Weightlifting Forums

I'm not 100% sure what that means (maybe translation for jargon is a bit awkward) but I will try to interpret as best I can.
Assumptions I am making

• I'm taking "sural sharing" as the co-contraction of the triceps surae (gastrocnemius and soleus) against the quadriceps.
• Pulling phase? Not sure which pulling phase. First pull, transition, second pull? The role of the knee flexors is different in all three.

There is a phenomenon where one muscle can indirectly act upon another joint through co-contraction between a monoarticular muscle (single joint) and an antagonist/synergist biarticular (multi joint) muscle. For example, the gluteus maximus (hip extensor) can extend the knee by co-contracting against the rectus femoris (knee extensor and hip flexor). Greg Nuckols has a write-up here on how that applies to the squat.

There are two prominent knee flexor groups involved in the weightlifting pull, the hamstrings (primary knee flexor) and the gastrocnemius (secondary, weak knee flexor). Gracilis/sartorius play a minor role and popliteus does almost nothing.

The hamstrings contract eccentrically throughout the first pull as the hip angle stays fairly constant (a few degrees of extension) and the knee extend. In the transition phase, the hamstrings extend the hip and flex the knee, with the quadriceps contracting eccentrically and getting stretched to prepare for the second pull.

Side note: this is why hamstring strains in weightlifting tend to occur at the end of the first pull and IMO should be very rare as they are almost completely avoidable. Do any hamstring exercise with a lot of hip flexion (seated leg curl, 45 deg back ext, good morning etc) once a week at a heavy controllable load (1-3 sets of 5), don't rush the first pull, problem solved. Also don't sprint to your bus stop, better to be late to training than to show up early and only be able to lift off blocks (half joke).

The gastrocnemius is a weak knee flexor and is only particularly active as a knee flexor when the leg is straight (Li et al., 2002) so it plays a relatively small role in resisting knee flexion until you get towards the end of the transition (where the hamstrings lose some leverage) and shortly before the start of the second pull.

The calves (gastrocnemius/soleus/tibialis posterior) have two roles in weightlifting IMO (underline, opinion)
#1 is balance, first and foremost. Lifters with exceptionally weak calves can tend to lean backwards because they cannot keep their balance in the right place. I never figured this was the case until I saw a powerlifter turned weightlifter with possibly the most tragic calves in existence (I can say this as he is my friend).

#2 is force/torque transfer from the hip and knee extensors into the ankle/foot joint during the second pull.

However, what you may notice in quite a number of athletes (stereotypically Asians, but also short limbed Europeans or half the Italian women's team) is a so-called "premature" raise of the heels before the second pull. Is this an error? I'm not sure, and I think as coaches we often don't like to admit that we don't know!

I don't believe we have good quality, relevant evidence (isometric mid thigh pull not relevant IMO) to suggest whether this limits vertical impulse into the bar. The biggest challenge to biomechanical reasoning is usually biomechanics research data - everything that you think makes sense is often wrong.


More than putting it in the absolutely right or wrong box, I think we should observe when it happens, ask why it happens and what the consequences are. The below is largely my observations, personal experiences and hypotheses, not to be taken as fact.

#1 First Pull
Some lifters push only from the ball of the foot with the heels completely off the ground.

This is considered an error by most coaches and it certainly makes it difficult for beginners to keep consistent balance. When the heels are off the ground in the first pull, the calves and quadriceps have to work extremely hard to produce vertical force but I think the amount of load through the adductor magnus/glutes/back is similar (if not more), so generally these lifters will have a slowed first pull. All other things being equal, this is a negative.

Why then does it happen? My best guess is that it allows the knees to temporarily remain more flexed and reduces the magnitude and rate of loading on the hamstrings.

#2 Transition
The raising of the heels in the transition allows the knee angle to get more flexion before the second pull, without losing vertical impulse in the middle of the pull. In my experience, this tends to occur with lifters who have strong calves, often (but not always) strong quads and almost always a relatively weak back.

The potential cost of this is that it may be more difficult to maintain balance and a vertical bar trajectory, but is this a question of the heel raise making balance difficult or the back weakness making balance/verticality difficult? Or both? I don't know, but I can certainly say that back weakness or fatigue makes "verticality" harder.

The other strategy to reduce the loss of vertical impulse in the transition, which is to minimise the magnitude of knee rebend during the second pull. Urik Vardanian is the eternal example of this. No contact snatches/cleans to straight legs/power/squat can be a good exercise for this, provided that it is no contact by not rebending the knees much instead of via arm curling. This will provide a relatively flat footed transition.

I don't personally believe either is inherently superior for lifting more weight. I think it depends on where someone is weak or strong, and what they can achieve consistently and successfully.

#3 Second pull/explosion
Some people argue that a flat footed explosion is ideal due to isometric pull from the power position. I think that is irrelevant, the bar is not allowed to stay still in the snatch or clean.

During the transition, both the quadriceps and triceps surae are stretched and store energy. Then in the second pull, the stretch-shortening reflex and stored energy can be used to rapidly release energy as a large force into the ground. This is very different to an isometric contraction with almost no elastic component. That elastic energy storage/release can produce a lot of force, Usain Bolt can produce peak ground reaction forces of 3932N or 400.9kg force in a sprint through one leg (Čoh et al., 2018).

This doesn't mean that you should tell people to do a calf raise, rather I think people should be told to push down through the ground and get as tall as possible.

Nice review, thanks!

The original slide title is "un caso dello sharing surale".

Another slide is "differenti modi di allenare il costamero (titina)" ("different ways to train the costamere (titin)").

I don't know if this is part of the framework on which the Italian school was designed or if they are lessons used to give a scientific aura to the course. The result is that I'm more and more curious.

Relevant info should be in one of the things I sent you about elastic muscular force production. The smartass in me wants to say training titin is simple, just lift weights (not technically wrong lol).



Titin is a protein spring that is responsible for the majority of passive muscular tension. It is viscoelastic, meaning that it is stiffer when it is stretched faster and subsequently produces more force when it is stretched further, harder and/or faster.

Therefore the strategies to (preferentially) train titin are

• Training at long muscle lengths, particularly exercises with more external load/moment in the stretched position
• Accentuated eccentric training
• Fast(er) eccentric training

You may have noticed, two of those three are common already in weightlifting. Squat snatches and squat cleans have fast eccentrics into a deep position, under load. Squats are often done to full depth (though not always).

Some lifters squat with a fast eccentric tempo on heavy weights which is good if controllable and sustainable, but many find issues with knee tendons after a while. Squats with similar weights to your squat snatch/clean can obviously be done with a faster eccentric, if that fits into your program.

Low ceiling jumping exercises like (BW or weighted) duck hops might be beneficial too, especially for beginners who cant descend quickly in the classic lifts.

Accentuated eccentrics, especially supramaximal eccentrics (relative to concentric 1RM) will also train titin. However, high load eccentrics obviously must be approached very carefully.

Elle wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2024 8:21 am Another slide is "differenti modi di allenare il costamero (titina)" ("different ways to train the costamere (titin)").

I don't know if this is part of the framework on which the Italian school was designed or if they are lessons used to give a scientific aura to the course. The result is that I'm more and more curious.

Sorry, I misread your original question.

The stuff about titin I wrote in my other comment is all accurate.

As for training the costamerse, what the costamere does is attach the sarcomere to the extracellular matrix for lateral force transmission. This is a positive adaptation for our sport because it allows for more force generation for a given muscle size, at the cost of shortening velocity. Weightlifting is a slow sport, I think that's a trade worth making.

How do we train this? It's very fancy according to some of the emerging research (relatively new field). Traditional heavy strength training appears to improve lateral force transmission through increasing costameres.

This seems to occur even with moderate and heavy loads (e.g. 8-10 reps, 3-5 reps and so on), though I'm not sure if higher repetitions, higher loads, or closer proximity to muscular failure would preferentially improve lateral force transmission. My gut feeling is that there is relatively little difference.

There may be a greater benefit for heavy eccentrics (including >100% of concentric 1RM) or accentuated eccentric loading for increasing lateral force transmission through the addition of costameres. Muscle damage may have a role to play in this. You can take eccentric 1RM to be about 130% of concentric 1RM for beginners, though this gap gets wider if someone mostly does eccentric training. Whether accentuated or supramaximal eccentrics are actually more effective for adding costameres, relative to training fatigue, I'm not actually 100% sure.

However, there is a cost to all training methods. The only perfect training method is 600mg... until WADA comes along.

The thing I forgot to mention: training with accentuated eccentrics is highly, highly fatiguing. I have had friends who were sore for a whole week doing accentuated eccentric triples with 90% 1RM or so. With weights above 100%, they are quite fatiguing, even for singles but especially for repetitions. I had a lecturer who did supramaximal eccentric squats treating himself as a lab rat - he programmed them once every two weeks due to the fatigue.

Thank you so much for the insight!

Last weekend I was in Rome for the elections of our Federation and I wanted to ask for clarifications from the coach who produced the slides but I didn't have the chance.

I don't know exactly if from that slide practical elements for training emerged, or if it was just a purely theoretical lesson.

It sounds very strange to me that a coach plans with the costamere in mind.

I'm not aware of eccentric training at the CPO, I've never seen them done. But maybe I missed them. I asked my sources.

Some updates from the Italian System (from the words of a former athlete):

Mon, Wed and Fri are heavy days: heavy snatch/clean and jerk and heavy squat
Tue and Thu: technique and bodyduilding
Once per week: cardiovascular training

The scheme for the typical heavy snatch session is: to go up to 90% (and above), do some singles and then to make some doubles/triples at 80%. For the clean and jerk they stop with the singles.
Also the squat is heavy, very close to the maximus very often.

Nothing we didn't already know, but it's nice to hear stories of sport life from former athletes.

Elle wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2024 10:31 am Some updates from the Italian System (from the words of a former athlete):

Mon, Wed and Fri are heavy days: heavy snatch/clean and jerk and heavy squat
Tue and Thu: technique and bodyduilding
Once per week: cardiovascular training

The scheme for the typical heavy snatch session is: to go up to 90% (and above), do some singles and then to make some doubles/triples at 80%. For the clean and jerk they stop with the singles.
Also the squat is heavy, very close to the maximus very often.

Nothing we didn't already know, but it's nice to hear stories of sport life from former athletes.

Wow, mindboggling. Only the same as Indonesia, Egypt, Vietnam and other countries with a Mon-Fri schedule for athletes.

There is seemingly a lack of long-term periodisation, with different qualities being emphasised throughout the microcycle/week rather than throughout the longer term.

The other slightly unusual aspect of that is the cardiovascular training - which is unusual, but not unique. China, Korea, some ex-Soviet countries and I'm sure some others have lifters jogging, cycling (not that kind, or maybe that kind), rowing etc to build cardiovascular fitness. It can be taken too far and can have detrimental effects, but low intensity work for a modest duration is not too fatiguing. I can see an argument for it improving general health/wellbeing and potentially work capacity/conditioning for sport. The best argument for cardio in weightlifting really is the olden days where people were blasting gear - cardio could keep the heart problems at bay for longer.

strapping wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 6:30 am Wow, mindboggling. Only the same as Indonesia, Egypt, Vietnam and other countries with a Mon-Fri schedule for athletes.

Not the best countries in terms of anti-doping culture XD

strapping wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 6:30 am There is seemingly a lack of long-term periodisation, with different qualities being emphasised throughout the microcycle/week rather than throughout the longer term.

I still don't quite understand the concept of periodization of the Italian national team. In the video I posted in the past there was a hint of discussion of periodization, but honestly I don't know what really happens.

A national coach once told me: "periodization? A bullshit from 20 years ago". But I don't know if it really reflects what happens in Rome.

strapping wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 6:30 am The other slightly unusual aspect of that is the cardiovascular training - which is unusual, but not unique. China, Korea, some ex-Soviet countries and I'm sure some others have lifters jogging, cycling (not that kind, or maybe that kind), rowing etc to build cardiovascular fitness. It can be taken too far and can have detrimental effects, but low intensity work for a modest duration is not too fatiguing. I can see an argument for it improving general health/wellbeing and potentially work capacity/conditioning for sport. The best argument for cardio in weightlifting really is the olden days where people were blasting gear - cardio could keep the heart problems at bay for longer.

According to Corbu's idea, athletes should be "fit". And that's why, despite having some strong 109/+109 in Italy (certainly not really competitive for a top 10 at international level), it seems that Corbu doesn't like these athletes because they are overweight.

Elle wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 7:10 am Not the best countries in terms of anti-doping culture XD

They were just examples, it's also not unusual for other countries without doping problems on an 8-9 session per week schedule. However, I do think that many athletes without drugs (not all) will struggle to recover from such a schedule of training.

Elle wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 7:10 am A national coach once told me: "periodization? A bullshit from 20 years ago". But I don't know if it really reflects what happens in Rome.

There is no such thing as training without periodisation, only training with shitty or unintentional periodisation.

Period-isation - to make blocks of time that emphasise a quality. If you train the snatch, then the clean and jerk, then squats in one session, you have periodised that session into 3 different exercises and emphases.

I think that the classic Western linear/block periodisation where only one emphasis is given at a time (e.g. 15s, 12s, 10s, 8s, 5s, 3s,) and other capacities are left to be detrained is a problem. If you only do moderate heavy snatchs/clean and jerks for half of the year, that's a problem.

Modern sport periodisation is not like that. Everything stays in the program year round, just emphasised to different degrees during different phases. In the off season, you focus on more GPP with maybe one session of moderate-heavy snatch/clean and jerk a week. In comp prep, you focus more on heavy snatch/clean and jerk, with a decrease in volume of squats/pulls and GPP. Not rocket science, just shifting focuses.

Elle wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 7:10 am The other slightly unusual aspect of that is the cardiovascular training - which is unusual, but not unique. China, Korea, some ex-Soviet countries and I'm sure some others have lifters jogging, cycling (not that kind, or maybe that kind), rowing etc to build cardiovascular fitness. It can be taken too far and can have detrimental effects, but low intensity work for a modest duration is not too fatiguing. I can see an argument for it improving general health/wellbeing and potentially work capacity/conditioning for sport. The best argument for cardio in weightlifting really is the olden days where people were blasting gear - cardio could keep the heart problems at bay for longer.

According to Corbu's idea, athletes should be "fit". And that's why, despite having some strong 109/+109 in Italy (certainly not really competitive for a top 10 at international level), it seems that Corbu doesn't like these athletes because they are overweight.
[/quote]
I would hope that's not true, but weight stigma is very real.

strapping wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 9:15 am I would hope that's not true, but weight stigma is very real.

I don't mean to say that there is body shaming, absolutely not. Only that some athletes in the heavy categories do not embody his idea of ​​a "prototype athlete". Maybe also because their results are not exciting compared to international standards (our best super has a record of 150-185). I think that if there was someone very strong, competitive at world level, obviously he would be in the team.