Originally Posted by
Scaldrew
Your main point is in conflict with your main line of reasoning. At every turn, you merely assert that something "cannot be", yet you never explain why. It's never clear to me why these things cannot be. You then point to a world class clean and jerk where the bar is only in contact with the thighs right before the jump, yet never argue what your example is doing there. If anything, its success demonstrates that the bar needs to be in contact with the thighs before the jump, however briefly.
Your main point is also lost in your main post. You begin by talking about the teaching method and how one crucial step is missing. Assuming that "bend your knees again above the knee" is a crucial step, verbatim, you go on to say that this step isn't in there. However, the book acknowledges the double knee bend and argues that it is more efficient to think about keeping the bar in contact with the thighs along the way than to think mechanically about your knees and hips. In other words, it is not as efficient to think "ok, now I need to bend my knees a smidge". But then you say that people can't keep the bar in contact all the way, which is false, as anyone who has deadlifted/cleaned/snatched or watched others perform this lift will know. So this point only seems valid if you rephrase it to "the book doesn't advocate you think about bending your knees again above the knee", but then this doesn't seem to be a problem to me.