Question of weight versus range of motion.
I noticed something interesting;
Sometimes I test an exercise by its imediate potentiation effect on a standing sprint start with four strides. However, I have noticed that the weight lifted is often more influencial than both the type of exercise, and the range of motion used.
Example; I performed some deadlifts with 'x' weight from the floor. But when I did simple shrugs from the blocks with very little lean from the hips, I had as much of a potentiation effect. (I'm not interested in using an exercise to potentiate the sprint, so much as testing the exercise ability to stimulate the nervous system.)
Example 2; I would have thought that walking lunges with dumbells, with rear knee touching floor (for glute-ham activation) would be far better for sprinting than say 'shrugs'. yet again, doing shrugs with a big weight, had a greater potentiation effect.
Example 3; What's the bench press got to do with running? Yet lifting a heavier weight in the bench gives a great potentiation effect on any athletic exercise that may follow afterwards.
Case note 1; Linford Christie occasionally did 'half' squats (which we know full well, means 'quater squats') with a huge weight. Other times he did full deep squats.
Case note 2; When Ben Johnson recovered from his hamstring injury in 1988, the parrallel squat was replaced with quater squats. If I recall correctly, Charlie said that the same weight was used whilst not putting to much stress on hamstrings, but still getting the central nervous system stimulation.
Also; I dont get a greater potentiation effect from an olympic lift than from a simple deadlift or set of shrugs. I dont get a greater potentiation from a full range bench press, than from a floor press or board press which is less range of motion but can be a heavier weight.
So I ask the forum for your thoughts.
Despite all the above, I am more interested in the longer term effect of a training style, than the imediate potentiation effect in the first 5 minutes.
Is the actuall weight lifted, possibly more influencial on effectively training the nervous system, than
A) the range of motion used.
B) the speed of lift.
C) the exercise used.
It seems; go too fast and you'll fry the c.n.s.
That's why I dropped all oly lifts from my program about six months ago, and not for the first time.
Range of motion seems pretty irrelevent unless you are using a decent weight.
Now, I am wiling to still use some full range of motion in a few exercises, no matter what our conclusions are. As full range can help decrease injury from running.
However, I may include a few other exercises, that allow me to lift bigger weights as well, even if said exercises go a bit against some of the conventional wisdom on athletic training ideas.
What are the forums experiances and inclinations on this subject?
Stimulation is general, not specific (that's why BP can be used). Activation needs to be specific only if there is a problem normally.
Originally Posted by Goose232
Thanks Charlie. I take it for granted sometimes, that the best sprint coach in the world is gracious with his time.
Originally Posted by Charlie Francis
I do enjoy those heavy barbell exercises, and I'm not so keen on the walking dumbell lunges.
Never the less, your second sentance gives me enough reason to carry on with the walking lunges with dumbells (individual needs in that area), but I now understand that I dont have to go mad with them and dont have to go too heavy, and I dont have to rush them towards big weights. I need to re-develope the glute-ham tie-in area sensibly, after loosing mass this last 4 years in that area. I'm also developing more functional mobility in the hips now, and I think the walking lunges are a good way to decrease injury risk. I can save my agression for the barbell lifts like bench press and shrugs which are a whole lot more fun.