Weightlifting Forums

M102A
Yauheni TSIKHANTSOU BLR did 390 (174/178/181x + 206x/206/212), placing provisional 7th OQR.
174 and 178 strong but unstable. Maybe less sauced than before, but technically mid.
181 was again strong but unstable and rushed. Yeeted himself under the bar like the other attempts but lost balance.

206 miss looked like he forgot to hold it overhead, was a bit unstable but within reach.
212 was fine, okay, whatever. Physically capable of more if he lifts properly.


KITTS Wesley Brian USA did 388 (172x/172/177 + 204/211x/211), placing provisonal 9th OQR.
177 looked just about maximal, but well executed.
211 miss was the typical wet kiss soft elbows walking, the make was a bit shaky but much stronger.

CHKEIDZE Irakli GEO with 387 is in 10th, CHEN Po-Jen TPE 386 out of top 10.

-

W81A
This was a more interesting session.

KOANDA Solfrid NOR totalled 266 (111, 116, 120x + 144/149x/150) to finally qualify as an 81 in OQR, rank #3.
She looked like lost a lot of upper back strength, lacking connection in the turnover and stability overhead. My guess is she just had a hard water cut (and/or menstrual cycle stuff) and not fully rehydrated. She's probably capable of 270+ at 81 though.

DAJOMES BARRERA Neisi Patricia ECU made 4/6 lifts (115/118/121x + 136/142/147x), with close misses on her third attempts.
SALAZAR ARCE Tamara Yajaira also made 4/6 lifts, (111/115x/115 + 145x/145/149), retaining the Ecuadorian spot and moving OQR #4 up to 265.
The Ecuadorian women's technique sparks joy because they lift the bar and don't do any complicated shit. Well except for Salazar's heel wiggle setup.

MEJIA PEGUERO Yudelina DOM makes her first appearance for the qualifying period with 252 (107/112/115x + 134/139x/140), moving into OQR 7th. Her lifts were okay, looks like she has improved a fair bit since we last saw her in competition.


ROGERS Martha Ann USA totalled 248 (110x, 110, declined + 138/142x/143x) which increased her OQR total by 1kg and taking OQR 8th.
Her competition was confusing to me on several levels. They supposedly declined the third snatch to save her for later, then took 142 and 143?

Her instability of skill expression at maximal weights is also strange and there doesn't seem to be any single obvious thing that consistently shows whether or not she'll make a heavy lift. She'll do everything right in one lift and miss it, then make an error in another and save it for a success.

When she does make an error at maximal weights, it's not always the same error. I find with most lifters I can usually predict within 1-2kg what they can or can't do on a given day, but not her.

Elle wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 10:39 am A question:

do you feel that this qualification system pushes the athletes too hard? Are there more failed lifts than in the past, with others qualification systems? Are there any data?

Yes, but no.

The qualification system was written to the IOC instructions, which after the mess of the Tokyo qualification system, specified that the qualifying system document must be short, simple and easy to understand.

I did not find the Tokyo system particularly intuitive, but I was able to figure it out and calculate Robi points and qualification thresholds fairly easily. This is because I am lucky.

Many countries are obviously not English first-language (or second language even), and have less opportunity for education in English, maths and IT.
A complicated qualification system can be a barrier to entry for some of these countries and athletes.

The other qualification systems proposed (that I know of) are a modification to the Tokyo Robi point system, and another proposal that was the length of a light novel, full of dense lawyer language.

Even with those systems, which take multiple competitions to build up points, the lifters on the fringe of qualification could be, and were inconsistent and making bad attempt selections anyway.


-

The reason why athletes are bombing out is because their coaches are stupid and/or greedy. This was an unfortunate but expected and an unavoidable outcome.

This is not a single event qualifier like a national Olympic team selection. In later competitions, such as 2024 continentals and certainly the World Cup, you have to go hard or go home if you're on the fringe of qualification. That's an undeniable fact.

But when you have 6 available competitions to make a total, the intelligent thing to do in the early stages is build confidence and momentum, and try to keep your athletes healthy. A lot of the bomb outs/missed lifts are due to lifters managing injury or pain/niggles.
Go heavier in the later competitions if you can and need to.

Even in a single given competition, building confidence is usually the way to go. Many coaches at an amateur level know very well how to build confidence in a beginner/intermediate lifter by opening conservatively and then ramping up.
But people treat elite athletes as deities, instead of regular human beings whose numbers are a bit bigger.

The assumption of opening heavy to give more chances at heavier weights treats the probability of attempt success as an isolated variable, and that each attempt at a given weight has a similar likelihood of success. Clearly, it's not. There are psychological factors, physiological and technical factors, fatigue from previous attempts and attempt selection factors, which all affect the athlete's ability to lift or fail a weight.

This is not new, and many coaches know this but simply get greedy or choke their decisions because of the pressure. Though for some particular coaches or athletes, it's just about ego.

It wasn't hard to require two totals within 18 months instead of one and the average thereof is your qualifier. No ROBI, Sinclair, formulas required.

Better compromise.

That said, with the current system as stated one doesn't have to lift like this. The aggressive (read: reckless) attempt selection isn't a given. You could post a good total and then - 12 months later - post a better total. What a novel concept!

What really is obnoxious though is having eight to ten people in a televised/streamed A group and three or four pull out, in multiple sessions. Why put their entries so high when it's been just a weigh in from the onset? Would call all of those responsible douches. B GROUP B GROUP B GROUP

The significant number of withdrawals and weigh ins is really off putting for this competition. It is a waste of everyone's time and money, and wasting a "Grand Prix" type of event. I feel bad for Cuba because it appears that this potentially could have been a very exciting competition with a lot of good lifters competing with one another.

There are some athletes who are pushed too much (who said italians?) but I don't know if, generally speaking, there are more no lifts than in the past.

I know some coaches say: "we don't mind the competition, just the qualification. If the total for the qualification is reached, we reach also a good position in that meet."

But with this mentality (which often leads to bombing out) and with all these withdrawals this sport is losing something.

strapping wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 11:54 pm
ROGERS Martha Ann USA totalled 248 (110x, 110, declined + 138/142x/143x) which increased her OQR total by 1kg and taking OQR 8th.
Her competition was confusing to me on several levels. They supposedly declined the third snatch to save her for later, then took 142 and 143?

Her instability of skill expression at maximal weights is also strange and there doesn't seem to be any single obvious thing that consistently shows whether or not she'll make a heavy lift. She'll do everything right in one lift and miss it, then make an error in another and save it for a success.

When she does make an error at maximal weights, it's not always the same error. I find with most lifters I can usually predict within 1-2kg what they can or can't do on a given day, but not her.

Something that has always bugged me about her snatching is how she never quite seems mechanically coupled to the bar as she breaks it off the platform. I like pretty much everything else about her technique.

I agree its odd the varied outcome of her competition reps, and its not like she doesn't do a mountain of work at heavy intensity. Though, sometimes it appears as if there are a lot of reps as doubles and part of complexes rather than just actual competition-like singles. I could be wrong about that, but I have had that thought numerous times when seeing her training posts.

From my armchair, I think Mattie just does too much training period.

WSuper
No changes to OQR.
USA has an interesting battle between two time Olympian ROBLES Sarah Elizabeth vs. THEISEN LAPPEN Mary Anne, a late starter in the sport coming over from throwing.

This supports my theory of winning weightlifting in countries without a nationalised youth system starts with poaching tier 2 athletes from "real" sports with real talent. Then coaching them I guess idk

Mary did 115/119/122x + 155/158/164x.
Sarah did 122/126/129x + 150/155x/157x.

Mary won the comp by 1kg, but missed the clean and jerk necessary to overtake ROBLES 282 in Bogota.
I wonder if Sarah Robles is injured, having push jerked. Subjectively, her pull and squat doesn't look as comfortable as before.

MSuper
No changes to OQR.
DAVOUDI Ali IRI hit a PB snatch on 203 (+1kg) on his third attempt but oopy poopy clean and jerks (238/251x/252x).


Comp recap
Most categories were sub-interesting entertainment level, W71 and W81 were the exceptions. None of the men's categories were interesting to me.
Some categories had 1 or 2 interesting lifters (whether absolute or personal interest).

The entry list was far more interesting than the start list.
As mentioned several times before, shit like entering a full team and pulling out a bee's dick of time before the competition not only diminishes the quality of the event, but also creates significant costs and fuckarounds for organisers. Finding a willing host for events like this is a pain, it's good that the IWF finally did something good about trying to prevent things like this happening again.

Withdrawals are an unavoidable outcome of multi-event qualification systems. I agree that this diminishes events and especially A group sessions, though I don't know how to appropriately address this. Sometimes A session lifters genuinely get hurt in a warmup and withdraw.
I guess exploiting social media and posting piss memes.

Hawkpeter wrote: ↑Sun Jun 18, 2023 10:09 pm Something that has always bugged me about her snatching is how she never quite seems mechanically coupled to the bar as she breaks it off the platform.

I agree, I think she jerks the bar off the ground. Not necessarily an error in my opinion, but I feel (may be wrong) like it's a significant contributor to her technical variation later in the pull. However, I don't coach her so I don't know whether she would be better or worse with a different start style or if she's experimented with both and found one more successful.

Anecdotally, I find dynamic starts are preferred by athletes who are limited by maximal strength or perceive themselves that way, which makes sense on a purely mechanical basis. I generally don't love dynamic starts but they do work well for some athletes for both psychological and mechanical reasons.

IMO the best lift I've seen her do technically was the 115 training snatch at some point last year. She didn't think, she stayed balanced through the first pull, no major delay in shifting the trunk towards vertical and relatively not much loss in vertical force between the first pull and second pull, and stayed tight in the catch. It was a very good lift.
-

More broadly, I define technique and biomechanics as different words in my head.

Technique is the way (or principles with which) someone goes about the lift - which includes interactions between mechanics, physiology, psychology, environment and so on. A month ago, Bud Charniga posted an article that was actually good.

I think most coaches have a common-sense understanding of the interaction between psychology and mechanics - we've all met beginners who jerk the bar off the floor because it feels heavy, lifters who cut the pull at heavy weights, etc.
However, I don't think we talk about how we teach the movements, how that affects physiology, how that affects psychology, how that affects programming, what cultural/social biases affect how we teach or make decisions and so on.

I don't really know where I was going with this tangent.

Hawkpeter wrote: ↑Sun Jun 18, 2023 10:09 pm I agree its odd the varied outcome of her competition reps, and its not like she doesn't do a mountain of work at heavy intensity. Though, sometimes it appears as if there are a lot of reps as doubles and part of complexes rather than just actual competition-like singles. I could be wrong about that, but I have had that thought numerous times when seeing her training posts.

brian.degennaro wrote: ↑Mon Jun 19, 2023 1:13 pm From my armchair, I think Mattie just does too much training period.

I don't know her full training program as I don't really follow her closely on social media.

As a generality, it seems to me that she performs a lot of fatigue-oriented training (e.g. repetition, combination exercises) which is similar between her and many other countries' (e.g. KOR, JPN) approach to training.

Lifting under fatigue is obviously a highly important skill in the clean and jerk.
However, I personally think (arm-chair) that a lot of lifters perform too much training under fatigue, and not enough "fresh" training. There is plenty of literature illustrating the detrimental effects of fatigue on motor learning.

I can't remember the quote or who it's attributed to (maybe Charlie Francis), but I've heard a saying along the lines of "You can't practise sprinting slowly".

Weightlifting is obviously not as speed dependent (especially on a technical basis) as sprinting, but I think a lot of lifters/coaches fail to account for how fatigue affects motor expression/learning, feelings and physiological adaptations towards different movements.

The relationship of maximal strength, fatigue and speed-strength in the classic lifts is complex, and not easily described through any one variable.
This IMO is why some lifters perceive themselves as maximal strength limited whilst I perceived them as not strength limited. Sometimes shit will feel (or even look) really heavy.

Percentages and ratios are of limited use, as is the eye test of just watching someone's lifting.
I've seen people who look slow/grindy and maximal strength limited yet squat/pull significantly more than their classics (e.g. Clean = 80% FS).

I've also seen people who don't look max strength limited in their lifts, yet deadlift their clean and jerk for a 5-6RM and front squat it for a 2-3RM.
That's me, I'm weak because I don't train much and often squat after fatigue from classic lift exercises. The days of people mistaking my vastus medialis for aggressive tumour are unfortunately over.

Anyway, I can't remember I was going with this tangent either. I guess I have a bias towards doing lots of truly classic lifts (singles, no straps, 80+% 1RM for skill development) and in my experience this helps with skill stability and confidence in competition, as Bud wrote. This also lines up with motor learning research for other sports.

strapping wrote: ↑Tue Jun 20, 2023 2:34 am
I don't know her full training program as I don't really follow her closely on social media.

As a generality, it seems to me that she performs a lot of fatigue-oriented training (e.g. repetition, combination exercises) which is similar between her and many other countries' (e.g. KOR, JPN) approach to training.

Lifting under fatigue is obviously a highly important skill in the clean and jerk.
However, I personally think (arm-chair) that a lot of lifters perform too much training under fatigue, and not enough "fresh" training. There is plenty of literature illustrating the detrimental effects of fatigue on motor learning.

How much sludge continues to back up into understanding high level WL performance due to the decades of AAS use? I think its the question that may never go away in our life time - Do we really know the best way to train natty weightlifters?