You didn't get attacked, just that starting strength was a poor decision
why is it? he needs something non specific to improve his strength.
Since when did strength levels correlate with recovery times?
How is the science in the dynamic effort method lacking?
If all you needed was powercleans to become explosive, Bunnings would have an olympic team.
Strength is a secondary objective in Rugby. There is no need to squat twice a week. Squat 1RM is not a priority. I'm sure OP could also throw a shot every day and adequately recover, should it be made a priority? I would imagine not. The role of the S+C is not to get away with as much as possible, it's to keep the athlete as fresh as possible. Squatting heavy twice a week does not do this. Once a week with moderate loads is plenty, especially under good coaching. The rest of the time should be spent on the priorities which are game skills as number 1, conditioning as number 2 and being fast as number 3. Strength training just keeps everything ticking over and raises the threshold of improvement in the other areas.
Thats the difference between daily and weekly periodisation. shit man, did you actually read practical programming?
DE method of lifting barbells - Styrketræning - Forum
Nice analogy - comparing lifting a 10kg box with a power clean.
Who do you coach, a girl's soccer team? squatting x3 a week has been precedent with most rugby/football teams.
lol I just read that article
he doesn't say that the dynamic effort methods are bad
he states that "the DE method of lifting barbells is not necessary for developing maximal strength."
but he isn't going to use the dynamic effort method to increase his maximal strength is he!?
he's doing to get better at jumping & sprinting, faster and performing a large amount of work in a short amount of time
1elitefts The Thinker said:Question
Sports Training-Thinker-What if any sportsmen do you feel benefits from lifting loads that represent 40-60% of one's 1rm in the sq/bp. Fmax (explosive strength development) can be achieved in the squat lifting 80% while not necessarily trying to find a weight that you can move the barbell at the greatest possible speed? The dynamic effort method taxes the CNS in a manner that has a lower dynamic correspondence so you choose to use those reserves on something of high correspondence? In addition does building absolute strength while developing rate of force development (jumps throw sprints) account for the strength necessary to complete throws/lifts of other sportsmen of equal size in say wrestling?
Answer
Frank, if we consider the most specific motor adaptation of lifting 40-60%1RM, on a barbell, as fast as possible then we know that the result is greater speed with that range of resistance on that exercise. From that standpoint we would have to consider what sport disciplines demand that a barbell be squatted, presses, or deadlifted with 40-60%1RM as fast as possible.
Of course no such discipline exists.
Moving further along the continuum of specificity we may begin to consider more non-specific representations of any type of external resistance, for instance, that represents 40-60%1RM of one of the athletes barbell maximums.
As we move further away from the actual special exercise we see how we may draw more and more correlations; however, this comes at the expense of less and less transference.
It's an interesting topic of debate because the 40-60%1RM range is truly a purgatory, training percentage wise, from the standpoint of practical application.
Nearly all of the Soviet and overseas literature points to the efficacy of training loads below or above that percentage range in order to develop speed strength (lower) or explosive and absolute strength (above).
The 60% percent rule seems to be most prevalent regarding restorative work and the percentage drop off in training load volume for deloading purposes.
We know that tendo numbers seem to register highest (power output wise) in the 40-60 percentage range; however, training for highest power output is a nebulous statement and again we must come back to the training means.
Registering high power output pressing, squatting, pulling 40-60%1RM on an accelerometer tells us only one thing for sure and that is that the lifter is generating X amount of power output on THAT EXERCISE WITH THAT LOAD IN PARTICULAR. It tells us very little with respect to what the athlete is capable of doing on the field, ice, mat, snow, track, against an opponent, throwing an implement that weighs less than 8kilos, swinging a hockey stick, pushing a bobsled, etc.
There's a reason why you don't see any meaningful attention paid to the speed at which one could squat, press, deadlift with 40-60%1RM in Dr. Bondarchuk's transference tables, Dr Verkhoshansky's literature or most if not all of the translated literature available to us Westerners.
A note to those who swear by the dynamic effort method of squatting, pressing, and pulling: If there was something particularly special about lifting those loads as fast as possible on a barbell don't you think that the greatest minds and coaches in the history of recorded sport would have popularized its use.
I don't say these things to criticize those who adhere to lifting 40-60%1RM on a barbell as fast as possible.
I say these things to encourage those people to question the possibility of whether there exists a more effective means of training relative to their objective.
"but he isn't going to use the dynamic effort method to increase his maximal strength is he!?
he's doing to get better at jumping & sprinting, faster and performing a large amount of work in a short amount of time"
The Thinker said:Registering high power output pressing, squatting, pulling 40-60%1RM on an accelerometer tells us only one thing for sure and that is that the lifter is generating X amount of power output on THAT EXERCISE WITH THAT LOAD IN PARTICULAR. It tells us very little with respect to what the athlete is capable of doing on the field, ice, mat, snow, track, against an opponent, throwing an implement that weighs less than 8kilos, swinging a hockey stick, pushing a bobsled, etc.
Im cleaning out the rubbish in this thread.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?