Reply With QuoteWhat about the knees?Originally Posted by DoinFives
Member
And while hip extension isnt the only thing happening while you clean, it is the most explosive part.
Member
What about the knees?
Member
Ostrich brush
Member
Clearly you’ve figured out a way to jump that doesn’t involve your knees and your ankles if I may add. You’ve also figured out a way to pull the bar off the floor that doesn’t involve your back, and racking the bar without moving your arms quickly. All things trained by the power clean along with the coordination to do them correctly in sequence.
Member
Yes triple extension. Chalk up a win for yourself today.
Member
In a day-to-day scenario, everything that involves lifting anything from the ground, doesn't involve the power production or kinematics that goes on in a power clean.
Most of those laborious movements are slow controlled awkward affairs. A regular dead lift is more applicable.
I can't really think of any.
Only thing I can think of is, as Satch said, jumping. (Say while hiking or something...over an obstacle)
Maybe if you kick someone? (knee extension)
Starting your Harley?
Maybe starting a lawn mower? (but that'd be a little bit more of arm-pulley C2 rower thing)
I don't think the effect (or adaptation) of "maintaining the ability to display power with your ever increasing strength" carries over globally throughout the entire body.
The typical power clean weights are too light to provide any meaningful deadlift strength adaption (light pull day).
It is less than 50% 1RM for most; or even the 60%-thing is laughable considering you are doing it for 1-3 reps sets and the limited volume (5s x 3r) typically.
✓ Member
Fulcrum, I think you are looking too much for training specificity from the clean, perhaps confusing training with practice. The 4 big lifts aren't even really applicable in day-to-day situations. They are idealized models meant to be the most efficient way to move a barbell so we can get strong quickly. I don't know about you but I rarely lay down on a bench to push something away, and I don't pick up many barbells off the ground outside of my gym. In keeping with your examples, the best way to get good at chopping wood would be to practice chopping wood.
But these are the best exercises and tools we have available to develop strength in a general sense. So too, is the power clean the best we have to develop power in a general sense. The point of the clean is not to get better a cleaning (unless you're an Olympic weightlifter, then it serves as both training and practice); it is to develop an athlete's ability to be explosive in a movement. And let's not forget that we are training the biggest, strongest muscle groups in the body to be explosive in particular.
Now, are they for everyone? Debatable. There are arguments that it is too technical, yet we still insist people do the squat, which is also a fairly complex, technical movement. Are there "motor morons" who just can't get the timing down right? Sure, but what better way to improve this capacity than to practice such a movement? I submit that after a certain point in attempting to learn the movement during training there is not enough benefit to warrant its continued use, but I think Rip has done an excellent job providing a method on teaching such a complicated movement from a book.
Are they only for athletes? I would ask you to refine that term in the context of many of the "general strength trainees" who partake in the Novice LP. I would also ask you why, if strength is such a priority, the ability to display it quickly would be of any less value?
Member
The question is whether or not power cleans actually do anything to train -general- explosiveness or not, i.e. not simply for the clean and other similar movements. Given that the book specifically states that explosiveness is not very trainable, I have always found this confusing and/or contradictory.
✓ Member
The argument in the book is that the ability to recruit motor units quickly is genetically limited. However, power production can still be trained, albeit it may be at a much slower rate. It can't be argued that as more weight is added to the bar, power production has increased through training.
I picture it this way: recall P = F*D/t and D remains essentially constant. To me, the t portion can probably be trained a small bit but is the genetic limitation. As long as the F portion increases, i.e., as long as weight is added to the bar, then power production has increased. We can increase F by deadlifting and squatting and such.
Member
yeah, that's the other thing ^.
If explosiveness is NOT very trainable, how is it so . . . . de-trainable then ????
"It" doesn't work the other way???
We have to train it, oops, I mean not Train(tm) something not very trainable to not let it decay then?
I believe the "display of power" is only specific to the motor pattern being displayed, and that which is practiced.
You should just be able to get "generally strong", everything else should take care of itself then.
Something doesn't jive here
Posting Permissions