Does anyone have any experience with Olympic lifts and training for middle-distances (5-10K)? What lifts do you do (sets, reps, etc.), and how do you normally balance it with quality running?
Does anyone have any experience with Olympic lifts and training for middle-distances (5-10K)? What lifts do you do (sets, reps, etc.), and how do you normally balance it with quality running?
Instead of doing a morning run on Tues/thurs, go to the gym.
Tues:
-3x3: Power Clean
-3x5: Front Squat
-3x5-8: Bench press/Push Press (alternate each week)
Thurs:
-3x3: Hang snatch/Snatch grip high pull
-3x5: DL/RDL
-3x5-8: 1 arm row/chin-up (alternate each week)
Very simple and effective. You'll get stronger and more explosive.
Olympic lifts do nothing to improve your running. The only thing they do is train the skills required for Olympic liftng, skills that are of no value to anyone except a competitive weightlifter. Don't listen to the coach d's of the world who insist that you have to copy the training of elites who use Olympic lifts. The fact that some elites use them is utterly irrelevant. 99% of professional coaches are clueless when it comes to training and you'd be better off just doing the exact opposite of what they recommend.
Enough ignorance wrote:
Olympic lifts do nothing to improve your running. The only thing they do is train the skills required for Olympic liftng, skills that are of no value to anyone except a competitive weightlifter. Don't listen to the coach d's of the world who insist that you have to copy the training of elites who use Olympic lifts. The fact that some elites use them is utterly irrelevant. 99% of professional coaches are clueless when it comes to training and you'd be better off just doing the exact opposite of what they recommend.
You're a doodoo head.
I think all of that lifting is really hurting Rupp and Farah. It's not like they've had any good running performances.
I've spoken with some fairly elite athletes and they tell me that lifting doesn't improve their running. It improves their overall athleticism which improves muscle balance and resistance to injury. Lifting has long term gains but short term drawbacks.
In my experience elite athletes are super flexible and have great mobility naturally. Unless you are blessed to be like them, Olympic lifts and mobility training will probably help you.
The biggest determining factor on if you will get any benefit from these is if you learn to do them correctly. A very small percentage of personal trainers, coaches, or youtube videos fully understand these movements correctly, so that can be more challenging than you think. I'd also recommend sticking to power cleans and squats. I think snatches are an unnecessary injury risk, and the power clean accomplishes building explosiveness without taxing the legs too much or requiring as much skill as a full clean.
For me personally, I was a 5k guy looking to move down in distance. Training olympic lifts helped my 800, but my 5k took a hurting. Helped me with my goals, but it all depends on what yours are.
Invoking the use of Olympic lifts (or any other training protocol) by elite athletes as evidence of their value is a logical fallacy—correlation does not imply causation. Do you really think those athlete would be chopped liver if they dropped Olympic lifting from their program?
Enough Ignorance wrote:
Invoking the use of Olympic lifts (or any other training protocol) by elite athletes as evidence of their value is a logical fallacy—correlation does not imply causation. Do you really think those athlete would be chopped liver if they dropped Olympic lifting from their program?
While it is true that correlation does not imply causation, I'm really not sure what else we're supposed to go off of for determining effective modes of training.
Mid D Convert wrote:
While it is true that correlation does not imply causation, I'm really not sure what else we're supposed to go off of for determining effective modes of training.
We should go by logic. An activity that neither meets the requirements for safe, effective strength training nor bears any resemblance to the activity we're training for and that exposes the body to enormous amounts of force has no place in a rational training program.
Enough Ignorance wrote:
Invoking the use of Olympic lifts (or any other training protocol) by elite athletes as evidence of their value is a logical fallacy—correlation does not imply causation. Do you really think those athlete would be chopped liver if they dropped Olympic lifting from their program?
It's at least evidence of their lack of harm.
Enough Ignorance wrote:
We should go by logic. An activity that neither meets the requirements for safe, effective strength training nor bears any resemblance to the activity we're training for and that exposes the body to enormous amounts of force has no place in a rational training program.
Ok got it. Rather than looking critically at our past training to determine what stimulus worked or didn't work, we should just philosophize over what might work.
While we're at it we can eliminate all forms of cross training, plyometrics, core work, or assistance exercises as these aren't running. Is hill work still ok, or should I only be running 800's on the track from now on?
Also, Olympic style weightlifting is no longer effective strength training. Got it.
Enough Ignorance wrote:
Mid D Convert wrote:While it is true that correlation does not imply causation, I'm really not sure what else we're supposed to go off of for determining effective modes of training.
We should go by logic. An activity that neither meets the requirements for safe, effective strength training nor bears any resemblance to the activity we're training for and that exposes the body to enormous amounts of force has no place in a rational training program.
I agree, let's go by logic.
1) Peter Coe, coach of double olympic 1500m champion Seb Coe, says weights do tremendous job of increasing power.
2) Seb blossomed from a good runner into a world beater while at Loughborough University under the tutelage of George Gandy, who had him do extensive weights in the winter.
3) Seb Coe ran 1:41 for 800m. He did weights often and throughout his career. Steve Cram & Steve Ovett did not do weights and were both slower of 800m and 400m.
4) Seb Coe would laugh at the assertion you have made in this thread. As would any track coach with a modicum of insight.
5) Seb Coe is more qualified to make assertions about what qualifies as good training than you.
Weights are beneficial
QED
The posters above demonstrate an appalling lack of basic thinking skills.
The observation than an elite athlete uses Olympic-style weightlifting proves NOTHING about how well such lifts "work." One's level of performance is the result of many factors, the most important of which is not training at all, but genetics. It is also impossible to infer the impact of any one training element from among all the other elements included in an athlete's overall regimen. For all you know, the inclusion of Olympic lifts might have harmed the athlete's performance. The only way to measure the direct impact of a training activity on performance is to undertake a well-controlled study on a statistically significant number of subjects. Observations about how elite athletes tend to train fall FAR short of this standard.
Statements by elite athletes and coaches are worse than worthless as evidence. Such statements only prove that the people who made them are full of opinions, not that their opinions are of any value.
To conflate weight training in general with Olympic lifting in particular as "seinfeld rerun junkie" did is so crass an error that it warrants no clarification. That's just disgraceful.
I'm done repeating myself and expounding on what should be obvious to anyone apart from an outright idiot. I'll let you guys get back to posting uneducated, illogical nonsense, spreading misinformation and misleading others.
Enough Ignorance wrote:
The posters above demonstrate an appalling lack of basic thinking skills.
The observation than an elite athlete uses Olympic-style weightlifting proves NOTHING about how well such lifts "work." One's level of performance is the result of many factors, the most important of which is not training at all, but genetics. It is also impossible to infer the impact of any one training element from among all the other elements included in an athlete's overall regimen. For all you know, the inclusion of Olympic lifts might have harmed the athlete's performance. The only way to measure the direct impact of a training activity on performance is to undertake a well-controlled study on a statistically significant number of subjects. Observations about how elite athletes tend to train fall FAR short of this standard.
Statements by elite athletes and coaches are worse than worthless as evidence. Such statements only prove that the people who made them are full of opinions, not that their opinions are of any value.
To conflate weight training in general with Olympic lifting in particular as "seinfeld rerun junkie" did is so crass an error that it warrants no clarification. That's just disgraceful.
I'm done repeating myself and expounding on what should be obvious to anyone apart from an outright idiot. I'll let you guys get back to posting uneducated, illogical nonsense, spreading misinformation and misleading others.
Easy there. I never mentioned any elite athletes. All I said was that they worked for me in obtaining my individual goals. Sorry?
Just out of curiosity, are you speaking from experience on whether or not Olympic lifting helped you or harmed you personally? Or is this just your best guess? If they did have a negative impact, feel free to elaborate to help the OP out.
Enough Ignorance wrote:
The posters above demonstrate an appalling lack of basic thinking skills.
One of them certainly does
read: you
The observation than an elite athlete uses Olympic-style weightlifting proves NOTHING about how well such lifts "work."
As opposed to the observation of an anonymous message board idiot like yourself
It is also impossible to infer the impact of any one training element from among all the other elements included in an athlete's overall regimen.
Mo Farah went to Salazar and started doing extensive weight training. His mileage remained the same. He now has amazing finishing speed. Connect the dots.
For all you know, the inclusion of Olympic lifts might have harmed the athlete's performance.
Yes, going from good european athlete to world record breaker (coe), or also-ran among the africans (who do no weights) to double olympic / world champion / european 1500 record holder (farah) is definite evidence against the usefulness of weights
The only way to measure the direct impact of a training activity on performance is to undertake a well-controlled study on a statistically significant number of subjects.
No
Start doing weights. Change nothing else. If you get faster, there's your proof.
See: Coe, Farah, many others
Observations about how elite athletes tend to train fall FAR short of this standard.
Nope
Statements by elite athletes and coaches are worse than worthless as evidence.
Nope
Such statements only prove that the people who made them are full of opinions, not that their opinions are of any value.
Statements made by anonymous message board idiots like yourself who argue against the observable evidence of athletes contradicting their opinion only shows that they are idiots and should be ignored
To conflate weight training in general with Olympic lifting in particular as "seinfeld rerun junkie" did is so crass an error that it warrants no clarification. That's just disgraceful.
To put words in my mouth is disgraceful.
I'm done repeating myself
thank god
I'll let you guys get back to posting uneducated, illogical nonsense, spreading misinformation and misleading others.
hahahahahahahaha
Mid D Convert wrote:
Enough Ignorance wrote:The posters above demonstrate an appalling lack of basic thinking skills.
The observation than an elite athlete uses Olympic-style weightlifting proves NOTHING about how well such lifts "work." One's level of performance is the result of many factors, the most important of which is not training at all, but genetics. It is also impossible to infer the impact of any one training element from among all the other elements included in an athlete's overall regimen. For all you know, the inclusion of Olympic lifts might have harmed the athlete's performance. The only way to measure the direct impact of a training activity on performance is to undertake a well-controlled study on a statistically significant number of subjects. Observations about how elite athletes tend to train fall FAR short of this standard.
Statements by elite athletes and coaches are worse than worthless as evidence. Such statements only prove that the people who made them are full of opinions, not that their opinions are of any value.
To conflate weight training in general with Olympic lifting in particular as "seinfeld rerun junkie" did is so crass an error that it warrants no clarification. That's just disgraceful.
I'm done repeating myself and expounding on what should be obvious to anyone apart from an outright idiot. I'll let you guys get back to posting uneducated, illogical nonsense, spreading misinformation and misleading others.
Easy there. I never mentioned any elite athletes. All I said was that they worked for me in obtaining my individual goals. Sorry?
Just out of curiosity, are you speaking from experience on whether or not Olympic lifting helped you or harmed you personally? Or is this just your best guess? If they did have a negative impact, feel free to elaborate to help the OP out.
Did you also change how you trained when you moved down to the 800? If so, how did you isolate weight lifting as being the factor that helped or helped the most?
If you're so logical and educated, please cite your information when you say that it is useless.
seinfeld rerun junkie wrote:
Enough Ignorance wrote:The posters above demonstrate an appalling lack of basic thinking skills.
One of them certainly does
read: you
The observation than an elite athlete uses Olympic-style weightlifting proves NOTHING about how well such lifts "work."
As opposed to the observation of an anonymous message board idiot like yourself
It is also impossible to infer the impact of any one training element from among all the other elements included in an athlete's overall regimen.
Mo Farah went to Salazar and started doing extensive weight training. His mileage remained the same. He now has amazing finishing speed. Connect the dots.
For all you know, the inclusion of Olympic lifts might have harmed the athlete's performance.
Yes, going from good european athlete to world record breaker (coe), or also-ran among the africans (who do no weights) to double olympic / world champion / european 1500 record holder (farah) is definite evidence against the usefulness of weights
The only way to measure the direct impact of a training activity on performance is to undertake a well-controlled study on a statistically significant number of subjects.
No
Start doing weights. Change nothing else. If you get faster, there's your proof.
See: Coe, Farah, many others
Observations about how elite athletes tend to train fall FAR short of this standard.
Nope
Statements by elite athletes and coaches are worse than worthless as evidence.
Nope
Such statements only prove that the people who made them are full of opinions, not that their opinions are of any value.
Statements made by anonymous message board idiots like yourself who argue against the observable evidence of athletes contradicting their opinion only shows that they are idiots and should be ignored
To conflate weight training in general with Olympic lifting in particular as "seinfeld rerun junkie" did is so crass an error that it warrants no clarification. That's just disgraceful.
To put words in my mouth is disgraceful.
I'm done repeating myself
thank god
I'll let you guys get back to posting uneducated, illogical nonsense, spreading misinformation and misleading others.
hahahahahahahaha
This has to be the best display of lacking thinking skills of any other post in this thread.
Do you really think the only thing that changed in Mo's training was weight lifting?
So, AlSal is nothing but a strength coach huh?
Laughable.
poster 452 wrote:
This has to be the best display of lacking thinking skills of any other post in this thread.
Do you really think the only thing that changed in Mo's training was weight lifting?
So, AlSal is nothing but a strength coach huh?
Laughable.
imbecile
Salazar said: ‘When Mo came to me 18 months ago, he was a skinny distance runner with a great engine but no upper body. At the end of races, he would tire and his head would bob around and his arms would flail.
‘He was the weakest athlete I’d ever trained — in terms of core strength and being able to do push-ups, sit-ups and single-leg squats. He was a 90lb weakling.
‘The No 1 thing that has helped Mo is not the 110 miles a week he puts in on the road, but the seven hours a fortnight in the gym.’
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/olympics/article-2187860/Mo-Farah-weakest-athlete-Ive-seen-says-coach-Alberto-Salazar.htmltwit wrote:
Did you also change how you trained when you moved down to the 800? If so, how did you isolate weight lifting as being the factor that helped or helped the most?
Yup, of course my training changed a lot. Mileage dropped dramatically (from 90ish to 25ish), and focused on a ton of quality work with very little easy mileage. The weight room was just as big a focus for me as my running. I don't think lifting was the only thing that helped me, and I'm not even sure if it was the biggest impact. But I'm as close to positive as I could be that it helped me personally a ton.
Again, this worked for me, but everyone has different goals and responds differently to certain stimulus.