A case for Box Squatting and Football

[Guest guest]

.Hall@C... wrote:

> IMO, Olympic lifting has it's place in football training, but it is not the

> end-all-be-all that many SC's make it out to be. As with the Westside

> methods, all multijoint exercises can be done explosively if trained with

> moderate loads and with compensatory acceleration. The reason I say this

> is because Olympic lifts are sport skills, requiring a high level of

> coaching and low intensity skill practice. Given the horrible track record

> of US Olympic lifting, your ability to find outstanding instruction on the

> classic lifts may prove difficult.

>

> Notice that your team's best power cleans are probably held by your best

> athletes. For example, at Texas A & M University, the 2nd highest PC on the

> team is a 365 pound effort by a 207 pound strong safety. Is the SS the

> strongest player on the team? No, but he is an incredible athlete with

> great balance and power. Does this mean he is a great player? No, simply

> a great athlete with a strong clean.

>

> I think having your less athletic players, such as interior lineman,

> spending endless hours on the Olympic lifts is a mistake. Have them

> perform high pulls along with box squats, on their dynamic effort day, but

> focus on goodmorning, squats, deadlifts off boxes, etc on their maximum

> effort days. Also recall that football is not played in the vertical

> plane. Finally, I have read that triple extension movements, such as the

> clean, can cause low back porblems when technique breaks down. Again, in

> your off-season or in-season training, do you have time to make sure that

> 100 players are cleaning with proper technique? Box squats are easier to

> teach. Spending endless hours working on perfecting clean and snatch

> technique will be better spent learning to box squat explosively and

> working very hard on compound movements.

>

> Hall

> Southlake, TX

made some very accurate points about the time commitments

required to develop proper clean and snatch technique. However, I

feel the if a coach has the time and knows what good technique is,

the snatch and clean and jerk are the most beneficial lifts a

football player can do, regardless of their position.

I recall that in past posts there was a debate over who would be

faster in a 20 yd. dash: a 100 m gold medalist or a gold medal

weightlifter. The only reason why the Olympic lifts are not the " end-

all-be-all " is that many strength coaches don't have or won't commit

the time and/or don't have the knowledge to teach the olympic lifts

properly.

[Why do many try to make teaching the Olympic lifts sound like the sporting

equivalent of " rocket science " ? This really is a serious exaggeration of

the situation and, if the coach has been well taught, there is no reason why

he/she cannot teach a competent power clean and power snatch in one workout.

The full clean and jerk or push jerk require a little more time, as does the

overhead squat, leading into the full snatch. Every single person who has

attended my Strength Camps has learned the Olympic lifts in less than a day,

and I am by no means unique in teaching the Olympic lifts that rapidly. Anyhow,

there rarely is any need for the average athlete to learn the classical lifts,

because the many variants based upon the clean, snatch and jerk are more than

enough to provide a huge repertoire of training exercises. Mel Siff]

Gee Roe

Winter Haven, FL

* Don't forget to sign all letters with full name and city of residence if

you wish them to be published!

[Guest guest]

.Hall@... wrote:

<IMO, Olympic lifting has its place in football training, but it is not the

end-all-be-all that

many SC's make it out to be. As with the Westside methods, all multijoint

exercises can be

done explosively if trained with moderate loads and with compensatory

acceleration...>

This ignores the whole concept of muscle rate of force development (RFD)

and its implications to the biomechanical specificity of training

(Principle of Dynamic Correspondence - see the " Supertraining " textbook).

Whether

an exercise can be performed " explosively " or fast is irrelevant to the

actual training response. Rather, it is the timing and amplitude of

motion when muscle RFD occurs that results in specific neuromuscular

adaptations responsible for a velocity training effect (Behm & Sale

1993, Enoka 1979, Moss et al. 1997).

<The reason I say this is because Olympic lifts are sport skills, requiring a

high level of

coaching and low intensity skill practice. Given the horrible track record of

US Olympic

lifting, your ability to find outstanding instruction on the classic lifts may

prove difficult.>

What do you mean by horrible track record? US weightlifters performance

in international competition cannot be gauged solely on technique

performance and training analysis. Other factors such as talent

identification and federal support monies have to be considered. Have

you ever been to a national level weightlifting meet? You may want to

watch lifters like Pete Kelley, Tara Nott, and Buster Bourgeois before

making degrading remarks towards their technical abilities. The lack of

technical instruction available should not be an excuse not to do

weightlifting related movements. For coaches interested in learning to

perform the lifts, they should contact Fleschler at USAW regarding

the Sports Performance Coach course.

<I think having your less athletic players, such as interior lineman, spending

endless

hours on the Olympic lifts is a mistake. Have them perform high pulls along

with box

squats, on their dynamic effort day, but focus on goodmorning, squats, deadlifts

off

boxes, etc on their maximum effort days. Also recall that football is not

played in the

vertical plane. >

And how do you propose that box squats will train movement in other

planes better than weightlifting? This argument is also irrelevant.

The purpose of training in the weight room to attain metabolic and/or

neuromuscular adaptations that cannot be done on the practice field.

For all ground based sports, force must be applied to the ground to have

motion (whether horizontal or vertical). This is trained in the weight

room by increasing neuromuscular activation and rate of activation

resulting in higher forces and RFD.

<Finally, I have read that triple extension movements, such as the clean, can

cause low

back problems when technique breaks down. Again, in your off-season or

in-season

training, do you have time to make sure that 100 players are cleaning with

proper

technique? Box squats are easier to teach. >

Any exercise performed incorrectly can result in low back (or upper

back, shoulder, knee, muscle, etc.) problems. Do you have time to make

sure your players are bench pressing properly and spotting correctly?

Do you have time to make sure that they are squatting correctly? All

exercises have technique considerations, which should be the

responsiblity of the strength & conditioning coach to ensure the

athletes are performing properly.

Loren Chiu

Human Performance Laboratories

The University of Memphis

Memphis, TN

* Don't forget to sign all letters with full name and city of residence if

you wish them to be published!

[Guest guest]

Hall wrote:

Third world nations, some of whom can not feed and clothe their own

citizens, beat the pants off the world's wealthiest and most results

driven

nation. Talent identification and lack of federal funding is an excuse

and

a cop out. The training and living conditions enjoyed by the average US

club lifter blow away the average lifestyle of Bulgarian or Iranian

champion. A recent article written by Randal Strossen, who spent a

month

with the Bulgars, stated team members rarely even enjoyed a meal of

animal

protein because the grocery stores were empty. US lifters enjoy a

better

lifestyle, better medical care, and based on your statements, quite

effective coaching. So why is it?

There are three reasons why the failure is so pronounced: One, they

aren't

strong enough OR two, their technique is poor OR three, their training

methods stink. Pick one. Regardless, I do not have to see the product,

only look at the scorecard when World's or the Olympics roll around.

Casler writes:

Hi , I think you missed the " main " reason.

They can make a couple million a year playing football or professional

wrestling or barely make ends meet competing in Weightlifting.

Regards,

A. Casler

TRI-VECTOR 3-D Force Systems

Century City, CA

[Guest guest]

Hall wrote:

> A REPLY TO LOREN CHIU:

>

> Thank you for your thoughts on my response to the question of using Olympic

> lifts as training tools for football. Please review my post....you will

> see that I never once said that Olympic lifts do not have their place, but

> quite simply, they are not the magic bullet that a portion of the S & C

> community makes them out to be. You will even note that I stated that high

> pulls (clean grip, snatch grip, from the hang, etc), should be used.

>

> The original discussion involves the training of high school football players.

> Most high schools don't have S & C coaches. Furthermore, most HS football

> programs, with 100 athletes and a very limited amount of time to train, are

> better served centering their training around things other than the snatch

> and clean. (Pulls and squats are easier to teach. There is not such a

> fine line between good and poor technique. Football players suffer a huge

> amount of wrist and hand injuries, thus making racking of a clean

> difficult.) Explosive power can be developed with box squats and pulls.

> (To your point, the feet on applying force to the floor. ) The players

> will learn them faster, have more success, and be more enthused with their

> training.

, you advocate the use of " pulls " as opposed to the full snatch

or clean; from my experience the pull, in the clean or snatch, is by

far the most technically difficult part (I have yet to perfect it).

After the pull, all that is needed to complete the lift is a simple

front squat or overhead squat.

By the way high school is where I learned how to clean and snatch,

albeit from a very knowledgeable and dedicated coach.

>

> I cannot argue with you regarding the BEST way to do things, your

> professional expertise should dictate otherwise. However, if you consider

> that most high school football coaches are also busy coaching wrestling,

> soccer, track, baseball, etc during the football off-season period, and

> most of their athletes are duel sport participants, instruction time is

> limited. Furthermore, most States strictly limit the amount of time that

> can be spent in winter conditioning. As an engineer, I know that what

> always works in the lab doesn't always work in the field.

>

> " But since you brought it up..... "

>

> Let's talk about USA Olympic weightlifting. You have run to their defense

> because I stated that the top coaching in the US may be difficult to find.

> Thus you have opened Pandora's Box. When was the last time a US male

> lifter won an Olympic medal? A gold medal? How about a world record is

> men's weightlifting? USA Weightlifting's performance record is an

> embarrassment. No one should ever site USAW as a model to do anything.

> Why would one look to USAW as a guide to train football players when they

> fail to keep their own house in order?

>

> Third world nations, some of whom can not feed and clothe their own

> citizens, beat the pants off the world's wealthiest and most results driven

> nation. Talent identification and lack of federal funding is an excuse and

> a cop out. The training and living conditions enjoyed by the average US

> club lifter blow away the average lifestyle of Bulgarian or Iranian

> champion. A recent article written by Randal Strossen, who spent a month

> with the Bulgars, stated team members rarely even enjoyed a meal of animal

> protein because the grocery stores were empty. US lifters enjoy a better

> lifestyle, better medical care, and based on your statements, quite

> effective coaching. So why is it?

>

> There are three reasons why the failure is so pronounced: One, they aren't

> strong enough OR two, their technique is poor OR three, their training

> methods stink. Pick one. Regardless, I do not have to see the product,

> only look at the scorecard when World's or the Olympics roll around.

I offer you a fourth possibility why the United States is not an

international competitor in Olympic lifting. I you were a top

caliber athlete in the United States which sport would you play:

Football, Basketball, Baseball, Golf, etc. etc., or Weightlifting. I

can guarantee that one would make a whole lot more money by playing

football than by becoming an Olympic weightlifter. I don't think

there are many other countries in the world with so many options as

to which sport one can participate in.

[Couple that with the fact that many schools actively ban weightlifting and

that many authorities claim that weightlifting is especially dangerous,

despite the fact that there are far more injuries among most other

school sports, especially football, basketball, soccer and hockey. Can you

imagine how good Americans would be in football, basketball and baseball if

they could only start practising these sports after high school? Mel Siff]

Gee Roe

Winter Haven, FL

[Guest guest]

.Hall@... wrote:

< Thank you for your thoughts on my response to the question of using

Olympic lifts as training tools for football. Please review my

post....you will see that I never once said that olympic lifts do not

have their place, but quite simply, they are not the magic bullet that a

portion of the S & C community makes them out to be. You will even note

that I stated that high pulls (clean grip, snatch grip, from the hang,

etc), should be used.>

There is greater risk of error in performing pulls than there is in

performing power snatches/cleans. When errors are made during the pull,

they prevent the lifter from successfully completing the lift. The act

or racking the bar (either on shoulders or above the head) ensures a

modicum of appropriate technique.

< The original discussion involves the training of high school football

players. Most high schools don't have S & C coaches. Furthermore, most HS

football programs, with 100 athletes and a very limited amount of time

to train, are better served centering their training around things other

than the snatch and clean. (Pulls and squats are easier to teach.

There is not such a fine line between good and poor technique. Football

players suffer a huge amount of wrist and hand injuries, thus making

racking of a clean difficult. ) Explosive power can be developed with

box squats and pulls. (To your point, the feet on applying force to the

floor. ) The players will learn them faster, have more success, and be

more enthused with their training.>

It is not the power output that is the concern with training though.

The external movement kinematics and kinetics have nothing to do with

the training effect. It is the neuromuscular contribution that results

in adaptation. The use of resistance training for strength and

conditioning goes beyond just lifting heavy weights or moving loads

quickly. There are motor learning and control issues that are perhaps

more important, particularly for athletes at young ages (high school age

and even younger). If one says that speed squats are as good as

cleans/snatches, one can then make the argument that explosive leg

presses are just as good (and perhaps safer ?!?). There is nothing

wrong with squats as an exercise, they are great for improving strength

and power. However, cleans/snatches, while improving strength and

power, have other beneficial adaptations that cannot be gained by doing

squats.

< I can not argue with you regarding the BEST way to do things, your

professional expertise should dictate otherwise. However, if you

consider that most high school football coaches are also busy coaching

wrestling, soccer, track, baseball, etc during the football off-season

period, and most of their athletes are duel sport participants,

instruction time is limited. Furthermore, most states strictly limit

the amount of time that can be spent in winter conditioning. As an

engineer, I know that what always works in the lab doesn't always work

in the field.>

This is a concern in virtually all levels of sport. NCAA rules are very

strict as well. However, a competent coach is able to address these

issues. Perhaps Burkhardt (S & C coach at UC Irvine) can tell us how

he has taught his many athletes over the years to perform snatches and

cleans (as well as the conditions that he has done so under). If a

coach does not want to take the time to learn to perform/teach the

lifts, that is their decision. However, as Mel has pointed out, there

are many many coaches who can teach an individual to perform a snatch or

clean in a single day.

Regarding USAWs " horrible track record. " I won't sit here and defend

USAW as an organization, particularly since I'm not a member (I'm a

member of the Canadian WL Federation). Your comments however attack

every coach and athlete in the US. You're comments are ignorant,

particularly if you base them off of Strossen's opinion pieces. It is

easy for the armchair critic to attack USAW (or any other sport, coach

or athete for that matter), particularly when they aren't involved in

the sport and don't have to deal with the day to day issues that arise

for the athletes and coaches in the sport. I teach my undergraduate

students to get their facts straight and write based on supporting

evidence and not opinion. I would expect all educated individuals to do

the same.

How many national meets have you attended, which weightlifting coaches

do you frequently communicate with, and/or what research have you done

to support your statements that US lifters aren't strong enough, have

poor technique or have poor training methods? These are unsustantiated

statements and do not explain the lack of medals garnered by US lifters.

The armchair critics won't admit it, but maybe there are social and

cultural issues that are at least partially responsible for the

performances.

Loren Chiu

Human Performance Laboratories

The University of Memphis

Memphis, TN

[Guest guest]

Loren Chiu writes:

> It is not the power output that is the concern with training though.

> The external movement kinematics and kinetics have nothing to do with

> the training effect. 

**** Loren, do you agree with the principle of dynamic correspondence as

described in Dr. Siff's Supertraining? If I understand correctly, it seems

some aspects of this principle are associated with the kinematics and

kinetics of the sport skill.

> It is the neuromuscular contribution that results

> in adaptation.  The use of resistance training for strength and

> conditioning goes beyond just lifting heavy weights or moving loads

> quickly.  There are motor learning and control issues that are perhaps

> more important, particularly for athletes at young ages (high school age

> and even younger).  If one says that speed squats are as good as

> cleans/snatches, one can then make the argument that explosive leg

> presses are just as good (and perhaps safer ?!?).

**** Would you mind elaborating on this point. I don't follow the

progression from speed squats to explosive leg presses.

> There is nothing wrong with squats as an exercise, they are great for

> improving strength and power.  However, cleans/snatches, while improving

> strength and power, have other beneficial adaptations that cannot be gained by

doing

> squats.

**** I attended Dr. Siff and Louie ' workshop in Las Vegas after the NSCA

conference this year. During the lecture, Louie mentioned some numbers for his

Westside lifters doing box squats with bands. For example, one of his

lifters did a box squat with bands so that at the bottom of the lift there

was 500 lbs of load on the lifter and then at the top of the lift there was

700 lbs of load due to the increase in band tension. Louie said they

electronically

timed the eccentric action to be 0.53 seconds and the concentric action to be

0.57

seconds. When Louie was mentioning this I was thinking I might like to do

my thesis on a comparative study between box squatting with bands and cleans.

I was tossing around the idea of using force plates and EMG to compare the

two. In the back of my mind, I guess I'm curious if box squatting can be

another way of increasing RFD and improving neuromuscular contribution. I

personally would rather coach cleans and perform cleans myself.

Nevertheless, I'm interested in the data. Any comments will be greatly

appreciated.

Thanks,

Gabe Rinaldi

Los Altos, CA

* Don't forget to sign all letters with full name and city of residence

if you wish them to be published!

[Guest guest]

<Loren Chiu>

<It is not the power output that is the concern with training though.

The external movement kinematics and kinetics have nothing to do with

the training effect.>

Gabe Rinaldi

**** Loren, do you agree with the principle of dynamic correspondence as

described in Dr. Siff's Supertraining? If I understand correctly, it

seems some aspects of this principle are associated with the kinematics

and kinetics of the sport skill.

LZFC reply:

The principle of dynamic correspondence describes the biomechanical

aspect of specificity well. However, the underlying biomechanics of

motion go deeper than the external or " mechanical " kinematics and

kinetics. There is a large difference between the biomechanical

parameters of the motion and the actual neuromuscular activation.

As an example, take the example of a half squat under two conditions.

Condition 1, the load is relatively heavy (eg. 90% 1RM). Condition 2,

the load is relatively small (eg. 30% 1RM). Under both conditions the

neuromuscular apparatus is activated quickly (ie. the rate of EMG

development [Komi 1998] and the muscle RFD) and maximally (ie. the peak

force and time at peak force). Therefore, the independent variable is

the conditions, and the controlled variable is the activation of the

neuromuscular apparatus. If I then choose velocity of movement as my

dependent variable, it's obvious that the relatively small load is moved

faster than the relatively heavy load.

If you look at the reference Moss et al. (1997), you'll see that there

are similar adaptations to either condition (even though the external

movement velocity is different). So when identifying the biomechanical

parameters, it is important to view a task at the gross level as well as

at the cellular (muscle) level.

<Loren Chiu>

< It is the neuromuscular contribution that results in adaptation. The

use of resistance training for strength and conditioning goes beyond

just lifting heavy weights or moving loads quickly. There are motor

learning and control issues that are perhaps more important,

particularly for athletes at young ages (high school age and even

younger). If one says that speed squats are as good as cleans/snatches,

one can then make the argument that explosive leg presses are just as

good (and perhaps safer ?!?).>

Gabe Rinaldi

**** Would you mind elaborating on this point. I don't follow the

progression from speed squats to explosive leg presses.

LZFC reply:

This statement was facetious. It is the type of logic the average

H.I.T. person follows in that machine exercises look similar to free

weight and therefore the same benefits can occur with less danger (due

to the fixed path). If one believes that all you have to do is lift

heavy weights or move loads quickly, this is the type of logic that

would follow. There are greater issues involved with strength and

conditioning than just these two parameters.

Gabe Rinaldi

**** I attended Dr. Siff and Louie ' workshop in Las Vegas after

the NSCA conference this year. During the lecture, Louie mentioned

some numbers for his Westside lifters doing box squats with bands. For

example, one of his lifters did a box squat with bands so that at the

bottom of the lift there was 500 lbs of load on the lifter and then at

the top of the lift there was 700 lbs of load due to the increase in

band tension. Louie said they electronically timed the eccentric

action to be 0.53 seconds and the concentric action to be 0.57

seconds. When Louie was mentioning this I was thinking I might like to

do my thesis on a comparative study between box squatting with bands and

cleans.

LZFC reply:

That's interesting info. However, it goes back to the idea that one can

only lift heavy and lift fast. One question I have is how long of an

" isometric " period is there during the box squat (which would be easy to

measure with a switch mat and a timer). Another question is at what

point in the range of motion does the peak RFD occur. Also, does the

time at peak force parallel that which occurs in sporting movements (see

Garhammer & Gregor 1992).

Loren Chiu

Human Performance Laboratories

The University of Memphis

Memphis, TN

[Guest guest]

,

Thanks for your comments. I wasn't able to locate the full text for these

studies. If you or anyone else has access to the full-text online, then

would you mind forwarding a copy to me? If not, I guess a trip to

Stanford's Medical Library is in order.

Komi 1998

Moss 1997

Garhammer and Gregor 1992

I'm including the discussion below to put these references into context in

case anyone has access to the full-text. Thanks again and sorry to take up

bandwidth with the request.

Gabe Rinaldi

Los Altos, CA

> LZFC reply:

> The principle of dynamic correspondence describes the biomechanical

> aspect of specificity well.  However, the underlying biomechanics of

> motion go deeper than the external or " mechanical " kinematics and

> kinetics.  There is a large difference between the biomechanical

> parameters of the motion and the actual neuromuscular activation.

>

> As an example, take the example of a half squat under two conditions.

> Condition 1, the load is relatively heavy (eg. 90% 1RM).  Condition 2,

> the load is relatively small (eg. 30% 1RM).  Under both conditions the

> neuromuscular apparatus is activated quickly (ie. the rate of EMG

> development [Komi 1998] and the muscle RFD) and maximally (ie. the peak

> force and time at peak force).  Therefore, the independent variable is

> the conditions, and the controlled variable is the activation of the

> neuromuscular apparatus.  If I then choose velocity of movement as my

> dependent variable, it's obvious that the relatively small load is moved

> faster than the relatively heavy load.

>

> If you look at the reference Moss et al. (1997), you'll see that there

> are similar adaptations to either condition (even though the external

> movement velocity is different).  So when identifying the biomechanical

> parameters, it is important to view a task at the gross level as well as

> at the cellular (muscle) level.

>

> <Loren Chiu>

> < It is the neuromuscular contribution that results in adaptation.  The

> use of resistance training for strength and conditioning goes beyond

> just lifting heavy weights or moving loads quickly.  There are motor

> learning and control issues that are perhaps more important,

> particularly for athletes at young ages (high school age and even

> younger).  If one says that speed squats are as good as cleans/snatches,

> one can then make the argument that explosive leg presses are just as

> good (and perhaps safer ?!?).>

>

> Gabe Rinaldi

> **** Would you mind elaborating on this point.   I don't follow the

> progression from speed squats to explosive leg presses.

>

> LZFC reply:

> This statement was facetious.  It is the type of logic the average

> H.I.T. person follows in that machine exercises look similar to free

> weight and therefore the same benefits can occur with less danger (due

> to the fixed path).  If one believes that all you have to do is lift

> heavy weights or move loads quickly, this is the type of logic that

> would follow.  There are greater issues involved with strength and

> conditioning than just these two parameters.

>

> Gabe Rinaldi

> **** I attended Dr. Siff and Louie ' workshop in Las Vegas after

> the NSCA conference this year.   During the lecture, Louie mentioned

> some numbers for his Westside lifters doing box squats with bands.   For

> example, one of his lifters did a box squat with bands so that at the

> bottom of the lift there was 500 lbs of load on the lifter and then at

> the top of the lift there was 700 lbs of load due to the increase in

> band tension.   Louie said they electronically timed the eccentric

> action to be 0.53 seconds and the concentric action to be 0.57

> seconds.   When Louie was mentioning this I was thinking I might like to

> do my thesis on a comparative study between box squatting with bands and

> cleans.

>

> LZFC reply:

> That's interesting info.  However, it goes back to the idea that one can

> only lift heavy and lift fast.  One question I have is how long of an

> " isometric " period is there during the box squat (which would be easy to

> measure with a switch mat and a timer).  Another question is at what

> point in the range of motion does the peak RFD occur.  Also, does the

> time at peak force parallel that which occurs in sporting movements (see

> Garhammer & Gregor 1992).

>

> Loren Chiu

> Human Performance Laboratories

> The University of Memphis

> Memphis, TN

>

[Guest guest]

Gabe Rinaldi

> Thanks for your comments. I wasn't able to locate the full text for these

> studies. If you or anyone else has access to the full-text online, then

> would you mind forwarding a copy to me? If not, I guess a trip to

> Stanford's Medical Library is in order.

> Komi 1998

> Moss 1997

> Garhammer and Gregor 1992

Komi 1998 is in the Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on

Weightlifting and Strength Training (ed. Hakkinen). Moss 1997 is in the

European Journal of Applied Physiology which is available online at:

http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00421/tocs.htm

although an individual or institutional subscription is required.

Garhammer and Gregor 1992 is in the Journal of Applied Sports Science

Research (now Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research) and

available online to NSCA members at:

http://nsca.allenpress.com

Loren Chiu

Human Performance Laboratories

The University of Memphis

Memphis, TN