olympic Training center in Colorado are full time lifters and still they don’t produce world class lifters. The “equal” statement needs bit more clarification. If you load 200 kilos on the bar in US, England, China or Russia, its always 200 kilos, the bar does not discriminate, heavy weights are heavy no matter where you are born! Also lifters coming from “second” world countries might have very rough backgrounds (some chinese lifters are from really poor families, they might even be malnourished). I have seen pictures from Apti Aukhadov’s gym where he started his weightlifting career, it was just couple of platforms and a few barbells in Chesnya. We all know that situation in Chesnya is somewhat unstable, but still there has been a lot of good lifters coming from there. That I think is the “equal” part of weightlifting. I’d love to hear more comments about this!!

ps sorry if there is spelling errors!

[quote]hatesmiles wrote:
You have a solid point there. National intrest to the sport matters. But from what I understand in US for example the lifters who train in Olympic Training center in Colorado are full time lifters and still they don’t produce world class lifters. The “equal” statement needs bit more clarification. If you load 200 kilos on the bar in US, England, China or Russia, its always 200 kilos, the bar does not discriminate, heavy weights are heavy no matter where you are born! Also lifters coming from “second” world countries might have very rough backgrounds (some chinese lifters are from really poor families, they might even be malnourished). I have seen pictures from Apti Aukhadov’s gym where he started his weightlifting career, it was just couple of platforms and a few barbells in Chesnya. We all know that situation in Chesnya is somewhat unstable, but still there has been a lot of good lifters coming from there. That I think is the “equal” part of weightlifting. I’d love to hear more comments about this!!

ps sorry if there is spelling errors![/quote]

Strictly speaking about US lifters. Even though they are at the OTC and “full-time” lifters, does not mean they are getting the salary of “pro” lifters in other countries. Many still have to work outside the OTC in order to support themselves.

I learned last year that in order to run faster, jump higher and do most things cool and impressive, you need to have a very solid base of strength. Its kind of a simpleton concept but really if you want to do a running front flip barrel roll over something or dunk a basketball or run a really fast 100m dash your definitely going to be needing a high strength to weight ratio.

For example I was reading in “Easy Strength” how Ben Johnson (a gold medalist sprinter in the 1980’s ) was was back squatting over 600lbs at a 175lb bodyweight and i thought to myself , OOHH, I SEEE.

[quote]hatesmiles wrote:
Weightlifting is the most equal sport of them all. It really does not matter where you are born, if you are talented enough you can be a world champion. Its a beautiful sport, for example Uzbekistan, Armenia, North-Korea produce high level athletes in this sport!![/quote]

I like this post.

Politics will come in to play in every sport and frustrate athletes, but at the end of the day in this game if you lift heavy weight consistently you will get on the world stage.

It’s what attracted me to weightlifting in the first instance. Clearly defined perimeters of success and failure, all resting on my shoulders in one moment…simply beautiful.

[quote]Koing wrote:

[quote]Drenmi wrote:
Also, where I’m coming from, training youngsters, they still live under the impression that being a good weightlifter is about “being strong”, when it’s actually just about being a good weightlifter.

They say stuff like: “if I get stronger in the legs, my clean will go up”.

Which might be true, but most of the time isn’t.

Instead they could say something like: “if I get stronger in the clean, my clean will go up”.

Or even better: “if I get better in the clean, my clean will go up”.

The strength idea draws attention from the very simple SAID principles that enable progression.[/quote]

If you can’t FS what your trying to CJ by at least 10kg for 3x you probably won’t CJ it…

The FS is really important at your absolute limit in the OLifts. Yes poor technique will lower it further but having a high FS coupled with ‘good’ technique will be better then good technique and not a great FS. I’ve seen loads of lifters that have good technique, but just aren’t very strong and this is why I can lift more. They can’t squat even 130kg let alone 170+ for reps…FS at the expense of not lifting is not good either. You have to FS and lift heavy as well to pull them both up.

Koing[/quote]

Hey Koing, snipes here. How’d you get on yesterday?

[quote]gogetit wrote:

[quote]Koing wrote:

[quote]Drenmi wrote:
Also, where I’m coming from, training youngsters, they still live under the impression that being a good weightlifter is about “being strong”, when it’s actually just about being a good weightlifter.

They say stuff like: “if I get stronger in the legs, my clean will go up”.

Which might be true, but most of the time isn’t.

Instead they could say something like: “if I get stronger in the clean, my clean will go up”.

Or even better: “if I get better in the clean, my clean will go up”.

The strength idea draws attention from the very simple SAID principles that enable progression.[/quote]

If you can’t FS what your trying to CJ by at least 10kg for 3x you probably won’t CJ it…

The FS is really important at your absolute limit in the OLifts. Yes poor technique will lower it further but having a high FS coupled with ‘good’ technique will be better then good technique and not a great FS. I’ve seen loads of lifters that have good technique, but just aren’t very strong and this is why I can lift more. They can’t squat even 130kg let alone 170+ for reps…FS at the expense of not lifting is not good either. You have to FS and lift heavy as well to pull them both up.

Koing[/quote]

Hey Koing, snipes here. How’d you get on yesterday? [/quote]

116
121x
121

140x
140x should have called 999 to get the cops to check out the robbery
140

It’s a good thing I can FS fairly well or I’d have been destroyed by following myself on the CJs…

Koing