Takano Athletics

This article was originally published in the early 1990’s when women’s weightlifting was pushing for inclusion in the Olympics.  It deals with the public perception of weightlifters’ body image and how that was carrying over to the female side of the sport.  Since women’s bodybuilding had already established a public image, many lay persons figured that women weightlifters would have to have “cuts”.  Come to think of it “cuts” was a pretty popular topic in those days.

I don’t usually like to advertise that I am a weightlifting coach when in the company of “civilians” because it frequently leads to an excessive number of silly queries and even sillier pronouncements.  Occasionally such occurences are unavoidable, and I’ll find myself in a non-weightlifting situation with a close and well meaning acquaintance who will declare to those within earshot that I am a somewhat accomplished weightlifting coach.  I drop my head and prepare for the inevitable, never knowing from which direction it will arise.

“You don’t look like a weightlifting coach!”

Sometimes “OK”, is the only retort that I care to issue.

How does anyone outside of the sport know what a weightlifting coach looks like?  Is it because of the wonderful media coverage of our sport?  If this were the truth all us weightlifting coaches would have to look like Ivan Abadjiev’s back.  Certainly they couldn’t have developed an image of a weightlifting coach by watching the one movie ever made about the sport, The 500 Pound Jerk.  In that forgettable little made-for-TV flick, the weightlifting coach was a little Hungarian guy who was later replaced by James Franciscus.  Alright–I don’t look like James Franciscus.

I’m sure that many of our athletes face these types of situations simply because the general public has no idea what a weightlifter is or looks like.  What aggravates me, however, is the number of stupid comments that arise within the weightlifting community from people who should know better.  Most of these center around the issue of muscular definition.  “He can’t be strong–he doesn’t have any cuts!”

The issue of lean bodyweight and evident muscularity is one that is overemphasized upon us by the commercial interests in this society.  Since high fat bodyweight percentages are often (though not always) correlated with heart disease and indirectly to slothfulness, poor Christian work ethic, and a lack of moral character, various commercial interests have convinced us that low cholesterol, muscular definition and aerobic fitness are the keys to some sort of social and physiological salvation.  Of course, these interests will provide us with the means to this salvation by selling us treadmills, dietary drink concoctions and colorful spandex.

The problem regarding how weightlifters should look wasn’t so vexing for the men  (at least within the members of the weightlifting community), since there was a considerable history of specimens to observe.  Of course the occasional anomaly arose such as Ibrahim Shams of Egypt in the 1940’s, or Hans Zdrazila of Czechoslovakia and Norbert Ozimek of Poland in the 1960’s, or Yurik Vardanyan of the U.S.S.R.  in the 1980’s, all ectomorphic by modern weightlifting standards.  The general pattern for male weightlifting physiques was and is still pretty consistent.  Weightlifters from 52 kg. world champion Ivan Ivanov to superheavyweight champ Alexander Kurlovich of the current vintage are strong, stocky, muscular men with varying degrees of “cuts”.  The bodybuilding oriented members of our society might find this lack of “cuts” undesirable, but who cares?–these guys lift big weights.  If an athlete lifts world class weights his physique represents great physical strength whether or not it conforms to the aesthetic standards of the uninformed.  The capacity to perceive empirical evidence need not be compromised to suit commercially generated societal norms.

The situation with women weightlifters was a little bit more difficult to deal with when the first women’s World’s Championships were held in 1987.  Although domestic competition in the U.S. had been conducted with regularity since 1981, and some “stars” had emerged, there was no real consensus as to the physiognomy of an ideal or classic woman weightlifter.  Some hoped she would look like a bodybuilder (and still do).  Some hoped she would look like a young Jane Fonda.  Certain individuals emerged as “authorities” on the subject and assured their trainees that slender women could lift world class weights.  The Chinese however, unburdened by a commercially motivated hierarchy, took a logical course  and measured the top 200 lifters at their national championships in 1987 and arrived at some statistical information that still appears to be relevant.

Before providing you with the results of this study I must caution you somewhat about the interpretation of such data.  Simply attaining the proportions of world class weightlifters will not guarantee an individual medals at the world’s championships.  The following numbers are merely guidelines that will enable an athlete to maximize her available potential.  So now–the numbers!

The average weight to height ratio is 60.79 kg./159.28 cm. or .38 kg./1cm.  This equates to

134.02 lbs./62.71 inches or 2.137 lbs./1in.

I’m sure that since these measurements were taken, the normal bodyweight averages of the four heavier classes has increased to a point where they exceed the upper limits of the respective bodyweight classes with the exception of the unlimited class.

Over the course of the past few years, I realize that the many women who’ve queried me aboutr some means of improving their performances didn’t seriously want to hear me tell them to increase their bodyweight to reach the most effective weight class.  The data provided substantiates the need to elevate bodyweight in order to achieve optimal results.  This data was taken from a group that has provided the majority of world champions during the short history of women’s weightlifting.  They don’t look like Ms. Olympias or young Jane Fondas, but they do lift the biggest weights.

The original measurements were taken by Liu Peiqing, Liu Huirong, Qin Xiaomei etal of the Department of Exercise Physiology of the National Research Institute of Sports Science in Beijing, China.  Thanks to former U.S.W.F. Executive Director Harvey Newton for providing the copy of the translation of the original manuscript.

WEEK 9

Day 1—Monday

1) Snatch: singles to max (max-10, max-5, max)2                                     14:14

2) Clean & Jerk:  singles to max (max-10, max-5, max)2                          21:35

3) Front Squat: 60%/3, 70%/2, 80%/2, 85%/2, 90%/1                                09:44

4) Press: (X/3)4                                                                                           12:56:56

Day 2—Tuesday

1) Power Snatch: 60%/2, 65%/2, (70%/2)2                                                 08:08

2) Power Clean & Jerk: 60%/2+1, 65%/2+1, (70%/2+1)2                           12:20

3) Snatch Extension: (90%/2)3                                                                    06:26:62

Day 3—Wednesday,

Rest

Day 4—Thursday

1) Snatch: 60%/2, 70%/2, 80%/2, 85%/1                                                    07:07

2 ) Clean & Jerk: 60%/2+1, 70%/2+1, 80%/2+1, 85%/1+1                         11:18

3) Front Squat: 60%/2, 70%/2, 80%/2, (85%/2)2                                        12:30

4) Clean Extension: (90%/2)3                                                                     06:36:98

Day 5—Friday

1) Power Snatch: 60%/2, 65%/2, (70%/2)2                                                 08:08

2) Power Clean & Jerk: 60%/2+1, 65%/2+1, (70%/2+1)2                           12:20

3) Back Squat: 60%/2, 70%/2, 80%/2, 85%/2, (90%/1)3                            11:31

3) Press: (X/3)4                                                                                           12:43

4) Good Morning: (X/4)4                                                                            16:59:157

This is a reprint of a Takanotes column published in IOL magazine in 1976.  The information is still relevent.  I’ve added some jumping stories at the end in italics.

What with the establish­ment of the biathlon there is no question that the single most important com­ponent of modern weight lifting is an explosive pull. With such a stress on pulling, the Bulgarians and Russians have devel­oped and refined the mod­ern pulling technique known as the double knee-bend. This particular technique is basically a series of leg and hip movements de­signed to get the bar into a position for maximum ex­plosion. This position is reached when the bar is approximately at mid-thigh the weight is on the balls of the feet, and the back is at the optimum angle for a quick extension. Take a look at some of the sequence photos of the top international stars that you’ve seen recently in IOL, and you’ll notice that they all hit a position where the bar is at mid-thigh or higher just prior to top explosion.

If you study these pho­tos very closely, you’ll notice that the optimum pulling position is very close to the starting po­sition for a vertical or standing long jump. Ob­viously the Europeans are very cognizant of this as they incorporate a great deal of jumping training into their programs. This has to pay big dividends since the top of the mod­ern pull is very nearly just a jump with the force transferred to the bar rather than maintained as vertical flight.

Of course other lifters have long incorporated some form of jumping in their training too. Back in the early and mid 1960 “s when most western lifters did little more than sim­ply lift weights in their training, many people were amazed to find that the Japanese lifters spend a great deal of their warm-up time doing frog jumps, vertical jumps and stand­ing long jumps. The effec­tiveness of these movements can be attested to by the fact that the Japanese lifters of those days were notoriously poor pressers and superlative quick lif­ters .

South Korean weight lifter Shin Hee Won is also a tremendous leaper and must incorporate a lot of jumping into his training. At only 162.5 cm. in height Won can leap up and grasp the rim of a standard bas­ketball hoop.

World’s super heavy weight champion Alexeev, a former volleyball player, is another great jumper. Certainly his lifting must be a function of his ability to perform a ver­tical jump of over 76 cm.

There is thus little question that the world’s top lifters do a lot of jumping, and most of them are very proficient leapers. Those of you readers interested in increasing your totals should already be doing some jumping in your training if you are serious about competition. The beginning of the work out is the best time to do these movements as your explosiveness is at its peak. They also serve as a good means of warming up the joints and muscles for the heavier lifts to come.

THE BEST WAY TO JUMP— The Bulgarians figure that the best way to practice jumping is to have the lif­ter jump from the ground up onto a platform that is adjustable in height. They feel that a top lif­ter should be able to jump from the ground up onto a platform set at nipple height. You can use this as a guideline to see how you match up with the bet­ter lifters. If you have access to an adjustable platform you can use it to determine whether or not your jumping ability is improving. Keep track of any improvements you make in your training log and see if you can notice any correlation between them and your pulling ability.

Jumping up steps is an­other way to keep track of your ability provided that you jump on the same steps during your train­ing.

Standing long jumps will give you a good ex­plosion work out. By con­centrating on a sharp back snap and a powerful leg drive, you can very close­ly approximate the type of movement used in pull­ing.

These preceding move­ments are included hope­fully as a means of im­proving your jumping a-bility and hence your pull­ing ability. They are cer­tainly not the only way to improve, but they do pro­vide means by which one can easily measure prog­ress . Jumping games (most notably basketball and volleyball) are also of great value though they present less of a control­led situation and can be inconvenient without a sufficient number of play­ers.

Just as a final word to the wise, try to do as much of your jumping as you can in a good pair of well pad­ded shoes, and on a soft surface like a lawn. The impact upon landing from a maximum effort vertical or horizontal jump can cause a great deal of trau­ma in the bones and joints, something that should be and can easily be avoided.

In those days we used the nipple height as a standard to see if we were explosive enough (please remember that all of this refers to males as there was no women’s weightlifting in those days).  Most of us could jump up to a platform about halfway between the navel and the nipples.

One day in the training hall at the Los Angeles Olympics in 1984, we ended up having an impromptu jumping contest up onto stacked blocks.  The two highest jumps were by Albert Hood (56 kg and 150 cm) and Guy Carlton (110 kg and 185 cm) who both jumped up on to heights even with their clavicles!

Several reliable witnesses have told me that they’ve seen my 62 kg lifter Nghiep Dinh jump on to a platform that lined up with his chin!

In the old P.H.A.T. Elvis days Nghiep, Franky Valdez and Thien-an Nguyen would have jumping contests trying to jump over the trunk of Franky’s Chevy Nova with a running start.  I didn’t see too many bruises.  I believe most of their attempts were successful.  (Note:  Franky’s Nova was not lowered.  It was stock!).

London 2012 is still two years away and I’m beginning to get the same inquiries that I and other weightlifting coaches normally get before the Olympics, and that is a query about the upper age limit for competitors in the Olympics.  It usually comes from middle age dreamers who somehow got the idea that the Olympics is an age-group competition.  So here’s the answer!

THERE IS NO UPPER AGE LIMIT ON OLYMPIC PARTICIPATION!

There is a minimum age requirement, however, and it is 16.

Olympic weightlifting is not a competition of birthdates.  It is a competition to determine who can lift the most weight overhead in the snatch and clean and jerk.

I’ve gotten the age limit question from 30 somethings with a 10 year history of sciatica, 40 somethings and 50 somethings who have less than a nodding acquaintance with a barbell.

What they should be asking is what they should bring to the table as an older or very old athlete to reach Olympic levels.  In case someone gets smart enough to ask this, let me provide some of the  answers here.  Keep in mind that we are generally dealing with a two year window or less before the Olympics in question.

• A prospective Olympian should have the motor learning skills of a top gymnast or dancer.  They should be able to master the snatch and clean and jerk after less than a week of training.
• The protein metabolism should be such that they gain muscular tissue at a rapid rate on a less than optimal diet. This diminishes with age.
• The metabolic pathways should be in place to restore the body after severely demanding training sessions.  The difficult part here is that it is almost impossible to develop these pathways specific to weightlifting without having done a great deal of weightlifting training.  This includes the ability to generate skill cells rapidly.  This also diminishes with age.
• There should be no significant injuries.  This would be difficult to maintain for anyone who has gone through enough training to develop the metabolic pathways.
• There should be a highly developed ability to know how to restore the body through the use of ice, analgesics and other modalities.
• The individual should have a highly developed capacity to perform in competition. This skill needs to be developed through a significant number of competitions in the sport of weightlifting or a sport with very similar psychological demands.
• The neurons innervating the major muscle motor units should be heavily myelinated.
• The personality must be entirely articulate with members of sports culture in order to contribute to the psychic ambiance of a training hall.
• The vascularity of the muscular and digestive systems must be well adapted.

ALL OF THESE FACTORS SHOULD BE IN PLACE BEFORE ONE DAY OF TRAINING BEGINS!

The date on the birth certificate is meaningless.

Day 1–Monday

1) Snatch: singles to max, (max-10, max-5, max)2                                                                14:14

2) Clean & Jerk: singles to max (max-10, max-5, max)2                                                       21:35

3) Front Squat: Same as Snatch                                                                                                  14:49

4) Snatch Extension: (95%/2)4                                                                                                    08:57

5) Press: (X/3)4                                                                                                                                12:69:69

Day 2–Tuesday

1) Snatch: 60%/2, 70%/2, 80%/2, 85%/2, 90%/1                                                                    09:09

2) Clean & Jerk: 60%/2+1, 70%/2+1, 80%/2+1, 85%/2+1, 90%/1+1                                  17:26

3) Clean Extension: (90%/2)4                                                                                                      08:34:103

Day 3–Wednesday

1) Power Snatch: 60%/1, 65%/1, 70%/1, 75%/1, 80%/1                                                        05:05

2) Power Clean & Jerk: 60%/1+1, 65%/1+1, 70%/1+1, 75%/1+1, 80%/1+1                      10:15

3) Back Squat: singles to max, (max-10, max-5, max)2                                                        14:29:132

Day 4–Thursday

1) Snatch: Same as Tuesday                                                                                                        14:14

2) Clean & Jerk: Same as Tuesday                                                                                             21:35

3) Jerk: 80%/2, 85%/2, (90%/1)4                                                                                                08:43

4) Fast Good Morning: (X/4)4                                                                                                      16:69:201

Day 5–Friday

1) Power Snatch: 60%/2, 65%/2, 70%/2, 75%/1                                                                      07:07

2) Power Clean & Jerk: 60%/2+1, 65%/2+1, 70%/2+1, 75%/1+1                                        11:18

3) Front Squat: 60%/3, 70%/3, 80%/3, (85%/2, 90%/1)3                                                      18:36

4) Press: (X/3)4                                                                                                                                12:48:249

This is a reprint of an article I published in an old issue of International Olympic Lifter.   It deals with the very old argument that weightlifting stunts growth.   I had to deal with the issue when I started strength training for female volleyball players.  I hope this is helpful to coaches that have to deal with the same problem.

For the past five years I’ve earned the keep of my weightlifting program at Van Nuys High School by providing strength training services for some of the school’s athletic teams.  The most consistent beneficiaries of this arrangement have been the members of the girls’ volleyball team.  During this time the team has won three city championships titles, and I’ve been able to expand my sphere of knowledge with respect to the training of volleyball athletes.  I must add that most of these girls are very cooperative and hard working, and I’ve gotten to know many of their parents who are very concerned with their daughters’ well-being.

The reason for this extra concern is the result of a policy decision by the N.C.A.A. several years ago.  Initially the National Collegiate Athletic Association attempted to equalize sports spending for both men’s’ and women’s’ teams, but found that the extraordinary expenses of conducting football and basketball programs, the two cash cows of collegiate athletics, inhibited the actual implementation of gender equality in the budgeting process.  The organization then made a pivotal decision to require its member universities and colleges to grant equal numbers of scholarships to men and women in order to comply with its gender equity plan.  Since football at division 1 schools was going to automatically use up its entire allocation of 85 scholarships, and men’s’ basketball would need all of its allocation to maintain a competitive program, the consequent result was that many men’s’ sports were forced to give up scholarships, while several women’s’ sports would now have a full complement of scholarships with which to conduct their programs.  Almost overnight every co-ed university in the country was offering a full complement of women’s’ volleyball scholarships.  I don’t know the exact number available per campus, but it should be obvious to the reader that a lot of tall young women across the country suddenly had a decent crack at a free university education.  This explains why some of my athletes’ parents are very concerned.

As expected I’ve found that volleyball people have their own little culture.  They are basically concerned with two things:  height and vertical jump.  Although I’ve found most of the parents to be pretty open minded about weight training, there are always a few that are concerned that weight training will stunt their child’s growth.  Yes, that old thing again, and I present it here for I’m sure that weightlifting coaches around the country have to deal with this one from time to time.  I believe the myth is the residue of rumor-mongering by people who needed an excuse to not train with weights.  By creating this straw man, they were able to appear wise rather than lazy.  It’s the same line of reasoning that produced the myth of knee injuries being caused by squatting.

I also believe that the growth issue is somewhat reinforced by the fact that the lifters in the lightest classes are always shorter than average.  For some reason this thought pattern is never carried over to gymnastics, which may very well cause a stunting of growth.

I therefore feel the need to rebut this misconception about growth and weight training or weightlifting, both for the skeptical parents of my future athletes and for other coaches dealing with the issue.

1)Weightlifting has a wide range of weight classes in order to provide fair competitive opportunities for a wide range of human sizes.  Athletes with short limbs have the best leverages for force development and therefore weightlifting coaches seek out short athletes during the selection process as they will have the best chances for success in the lighter weight classes.  This is akin to the process of seeking out short athletes to become jockeys.  I don’t believe I’ve ever heard that equitation stunts one’s growth.

2)This point is anecdotal, but nonetheless worth mentioning.  The vast majority of weightlifters are as tall or taller than their parents.

3)Weightlifters in the two heaviest classes are significantly taller than the average person.  The tallest weightlifters top out at about 1.90 m. (6′2″).  With some rare exceptions, athletes taller than this figure can generally not compete in the sport because tall athletes have disproportionately long arms and legs (especially in the humerus and femur).  The standard dimensions of the weightlifting bar would inhibit a very long armed athlete from using a comfortable snatch grip, and the relative lengths of the humerus and femur would have most tall athletes touching the elbows to the thighs during the squat clean, a violation of the rules.

4)Former Soviet National Weightlifting coach Alexei Medvedyev conducted a study on the growth of weightlifters vs. track and field athletes and non-athletes.  His results indicated that weightlifters follow a growth pattern more similar to non-athletes than to track and field athletes, that weightlifters continued skeletal growth to an older age than either group and that some weightlifters achieved the same height levels as the track and field athletes who were specifically selected for height characteristics.

5)Weightlifting is an anabolic sport.  Don’t get excited.  The term anabolic is defined as a process of synthesizing larger molecules from smaller molecules and particles.  Long chain polypeptides (muscle filaments) are constructed by binding together amino acid molecules during the muscle-building process.  The weightlifting training process causes the body to secrete hormones (insulin, growth hormones, testosterone) that facilitate this process.  By consuming larger than average doses of proteins, weightlifting athletes can maintain the positive nitrogen balance that insures that the body is consistently in a state of growth.   For my volleyball athletes concerned with skeletal growth, they must realize that the growth of bones involves the development of a protein matrix around which calcium salts are incorporated to cause the bones to both elongate and increase in cross sectional area.  Carefully orchestrated weight training probably will cause additional growth rather than cause a lessening of height.

6)Sports that require athletes to remain in a state of semi-starvation probably do cause some stunting of growth.  Women’s gymnastics which requires its participants to keep body fat levels so low that sexual maturity is delayed is probably the biggest offender.

Hopefully the preceding points will be of value to concerned parents, athletes and coaches in dealing with the debunking of myths and the ultimate physical development of the athletes in question.

More from readers about the most difficult aspect of teaching weightlifting technique.

This is from CJ Del Balso, a young coach based in San Juan Capistrano.  He is teaching the Olympic lifts to the students at his school and putting on meets.  Here was his reply to my request for input about the most difficult aspect of teaching technique.

Thanks for sending me your newsletter. Without a doubt, the most challenging part of teaching weightlifting technique is the shift as you mentioned. Like you, I find that this part of the technique causes the most frustration with my athletes and the most time to master. It’s good to hear that I’m not the only one who is challenged with this aspect of teaching the lifts. Take care.

Another response comes from Michael Grandominico of Ohio who provided some suggestions but also requests any available assistance.

This is Coach Mike G associated with D1, The Place for The Athlete…
Many of the athletes I have worked with have encountered similar setbacks in the same areas. Ways I have found to better help them understand the proper movement pattern are as follows…
-Premature Bending of the arms: incoorporate the hook grip, and expain the purpose of this grip.. also comparing the arms to a ball and chain, arms representing the loose dangling chain and hands grasping the weight representing the ball
-Uncoupling of the upper spine: emphasize chest out and head angled up
-Back to far on the heels: not sure exactly what you mean( if you have the time can you please explain and how exactly you would correct this problem)
-failure to thrust the hips forward while pushing up from the balls of the feet: One of the most seen common problems I have encountered. When this problems arrises I try coaching my athlete to “get tall”, “explode the hip all the way through”. I find that this key explosive movement progressive improves over the period of a month or so.

* If you have any other tips, ideas, techniques that will help me to better train my athletes on these setbacks, I would love to learn about them.

Thanks for your time,

Coach Mike G.

Anyone interested in the approach that I used for many years to overcome this coaching problem should refer to my three part article that is available for immediate free download in the downloads section of www.takanoathletics.com.  Just click on the Downloads menu.  Select Instructional Articles and then download Coaching Optimal Technique in the Snatch and Clean and Jerk.  Hope this is helpful!

T

WEEK 7

Day 1—Monday

1) Snatch: 60%/1, 70%/1, 80%/1, 85%/1, 90%/1, 95%/1, 85%/1, 90%/1, (80%/3)3  17:17

2) Clean & Jerk: 60%/1+1, 70%/1+1, 80%/1+1, 85%/1+1, 90%/1+1, 95%/1+1, (80%/3+1)3

24:41

3) Snatch Extension: (90%/3)5                                                                    15:56

4) Back Squat: 70%/3, 80%/3, 85%/3, 90%/2, 95%/1                                 12:68

5) Good Morning: (X/5)4                                                                            20:88:88

Day 2—Tuesday

1) Snatch: 60%/2, 70%/2, 80%/2, 85%/2, 80%/2                                        10:10

2) Clean & Jerk: 60%/2+1, 70%/2+1, 80%/2+1, 85%/2+1, 80%/2+1          15:25

3) Clean Extension: (90%/2)4                                                                     08:33

4) Front Squat: 60%/3, 70%/3, 80%/3, 85%/3, 90%/2, 80%/3, 85%/2        19:52

5) Press: (X/4)4                                                                                           16:68:156

Day 3—Wednesday

1) Power Snatch: 60%/2, 65%/2, 70%/2, 75%/1, 70%/2                             09:09

2) Power Clean & Jerk: 60%/2+1, 65%/2+1, 70%/2+1, 75%/1+1, 70%/2+1 14:23

3) Back Squat: 60%/3, 70%/3, 80%/3, 85%/2, 90%/1                                 12:35

4) Power Jerk: 60%/2, 70%/2, 75%/1, 70%/2                                             07:42:198

Day 4—Thursday

1) Snatch: 60%/1, 70%/1, 80%/1, 85%/1, 90%/1, 95%/1, 80%/1, 85%/1, 90%/1       08:08

2) Clean & Jerk: 60%/1+1, 70%/1+1, 80%/1+1, 85%/1+1, 90%/1+1, 95%/1+1, 80%/1+1, 85%/1+1, 90%/1+1                                                                                                                    16:24

3) Snatch Extension: (95%/3)4                                                                    12:36

4) Front Squat: 60%/3, 70%/3, 80%/3, 85%/3, 90%/1, 95%/1, (80%/3)3   23:58

5) Press: (X/5)4                                                                                           20:68:266

Day 5—Friday

1) Power Snatch: 60%/2, 65%/2, 70%/2, 75%/1, 60%/2, 65%/2, 70%/1    12:12

2) Power Clean & Jerk: 60%/2+1, 65%/2+1, 70%/2+1, 75%/1+1, 60%/2+1, 65%/2+1, 70%/1+1

19:31

3) Clean Extension: (90%/3)4                                                                     12:43

4) Back Squat: 60%/3, 70%/3, (80%/3)3                                                     15:58

5) Good Morning: (X/5)4                                                                            20:78:344

Last year at the National Strength and Conditioning Association (NSCA) National Conference, the Weightlifting Special Interest Group (SIG) met and one of the issues voted upon was that my newsletter should include a section on the weightlifting SIG and thus serve as the official organ of communication within the SIG.  There was a general consensus that this would be a great way to keep the SIG members aware of events taking place in the weightlifting community and to furthermore keep members of the weightlifting community aware of the existence and activities of the SIG.  Fine with me.  The more eyes that get to find out what’s going on in weightlifting, the better for everyone involved.

I finally got around to getting a full mailing list of everyone that had ever signed up for the SIG, and began sending the newsletter out to them (about 2,600) along with the 3,000 or so I’d already had on my list.  There was some crossover, but when the dust settled it came out to around 5600.  That’s a good sized group of pretty dedicated followers.

Anyway a couple of days ago I get an e-mail from the national NSCA office saying that a couple of people were complaining that I was advertising my business in the newsletter, and to stop doing it because…….!  I don’t know.

I called the office back and said that if anyone is offended, they are always free to unsubscribe (I guess so that they are no longer exposed to my greedy, materialistic motives for putting out the newsletter).

Anyhow it brings me to the main point of this blog and one that I’ve been turning over in my head for quite awhile.  I know the United States Olympic Committee (USOC) doesn’t want to hear this, but the fact of the matter is that the Olympic sports in which we do well are those in which coaches can make a comfortable living.  Either they are supported by schools that have athletic teams in those sports, or there is enough of a market that they can open private schools or academies that will provide a living wage.

It might seem crass to say so, but most Olympic athletes don’t make it past one Olympics.  It’s one and done.  Coaches are around for many quadrenniel cycles and many of them just get better the longer they are involved.  They find new athletes, train them and maintain the culture of the sport.

In another perspective the Olympics is a competition between our coaches and the coaches of the other 200+ nations of the IOC.  The better countries have professional coaches in many sports.  In weightlifting the USA is sending amateur coaches against professionals from other top lifting nations.  Most of our coaches earn a living at something other than weightlifting and coach weightlifting in their spare time (Owning and running a gym does not count.  You don’t get better at coaching weightlifters by owning and running a gym.  You just cut down on drive time.).

If I could organize the whole plan for U.S. weightlifting and had a huge budget (which I am going to get by advertising Takano Athletics in the WL SIG newsletter), I would pay competent coaches situated in strategic (i.e. high density population) areas to coach weightlifters.  The salaries would be high and the position would be subject to review at the end of each quadrennium based on results in the Olympic Trials and Olympic Games.

I would also pay the athletes so that it would be our professional coaches and professional athletes against those of the other countries.  I also realize that it is a competition between the sports medicine and sports science programs of the various nations, so those would need funding as well.

Then the plan would shift to establishing training centers in a strategic geographic distribution.

Overall I think this general approach would work for all the sports in which we are not doing well in the Games.

I also get the feeling that for a long time, no one in a position of power at USOC knows a whole lot about coaching education and athletic development programs.  More on at that later date.

So when my newsletter pitches start generating huge money, watch out!

This e-mail was sent to me in response to my mid-May newsletter about the most difficult part of coaching proper technique.  Danny was a top junior lifter and is now establishing himself as an excellent weightlifting coach.  He offers his thoughts on this technical problem and they are worth considering as we go about our coaching pathways.  Many people have achieved the same ends through different routes, and this is often how innovation or improvement comes about.  Enjoy!

Bob,

You and I have met only once, formally.  I introduced myself to you at a recent national meet after receiving your newsletters.

My name is Danny Camargo.  I was a successful Junior lifter from 1992-1998, a 3x Jr. World Team member, and a resident athlete under Dragomir (1994-1998) at the OTC during the Pete Kelly, Wes Barnett, Tim Mcrae, and Chad Ikei era of our sport.

Thank you for continuously sending me your newsletters.  After my retirement, I began coaching.  Now in my 11th year as a coach, I have risen to the U.S. International level of coaching (USAW).  I found your newsletters insightful.  I’ve never felt compelled to write you as I have just sat back and enjoyed your literature.  Until now.  I just want to say that I AGREE with you 100% that teaching the transition is the most difficult part of the lifts.  If anything is ever consistently challenging to teach, it’s this part.  So I agree with you.

More importantly is this topic of the “double knee bend.”  Because of my background in Olympic Weightlifting, I was sought after by local CrossFit gyms.  They found me and sought out my expertise (here in Florida…I’m in the Orlando area).  Although I understand why coaches try to teach the “double knee bend”, I am having a huge problem with that concept.  Perhaps we can talk more about it.

I’m not completely sold on the idea of teaching the “double knee bend.” Again, I don’t want to disrespect or undermine any experienced coach out there.  In fact, I’m not even trying to be negative about the concept.  It’s certainly useful and when done correctly, especially with the right body type, it is extremely effective.  However, in my opinion, as a former elite athlete and now U.S. coach, I feel the “double knee bend” is a high level concept that should not be taught to the novice.  It’s pretty complex for a beginner.  Just my opinion.  As such, I am having so many Crossfitters and dedicated Olympic Weightlifters attempting to do this on their own or from inexperienced coaches.  It’s kind of a hot topic for me.  Thoughts?

Thank you again.

p.s.- I grew up in a time in this sport where this transition we talk of was referred to as “the scoop.”  How’s that for an outdated term?  My first coach and mentor before Dragomir was Bill “Coach Mac” McDaniel.
–
Thank you,
Daniel Camargo
U.S. International Coach, USA Weightlifting