::Nieuwsberichten
korte krachttraining
bench: 10x4 6x50 3x6x60 2x70
squatmachine: 10x80 2x10x100 (explosief uit, 3 sec terug)
WU
90-80-70 versnelling rustig
60-50-40 versnelling 90% + coast
6 x 30m startspelletje
300-200-150-200-300 200m wndrust (~= 3′)
(46.9 28.6 20.9 28.1 45.2)
150m te rustig aan gelopen als ik ‘t terugzie, had een 19-er moeten zijn.
Eddy van Oort op @ 10:41 ambank 10x40 8x50 3x6x60 1x70 0x75
squatmachine 10x70 2x8x100 6x120 , “diep”.
2 x 6 x 200m in estafette vorm, on flats
(30.6 30.0 30.5 30.3 32.2 31.3) (rust: 1:16 1:20 1:20 1:21 1:17)
23′ rust/medizin bal oefeningen
(33.3 32.3 32.1 31.9 31.9 31.0) (rust: 1:19 1:20 1:18 1:21 1:16)
Stukjes van discussie op werpers forum The Ring
Throwers Forum -- 2004.04.13Dave Caster
9:18 PDT, 8/11/98
Ken, some things I've observed recently (and have been told)
have piqued my curiosity regarding the use of sleds for pulling purposes in
order to increase capacities that could help out a shotputter. I remembered a
while back that you had mentioned that Chris pulled the family Blazer as a part
of training. I was reminded of this when I ran into a friend of yours while in
Seattle, and he showed me some articles about Chris, and coincidentally, there
was a picture of him pulling the vehicle. Now, I have also seen some footage of
that youngster in Bayonne, NJ (DiGiorgio, I believe his name is) and he does
pulling drills as well, using a sled and going uphill. As well, I remember some
information from Andy Baran, I believe written to you, regarding Timmerman's
pulling of a tractor tire. Now I do not know if pulling things (whether they be
sleds, tires or Blazers) is a commonplace practice in the training of
accomplished shotputters, but the common thread here is a bit hard to ignore.
To add to the whole pulling query, a recent visit out to Westside
Barbell evidenced use of sleds after workouts for restorative-recuperative
purposes (with the sleds being pulled in somewhat odd ways-more on that later).
During that same visit, I was a bit shocked with some of the physical
improvements Louie Simmons had been able to achieve with his own physique since
the last time I saw him. He credits a good deal of the added thickness (and his
increased strength levels and decreased amount of injuries) to the use of the
sleds.
Now, his use of the sleds is not limited to pulling of a
dragged weight with a harness. He has implemented, with the use of heavy
construction strapping for means of attachment to the ankles, methods to drag
the sled-forwards, backwards and sideways-in ways that offer even greater
benefit to the hamstrings, glutes, and hips that could otherwise be achieved by
a more traditional pull. Always one to take things a step further, he has hooked
the sled up so it can be pulled with the hands, and he pulls the thing, facing
away from the sled, with a simultaneous walk-and-arm motion movement (with the
arm motion including, but not limited to, a pec-deck type contraction, or upward
thrusts as in a punching motion, wide circles and the like-executed while
walking/pulling the sled along), and he has claimed that this has really helped
thicken him up-and is quite exhausting (try it, it will really pump you up
fast). He does these drills after workouts, using I believe between 25-90 lbs.
when incorporating the arm action. Pulling time varies with his energy levels,
but he has gone upwards of 45 minutes + with these drills after a workout (he
has built up to this, of course, over time). He has experienced a 30 lb.
increase in his deadlift during the time he started using this strategy.
It looks to me like dragging stuff has some interesting fringe benefits.
My questions to you are simply:
How often does Chris employ his Blazer
pulling protocol?
Does he pull any other objects?
When did he
start this sort of exercising?
Are there any other interesting wrinkles
he employs in this sort of exercise mode?
Any input you have here would
be greatly appreciated. Louie has a way of driving home a point when he strongly
believes in something, and when he gets like that, I listen, because he has
always been right on the money (for us, at least) with any of the protocols he
strongly advocates. Now that the throwing season is over, it's time to get
cracking on new wrinkles and I wanted to see if you had any insights to share
along these lines. My E-Mail address is CASTERD@FNBROCH.COM if you have any
thoughts you'd like to share. Thanks again.
Ken Sprague
Dave, thanks for your questions concerning Chris' inclusion of
the "Blazer pull" into his strength training program. In answering those
questions, let me begin with the underlying rationale.
1. It makes sense
to me that, whenever and to what degree possible, adding resistance to a
"natural" or sport-specific movement is the most effective means of strength
training for an athletic endeavor. Neither barbells (even Olympic lifts and
squats) nor machines are much good for building strength which can be
specifically applied to a throwing movement. Additionally, both machines and
barbells constrain/restrict the natural movement of a joint and simultaneously
"wire" (with multiple repetitions over time) that "unnatural" movement into the
athletes repertoire. [An ideal device for the thrower would one that adds
resistance throughout the throwing movement---of course, none exists.] Hence,
the primary reason for a sled or Blazer pull---from my perspective---would be to
apply gross resistance through a mutiple-joint natural motion.
2. A
secondary perspective on the Blazer pull is that the puller moves through
varying positions of stability and instability and, in doing so, stresses the
"stabilizing" muscles---ie, his/her body learns to perform in unstable positions
more akin to real world athletics.Conversely, stability is inherent in the
technique of most lifting movements (that's another relative minus for
traditional lifting movements). Remember, the Blazer pull is all-out, leg-by-leg
exertion---lots of instability.
Now to your specific questions:
1. [How often does Chris employ his Blazer pulling protocol?] Everytime
he trains his legs, he pulls the Blazer. Sometimes the Blazer pull is the only
leg exercise.
2. He pulls no other objects.
3. [When did he
start?] He's been pulling the Blazer since he was 13---about five years.
4. [Any other interesting wrinkles?] With a harness, he pulls the Blazer
facing forward and backwards (he's moving backwards). If you try it moving
backwards, you'll be amazed how closely the leg-drive and body position
duplicates a glider's motion out of the back of the circle.
Notes: The
repetitions/resistance can be modulated by using the brake. If Chris is on a
low-rep/high resistance mode, I modulate the brake----much like a longtime
training partner can anticipate how much to help during forced-rep bench
presses.
Other times---I suspect this is why Louie is thickening from
the sled pull---Chris is on a higher rep bodybuilding protocol. He might pull
the Blazer up a slight grade for 50 yards---a great pump.
You also
mentioned that Louie attaches straps between his ankles and the sled---that
sounds analogous to the use of cables and selector stacks to get the "natural"
high knee movement. Sounds great.
One last note: Chris' use of
sand-filled innnertubes for jumping movements is based on the same resisted
"natural" movement premise as the Blazer pull.
Dave, thanks again for
your questions: it provokes lots of self-analysis.
Brad Reid
My father (who was my trainer) always told me that weightlifting had its limitations -- one obvious one being that it developed vertical strength almost exclusively. But, in most sports, you have to apply your strength at some other angle or combination of angles. The sled and car pulling and pushing mentioned by Dave C. and Ken S. get away from standard weight training where everything is pushed and pulled vertically. It also ties the upper body and the lower body together by offering resistance in the body's midsection, either front or back, depending on whether you are pushing or pulling on an object. As an experiment, someone might try anchoring some big rubber bands to a wall and bench pressing against a bar passed through the strand loops from a standing position (pressing horizontally). Instead of the typical bench press lying on your back, a standing bench press pushed fast and with a pop would tie in the abdominals and other stabilizers needed by weight throwers. There would be no bench there to support you, just your abs and other stabilizers just like in a put or a throw. I'd recommend that the stance be one foot forward for a powerful base and that the athlete actively engage the entire body in an attempt to lock out the arms aggressively. I can think of two or three other variations on pushing or pulling for the torso but you all get the idea.
Ken Sprague
Dave, our approach to forming Chris' weight training
"philosophy" has been to find the workout program that best suits Chris'
personality. In short, he goes "all-out" during every workout. [I'm not saying
this is the best, or even a reasonable philosophy for everyone --- but it's the
best mesh between Chris' mind and body.] Now to answer your specific questions.
1. Where the exercise permits (ie, squats), Chris (after several warm-up
sets) uses a 1RM or 2RM weight. After 1 or 2 reps on his own, he completes the
set with an additional 4 to 6 assisted reps. This has been his year-round
training method since he was ~10 years old. No periodization. No "light" days.
Always super-high intensity.
2. Chris does deep back-squats with his
feet positioned shoulder-width apart. He has never done front squats. He has
done partial squats out of the power rack. It's important to note that Chris'
primary leg exercise (until he was 15 years old) was the leg press. I MADE A
MAJOR MISTAKE BY HAVING HIM RELY TOO MUCH ON THE LEG PRESS AS THE PRIMARY LEG
BUILDING EXERCISE---the reliance caused a (functional) muscular imbalance
between leg and back strength. I'll expand on this in a later post---it's
important to consider with a young thrower.
3. He has no predetermined
workout (at least nothing micro-planned) when he walks into the gym. The only
predetermination is that it will be "leg day" or "upper body day." The selection
and sequence of exercises are determined during the workout. There are "key"
exercises that usually find the way into the workout---unless soreness or
fatigue intervenes.
4. For the first time, Chris is doing a high-rep
"bodybuilding" routine. This is a prelude to his moving to Stanford---the intent
of the change is to prepare him for a potential (coach-mandated) change in
program.
5. The inner-tube jumps are part of every leg workout. He uses
poundages between 15 and 50 percent of his 1RM squat weight---the speed of
movement and height of the jump is a function of the weight. He jumps as high
and fast as possible on each jump (sets of 3 reps).
6. He has never done
snatches; he has done cleans for no more than a dozen workouits over the past 8
years. THIs HAS BEEN A MAJOR MISTAKE ON MY PART IN CONJUNCTION WITH RELIANCE ON
THE LEG PRESS---I regret not advising him to consistently perform snatches,
deadlifts and power cleans over the years.
Dave, thanks for your
interest. As I mentioned above, I'll post my feelings on my mistakes in training
Chris over the years. Maybe the post will prevent similar mistakes by other
parents.
Dave Caster
Ken, thanks a lot for sharing Chris' training strategies. Your
observations regarding mistakes along the way are very helpful (and a more
detailed analysis would definitely help us all out).
I remember you
mentioning the "assisted rep" strategy in the past . . . and operating on your
suggestion back then, we gave it (and variants thereof) a whirl, and have found
it to really jump the strength levels real fast! It works best for those of us
who have a lot of the fast twitch fibres (and we use it either opposite from a
percent training day in which similar lifts are moved quickly for 50-65% of 1RM
during the same training week, or just by itself for a few weeks, with the
percent training rotated back in after a few weeks depending on recovery rates,
staleness, etc).
What is most interesting to me is the relative non-use
of the olympic lifting variants over the past 8 years, yet the high degree of
success he has experienced, and the high levels of USEABLE THROWING STRENGTH he
has attained. I question whether or not this omission is a mistake; those who
have looked into the way the Soviets made their olympic lifters so incredibly
strong and successful will find that they did a good amount of the kind of
training Chris has done with the squats and weighted squat jumps in order to be
able to do the things that they did.
Ken, I have some simple throwing
volume questions for you. How many times a week does Chris throw, and how many
throws does he typically take in a session? It would also be interesting and
beneficial to know how this volume has changed over his throwing career.
Thanks again for your insights, they are really helpful.
Ken Sprague
In a response to Dave Caster, I noted a mistake I made in
developing Chris' weight training program over the years.
Succinctly, an
inappropriate (unbalanced) exercise selection created an apparent imbalance
between Chris' leg and lower back strength.
I noted that Chris' primary
leg exercise until he was 15 was the leg press (through which he built a unique
level of strength in his quads and hips): he could do SINGLE-LEG (full flection
through full extension) leg presses on a Hammer Strength machine with 40-45#
plates.
Now the mistake: he did no exercises to develop comparable
strength in the lower back.
Ideally, during a glide put, much of the
power of the leg drive is transferred through the back and winds up in the
throw. If the back is a functional weak link, much of the available force from
the leg drive is not transferred into the throw. That's the apparent case with
Chris.
Why I believe this to be the case is that Chris gets nothing from
his glide: his standing throw is equivalent to (and sometimes greater than) his
standing throw. Also, his first tries with the spin (which uses the back less as
a "hinge" for the transfer of leg drive) exceeded his best efforts with the
long-practiced glide.
Technically, the weak-link manifests during the
glide as a bent knee: Chris never straightens his leg---even his best throws
find his knee bent ~45 degrees at the point of releasing the shot. The bent knee
is (probably subliminal) a way to protect the back from the unacceptable forces
of the leg drive.
I noted my feelings that I made a mistake by not
encouraging the use of the snatch and clean: long term implementation of the
snatch and clean would have probably allowed the lower back to keep pace with
the strength development of the legs from the leg press. I should have
said---and it would have been accurate---that I made a mistake by not including
exercises that would correspondingly strengthen the lower back. Cleans and
snatchs, per se, are not necessary for a thrower to build power necessary to
throw far. [Deadlifts, hypers, reverse hypers (a Venagus favorite) are good
alternatives.]
The moral to this story: when using "isolated" movements
(I loosely include leg presses in this category), be sure to include a
sufficient selection of movements necessary to adequately stress all major
muscle groups important to the throw.
Chris has developed what Dave
describes as "useable throwing strength"---but he will throw much farther when
the weak links are abated through a focus on correcting his weak links through a
renewed exercise selection. [Dave, in this regard, his September 15th goal is 6
unassisted reps with 600# in the deadlift (looks like he'll make it).]
Fortunately, over the past year, we have taken greater care in
developing strength that appears specific to the spin (relative to the glide)
that should allow him to quickly excel with the spin when he begins that
technique at Stanford in the fall.
Dave, answering your question
concerning Chris' throwing volume would be misleading: his throwing volume has
been a function of the Northwest weather (there is no indoor season and a very
short outdoor season). No time to gradually add volume. No longterm approach.
I've read and analyzed John Smith's thoughts in this regard: If I had a
question in regards to throwing or indegrating throwing and lifting, I would
precisely follow his advice.
I have always emphasized building power for
Chris, knowing that he would get good technical advice when he went to college.
[That's the primary reason (with the weather) that he hasn't yet begun the
spin---we wouldn't know where to begin without the possibility of building bad
habits.]
Ken
Dave Caster
Ken, thanks once again. I appreciate your thorough analysis, and
I am in agreement with you on the things you said about lower back strength-you
are singing our song here (and it doesn't surprise me that Venegas likes those
reverse hypers; they are wildly beyond any other back drill around-and one
heckuva lot safer and easier to specifically implement in a program than the
quick lift variants, if you're concerned with the simultaneous cultivation of
other capacity concerns).
We've tapped John Smith's brain on the throws
volume stuff to be honest (as well as on technique, implement weight rotation
and the proper drills to use when beefing up the short-long glide), and he has
been invaluable to us in allowing gains to occur during a year that we also
decided to strip all the bodyfat off (28 lbs worth). I was curious as to if
there was anything special that Chris employs in throws volume cycling by way of
comparison to what we have already learned from John.
The things you
have said speak volumes towards how important strength and explosiveness is to
the shotputter.
Ken Sprague
George, in the short of it, the Blazer Pull represents a
variable resistance device (vehicle-harness) which permits a reasonably natural
sequence of human motions.
The workout can be geared toward muscular
endurance or strength by varying the resistance/reps----resistance (and
corresponding reps) can be varied by selecting a higher/lower incline or
modulation the brake.
Chris has pushed/pulled the Blazer as far as a
quarter mile (when working muscular endurance) on a slight incline; or, he has
been limited to as few as 6-7 "lock-out" reps when incorporating a steep
incline. The bottom line: the resistance is variable to meet the goals of the
athlete.
I've found it used for best results at the end of a traditional
(squats, etc) leg workout. It can't be done before other exercises because it's
so thoroughly exhausting. [In fact---and it's hard for me to say this because I
try to hold on to traditional training protocols---I suspect pulling a vehicle
coupled with squat-jumps with sand-bags would be a complete and maximally
productive leg-back workout for a shot/discus thrower (a complete workout for a
hammer thrower).
Another point to reiterate about the Blazer Pull is:
the completeness (ie, includes more muscles in the movement that are performing
near capacity) of muscular effort of the legs and torso is not matched by any
other training device. Both free-weights exercises and machines tend to inhibit
and isolate natural motion.
Dave Caster
Luke: Chains and bands are simple ways to change accomodating
resistance in your major (and minor) lifts. Example-when you bench, the further
the bar gets from the chest as you push it up, the easier the weight is to move
because of the advantageous change in levers. That's why if you put a bar in the
power rack 2/3 of the way off your chest and then bench press it off the pins,
you can do hundreds of more pounds than you could from the chest itself. If you
hang heavy chains off the bar in such a way that, as you push it up, the chains
come off the ground and their weight is borne by the bar (and you), this
leverage advantage goes away, and you have to push like hell in what was
previously the easiest part of your bench or squat-the second half. The exercise
becomes much more productive in this way. We do the same thing with heavy rubber
bands. These are harder than the chains, as the increase in weight is not as
linear, and it feels like the bands want to shove you through the bench. In a
nutshell, use of these devices match the weight lifted to your strength
curve-something a lot of machines were designed to do, but fall short of because
they don't work the body as well in the smaller stabilizer muscles as free
weights do. The chains and bands are the best of both worlds. And a nice side
benefit is that it encourages your stabilizers to work harder to steady a bar
that is bearing a goodly amount of chain freely hanging from it and moving
around a wee bit.
The amount of chain or tension of the bands is wholly
dependent on what you are trying to do, and how strong you are. If you are
dynamically training your bench, and you customarily use around 220-250, moved
quickly, about 35 total lbs. of chains will work well (such that the resistance
at the bottom of the movement is 220-250, and the resistance at the top is about
255-285). You can attach much more, if your goal is to build absolute strength.
George Torres: Regarding dragging sleds and the like-we have been
dragging things and pushing them in an attempt to increase general physical
preparedness and increase influence of the training effect on the stabilizer
muscles, much as Ken Sprague has outlined in his informative previous posts
regarding Chris' Blazer pulls. Our interest was piqued thru hearing of Chris'
use of this protocol, and the practice of dragging sleds and other objects as
practiced by Louie Simmons and his lifters at Westside Barbell.
Now,
Chris pushes and pulls the family Blazer, and Ken has said a lot about that.
We've combined this tactic with some of the neat dragging drills used at
Westside. Louie got my attention when he said that he had hooked a sled to his
ankles, and would drag it, walking backwards, changing the rigidness of his leg
in order to move the effect of the exercise around to different muscle groups.
He said that he felt like he could levitate after doing these-and it reminded me
of what Ken said about the potential benefits (to a glide shotputter) of pulling
the Blazer backwards.
So we tried the following combo, and boy, did it
work: We attached 2 chains to the sled, with handles. We would load the sled
with enough weight to cause good tiredness after pulling it continuously for 200
feet. We would face the sled, holding one handle in each hand. To our ankles we
attached approx. 20 lbs of chain (to each ankle). We would then walk backwards,
simultaneously pulling the sled with our arms, and shuffling the feet to pull
the chains along. After a few 200 foot trips, removal of the chains from the
ankles made you feel like you were going to float away!
While that is
all well and good, if it does not help your throws, it may be a waste of time.
Interestingly, we noticed that we could now more quickly and accurately execute
one of our favorite shot drills, the double hop glide.
I don't know if
it is due to increase in strength, increase in innervation of the muscle groups
required to do the drill, or because of more adequate stabilizers-I only know
that it made the double-hop more productive . . . and, for my daughter, more
do-able with overweight shots (something that was a problem before, but is a
snap now).
Fancy sleds are not necessary. A Finnish powerlifter that I
correspond with simply takes a long rope, laces it through two 50kg plates, ties
the rope to his lifting belt and drags the plates along the ground. Simple but
effective.
You can use a lot of weight and pull like all get-out, or use
less and pull longer and faster. You can pull uphill; you can pull through long
grass. If you use less weight, you can pull the sled backwards as I had
mentioned before, and pull your hands back in a rowing motion or wide in an
inverted fly motion and really light up all those middle back muscles that are
somewhat hard to reach, while walking backwards. You can vary how many times a
week you pull, how you pull, how you attach the pulled-pushed object to you, and
distances per drag. We like to do 200 foot pulls. The Finnish powerlifter does
shorter, 20 meter pulls. He pulls this way with 100kg 3 times a week, following
his reverse hyper work, which follows his regular weight training work. As Ken
mentioned before, this sort of exercising can be quite a taxing workout all by
itself.
The lifters at Westside also add in this twist-they will pull
the weight fastened to the back of their belt, simultaneously pushing a
wheelbarrow. Try this-it's pretty exhausting.
One last thought-this sort
of pulling will really tire out (of all things) your feet, especially if you get
up on tip-toes for some pulls, or pull those chains around your ankles sideways
in a shuffling manner. And I can't help but think that stronger feet must help
an athlete who has to forcefully but deftly and speedily blow thru the ring on
tiptoes.