• Keep up to date with Ausbb via Twitter and Facebook. Please add us!
  • Join the Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

    The Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum is dedicated to no nonsense muscle and strength building. If you need advice that works, you have come to the right place. This forum focuses on building strength and muscle using the basics. You will also find that the Ausbb- Australian Bodybuilding Forum stresses encouragement and respect. Trolls and name calling are not allowed here. No matter what your personal goals are, you will be given effective advice that produces results.

    Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.

A question on Strength: Intensity & Volume loading

I was questioning the notion of the OL being definitely much more powerful than the PL because of the way they train when maybe certain power lifters like Shane Hamman who converted to Olympic lifting i think would be powerful either way because they are genetic freaks as i also believe there could be others in power lifting that may be the same and also possess comparable power as Olympic lifters.
Hello, it's coincidental that you mention Shane Hamman, and Shane as being powerful because I have already spoken about this lifter and don't find him to be as powerful as an Olympic lifter (stronger yes/powerful no). Please don't take my word for it but have a look at some facts which I have provided sometime ago now on Ausbb...

Here is where I mentioned this man before (reply #17): http://ausbb.com/bodybuilding-training-discussions/11507-shoulders-different-presses-2.html


Fadi.
 
Last edited:
You being some 35kg heavier than myself would 'generally" be slower,

You would have more weight behind your punch, but the force, because of the speed would be less.

Chris punching power would also be better as he has greater technique that would involve more of his lower body in his punches.

Now on to athletes who generate more force. You know those people who are quite good at jumping and sprinting, a lot of them are not stronger than the average person so their force output is similar (there are exceptions). One major reason why some people jump higher and run faster is they have a better stretch shortening ability (reactive ability) which means they are more efficient at utilising the eccentrically loaded movements, or counter movement if we use a jump as an example.

So someone who can jump 35 inches naturally without any training usually has a very high efficiency in their tendons due to limb lengths, tendon angles, tendon length, tendon construction etc. Now you can get that same person in the gym and he may only lift the same amount as someone who can jump 20 inches. So his ability to generate muscular power is the same but he can instead accentuate this with his extreme reactive strength.

You usually find that the freaks have this high reactive strength and are naturally a stronger ****er. So they come into the gym and squat a hell of a lot without any training, someone like Israel Folau would be a good example he is strong, powerful and has good reactive strength. The good news is you can train all of these and become a good athlete like that naturally athletic bastard already is (no I am not jealous at all), you may find you have a good reactive strength and that you need more maximal force production training or that you are strong yet with a poor reactive strength and you may train your reactive strength with depth jumps and the like.

A powerlifter is much stronger than a weightlifter but a weightlifter is much more powerful than a powerlifter, all thanks to their unique way of training.

Fadi's quote brings up the missing element that I have not brought up. A powerlifter trains for maximal strength whilst a Oly lifter trains for power, they use lifts that are technical and need a really fast motion after the bar has left the floor or it will never make it through where we are generally weaker (look at the snatch from the shrug to overhead we are generally very weak in that movement, Fadi may want to explain it for me as he could do a much better explanation than I ever could). The fact that an Oly lifters goal is to have the highest bar speed possible to help them through the hardest and their weakest point means that they are training very differently to a powerlifter. This training therefore increases the ability for the muscles to turn on faster, neurologically, and therefore express their maximal force faster. This expression of strength will therefore mean more work done in a shorter period of time and therefore greater power. Some powerlifters try to incorporate this idea into their lifting to blast through sticking points.

The Oly lifter has no ability to use their reactive strength at the start so they are relying on maximal force and speed solely unlike most track and field athletes. They are the ones who can generate the most force in the shortest time due to this training style. And in regards to athletes they need all of these methods so that they gain more maximal strength, faster activation of muscles and better efficiency at storing and utilising eccentric loading to increase their force outputs while running and jumping.
 
(look at the snatch from the shrug to overhead we are generally very weak in that movement, Fadi may want to explain it for me as he could do a much better explanation than I ever could).

Thanks for your post Dave, it was awesome my friend. I hope I can explain the snatch lift in a simple way, so here goes...

The “secret” to a successful snatch lies with the hip drive or thrust as some like to call it. Once the bar has passed the knees, the weightlifter makes a conscious effort to drive his hips forward (extend them fully) whilst simultaneously straightening the legs and shrugging the bar upwards. Driving the hips forward where the bar brushes the lifter’s thighs redirects and generates a tremendous amount of power in an upward direction that it causes the lifter’s feet to leave the ground. At this moment, the bar is either suspended/hovering or still travelling up slightly. It is at this crucial moment (after the full extension has been completed fully) that the lifter dives underneath the bar and balances the weight according to the path it has been lifted. The path I'm referring to here is the path where the bar travels. A right path begins from the moment the bar is pulled off the ground and critically maintained close to the body, so close that many lifters (including myself) often cause their shins to bleed by the rubbing of the bar against them. So a straight line is crucial if one is to receive the weight in a balanced position, not forward and not back. I'll stop here before I complicate the issue. Thank you.

Please note the word “simultaneously” and its point of insertion. It’s paramount that two actions of the lift are performed immediately after each other in lightning speed that all looks as if performed simultaneously.
weight1.jpg


3.jpg


If you were to listen in on a flight captain and his first officer during a 747 takeoff roll, you’ll hear these words uttered by the one who is observing the speed: V1, V2, Rotate. Between V2 and Rotate is such a short time (due to the speed of the 747 blasting forward) that when the word Rotate is heard, you think it was said simultaneously with V2 (as in V2Rotate). And as the rotation of the plane lifts it off the runway, so does the power generated through the hip drive and shrug lifts the weightlifter off his lifting platform.

2165189613_6af5a582bc.jpg


Now compare the above with a none weightlifter trying to lift a relatively heavy weight. What you will see here is an absence of hip drive followed by what looks like reverse barbell curl, as the lifter tries to use his arms and shoulders instead of his legs, hips, and traps. As that lifter improves, he will no longer use his arms and shoulders to generate power upwards, but will still fail with the big lifts due to a none existent hip drive (and all that is attached to it as I’ve described above). This is mostly seen with cross fit athletes unfortunately.

No hip drive = no big lifts.


Fadi.
 
Last edited:
Fadi, that is easily the best explanation for the snatch that i've read in quite a while. May i use some (if not Most of it) for my coaching course, if i need to discuss either olympic lifts?

Towards the last few weeks before fracturing my toe, I was starting to really get the knack of using my hip drive to lift the weight & not so much my arms.


Back on topic I guess....Would you fella's say that a program that starts with a higher volume is more suited to less experienced people, since it builds mental pathways for how to do the actual lift, without the stress of working within the range of 90% +.

For a clearer example, would 5 sets 5 rep squats at around 70-75% be more suited at the start of a program be more useful, since it builds confidence, allows the athlete to utilize the best technique they can as well as building more overall weight....

May's squat 1RM is 100kg. (p.s. mary is a strong chick, weighing 85kg lol).

70% of 100kg is obviously 70kg.

70kg x 5 x 5 = 1750kg moved for that squat session.

If she wanted to squat the same amount of volume at say...85%...it'd look like...

85kg x 4 x 5 = 1750.

Obviously both approaches get you to the same location. The 70% road will take longer, while allowing Mary to not feel like she will pack in the whole sport & take up knitting at the local RSL
 
Back on topic I guess....Would you fella's say that a program that starts with a higher volume is more suited to less experienced people, since it builds mental pathways for how to do the actual lift, without the stress of working within the range of 90% +.

For a clearer example, would 5 sets 5 rep squats at around 70-75% be more suited at the start of a program be more useful, since it builds confidence, allows the athlete to utilize the best technique they can as well as building more overall weight....

May's squat 1RM is 100kg. (p.s. mary is a strong chick, weighing 85kg lol).

70% of 100kg is obviously 70kg.


70kg x 5 x 5 = 1750kg moved for that squat session.

If she wanted to squat the same amount of volume at say...85%...it'd look like...

85kg x 4 x 5 = 1750.

Obviously both approaches get you to the same location. The 70% road will take longer, while allowing Mary to not feel like she will pack in the whole sport & take up knitting at the local RSL

I don't agree that they get you to the same location. 85% and 70% loads will have a different training effect. 85% x 4 x 5 would be much harder, with higher intensity, than 70% x5x5.
The total weight moved is a useful guide to a variety of things, but you have to look at intensity. For eg, 100kg x20 x3 bench is a relatively low intensity session for me, but the total weight moved is fairly high when compared with 200x3x5- where the intensity is much higher.
 
Last edited:
If Mary was a beginner then it would probably get her strength to the same level but it would likely take her longer, as Spritcha has pointed out as a more advanced trainee (for a women she would be more advanced than a beginner) it would not get her the same results as the stimulus is quite low.

For a clearer example, would 5 sets 5 rep squats at around 70-75% be more suited at the start of a program be more useful, since it builds confidence, allows the athlete to utilize the best technique they can as well as building more overall weight....

Yes, a newb will get a lot of gains through reinforcing movement patterns under load. The more advanced you are the greater your need for intensity is.

Personally I like the total volume approach but instead of changing the % used I would keep it the same and use more sets with less reps. Your intensity per lift is the same and your total volume is the same yet you are fresher on each set than going to near failure. You could do 10x3 of 85% instead of 6x5 of 85%, I do like Wendlers use of an all out last set to utilize the gains made from going to fatigue, though this does ultimately increase your intensity of lifting without increasing your % of 1 RM lifted.
Posted via Mobile Device
 
Such a small thing - the hip drive, yet such a hard and un-natural thing to do - for me. Maybe why I can push press more then I can power clean.


Damn it!!
 
Top