Saturday, January 14, 2012

questions

questions
questions

#1
The Power Clean is what I would call a technique intensive movment, if done properly. The slow pull from the floor with straight arms, the explosive second pull, with elbows up and up, rising on the toes with a full shoulder shrug. This is a good movement for a well-conditioned athlete...but there exists quite a potential for damage from the uncoached movement, i.e. like Cajin turning his wrists over either too slowly or with lack of sufficient height...either one will strain the wrist tendons.



Dr. Ken (another man with a similar background, especially training for football) doesn't recommend the power clean, for the reason I mention and also that it places unusual demands on the connective tissues.

Numerous authorities now feel that you can't train "explosiveness," at least not with conventional weight training exercises.

How do you answer this?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is always the potential for injury whenever any exercise is done incorrectly and this goes for the power clean as well. However, it is a simple movement to teach. Keep in mind that a beginner will be handling very light weights while learning proper form, so the risk is no greater than it is on squats, benches, inclines, or any other primary exercise. As for the power clean placing too much stress on the connective tissues, I don't think that's a problem.

And the concern about wrist injuries is also ungrounded. Should an athlete have weak wrists, tape them and include specific movements to strengthen them. We're talking about preparing athletes for a variety of contact sports where they often explode into one another at full speed. If they can't handle power cleans, they aren't ready to participate in contact sports.

I believe that YOU can enhance explosiveness in the weight room. I've seen it done on countless occasions. Power snatches, full snatches, full cleans, and jerks all force the muscles, attachments, and most importantly, the nervous system to react more quickly. And that attribute can be utilized in any physical activity. Even the strength he gains from more static lifts, like the squat and deadlift, helps him jump higher and move faster. Bill Starr



#2
I'm more curious about what went on back in the day when lifters did both (military press and flat bench). Did overhead work have a protective effect on the shoulders? I work out with a group of masters olympic lifters. The oldest has been competing for about fifty years, not kidding, seriously, since the 1950s. Most of these guys have zero shoulder problems and have never heard of their rotator cuff. By and large they are much more pain free than powerlifters of similar caliber twenty years younger.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When the overhead press was the primary upper body exercise, there were no such things as rotator cuff injuries, because that lift worked the small muscles that make up the rotator cuff and made them stronger. The bench press does not hit those groups. A great many athletes who give priority to flat benches do not bother to do anything for their upper backs. This results in a disproportionate strength in the shoulders and sooner or later will spell trouble. This problem can be rectified with some heavy work on the upper back: high pulls, shrugs, and bent-over rows.

Also, building variety into the upper body routine helps to prevent injuries. Once an athlete has graduated into the intermediate stage, I have him do: flat benches, inclines, overhead presses, and dips. He starts out with freehand dips, then when he is able to do 20, I have him do weighted dips. Working all the different angles of the upper body assure a more balanced development and all of the exercises help the others improve. I also make sure that the upper back receives plenty of attention. Of course, as always, using correct form is critical to safety. If an athlete learns to pause the bar on his chest on the flat bench from the very beginning, he will greatly reduce the risk of injury and be able to handle more weight in the long run.

I have written many times that I prefer the incline over the flat bench for young athletes. It is a pure shoulder exercise which is more suitable to sports such as baseball, basketball, and lacrosse. It is difficult to cheat on the incline, and this is a good thing. The reason the flat bench is part of The Big Three rather than the incline is because when Tommy Suggs and I devised this program, there simply weren't any inclines available in high school. There weren't even many in commercial gyms back then.


#3
What's your thinking on noisy knees? Not painful, however in addition to the noise, there's enough "feeling" to make it nerve-racking sometimes.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If they don't hurt, I wouldn't be concerned. I've trained with quite a few lifters who experienced noise in their knees when they squatted, but it never caused them any real trouble. Naturally, if they do start hurting, it would be wise to see a doctor.

#4
 Bill Starr?s book is directed toward training young athletes with constraints both on the available time and the number of athletes that must be accommodated in that time.
This profile differs markedly from that which is germane to most IOL members. Specifically, many of us are hardly young, we typically train alone or with a partner in a setting where throughput is not an issue and at least some of us have the luxury of time. My first question for Bill Starr is whether he would make different recommendations for an IOL community than he would for a HS/college/pro football team.

I have a ?specialized? question from my son. Evan is a HS senior who has been recruited to play college lacrosse. His HS coach has him on a training program that is indistinguishable from that recommended in Bill Starr?s book. Evan is a face-off middie and asks whether, in all your experience with JHU LAX, you had occasion to promote any specialized training for the face-off guys.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I start older athletes out with the same program as I do younger ones. Then, if they have specific needs, I alter it to fit those needs, such as not being able to rack a power clean because of bad shoulders or inflexiblity. I have them do power snatches instead and if these are also difficult to do, I have them high pull. Age isn't the factor. It's how firm the strength base is and that's what the program outlined in the book is trying to accomplish.

A LAX player who is involved in facing off must be strong and quick. He must have strong hips and legs, as well as a sturdy back and upper body. This simply means that his strength program must be set UP to build balanced strength. If any area is disproportionately weak, he will not be a good face-off man. Bill Starr

#5
What is your current training and nutrition strategy for yourself, and how has it changed as you've matured?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I basically use what Jack LaLanne has been preaching for over fifty years, high reps with light weights. I walk and train six days a week, usually 45 minutes of each. I have two routines which I alternate every other day. At 68, I want the exercises to flush blood and nutrients to my joints and I do not want to put them under any undue stress. The high reps, sometimes in the 200-rep range, works my muscles and alleviates my arthritis.

My nutritional philosophy in regards to supplements is very much the same as it was when I wrote TSSS. That's when I really learned how important the various supplements were to health. I build my diet around protein and take large amounts of supplements to insure that I am getting plenty of the necessary vitamins and minerals. It's what Peary Rader called the "shovel method." High dosages of vitamin C and mult-minerals head my list, followed by E, A&D, B-complex, L-lysine, B6, and folic acid. I also use Mag-Cal at night to help me relax and get to sleep.

I avoid all the fad supplements like HGH and creatine because I just don't need it at my age and why take a risk that it might be, in fact, harmful? Since I'm not training heavy any longer and walk instead of run, my caloric needs are much lower. I only eat two meals a day and in smaller portions than I used to consume. No snacking. Bill Starr


#6
There's a recommendation in this section that I question and it specifically relates to the "good morning" movement.

Someone please check me if I'm wrong...but doesn't Bill recommend doing the movement with a rounded back?

This is completely contrary to what I've heard, read and teach. By rounding the back, you may indeed get a greater activation of the erectors...at the expense of possible damage to the disks.

Current thought and practice limits the movement to the depth that may be achieved while maintaining the natural curvature of the lower back, effectively pivoting at the hips...rather than rounding the back and spine.

I can "allow" that as a non-weighted movement for rehab...but the use of even a light weight in the round back style has leverage factors going against the practice as being safe for the disks. When the back is rounded like that, the erectors have to relax to allow the movement...now, muscle is no longer controlling the movement and the disks are unevenly loaded on one face.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've never bought into the notion that doing good mornings with a rounded back is damaging to the disks. The spine is designed to bend forward. It wasn't all that long ago that our ancestors moved around with very rounded backs. If moving heavy weights with a rounded back injured the spine, then every powerlifter and other strength athlete who does deadlifts would be in traction, because every single one of them rounds their backs on max attempts. Some every do rounded back deads as part of their training to prepare them for heavy lifts. In addition, every person who has a job or hobby where he leans over and lifts heavy objects all day would have abuse risks as well.

Remember, an athlete starts out with light weight in the good morning and proceeds slowly, allowing time for the lumbars to get strong enough to handle the stress. The only risk in doing rounded back g/ms is trying to do too much too soon. But this is true for flat back g/ms also.

Another important factor in this regard is technique. When either style of g/ms is done with sloppy form, the risk factor soars. When done perfectly, the risk is negligible.

At the universities where I strength coach, I started over a thousand athletes, male and female, on good mornings. I always have them try the rounded back version first. If there is no problem, I have them stay with it. Should they experience undue discomfort, I switch them to flat backs or seated. I've had some cases where the flat back g/ms hurt them while the rounded style didn't. In the fifteen years, I only had one athlete hurt himself while doing g/ms: a football player who tried to used the same amount of weight on his first day back that he had previously used at the end of the off-season program eight months before. For the record, he did them with a flat back.

I reiterate that using correct form is the most critical factor in regards to safety. If any version is done in a jerky motion, there is a risk to the lower back. And while it's true that the lumbars do relax at the bottom of the movements, it's not a total relaxation, but rather only a partial one. If the lumbars completely relaxed, the bar would crash to the floor. The stretch reflex prevents the muscles from fully relaxing when being stretched and keeps the disks from being harmed when heavy weights are moved with a rounded back. Bill Starr

0 comments:

Post a Comment