IronGarm

http://www.crossfit.com (scroll down)


"The trace in the photo on the left shows the vertical rise of the “first pullâ€

Posted at 7:41

http://www.crossfit.com/discus/messages/22/22.html

This where Oly guys make me crazy. There is ZERO, i mean zero research showing Oly lifting make you faster. They might have timed some lifters in Mexico in 68 or something, but the whole Oly thing is an echo chamber.

If somebody is looking for hip snap, teaching them to swing the Kb leading with their hips is the best drill i know or have ever done.

The truth is i have seen 8-10 year olds who have never lifted a weight in their life explode their hips as they tackle somebody. I suspect this cannot really be taught effectively for carryover to the field of play.

Men's Fitness says Glassman limps from a ring injury? Hmmmm...

Never happened.

Pllllbp. In addition to the other comments, I'd like to add that there are different kinds of KB snatches. A DB swing looks a lot like a swing snatch, sure, but a pull snatch comes straight up. Like Bill said, dead snatch the 88 and see wha happa.

GDG!

It did according to Tommy Kono, who was there.

Reference please. Johnny Pullups researched the crap out of this and it looked like BS.

Johnny Pullups?

Tommy Kono?

I know who I'm gonna believe.

It's in Kono's book.

Mak,

Please do not confuse Stephen with facts.

DD

Bill, having read your post here and your post on XFit, I am unclear as to what your claim is. It seems clear to me that snatching a barbell and snatching a kettlebell develop different athletic abilities, if only because the groove of the KB snatch and the groove of the snatch are very different, and the latter always admits of a greater load.

The 'scoop' - as far as I can tell, the 'scoop' is just what happens to your bar path when your properly time your first and second pulls, and looks different in different lifters of international caliber. In every case, though, the purpose of having two distinct pulls is to drive the bar up and back rather than just up, enabling you to lift the maximum amount of weight. The two pulls make it possible for you to lift heavier weights. The off-center weight distribution of the KB forbids the use of this two-part pull; you have to pull all at once and extend all the way through to flip or corkscrew the bell over properly. Somebody properly trained in both KBs and oly lifting will always be able to snatch more total weight with a barbell than he will be able to snatch with one or two kettlebells.

Isn't this all it really boils down to, when you skim the polemical cream off the top and just look at the substance of the argument?

Re. the unique benefits of oly lifting, the argument against the kettlebell seems perfectly sound to me, but it seems like a moot point. You can always put more weight overhead with a barbell than with a kettlebell, so of course oly lifting will always be a better tool for peak power training than KG lifting.

Now, arguing oly lifting against Westside or some other good PL-based training system - THAT would be an interesting argument, and one that would really get at the question of whether the sequence of first/second/third pull/squat under really has a unique value.

It's in lots of books, then you ask the author for details and the backtracking starts. Hatfield has it in his book and retracted.

Obviously that means you're right and the rest of the world is wrong.

Yes.

Reference, please.

BTW, it was 1964, not 1968, and Hatfield's old Oly coach Joe Mills was involved.

Edit : 1964 not 1946

Joe Mills! There's a name I haven't heard in a while.

I was hanging out with Cameron at the OBBS dinner a few months back. He's still in great shape.

Reference to the reference. Dr. Squat's search function sucks.

http://forum.dragondoor.com/training/message/319823%5C

'64 Olympics weren't in Mexico City.

That reference to a reference is bullshit. It was 1964, not 1968, and the subject was vertical jump, not sprinting.

I know that and didn't say otherwise.

The topic on Dr. Squat was specifically Oly lifters beating sprinters in a 10 meter dash. The first sentence of the post indicates that's what he's talking about. There were a dozen threads on DD about it.

Everybody who believes it says it happened in '68 in Mexico, including, according to Makena, Tommy Kono, an alleged witness.

Tyler sez Kono doesn't remember it:
http://forum.dragondoor.com/training/message/317215%5C

If Tyler didn't suck monkey balls and Kono wasn't older than Andy, this might matter.

True. But since at least five people, some with half a brain, have tried to find confirmed info about this study and come up with nothing, including alleged witness and sloppy authors who wrote about it, you start getting close to proving a negative.

But you can't, of coarse. Can you give a reference proving this actually happened?

Mother fucking hell,

Who cares about a 10 meter dash?

DD

You might as well try to prove Jesus existed.

In faith,

DD