Re: Prilepin's Table & Supertraining?

[Guest guest]

>

> I have heard two different versions of how the table

> was developed. The first version states that Prilepin

> collected data from the training logs of more than

> 1000 World, Olympic, National and European

> weightlifting champions (sometimes this version just

> mentions Russian lifters) and the table represents a

> consensus of training practices. The second version

> is that he conducted experiments with junior lifters

> and then applied his results to national team members

> in developing the table.

>

> Like much of the Russian " field work " of that era,

> there does not seem to be any data on what was done or

> how the conclusions were reached. No one ever cites

> anything published about the use or development of the

> table, just the table itself.

>

> Does anyone know what the real story is?

>

> People apply the table to non-Olympic lifts even

> though everyone seems to acknowledge that the table

> was based off of Olympic lifts. There never seems to

> be a clear statement that Prilepin or other Russian

> weightlifting coaches applied the table to non-Olympic

> lifts. I find this odd since my understanding of

> Russian training at the time (70's and 80's) was that

> it involved a lot of ancillary lifts at least compared

> to the subsequent Bulgarian approach. One would think

> then that ancillary lift rep/set/weight schemes would

> have been addressed directly.

>

> Jon Haddan

> Irvine, CA

>

********** Prilepin's table and how it was acquired in in one of the back

issues of the Soviet sports review. From what i recall it was at the " half power

point " in other words when the lifts began to drop in power output by half that

set the limit on the number of reps and sets

This was a very crude yardstick for work capacity as it was group data from a

wide range of individuals covering a series of exercises. A tendo unit and

individualization would proof much more useful.

Green

Lompoc, CA