One of his better articles.
I find myself saying 'Don't just lift the bar- lift with the bar' more and more over the years. Part of that is about fostering the oscillation throughout the lift. Certainly its a consideration for lifters who have attained higher levels of competence.
Variance among bars plays a role as well, most gyms have a variety of them and consideration can be paid to training on the bar type that you expect to see in a competition.
The Bud Thread
-
brian.degennaro
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2022 3:19 am
Re: The Bud Thread
For me, I can perform significantly better on whippy barbells or even displaced weights. The lifts feel dramatically easier for me when I do so.
Re: The Bud Thread
6/10 ok article but not a classic
Snatch on Uesaka or a good Eleiko, clean and jerk on ZKC for extra boing
Bud's elasticity fetish point on the pull makes no sense as usual; the height of the barbell is essentially a product of force and time and the magnitude of elastic recoil from the pull is insignificant in terms of height.
The role of arm bend isn't (or shouldn't) be to add whip into the barbell, but to balance the athlete-barbell system and take load off the lats/upper back if they're relatively weaker. More likely, a larger magnitude of bar deformation has happened not due to the arm bend, but due to a larger loss of acceleration during the transition, followed by a more violent beginning of the second pull.
Lifters not using elastic recoil (of the barbell and legs) in the clean is common and I agree with his point that it's not about "catching the bounce" but creating the bounce by timing the deceleration of the system to use the recoil of both the legs and barbell to stand up the clean.
Of course, all of this applies equally to the jerk. Most lifters just muscle the jerk overhead with legs and/or arms, and often muscle it even more in the reception of the jerk. I see a lot of lifters at national level (some at international level) either not using elasticity to their advantage, or sometimes lifting against the elasticity of the bar.
Snatch on Uesaka or a good Eleiko, clean and jerk on ZKC for extra boing
Bud's elasticity fetish point on the pull makes no sense as usual; the height of the barbell is essentially a product of force and time and the magnitude of elastic recoil from the pull is insignificant in terms of height.
The role of arm bend isn't (or shouldn't) be to add whip into the barbell, but to balance the athlete-barbell system and take load off the lats/upper back if they're relatively weaker. More likely, a larger magnitude of bar deformation has happened not due to the arm bend, but due to a larger loss of acceleration during the transition, followed by a more violent beginning of the second pull.
Lifters not using elastic recoil (of the barbell and legs) in the clean is common and I agree with his point that it's not about "catching the bounce" but creating the bounce by timing the deceleration of the system to use the recoil of both the legs and barbell to stand up the clean.
Of course, all of this applies equally to the jerk. Most lifters just muscle the jerk overhead with legs and/or arms, and often muscle it even more in the reception of the jerk. I see a lot of lifters at national level (some at international level) either not using elasticity to their advantage, or sometimes lifting against the elasticity of the bar.
Re: The Bud Thread
I'm with Bud on this one though I don't think he has identified a problem that is particularly prevalent among higher level lifters.
Height of the bar must be an aggregate of biomechanical and biomotor sufficiency, applied with synchronicity, such that system latency in other phases of the lift does not occur.
Though new and emerging lifters may benefit from the intention created by aiming for a the kinesthetic feedback of hitting an object with the end of the bar, you don't really want that to be the way that the overall lift is successfully accomplished for the long term.
Height of the bar must be an aggregate of biomechanical and biomotor sufficiency, applied with synchronicity, such that system latency in other phases of the lift does not occur.
Though new and emerging lifters may benefit from the intention created by aiming for a the kinesthetic feedback of hitting an object with the end of the bar, you don't really want that to be the way that the overall lift is successfully accomplished for the long term.
Re: The Bud Thread
I think the pull to a stick is fine; I'm not bothered by it either way.
A stick can be used as a psychological tool, not so much for feedback but rather as a motivator and target.
I have no disagreements about regarding the full straightening of the body in pulling exercises. Maximal bar height is not achieved at any joint's maximal extension in a pull or a snatch - but that is a half strawman. Most lifters doing pulls do not straighten to the extent shown in the first two photos, those pulls are not how most people do pulls and certainly not how I would program or teach them.
WRT bar height in pulls vs classics: Pulls (of all variations) are a preparatory exercise, not a competition exercise or variant. They train the hip/back extensors and the upper body. They make less use of the quadriceps/calves in the pull than the classic lifts, which is fine as the quadriceps can be trained using squats and the actual lifts.
The fact that bar height is less in pulls compared to classic lifts is not important, as long as a lifter does not have such bad technique as to pull in the snatch/clean as if they are only doing a pull, then receiving (and likely hopping forward as a result).
With Bud's irony gotcha at the end there, I will say that despite Bud's railing on pulls, I do think that they can help speed up a lifter's transition and fixation if applied judiciously. Bud loves to talk about how it's untrue that the shoulders must be close tot he barbell, which strictly speaking, isn't wrong. However, he fails to mention the way that affects time to fixate the entire system. A loopier bar is harder to fix, not necessarily with the elbows but almost always with the shoulders.
The lifters who have a sticky top of the pull and delayed turnovers typically have a combination of not great upper back development and putting too much load/jerk on the upper back at the top of the pull (e.g. Sarah Davies, Gevorg Gabrielyan).
A stick can be used as a psychological tool, not so much for feedback but rather as a motivator and target.
I have no disagreements about regarding the full straightening of the body in pulling exercises. Maximal bar height is not achieved at any joint's maximal extension in a pull or a snatch - but that is a half strawman. Most lifters doing pulls do not straighten to the extent shown in the first two photos, those pulls are not how most people do pulls and certainly not how I would program or teach them.
WRT bar height in pulls vs classics: Pulls (of all variations) are a preparatory exercise, not a competition exercise or variant. They train the hip/back extensors and the upper body. They make less use of the quadriceps/calves in the pull than the classic lifts, which is fine as the quadriceps can be trained using squats and the actual lifts.
The fact that bar height is less in pulls compared to classic lifts is not important, as long as a lifter does not have such bad technique as to pull in the snatch/clean as if they are only doing a pull, then receiving (and likely hopping forward as a result).
With Bud's irony gotcha at the end there, I will say that despite Bud's railing on pulls, I do think that they can help speed up a lifter's transition and fixation if applied judiciously. Bud loves to talk about how it's untrue that the shoulders must be close tot he barbell, which strictly speaking, isn't wrong. However, he fails to mention the way that affects time to fixate the entire system. A loopier bar is harder to fix, not necessarily with the elbows but almost always with the shoulders.
The lifters who have a sticky top of the pull and delayed turnovers typically have a combination of not great upper back development and putting too much load/jerk on the upper back at the top of the pull (e.g. Sarah Davies, Gevorg Gabrielyan).
-
brian.degennaro
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2022 3:19 am
Re: The Bud Thread
What I always find funny about Bud's hatred for pulls is that even if the goal is to lift the heaviest barbell to the lowest height, the upperbody still needs to be heavily involved in transitioning the lifter into that squat position. Failure to utilize the shoulders, rotators, and traps against the barbell as an anchor in space will result in a loopy and loose receiving position. Even if he uses Deng Wei and others (including his daughter) as examples, there are still technical faults with all of his chosen examples, especially in the catch. Failure to get adequate humeral abduction, scapular retraction, IR into ER during the turnover is a technical fault. I would argue upright rows and trapi pulls are useful exercises to strengthen and train that ROM.
There is this strawman that "pulls to a stick" are still a popular exercise utilized worldwide. I cannot for the life of me think of any training where it is used extensively for myself or others. Maybe as a game to play with others or a way to mentally boost confidence from time to time, but nothing on the regular. I have also not met any coach or athlete who genuinely thinks that the barbell must be raised to its maximum height before the lifter sits under the barbell. Everyone says the barbell must be raised to its maximum height but there is no qualifier after of "before you sit."
Bud confuses "passing through these positions" to mean "we must deliberately achieve these positions" when it comes to textbook "classical" technique. Speaking to classical technique, my coach still speaks with his coach Plukfelder and we talk about modern lifters whenever major competitions come up. Their comments on lifters who do not conform to "flat feet during the pull"? "That was an excellent snatch; very good padriv."
There is this strawman that "pulls to a stick" are still a popular exercise utilized worldwide. I cannot for the life of me think of any training where it is used extensively for myself or others. Maybe as a game to play with others or a way to mentally boost confidence from time to time, but nothing on the regular. I have also not met any coach or athlete who genuinely thinks that the barbell must be raised to its maximum height before the lifter sits under the barbell. Everyone says the barbell must be raised to its maximum height but there is no qualifier after of "before you sit."
Bud confuses "passing through these positions" to mean "we must deliberately achieve these positions" when it comes to textbook "classical" technique. Speaking to classical technique, my coach still speaks with his coach Plukfelder and we talk about modern lifters whenever major competitions come up. Their comments on lifters who do not conform to "flat feet during the pull"? "That was an excellent snatch; very good padriv."
-
brian.degennaro
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2022 3:19 am
Re: The Bud Thread
Given how terse Bud's write-ups have gotten, I am surprised he did not submit one immediately upon the conclusion of Lasha's failed 260 attempt.
Re: The Bud Thread
Bud is back, and there is plenty of prose in this review of 2023 Worlds.
Re: The Bud Thread
There are points I agree with here and there but unfortunately it is still a modern Charniga article.
Typical of contemporary Charniga articles, the conclusion is the start point and the happenings of the competition are used to justify them.
The approach to attempt success rate is one I agree with, building momentum is important for most lifter's psychological strength *development*. A point lost on many national team coaches, who will gaslight, gatekeep, girlboss grindset their way to maximum results on first attempts to qualify.
The "digital narcissism" point is an old man yelling at clouds, but not without total truth. I think there is a loose correlation between training hall heroics and Instagram popularity. However, to then say that North Korea is displaying a "lack of narcissism" by pulling out of competitions so they don't get tested is a nuclear level take.
-
Saying Iran's weightlifting squad is professional, disciplined etc. is very funny if you know anything about the federation/political history (though to be fair, a lot of the information is only in Persian or Arabic).
Making a point that Mostafa Javadi IRI won M89 by making successful lifts is valid; but a quick look at his history shows that his results are not consistent, like most Iranian lifters. His apparent "rapid improvement" is in comparison to competitions where he didn't make his top attempts.
The typical Iranian men as of the last ~10 years pull reasonably in a snatch but clean with a stiff legged hip thrust, necessitating "speed under the bar" because the rhythm of force application in the pull is illogical. Ironically, Javadi's ability to lift a slow moving 215 was (IMO) more likely because he actually used his legs (a bit more) in the pull and subsequently was more easily able to catch the bar in a higher, and more balanced position.
His missed lifts demonstrate a lack of skill in the pulling phase of the lift (and staying connected), never a lack of ability to zoom under it (see: missed snatches).
-
I don't think necessarily that the push jerk is a "wrong" way to lift as there are legitimate reasons to do it, though it is a bad choice for most people.
Nor would I agree that Tian Tao's mobility/flexibility deteriorating with age as a reason why he missed. Man's is still plenty mobile.
The reason is because simply because those two do not have fundamentally sound jerk technique to begin with; along with single-sided physical preparation for the jerk.
Both lifters have erratic balance and trajectory in the drive of the jerk; exacerbating the difficulty of stabilising a push jerk. Viktor Sots made the push jerk famous and he's still arguably the best to ever do it, probably because he was simply a good jerker regardless of push or split. Good amortisation and use of bar whip, vertical drive, met and stopped the bar well, and had a fairly "neutral" catch position (not overly upright or leaned) which then allowed him room for error.
The Chinese used to do it better, with their chest up (e.g. Zhan Xugang) and attempting to support the bar in a more vertical position, but the obsession with getting the head through and supporting with the upper back has lead to a receiving position with the hips moving far/quickly backwards. This is of course, very difficult to control in the moment, but I think also leads to some of the inconsistency in bar trajectory in the drive.
The other side is the Chinese aversion to using one's "anterior" pressing muscles to support the barbell, with Tian Tao/Li Dayin being very weak in presses despite mountains of muscle mass. Subsequently, they can't support a vertical overhead position. Of course, Charniga would not agree with me there, it would simply be a lack of "skill" and "flexibility".
-
The Meso roasting isn't disagreeable, block pulls on 250 are meaningless. I'm not convinced by the idea that feeling a heavy weight from pulls/squats or even hang/block lifts gives you lasting psychological strength. Whilst it may genuinely boost confidence momentarily, I doubt that confidence and memory is present during the lifter's competition warmup or attempts.
I'm not really sure where the impression that he doesn't miss jerks comes from. He's always been a solid jerker but not a guaranteed one after hard cleans, and the knee injury likely doesn't help. That said, I don't think his misses are from a lack of doing jerks from racks, nor from heavy block pulls.
Typical of contemporary Charniga articles, the conclusion is the start point and the happenings of the competition are used to justify them.
The approach to attempt success rate is one I agree with, building momentum is important for most lifter's psychological strength *development*. A point lost on many national team coaches, who will gaslight, gatekeep, girlboss grindset their way to maximum results on first attempts to qualify.
The "digital narcissism" point is an old man yelling at clouds, but not without total truth. I think there is a loose correlation between training hall heroics and Instagram popularity. However, to then say that North Korea is displaying a "lack of narcissism" by pulling out of competitions so they don't get tested is a nuclear level take.
-
Saying Iran's weightlifting squad is professional, disciplined etc. is very funny if you know anything about the federation/political history (though to be fair, a lot of the information is only in Persian or Arabic).
Making a point that Mostafa Javadi IRI won M89 by making successful lifts is valid; but a quick look at his history shows that his results are not consistent, like most Iranian lifters. His apparent "rapid improvement" is in comparison to competitions where he didn't make his top attempts.
The typical Iranian men as of the last ~10 years pull reasonably in a snatch but clean with a stiff legged hip thrust, necessitating "speed under the bar" because the rhythm of force application in the pull is illogical. Ironically, Javadi's ability to lift a slow moving 215 was (IMO) more likely because he actually used his legs (a bit more) in the pull and subsequently was more easily able to catch the bar in a higher, and more balanced position.
His missed lifts demonstrate a lack of skill in the pulling phase of the lift (and staying connected), never a lack of ability to zoom under it (see: missed snatches).
-
I don't think necessarily that the push jerk is a "wrong" way to lift as there are legitimate reasons to do it, though it is a bad choice for most people.
Nor would I agree that Tian Tao's mobility/flexibility deteriorating with age as a reason why he missed. Man's is still plenty mobile.
The reason is because simply because those two do not have fundamentally sound jerk technique to begin with; along with single-sided physical preparation for the jerk.
Both lifters have erratic balance and trajectory in the drive of the jerk; exacerbating the difficulty of stabilising a push jerk. Viktor Sots made the push jerk famous and he's still arguably the best to ever do it, probably because he was simply a good jerker regardless of push or split. Good amortisation and use of bar whip, vertical drive, met and stopped the bar well, and had a fairly "neutral" catch position (not overly upright or leaned) which then allowed him room for error.
The Chinese used to do it better, with their chest up (e.g. Zhan Xugang) and attempting to support the bar in a more vertical position, but the obsession with getting the head through and supporting with the upper back has lead to a receiving position with the hips moving far/quickly backwards. This is of course, very difficult to control in the moment, but I think also leads to some of the inconsistency in bar trajectory in the drive.
The other side is the Chinese aversion to using one's "anterior" pressing muscles to support the barbell, with Tian Tao/Li Dayin being very weak in presses despite mountains of muscle mass. Subsequently, they can't support a vertical overhead position. Of course, Charniga would not agree with me there, it would simply be a lack of "skill" and "flexibility".
-
The Meso roasting isn't disagreeable, block pulls on 250 are meaningless. I'm not convinced by the idea that feeling a heavy weight from pulls/squats or even hang/block lifts gives you lasting psychological strength. Whilst it may genuinely boost confidence momentarily, I doubt that confidence and memory is present during the lifter's competition warmup or attempts.
I'm not really sure where the impression that he doesn't miss jerks comes from. He's always been a solid jerker but not a guaranteed one after hard cleans, and the knee injury likely doesn't help. That said, I don't think his misses are from a lack of doing jerks from racks, nor from heavy block pulls.
Re: The Bud Thread
There is some low hanging fruit being critiqued here, not for the first time we're left to consider what intervention's Bud would be okay with.