For the past few months, I have been corresponding with an experienced European shot put coach (who shall remain unidentified, so don't ask), asking him questions and getting his comments on a variety of issues.  I have decided to post a selection of his responses to me that some of you might find interesting or thought provoking.  Some are quite specific to shot putting, while others would apply to a variety of throwing events.  He even makes a few comments specifically about training for the Highland Games, although he is obviously not an expert on the finer points of such training. 

Please understand that this is not an article written as a single piece, but the result of an ongoing dialogue of questions and comments, followed by a reply, followed by follow-up questions and additional comments, etc.

[With respect to the “Timmermann on Shot Put” document]
 
This programme you refer to is probably correct in
most of its parameters.  Whether it was used for the
Seoul Olympics I'm not sure.  It does look like the
weightlifting scheme many DDR throwers used with a few
changes here and there.  The repetitions and sets used
are correct.
 
I'm not sure about the shotput training though, I have
seen other things done with the shot that are not
there, like light shot training ,weightvest training and
sprinting.
 
The weightlifting programme was a hybrid between a
traditional weightlifting programme and a special
exercise regime, meaning that every exercise used was
there to resemble as much as possible a certain part
of the throw the trainers thought was very important.
The behind the neck jerk was used to strengthen the
blocking leg (this leg came to the front for the
jerk), to make the legs/hips explosive and to keep the
arm, shoulder back when throwing.  So a front jerk for
example would destroy the last point and would be less
effective.
 
The squat was replaced by the half squat because it
was more effective in making the legs work as in the
throw.  If the thrower needed more general leg work, he
would also perform full squats, but this surely wasn't
Timmermann's case.  The critical point here is time
under tension.  When doing full squats, no matter how
fast you squat, it is a long process.  The brain has to
understand it has to be as quick as possible and this
is better done with half squats, even if they are so
heavy that the extension takes the same time as the
full squat!  And if done intensely, they can only be
done once a week, twice is too much.  If you have room
for recovery, use it for throwing.  
 
Weights were used to stimulate and imitate, the training
sessions weren't endless, only short and powerful.  
Front squats are great for the quads, but they injure the wrists
and don't hit the back, so they are a less productive
exercise left for those that have very strong backs
but lack quad strength.
 
For bench pressing, everything that I said about
squatting is true here too, so it was done with a pad
and a bounce to make it explosive and done with the
block leg on top of the bench and the back leg down on
the ground pushing to resemble the last part of the
throw.
 
The snatch has its place in training for 2 reasons:
It's the athletic movement with the most power output
along with shotputting, and if used correctly it can
engage the hip muscles which are the most important
muscles for throwing in a very explosive way.  The first
reason is useless to a shotputter, because he shotputts daily.
So, the trainers came up with a variation that
used the hips very explosively.  
 
Timmermann's style was a style
of throwing that needed very strong legs and hips and
light upper body that only transferred the power, sort
of like in weightlifting.  Now, Timmermann was a rower
before becoming a thrower and 2 things happened: 
He was already doing snatches and was very strong at them
so he got too strong and got injured by them in the wrists and
doing them differently and could not do the hip snatch correctly.
 
The weird jump he was doing was nothing other than a
variation that used the hips and back more AND
resembled the very start of the throw where he coils
and uncoils and springs to the toeboard!  It was a
weird kangaroo jump and he was strong, so high reps
were the deal or he would injure himself, plus this
was more a weighted drill than a weight exercise, I
think it was performed after throws and not with the
rest of the weightlifting.  Also, remember, from the 
waist down it's ok to add mass, it lowers your center of
gravity and makes your balance better!
 
The upper body in this style is used only as a
lever, to transfer power and release the shot - remember
the era it was about 10-12 years from the drop of the
press from weightlifting.  When weightlifting press was
dropped many things happened the scientists weren't
expecting.  The athletes got a bit better (generally) in
the jerk and a LOT better in the snatch!  A glide
although as a movement resembles the clean and jerk, as
a rhythm resembles the snatch.  IF you succeed and make
it one movement without delay in the middle, all you do
is transfer power from the legs and hips to the bar
and if it's continuous it's very economical!
 
The Germans used the throwers as Formula 1 cars.  They
developed a theory and realized it on them.  Each car is
better than the last because each time a fault of the
former theory was corrected and strong points became
stronger.
 
Beyer was anti-economical and the analogy to a clean
and press, huge power, non continuous movement.  The
result was great but there were many injuries.  If not
for injuries I am sure absolutely he would still own a
WR around 23.60 or so only because he was so strong
and powerful.
 
Timmermann couldn't become stronger but was lighter
so they had to make the glide more like a snatch and
he was perfect for that.  This weight training and theory
isn't for everyone, it was tailored for him only.  There 
was so much more to their training than what's in this
paper and the German scientists always came up with
something new as were their Soviet and other European
counterparts.
 
The key is which of these fit your individual
athlete, do what makes your athletes feel better and
perform better and this, each coach has to learn for
himself because only he can see the athlete.  This is the
quality of a good coach, he's like the chameleon, changes
things around and finds what suits each athlete best.  But what 
Timmermann then produced with Werner Goldmann will
probably be unparalleled...
 
[Regarding Bondarchuk’s training methodologies and
his comments regarding minimum strength levels required
by world-class throwers]
 
Bondarchuk has a very different view from mine on
weight training.  He likes special strength with special
exercises like twists for more reps.  He sets some
numbers in mind and as goals and that's it.  What does
it mean a 160k bench is enough?  That he'll have the
athlete go up to there and not push more?
In my book, in the weight room you go for the personal
record like in the ring.  I don't care if it's for 1 rep
or for 20, you give it 100%.  I agree with Abadjiev
school of thought.  No percentages, no tempo, no loading
and deloading.  100% all the time creates adaptation.
 
A lot of coaches believe in higher reps to relieve the
CNS of the extra tension and give tendons a break.  I
have seen it work in powerlifting exercises but not on
weightlifting exercises.  It could be ok if the athlete
responds well to this kind of programme, as a coach you
have to try and see what's right for every athlete.  I
have said again a good coach is like a good tailor.  The
costume has to be custom made.
 
I do agree some athletes don't need to be extra strong
to throw far, nevertheless you have to make them as
strong as possible.
 
 
[Regarding possible stagnation from the continual use of 
near-maximum weights and the importance of specific 
training adaptations]
 
There is a vast difference between a simple lift like
the squat and a technical lift like the snatch.
If you lift at more than 90% in the squat for a long
time it might lead to stagnation, and you could
substitute high intensity squat training with high
intensity box squat training or a different exercise
every 2-3 weeks like Simmons advocates.
But you cannot do that with the snatch or the shot or
any technical lift that is based on skill and not
power.  The technical movement is different for each and
every strength percentile, that means that a 80% snatch
isn't a 100% snatch seen on video at 80% of the
playing speed.  Some parts get faster, some don't and the
result is that the body adapts to a different exercise
altogether!!!  This is why the Bulgarian system is so
successful, because the athletes train the way they
compete.
 
Training sessions are a rehearsal for meet day
first, then a preparatory stage for the meet.
Meet day isn't for doing max singles for the first
time...it could work for squats (I doubt it...the
Eastern Europeans still beat the Westsiders in
squatting, and squatting deep and legally that is) but
it doesn't for snatches or shots.
 
As for weight training and Bondarchuk...it all boils
down on which tool you use and for what.  Bondarchuk
likes to use weight training for explosive training
and special strength training.
Both of those can be accomplished in a much
better way with heavy implements.
A fast bench with 160k moved at 2m/sec cannot (how
can it?) teach the arm of a shotputter to be explosive
because he has to move the shot at 14m/sec...and it
all comes down to training specificity again (the
Bulgarian system).
 
If I have a slow armed shotputter, I have him throw
the 5k and the 6k.  Period.  Moving the arm at 15m/sec
will give you a faster CNS response.  A 8k or 9k will
give you more strength for the shot, much better than a
bench press.
 
The weights for me are hypertrophy and CNS
stimulating tools.  And there is no better tool for
those two than weights.  Hypertrophy comes with 3-5 reps
and CNS stimulation with max attempts.  All done for max
intensity.  Max attempts are the key to adaptation, or
else you either adapt to a useless stimulus or need
too many sets for a non-bodybuilder to create
hypertrophy (no 25 sets per bodypart here).
 
 
[Regarding the design of practice sessions and throwing intensity]
 
The training sessions should resemble a
competition.  This means that there's a
warmup, non-specific and specific with the shot, a
couple of warmup standing throws and then the session
begins.  Depending on the daily goal, it could be
standing throws with a light implement or a heavier
one, the movement might change but after warmups I
expect full intensity throws.
 
The problematic points of the movement are analyzed on
video and viewed and reviewed mentally, shown to the
athlete in another session where we stay just the two
of us inside a room and watch the video.  At the same
time I have him see the problem and ask him then and
there to do the correct movement without an implement
or let's say with throwing a towel wrapped up.  We do
this until what needs to be changed becomes
clear.  Sometimes, we go right away to the ring and
throw a light implement, first to only do the movement
correctly and then do it intensely.  Then I give the
standard implement.  We do it again, starting with the
movement only and adding intensity.
 
A technical change that cannot happen at full
intensity is a useless attempt.  The thrower has to be
able to do this at 100%.  Most of the times, it is
understood and done in the very first training
session, but be aware that I now only work with
advanced athletes.  Nevertheless, it works great too with
less advanced and less kinesthetically aware
athletes.
 
Regarding his earlier comment on the inclusion of box squats
in the lifting rotation]
 
With box squats I refer to the Westside squat which is
a quite good leg exercise.  The other exercise I also refer
to as half squats or bench Squats, as done by the East Germans.
The box squat is a good exercise but should only be
used as an exercise for special purposes such as to
improve reaction or build glute strength.  It has a few major
drawbacks for throwers, one is that at no point during the throw
is there the luxury to lose and regain your center of gravity,
it should always be right over your legs and easy to control
with them and the second is that during the throw there is
no luxury for the glutes and quads/hams to work without
the calf muscles.  We work on our toes and the box squat
might teach you otherwise.  Also, we jump with the quads
and not the glutes because we cannot bend our backs
during jumping and throw at the same time.  And many
more.  The point is that the box squat teaches a
movement never done during throwing.  If you see it
as a good glute exercise fine, but I think the
good morning is better...
 
[Regarding the importance of lifting with maximum intensity
within the desired repetition range]
 
My belief is that the CNS stimulation that happens
with weight training during a max attempt with max
weight is greater than the stimulation during a max
attempt with max power.  I find the need for a maximal
stretch useless if this max stretching does not lead to a
maximum contraction.  Having a maximal myotatic
reflex without a maximal contraction is like teaching the
arm to reverse and start a movement and leaving the job
unfinished.  Unless the weight is maximal, a maximal
contraction following a maximal stretching will lead
the athlete to release the weight, thus leading to the
need of bands or something similar that do defeat the
purpose of weight training for throws!  Because we
train to accelerate a given weight and not keep a given
speed for an increasing weight as leverages get favourable.
I agree with most DDR findings but they are not gospel
to me.
 
[Regarding the disadvantages of using full squats during the
pre-competitive period]
 
The problem for me with using full squats during the
last 3 months before competition is that I have seen
again and again that it slows the throwers down.  The
quads should not wait for a full stretch or for help
from the glutes or hams in order to fire.  Never will
this ever happen during a throw.
 
I have played many times with the idea of training my
throwers from the waist down like oversized
jumpers, using half squats, half squat jumps, one leg
jumps to and from boxes, etc.  It's much better than to
train them as weightlifters.  Weightlifters aren't fast
enough to throw.
 
[Regarding huge overhead throw results]
 
Remember, this is a different movement, you don't
have to be a world class shotputter, discus or hammer
thrower to throw big on these.  I personally know of 
3 hammer throwers that have thrown 23m and one
of them threw 65m in the hammer.  Beyer and Gunthoer
certainly never achieved their true max on these as they
had some major back injuries and surgeries...
 
 
[Regarding lifting program design]
 
Generally the top weight is the goal.  Once it's
achieved the workout ends.  Repeating it is worthless
because there's no additional stimulus.  The only reason
would be for me that the last max was done in bad form
and thus I "disqualify" it.
 
The series might look like :
120x3, 150x3, 180x3, 210x3, 230x3, 250x3, 260x3, 
record attempt x3.
 
I always try to increase the level of preparedness of
my athletes and increase the starting weight.  My best
athletes start squatting with 180k.
 
I believe in the conjugate system as a principle, that
is, I rotate exercises.  Every single one of the weight
training exercises covers a weak area, so box squats are
no different.  Of course its use in the rotation would
be once per year for a normal athlete, I use the half
squat, half front squat, step-up, full front squat, full
back squat, lunge, box squat in that order of
importance.
 
I generally avoid exercises where the hands hold a
barbell as they tax the CNS too much, so I prefer the
good morning and hyperextension to any kind of
deadlift.  Remember, I mostly train the shotput.
I also never prescribe "Olympic movements", they have
nothing to offer.  A movement slower than the actual
throw won't make you faster and the lack of a negative
part makes them useless for hypertrophy.  Faster hips
can be achieved with sprinting, standing broad jumps
and overhead throws.  Hypertrophy can be achieved with
good mornings and hyperextensions.  No room for anything
else.  I want none of my throwers to synchronize the hip
extension with an arm pulling and shoulder shrugging motion.
The only "Olympic” movement I use is the jerk, which is a
great movement for the legs mostly.
 
 
[Regarding the use of “Dynamic Effort” lifting for throwers]
 
You assumed right, a "dynamic" effort day is useless to
a thrower, any kind of weight training cannot make you
move faster than the actual throw.  If one needs to be
faster, then more light throws are in order and even
more heavy throws.  More throws in general I'd say.
 
[Recommendations regarding the use of squat jumps
and step-ups]
 
Half squat jumps are used in the last 2-3 weeks before
a major competition, they activate the CNS very
well, too well I could say so they lead to overtraining
very quickly, at least for us heavier throwers.  A
typical regimen would be 5-7 sets of 3-4 reps with
between 50-100% of bodyweight.
 
Step-ups are also very good for that period of time.  I
have most of my gliding shotputters do lunges for the
right leg and step-ups for the left, blocking leg the
last 2 weeks.  Then I only care for special strength.  I
have the athletes step loudly on the step, I want to
hear a big sound and a quick load that resembles the
block.
 
 
[Explanation of why he moved away from using most Olympic
lifts in his advanced shot put training programs]
 
Training knowledge is dynamic.  I abandoned
Olympic lifts totally because I figured something's
wrong about them but couldn’t put my finger on it.
These lifts are usually good enough only for beginners
to understand that the power comes from the legs and
to teach the legs to push.
It was a time I believed in no plyos of any kind and
still don't think highly of them, but they do have a
small place in the conjugate system.
 
I was always very careful of their CNS stimulating and
fatiguing properties and only appreciating their
special strength properties.
I also valued them for much different
reasons than the usual.  Because they resembled a
throwing stance, because of the leg reaction after the
catch and because of the overall power production
properties, not because they teach you to be “fast"...
In the meantime I found much better tools for my work.
 
I also hate the idea of confusing the athlete (and me)
with teaching them the correct technique.  A mind can do
3 things well, 2 things very well, and 1 thing only
really well.  I only want my athlete’s mind to be
concerned with one technique only and that is of the
shotput.  Olympic movements have to be shown and done
correctly or else they are really counterproductive
and injury inducing.
 
I really like to give a programme to my athletes, watch
their training once and then after that only ask them
to do exercise X for Z sets and Y reps, without expert
supervision.  I really avoid exercises that must be done
technically right or have an inherent danger when the
weight gets very high which will inevitably happen
with my system.
 
To give you an example I might even have my athletes
do step-ups and incline presses on a smith machine with
top end weights in order to avoid any balance loss.  In
the weight room I don't work balance, but mostly prime
movers.
 
The DDR snatch is a variant I still use but as a high
pull without a catch and only as a hip strengthening
exercise.  Useful as a special tool but not the
cornerstone of workouts.
 
If I was to train other throwers my ideas would be
different of course, and I do believe they have a very
important place for the hammer and a good role maybe
for discus and javelin.  But these events don't interest
me much and I spend no time researching for them.
 
[Comments regarding the Highland Games and possible
training differnces compared to the T&F throwing events]
 
Highland games seem very interesting to me. 
The main difference I see is that you have to
completely change the way you handle the ground. 
I would probably favour non-reverse throwing of the
stones and add a lot of deadlifts of all kinds, fast, slow,
low pulls, high pulls, and a lot of special strength training
with the implements.
 
The problem (for me) here is you have to be an
all-around athlete and cannot choose to drop pulling
movements in case you want to be competitive overall.
So a lot of pulling strength and a lot of rotational
torso work would be imperative (the latter also is for
the shot).
 
The main lesson here I believe, as in strongman, is that
you have to train more with the actual implements than
to weight train, as evidenced by inferior athletes of
today performing much better than some monsters of the
past, just because they train the events.  Today's
athletes don't prepare for competition with
bench/deadlift/squat anymore but have actual strongman
equipment gyms.
 
Because of the very heavy nature of Highland Games I
would even toss with the idea of only training the
events first for a couple of months and then add a
basic deadlift/pushpress workout for 10 sets each for
triples once a week and after another couple of months
add another weekly clean & jerk workout for another
10-15 singles.  Basic, all around training stuff.
 
[Regarding whys some form of squat was not included
in the HG training program outlined above]
 
In the programme I gave you, there is a squat, during
the clean and jerk.  It starts from the floor and even
if the bar is caught high after the clean, then do a
front squat before the jerk...a very taxing exercise and
the best single one (I agree with Feuerbach here).
 
[Some follow-up points regarding the use of Olympic lifts]
 
Olympic lifts are something I've changed my mind about
and definitely something  I've given a lot of thought to.  
It's obvious that at the final stages before a big meet I like
more special exercises, or so to say to make basic exercises 
"more  special".
 
It's easy to see that a snatch or clean plays a very
different role for the hammer thrower than it does for the 
shotputter, right?  It's a special exercise, a strengthening 
exercise, an agility exercise even an essential exercise, 
more so if done with a close grip or with the bar next to 
your right or left side instead of to the front.
 
The part about being too dangerous on top weights
doesn't affect them too much, because apart from the 
jerk, you can freely drop the bar any time, a technique 
the athlete has to be shown from day one.
 
[Regarding the use of bands or chains by throwers]
 
As for the use of bands, I believe maximum effort
during the entire range of motion isn't what we're looking
for, it's maximum acceleration.  I'm sure extra slow reps,
or should I say...hmm...0,6,1,6 reps per Poliquin would
result in even more uniform and extreme effort during
the entire lift.  The stretch reflex could be triggered a bit
more with chains and bands but I'm sure it's triggered 
much better if you control the bar half way down and
then just drop it from there on your chest and quickly
reverse the movement...which is something throwers do
for half a century or more...correct?
 
Has Simmons or anyone tried to use the Tendo unit to
see if a 400 pound bench bar is lifted faster by the same
athlete when used in tandem with bands or pressed 
ballistically with a drop and pad?  How do you think the
bar would go up faster?
 
[Regarding the relative importance of bar speed when lifting]
 
I don't care too much about measures of power.
I tell you again, total power is unimportant - it's not
important how long it took for the thrower to take the
shot from point A to point B...it's the velocity that the
shot goes through point B that matters!!!  The shot 
could as well have ups and downs in velocity and the
power might be very high, but the velocity of the shot
when it leaves the hand is what's important!!!
 
[Regarding training to improve speed]
 
My feeling about weight training for being faster is
this:  It does make you faster by making muscles stronger
and their contraction faster.  But throwing is a skill: 
in order to become faster at a skill you have to do
the excact same thing, only faster.  Period.
 
Race car drivers often "train" with a faster car to
improve their reflexes, how useful would it be for a
Formula 1 driver to train using a bus?  Very different
stimulus, very slow speed.  As the stimulus gets nearer
and the speeds are faster, it might help you more...
it's like that with the throws...a jerk might be better than 
a clean and a clean better than a squat, to "teach
you" do the shotput faster than it is, but how can it be
compared to actually throwing the shot at a higher speed?
 
If you drive your car at 100kph and that's your
limit, what could make you go faster?  Something that's
faster than your car that either pulls or pushes you right? 
Anything going at less than 100kph cannot help you go 
faster.  The outside stimulus has to be faster.  I cannot
explain it more or better than this.
 
Runners have someone pull them with an elastic
rope, throwers throw lighter implements, swimmers use
flippers...yet they all weight train for hypertrophy and
strength...not faster skill.
 
[Regarding the use and importance of plyometrics]
 
Plyometrics have value, but it's something the athletes
have a really different and very varying tolerance level to.
Some can get injured and some exhausted by them way
before they become effective.  In general, I've
found the athlete has to be doing them since the initial
training stages, if the athlete's already advanced then they
don't help much.  Only for CNS toning and some limited 
special exercise use perhaps.
 
 uploads/PeterIngleton/2008-04-18_124146_Comments_From_Shot_Put_Coach.doc -  

Peter,

Thanks for posting this.

Rick

I like the article  but disagree with the dynamic effort day.  ryan v would to i think.  those dynamic effort days help me get stronger and since i started doing them last yr  has helped my throws.  

I dont think so Mike B.  Don stewart believes in dynamic effort exercises and i got started on those cause of him.  

Kerry,

I am not sure exactly where I stand on the use of Dynamic Effort ("DE") days myself, at least during the precompetitive and competitive periods.  Certainly, many successful throwers have used DE or timed-sets workouts in the period prior to competitions.  However, this doesn't necessarily prove anything one way or another.

The author's point is that the logic behind their use is, in his opinion, flawed, since throwing the shot and most other implements happens at speeds much greater than that achieved during the DE sets.  As such, how can such sets improve the speed or explosiveness of a thrower?  Notice that the situation is very different when it comes to powerlifting, where DE sets are obviously done much faster than competition singles. 

While I am certainly no expert on powerlifting (or Olympic lifting), I believe that one could make a good argument that many of the finer points of advanced powerlifting training (or Olympic lifting) lose their logic when applied to a thrower, whether they are shot putters or HG athletes.  Especially at more advanced levels, each of these sports is quite different and has quite different specific demands, so some aspect of training that makes perfect sense for one cannot necessarily be applied to the others. 

Another key point to keep in mind is that the author makes it clear that he believes throwing various weights of implements is superior to achieving the specific goal for which DE training is designed.  However, if one's training primarily consists of lifting without much throwing, then it might make a lot of sense to include DE days in your lifting, since these will certainly have relatively more transfer to throwing than max triples.

This brings up an important general principle - a training "system" is a set of exercises or methods that are designed to interact with and support one another.  One cannot take only the aspects of the system you like, discard the rest, and expect the remaining program to have an effect similar to the original.  This is not to say one cannot pick and choose among different methods, or that different athletes do not have different needs, only that one has to be very conscious about how the parts of a system interact and support one another. 

Someone who is throwing six times a week, along with doing some form of jumping twice a week and a bit of sprinting twice a week may well have very different lifting requirements than someone who is lifting three times per week, throwing twice a week, and not doing anything else.

Dynamic Effort days are a must! Dont know what I would do without them. I work just as hard on DE days as I do on max effort days. Gives the CNS a good much needed rest and creates huge amounts of power. Other than that this guy is right on the money I think. Great post Peter!

Josh,

There are indeed a number of superb American shot putters at the moment, and this is consistently a strong event for the US.  The shot competition at the US Olympic Trials is going to be incredible!  Obviously, there are some excellent American throws coaches as well - Art Venegas and Don Babbit come immediately to mind. 

Who this guy is and who he has coached is not that important.  I trust it is obvious that he has a great deal of knowledge and experience.  I have never suggested he was the a better coach than anyone else, or that all of his methods or opinions were necessarily correct.  I have found much of what he has to say interesting or at least thought provoking, and I was quite sure several others would likely feel the same way.   

I found it interesting as well.  I just thought should be set against the correct backdrop.   Lot's of interesting stuff there, but we need to consider what this guy does, and what the very best guys do might be different.  This is important when gleaning info from shot putters, whose training is probably going to look a bit different than a Highland Gamers.

I agree, who he is is unimportant, BUT who he trains IS important.  Plus, towards the end there he is purely speculating on training the Games.

Thank you very much for sharing this.

As for the dynamic effort training.... yes it will help you get stronger and this strength hopefully carries over to the throws.

I think the coach is stating that no matter how fast you move the weights the speed will never be fast enough to replicate the throws themselves so dynamic does not have a direct carryover on just the speed.

For me the focus of dynamic method training is the intent to be exposive that creates maximum muscle tension in the shortest time possible.  The speed of the action and the weight itself are secondary to the creation of maximal tension.

Hopefully Mr. Sorin chimes in as I get much of my dynamic/tendo training advice from him and he works to create speed in certain exercises and will do snatches where the bar has to at least travel at 1.7 meters a second... slower then that is no good for him.

BTW... Josh did your wife read the article to you .... lots of big words.

Terry,

Stick with what you know:  Baked goods and bargain shopping at the husky store.

Josh Roslik wrote: Terry, Stick with what you know:  Baked goods and bargain shopping at the husky store.

good comeback Hafford must have helped you type it as your digits could not possibly only hit one key at a time.

kover wrote:  I agree with that Terry. After rereading it again i think your right on with that.  I just took it as he did not believe in de days,  i think that varying training methods is very important to our sport, again as i have stated several times, no one really knows how to scientifically train for our games cause it aint been done.  Track and field coaches have so much to work with cause they have so many yrs of research and tried and true methods.  Valenti has said it many times  we are pioneers of this sport right now.  What we are doing is groundbreaking stuff.........  my 2 cents

One thing that needs to be placed in the conversation is the athlete who is training.  Sizes and shapes as well as lengths of limbs.  People who have different strengths and types of strength.  What is going to help the individual.  Many of the elite track coaches are dealing with elite athletes who have made it far or were spotted for their potential to do well based on their individual physical attributes. 

In looking at the article on Timmerman and watching his videos etc the only thing we have in common physically is ..... nothing I know of.  So training like him may not be in my best interest.  I can still learn from him and his training though and there are a few nuggets of goodness there in the article.

Get stronger - how much stronger do you need to be or when is the pursuit of getting stronger a hinderance (is this possible to be a hinderance?)  Law of diminshing return.

What types of strength do you need to work on? Max effort? Dynamic?

I will go out on a limb here and say that many who post here may be strong enough in the weight room already.  Some may have already came close to meeting our physical limits or potential (I know it sucks so blame your parents)  What most of us lack is solid technique that will enable to transfer our strength(s) to the implements.  Many I have seen do not know how to use their hips or refuse to.

How many keep good records of their training? 

Have someone else evaluate you in the weight room.  On the field etc.  Identify weaknesses and strengths and look to correct.  Create a plan and stick with it.  I have only come up with two truths in the weight room.... kids who train hard in the weight room get bigger and stronger if they rest (recover) hard and eat right.... and if you are doing the same thing over and over expecting different results you are not going to be happy.

Trainerterry wrote: Josh Roslik wrote: Terry, Stick with what you know:  Baked goods and bargain shopping at the husky store. good comeback Hafford must have helped you type it as your digits could not possibly only hit one key at a time.

Actually it's easy for me to type.  It's hard for you because you're trying to eat a bowl of mashed potatoes at the same time.

Some relevant follow-up responses:

[More on plyometrics]
 
I went through a phase of not believing in plyos
because I personally was not the typical case of how
throwers were developed in Eastern countries.  I didn't
start the throws at age 10 and did not start plyos
early enough for my structure to grow along while
doing plyometric training.  My growing was pretty much
done when I started throwing (16 years old) and my early
trainer didn't believe in them either so until I found out
what they could do they were worthless for me.
 
They also were worthless because I had a natural
talent in jumping without actually doing them at all,
which made me very adamant on how worthless they were!
I could outjump high jumpers and triple jumpers who
were jumping all day long and weighed half what I did
while I was only jumping when we had our matches
together...and to this day this is still my best
argument on the worthlessness of them as a general
tool of building "jumping ability" with idiotic
programmes of endless jumps...and I was not alone in
this.
 
The best jumping ability I have come across was the
ability of Yuryi Vardanian, a famous 85kg weightlifter
in the late 70s who could do standing broad jumps at
4.10m!!! Guess how many jumps he did in his
training...  Both of us could do triple our bodyweight in
squats and lift four times as much in half squats and this
was enough.
 
This aside, in the last few weeks a few jumps with
high intensity can really excite the nervous system
and this is how I use them.  After training, 5-6 maximum
jumps.
 
[More on the use of the Dynamic Effort method
vs. the Maximum Effort method]
 
Indeed, fast reps as in "DE" days do create a lot of
muscle tension.  BUT:
 
a) they also teach deceleration of the bar at the end
of the movement unless bands are used, which also 
beats the purpose of accelerating through the rep.
 
b) the CNS stress of near max or max reps just isn't
there, and this includes muscle stress of synergistic
muscles, not just the protagonists.
 
c) I have personally found that in training cycles I
have used them (I always try to use any idea I come
across and then decide) the throwing result was
poorer.
 
The last reason alone is enough for me.
 
I think max attempts are better for creating muscle
tension, training reps to failure (4-8 reps) are better,
and even what Hatfield calls CAT reps with 80% are
much better (and more throws specific).  That is if you
have a reason to avoid max reps.
 
There is a point of diminishing returns in maximum
reps.  This is when the bar is too heavy to move.
Our task is to accelerate a moving object, not try to
move a stationary object!!!  If the bar stops, the CNS
stress is too much and you'd better not train the next
day or expect much from this training session.
 
Our maximum is different than a powerlifter's
maximum.  The difference is not more than 5-10 kilos,
but I don't want to see bad form, twisted knees and spines,
eyes bulging, fainting, bleeding noses and missed reps.  
Our place to give our last percentage of sweat, tears
or even blood is the Ring!!!  Not the weight room.
That said, if I see less than 100% commitment in the
weight room either, I lose interest in the athlete.
 
From the intensity I'm talking about I never back
off.  Being a strict conjugate method fan, when an
exercise stops giving I change it and again go full
on.  The nervous system has to know that if I start the
engine, the engine will have to work at 100% every
time.
 
[Regarding strength training specifically for throwing]
 
Timmermann of course did not train for strength for
strength's sake, he trained for strength for throws
sake!!!  He trained the way throwers should train in
my opinion, with few, infrequent, intense sessions that
have a direct analogy and impact on what you want to
do in the ring.
 
If he wanted a better bench press, he could have done
shoulder presses, triceps exercises, bench press
variations, upper back exercises etc etc, like
powerlifters do.  On the contrary, he didn't train the
bench for benching strength, he just benched to throw
more!  Only that and behind the neck jerks for upper-
body weight lifting!
 
Weight training sessions lasted an hour and a half,
2-3 times a week, bench once, jerks once, squats and
good mornings twice and that's it!!!  And this was for
a 23m glider!!!
 
Now, look at the weight training sessions of some of
the throwers and even what Smith prescribes and you
might think he trains 30m shotputters or powerlifters!!!
 
Look at the simplicity of the programmes of
Capes, Albritton, Woods, Feuerbach and you'll see they
trained the basics, for strength, but strength as a
means to an end, not just for strength!!!  I'm sure
Capes trained strength differently for powerlifting or
strongman.

Without getting too deep into this, (due to my schedule and poor typing skills.) My comments:

 I think that dynamic days are important for throwers, especially for those who are already strong. DE days done in full ROM seem to help the athlete aquire a feel of accelerating sub max loads with maximum intent, the idea of throwing. Also, with lighter loads, you can feel the weight, something that dulls a bit when going heavy all of the time. I see big strong guys who have done only powerlifing / strongman that have de-sensitized themselves to lighter weight, dangerous if you want to throw far, especially in the wts or hammers.

Interesting:

A college coach called me the other day and said that they did a correlation test with the vertical jump (which lift or trait lends itself to highest vert jumps, generally thought to be an excellent test of power porduction and athletic ability). Results: Max Squat was #1, Body Comp #2, Bench max #3, bench reps test #4, power clean max #5.

Very interesting. THEN, they did everything the same, but trained the clean for certain speed numbers (using the Tendo), and is went directly to #2 behind squat max. Now, it makes me wonder, would squat be even MORE effective if trained DE method at certain points?

I just have a hard time believing that only heavy max effort work inthe wt room will best convert to far throws. If the original argument that DE is too far (velocity wise) from throwing, then what is ME lifting????? Much further away.

In regards to the european coach (who has some GREAT ideas by the way):

Also, take into account, the athletes that this coach was most likely coaching were HIGH level athletes, ones that were wired like Ferraris to begin with, not tractors. You must train the athletes for what EACH athlete needs. Timmerman was NOT a slow guy...ever, lifting or not. I think many guys who are big and strong need to do more DE work, and guys who are naturally fast need to to more ME. train your weakest link. Brad Snyder went from 57-64' in the shot (freshman year) with mostly strength work (400+ clean, 600+ squat, 500+ bench). He was lean and fast to start with. He later threw 68'5" on mostly jumping, running and faster lifting. He told me he felt it was the most important thing in his training, not heavy lifting anymore.

Side note - I have done very little speed work so far this year, I was already fast, I needed more mass and load strength. It worked. Now back to blending in more speed work so my new founded bodyweight can move like I did when I was 220. In my opinion, that is what I will have to do to throw far. A HUGE component of whether a plan works or not is if you believe in it. Have no doubt and work each plan, you will get better.

Sorry to ramble.

Bert,

Your comments are generally right on, as usual, but I would like to respond with a couple of comments of my own.  With respect to the following point:

Bert Sorin wrote:   with lighter loads, you can feel the weight, something that dulls a bit when going heavy all of the time. I see big strong guys who have done only powerlifing / strongman that have de-sensitized themselves to lighter weight, dangerous if you want to throw far, especially in the wts or hammers.

While this is absolutely true as you have written it, this would not necessaily be the case with respect to someone who was throwing all the time in conjuntion with their heavy lifting.  Not necessarily in the same workout, or even on the same day perhaps, but throwing several times a week.  The throwing, ideally with implements of various weights, ensures that the athlete is continually working to improve their specific speed and feel for the implement.  This is an absolutely key point that cannot be neglected without completely changing the entire system, as noted above. 

While I am not arguing that this fellow is right or wrong, I must be clear that he does NOT believe in the use of the Dynamic Effort method for throwers.  He clearly takes what is sometimes called a "barbell approach" or, more technically, a bifurcated approach to training, that is, an approach that emphasizes both ends of the training continuum while avoiding the middle area.  This is my interpretation. 

In other words, he believes in heavy, specific lifting to build strength combined with lots of throwing of various implements along with lots of overheads to improve specific speed, explosiveness, and specific strength.  As you know, throwing, at least with reasonable technique, is an extremely dynamic, explosive, and even plyometric activity.  Continually working both ends of the training spectrum in this manner results in balanced development.  Neglecting one end or the other leads to a program that is completely unbalanced and ineffective, as illustrated nicely in your comment above. 

This approach makes a lot of sense, but whether it is the best approach is another question, particularly in the weeks before a competition.  The key point, however, is that you have to work on both aspects of his program for it to be effective, just as you have to load both sides of a barbell in order for it to be balanced.  If one is not willing or able to employ the entire system for any reason, one needs to use a different system, which may well incorporate the dynamic method.

With respect to your comments on the improvements realized in the value of the power clean after the emphasis was switched to bar speed, I have a question (or perhaps it is an observation).  First, is it possible to do a power clean using (i) decent technique and (ii) a high catch and NOT develop good bar speed? 

With all the variablity seen in power clean technique and catch height, I wonder if the emphasis on bar speed (which is the key factor) really just resulted both in and from improved technique and and a higher catch?  In other words, a lot of the athletes were originally probably trying to lift more weight than they could with decent technique, or were lifting with decent technique but catching the bar low, limiting the bar speed developed in either case.  Comments?

Another question is wheteher they tested hang snatches or jerks, both of which would likely have a very good correlation with the standing vertical jump?