Rip's New Article: Is Olympic weightlifting strength training?

[Mark Rippetoe]

I don't think so. Show me where I'm wrong.

http://startingstrength.com/index.ph...ength_training

[joosejpr]

I enjoyed reading this. Cheers.

[Kumar]

This spurs me to ask a question that has puzzled me for years.

As a sporting nation, the US either dominates or holds its own globally in sports and games that are played and are popular in the country. Even in the men's soccer game, which is not, it doesn't do so badly, while in the women's game, it excels. For a long time, gymnastics wasn't as good, but that has changed in recent years.

In the early day's of Olympic weightlifting, it did pretty well - names such as Davis, Schemansky, Kono come to mind. So what's behind the reason for the poor performance in Olympic weightlifting for some decades now? It can't be just the drugs subject, that would have a bearing on so many other disciplines as well.

[nevermind]

Why is nobody paying attention to this neglected strength issue then? It is true that in the UK, as in the USA, 100% of the elite athletes are lost to higher paying sports.

Why did the USA switch from the 1960's successful model to a non strength based model?

[elVarouza]

Good read. Of note, Misha Koklyaev has actually pulled 415kg/915lbs. Hasn't slowed down his clean much. As a side note, his starting position (at 0:14) looks familiar, no?

[Mark Rippetoe]

In the early day's of Olympic weightlifting, it did pretty well - names such as Davis, Schemansky, Kono come to mind. So what's behind the reason for the poor performance in Olympic weightlifting for some decades now? It can't be just the drugs subject, that would have a bearing on so many other disciplines as well.

It's probably the money, since the sponsorship has evaporated with York Barbell and Hoffman's stewardship. The draw is gone now. And it doesn't take much deviation from sensible training until the angle amounts to a considerable gap. So basically, contingency. This is just the way it worked out.

Why is nobody paying attention to this neglected strength issue then? It is true that in the UK, as in the USA, 100% of the elite athletes are lost to higher paying sports.

Why did the USA switch from the 1960's successful model to a non strength based model?

The wrong people were in the right place at the right time. Read Muscletown USA by our friend John Fair.

[Kyle Aaron]

There'd be a vicious/virtuous cycle effect, too. Here Down Under whenever someone wins gold in a sport in the Olympics, there's a rush of people of all ages signing up to do the sport. When Australia was in the FIFA World Cup membership of soccer clubs increased even though we did badly - it was just on everyone's minds, so a few of them gave it a go.

Whereas if there's some sport we've been atrocious at for a long time and which never gets any publicity, well that's not going to help recruitment. Which then makes it more difficult to do well, and...

[Meshuggah]

Great reading, as usual.

[D_51]

Rip,
Solid read. An athlete should train for maximum strength in squats, pulls and pressing, but where does that leave him for training the O' lifts? The focus of training the lifts is optimum technique and this should not be sacrificed to put up bigger numbers in the short run. I think the desire to show progress, brag about gym numbers and a fixation on "I should be using x% of whatever I need to lift at a certain comp" is driving coaches and athletes to sacrifice long term success. In my previous career, we would say that "slow is smooth and smooth is fast", meaning that repetiton with perfect technique will lead to optimum performance when it counted. This isn't to say that you want to stay slow in training, you just let the speed come naturally as long as technique stayed spot on. And as strength and conditioning improved through other training, you were able to hold perfect technique at faster speeds and for longer durations. You could not seperate any of the three factors.
I know there are clear differences between the training I am talking about and weightlifting, but the human body is what it is. How do our coaches not understand this? Or am I off base here?

[Dastardly]

I am going to throw something in just to stir things up..

If the USA and UK are bad at weightlifting because they are losing the high level genetic specimens to other sports, then why is both the USA and UK capable of producing the highest levels of Powerlifters?

Also if you look at some of the countries which have excelled at weightlifting in recent times, like Poland, Belarus, Germany, Iran, Greece, Thailand, and even Bulgaria. They are tiny compared to the USA, barely filling a US state in many cases and certainly lacking the excellent school-linked sporting programmes, well equipped gyms and such.

I dont think the "talent pool" excuse stands up to much. I the days when the USA dominated weightlifting, the draw of other sports was still there wasn't it? Most of the people who could be high level athletes are probably going about their daily lives, working 9-5 jobs - they are not all superstar athletes. The USA has had top level track and field athletes over the past couple decades and currently. These people are not getting paid like Football or Basketball players. But the "talent pool" for track & field still exists.