weightlifting: a brief overview - rwl weightlifting inc...

Weightlifting: A Brief OverviewMichael H. Stone, PhDEast Tennessee State University, Johnson City,Tennessee

Kyle C. Pierce, EdDUSA Weightlifting Development Center, Louisiana State University, Shreveport, Louisiana

William A. Sands, PhDCoaching and Sports Science, United States Olympic Committee, Colorado Springs, Colorado

Meg E. StoneEast Tennessee State University, Johnson City,Tennessee

© National Strength and Conditioning AssociationVolume 28, Number 1, pages 50–66

Keywords: youth weightlifting; talent identification; strength;power

Before we can begin a meaningfuldiscussion of weightlifting it ispertinent to begin with appro-

priate definitions. For the purpose ofthis discussion the appropriate termfor training with added resistance/loadis resistance training (RT). RT can beused as a general term to describetraining with different modes. Thesemodes can include free weights andmachines. Weight training is a generalterm and a type of RT used to describemethods/modes in which a load(weight) is actually lifted; this couldinclude free weights or a weight stack.

The general term RT also includes vari-ous training methods having diverse

goals. These methods include trainingfor rehabilitation/injury prevention,general fitness and recreational sports,bodybuilding, and competitive sports.From the aspect of competitive sportsthis includes the following:

• Using RT as an integral part of train-ing for sports other than powerlift-ing or weightlifting.

• Using RT for powerlifting. Powerlift-ing is actually a strength sport inwhich 3 lifts are contested. The 3lifts, in order of execution in a con-test, are the squat, bench press, anddeadlift.

• Using RT for weightlifting. Weight-lifting is a strength/power sport inwhich 2 lifts are contested. The 2lifts, in order of execution in a con-test, are the snatch and the clean andjerk. Weightlifting (one word)should not be confused with weightlifting (2 words) or weight training.Weightlifting refers to a specificsport, whereas weight lifting referssimply to lifting a weight (44). In thiscontext weightlifting is often referredto as Olympic lifting; however, this

terminology is misleading in that allweightlifting does not occur in theOlympics. Furthermore, none of thegoverning bodies (international ornational) use the term “Olympic lift-ing” in their name. Governing bodiesconsistently use the term weightlift-ing (e.g., USA Weightlifting, Aus-tralian Weightlifting Federation, In-ternational Weightlifting Federation[IWF]).

Several performance-associated charac-teristics impact the ability to perform asa weightlifter. These characteristics in-clude strength, rate of force develop-ment, and power.

Strength can be defined as the ability toproduce force, and this force can be iso-metric or dynamic (58, 61). Becauseforce is a vector quantity, the display ofstrength would have primary character-istics of magnitude and direction. Themagnitude can range from 0 to 100%.The level of force production and itscharacteristics are determined by a num-ber of factors including the time periodof muscle activation, the type of con-

s u m m a r y

This is the first part of a 2-part dis-

cussion on weightlifting and will de-

scribe the historical and scientific

background of the sport.

50 February 2006 • Strength and Conditioning Journal

traction, the rate of muscle activation,and the degree of muscle activation. Theimportance of force production can beascertained from Newton’s second law, FF = ma. The acceleration (a) of a mass(m) such as body mass or an external ob-ject depends upon the ability to generateforce (FF). Acceleration in turn results ina velocity; as weightlifting is a velocity-dependent sport, high force productionis an essential element. Another impor-tant characteristic associated withstrength is the rate at which the force isdeveloped. Rate of force development(RFD) is associated with accelerationcapabilities (53) and can also be an im-portant factor among strength-powerathletes in determining superior perfor-mance. For example, the critical aspectsof most strength-power sports occur invery short time frames (<250 millisec-onds); if a greater force (due to greaterRFD) can be produced in this criticaltime period then greater accelerationsand velocities can be achieved. Interest-ingly, stronger athletes also appear tohave RFD advantages (22).

Power production is the product of forceand velocity (FF × V ) and is likely the mostimportant factor in determining successin most sports, particularly weightlifting.Thus, the ability to generate force(strength) and its related component,RFD, is an integral part of power produc-tion, and therefore may be a key compo-nent in determining athletic success.

Endurance can be defined as the abilityto maintain or repeat a given force orpower output. High-intensity exercise en-durance (HIEE) is the ability to main-tain or repeat very high forces or poweroutputs. Although weightlifting is notgenerally thought of as an endurancesport, being able to repeat high forces orhigh power outputs (HIEE) is a necessi-ty both in training and competition.

The development of these characteristics(strength, RFD, power, HIEE) is impor-tant for success in weightlifting. It is alsoimportant to note that RT can empha-

size one or more performance character-istics, such as training for maximumstrength, power, or HIEE. The emphasiscan then be termed strength training(training for maximum strength), speed-strength training (training for power),strength-endurance training (training torepeatedly lift heavy loads), or power-en-durance training (training to sustain orrepeat high power outputs). Training forweightlifting is largely performed usingfree weights, and typically there will bean emphasis on different aspects (perfor-mance characteristics) of training duringa training cycle (see Training the Athletesection).

Historical PerspectiveWeightlifting can trace its beginnings tomore than 4,000 years ago. Evidence forboth strength training and strengthcontests can be found in the illustra-tions of weight-lifting and strengthmovements on the tomb of the Egypt-ian Prince Baghti dating from approxi-mately 2040 BC. Detailed writingsfrom Lu’s Annals (54) dating from 551BC also indicate that feats of strengthand strength training were valued ath-letic endeavors in ancient China. An-cient records indicate that contests ofstrength/power were apparently not in-cluded in the ancient Greek Olympics.However, ancient Greek writings, stat-ues, and training/competition imple-ments (e.g., halteres, or throwingstones) indicate that resistance trainingand contests of strength/power werequite popular in ancient Greece at leastas early as 557 BC and that exhibitionsand strength contests were likely in-cluded in other ancient games (54).Such contests of strength/power gainedin popularity into the modern era.

The present day sport of weightliftingrequires not only great strength but alsoexceptional power, speed of movement,and flexibility. The beginnings of mod-ern weightlifting can be traced to themid 1800s, when several clubs devotedto weightlifting and general strengthtraining began to spring up in Europe,

particularly in Austria and Germany.The first World Weightlifting Champi-onships were held in London in March1891. Weightlifting, as a sport, rapidlyspread to the United States; through the1930s to the early 1960s the UnitedStates was a world leader in weightlift-ing, producing several world andOlympic champions (15).

Men’s weightlifting was included in thefirst modern Olympics in 1896 as a partof track and field. Its own internationalfederation was formed in 1905 and wasrecognized by the International OlympicCommittee (IOC) in 1914. Weightlift-ing became a permanent fixture in theOlympics at the 1920 Antwerp Games.During the early 1980s, women’sweightlifting increased in popularity,particularly in the United States andChina, and the first women’s worldchampionships were held in DaytonaBeach, Florida, in 1987. Women werefirst included as part of the Olympicsweightlifting program during the 2000Games in Sydney, Australia. In mostcountries weightlifting includes both ju-nior (12–20 years) and open men’s andwomen’s competitions; these competi-tions are held at the local, regional, na-tional, and international level.

From 1896 until 1925, weightliftingcompetition included both 1- and 2-arm lifts. In 1925 the IOC limited com-petition to 3 lifts: the 2-hands press,snatch, and clean and jerk (54). These 3lifts were contested from 1925 until1972 when the press was dropped fromcompetition, largely as a result of diffi-culties in judging press technique.Presently, weightlifting is contested inapproximately 165 countries and, bynumber of countries, is consistently 1 ofthe 7 largest participant sports in theOlympics.

Each country has its own governingbody responsible for holding competi-tions and certifying athletes and officialsaccording to international rules. Addi-tionally, national governing bodies may

51February 2006 • Strength and Conditioning Journal

be engaged in the education of coaches,which includes clinics and seminars.The IWF was founded in 1905 and isheadquartered in Budapest, Hungary.Information concerning the history, re-sults of international competitions, andeducational aspects of weightlifting areprovided via the IWF web site at www.iwf.net.

The Athlete: Physical CharacteristicsElite male weightlifters’ somatotypeand physical characteristics are some-what similar to those of wrestlers andthrowers in track and field (73). Pre-liminary measurements of femaleweightlifters made by the authors alsoindicate that there are somatotype sim-ilarities between female weightliftersand female wrestlers and throwers. Al-though there are exceptions, superiorweightlifters tend to have shorter limbsand a relatively long trunk comparedwith sedentary individuals (75). At thesame body mass, elite weightlifters typ-

ically posses a relatively high lean bodymass and low percent fat comparedwith untrained subjects or athletes inother sports (66).

Percent fat among elite male weight-lifters may range from 5 to 6% in thelighter body weight classes to >20% inthe unlimited body weight class. For fe-male weightlifters these values (% fat)are typically 5–10 percentage pointshigher than male weightlifters. Addi-tionally, weightlifters generally have arelatively high body mass and lean bodymass : height ratio (66, 73); thus at thesame body mass weightlifters tend to beshorter than other athletes. Based on anachievement classification of weight-lifters, Table 1a shows some of the physi-cal characteristics of male weightliftersof different abilities. Note that percentfat tends to decrease with the increasinglevel of athlete (66). The physical char-acteristics of female weightlifters areshown in Table 1b. The data forweightlifters (Tables 1a and 1b) were

collected between 1978 and 1988. Table1c shows the physical characteristics of 9male and 7 female elite U.S. weight-lifters training for the 2003 WorldWeightlifting Championships. Com-parison of Tables 1a and 1b with 1c indi-cate that the physical characteristics ofelite weightlifters have been generallyconsistent over time. However, the ratioof body mass : height appears to haveincreased, particularly among thewomen.

The relatively high body mass : heightratio compared with untrained subjects(and other athletic groups) is advanta-geous because it may confer some lever-age. For example, a shorter staturewould decrease the relative height towhich the bar must be moved in orderto complete a lift. Additionally, theremay be a force-generating advantagethat results from having a high bodymass : height ratio. For example, if 2athletes of different heights and differ-ent limb lengths have the same muscle


Table 1aPhysical Characteristics of U.S. Male Weightlifters

NumberAge

(year)Body mass

(kg) % Fat LBMHeight

(cm) W/H

EL (n = 14) 24 ± 3 89.1 ± 18.0 10.1 ± 4.0 80.1 ± 13.0 171.0 ± 9.5 0.52 ± 0.12

M + 1 (n = 7) 26 ± 4 84.9 ± 20.9 11.7 ± 5.0 74.1 ± 14.9 173.5 ± 11.0 0.48 ± 0.13

C2< (n = 13) 24 ± 4 86.2 ± 18.2 12.4 ± 6.9 75.4 ± 15.2 172.5 ± 13.0 0.50 ± 0.14

UT (n = 7) 20 ± 3 90.1 ± 5.4 18.2 ± 7.4 74.0 ± 9.6 179.0 ± 3.5 0.05 ± 0.13

Note:W/H = body mass (kg)/height (cm); EL = elite; M + 1 = master and first class; C2< = class 2 and below; UT = untrained men (group match sta-tistically on body mass); LBM = lean body mass. Body composition was measured by skin folds. UT, C2, M, first, and elite data collected 1978–1983.Elite data collected fall 2003 and presented at USOC in-house seminar 2004.

Table 1bPhysical Characteristics of Elite Female Weightlifters

NumberAge

(year)Body mass

(kg) % Fat LBMHeight

(cm) W/H

WL (n = 14) 27 ± 5 61.3 ± 11.5 20.4 ± 3.9 49.0 ± 12.2 161.6 ± 8.6 0.38 ± 0.06

UT (n = 13) 26 ± 7 61.1 ± 9.9 27.0 ± 7.4 44.6 ± 16.8 164.2 ± 8.6 0.37 ± 0.09

Note: W/H = body mass (kg)/height (cm); WL = elite weightlifters; UT = untrained women (group matched statistically on body mass); LBM = leanbody mass. Body composition was measured by skinfolds.WL and UT data collected 1987; elite data collected fall 2003 and presented at USOC in-house seminar 2004.

mass and volume, the shorter athletewill have the greatest muscle cross-sec-tion and therefore a greater muscleforce–generating capability. The rela-tively low body fat associated with ahigh lean body mass, typically observedin elite weightlifters, can be associatedwith the extensive training programsused (42, 43). Thus, elite weightlifterscan be described as generally mesomor-phic, shorter than other athletes at thesame body mass, and having a relativelylow body fat content.

Performance Requirements

Basic Technique for Pulling MovementsThe performance capabilities of a com-petitive weightlifter primarily dependupon leg and hip strength and power(18). In the snatch, the bar is raised fromthe floor to an overhead position in 1motion; the lifter splits or squats underthe bar and then stands erect (Figure 1).The second lift contested is the cleanand jerk. The bar (weight) is firstcleaned (Figure 2a) by lifting it from thefloor to the shoulders (in front of theneck); the lifter either splits or squatsunder the bar and then stands erect.After cleaning the bar it is jerked over-head. The jerk results from driving thebar overhead using the legs and catchingit on straight arms; at the completion ofthe drive, the lifter either splits or squatsunder the bar and again stands erect(Figure 2b).

The most efficient technique for thepulling movement is termed the “dou-


Table 1cPhysical Characteristics of Elite U.S.A. Male and Female Weightlifters (2003)

Age(year)

Body mass(kg) % Fat LBM

Height (cm) W/H

Elite Males (n=9) 23 ± 4 95.2 ± 19.0 13.2 ± 5.8 80.4 ± 11.8 171.4 ± 4.8 0.56 ± 0.11

Elite Females (n=7) 23 ± 4 68.9 ± 7.5 19.6 ± 4.4 54.9 ± 3.7 161.1 ± 5.8 0.44 ± 0.04

Note: W/H = body mass (kg)/height (cm); LBM = lean body mass. Body composition was measured by skinfolds. Data were collected fall 2003 andpresented at USOC in-house seminar 2004.

Figure 1. The snatch.

ble-knee bend” (DKB; 1). The pullingsequences shown in Figures 1 and 2a de-pict this technique.. In these sequences(Figure 1 and 2a) of the snatch andclean we can clearly observe the DKBoccurring. Several key positions can benoted in this series of photos. Position 1

corresponds to liftoff at which point theshoulders are over and in front of thebar and the back is flat or in a normal“lordotic” position (arched) and re-mains in this position throughout thepull. The feet are flat on the floor andthe center of foot pressure is forward

near the ball of the foot. At position 2the bar has moved to the knees, theshoulders are still above and in front ofthe bar, the feet are still flat on the floor,and the center of pressure has nowmoved toward the heel. The bar andlifter have moved up and back primarilyas a result of extension at the knee. Posi-tion 3 corresponds to the DKB positionat which the bar has moved to themidthigh, the feet are still flat, the kneeangle will be approximately 130–140°,and the trunk is nearly vertical. Thecenter of foot pressure has now movedtoward the middle of the foot. Position3 is the strongest of the entire pullingsequence and is crucial for high-levelsuccess. In position 4 we can observecomplete extension; the weightlifter hasmoved onto the balls of his (or her) feetand the shoulders are shrugged—afterwhich the lifter moves under the bar forthe catch (Position 5).

A stretch-shortening cycle occurs when aconcentric muscle action immediatelyfollows a lengthening (eccentric) muscleaction. Most elite lifters use a rather pro-nounced DKB or stretch shortening dur-ing the transition (moving from position2 to position 3), with a final knee angleof about 130–140º, the final knee anglein the snatch typically being somewhatsmaller (greater knee bend) then in theclean (4, 48). Some elite weightlifters usea much shallower DKB with greater kneeangles. It is not completely known whythis difference in knee angle occurs;however, it may be due to differences inelastic properties or muscle-activationabilities.

During the transition (positions 2 and3) into the DKB there is an unweightingphase as the knees are rebent and thetrunk is brought into a near vertical po-sition. During the second pull (posi-tions 3 and 4) there is a sharp increase invertical force until the weightlifter dropsunder the bar for the catch. Even at max-imum weights the entire lift (floor tocatch) should be completed in less than1 second.


Figure 2a. The squat clean.

Elite weightlifters will typically com-plete the transition phase more rapidlythan unskilled lifters. RFD may play animportant role during the transitionphase. A faster transition (DKB) amongskilled lifters likely results from the abil-ity to apply eccentric force at faster ratesand greater magnitudes (33). Further-more, the elite skilled lifter can acceler-ate the bar faster during the subsequentconcentric phase (after the DKB). In an-alyzing (both qualitatively and quantita-tively) over 1,000 lifts from national(United States and Britain) and interna-tional contests, it is quite clear that themajority of high-caliber and elite lifters(>99%) placing in the top 5 of thesecontests use a DKB pulling technique.

Bar position relative to the body is par-ticularly important during the DKB. Asthe bar rises, the bar should actuallytouch the thigh during the DKB. This isbecause leaving the bar in front of thethigh (not touching) creates a positionfrom which less force can be exerted, asthis position creates an extended-mo-ment arm. Furthermore, the further thebar is in front of the lifter’s center ofmass, the greater the energy that must beexpended in order to bring the bar backtoward the lifter so that it can be success-fully caught on the shoulders or over-head. Although brushing the thigh (not adrag or bang) may increase the frictionencountered during the pull, this is morethan offset by the ability to accelerate thebar from the DKB position. Transmis-sion of peak force to the bar occurs justafter the initial thigh contact, and peakvelocity occurs shortly after peak force.Peak power typically occurs betweenpeak force and peak velocity.

Importance of the DKB PhaseThe vertical ground reaction forcescommonly observed during a pullingmovement can be noted in Figure 3. Aspreviously discussed, most weightliftersof reasonable standard use a stretch-shortening cycle in which the knees arerebent and moved under the bar (theDKB phase). This consists of an un-

weighting period in conjunction witheccentric and concentric muscle actions.This DKB phase is important because(a) it reduces the tension on the back(13), and (b) the sudden forceful stretchin some manner enhances the concen-tric portion of the pull. The mecha-nism(s) by which a stretch reflex en-

hances concentric action is not com-pletely clear, but may involve increasedelastic energy use, a myotatic (stretch)reflex, optimizing muscle length, im-parting additional energy into the con-tractile apparatus, optimizing muscleactivation patterns, or some combina-tion of mechanisms (5, 13, 45).


Figure 2b. The split jerk.

Good technique is essential for a num-ber of reasons including transmittingforces efficiently and in the appropriatedirection so that ultimately a greaterweight can be lifted, the potential forcarryover to other sports performanceswill be enhanced, and the potential forinjury can be reduced.

Performance CapabilitiesAs previously defined, strength is theability to produce force (58, 67). Forcein turn is related to the ability to acceler-ate an object. Power can be defined as theproduct of force and velocity or as a workrate (58, 67, 69). Higher peak work ratesare quite advantageous in strength-power sports, generally separating thewinner and losers (41, 67). It is obviousthat weightlifters possess great strengthand power (10). It is not unusual for eliteweightlifters to lift overhead 2–3 timestheir body mass. For example, 4 maleweightlifters (Hailil Mutlu, NaimSuliemonyglu, Stephan Topurov, andAngel Genshev) have lifted 3 times theirbody mass in the clean and jerk, and over20 female weightlifters have lifted 2

times their body mass in the clean andjerk; women are now approaching 2.5times their body mass.

Strength. The loads lifted in the snatchand clean and jerk are partially related tobody mass. Differences in maximumstrength between larger and smaller ath-letes primarily result from the relation-ship between muscle force capabilitiesand muscle cross-sectional area. The rela-tionship between cross-sectional area andmaximum strength is a linear function(11, 31, 77), so as cross-sectional area in-creases so does maximum strength. Largerathletes having a greater absolute cross-sectional area of muscle can produce moreforce and lift more weight then smallerathletes (provided similar training hastaken place). This difference is largely re-sponsible for body weight classes inweightlifting and many other sports.

Body weight classes have been changedseveral times over the years; thesechanges result from differences in thenumber of athletes entering variousweight classes from year to year and dif-

ferences in the average weight lifted ineach class at continental and worldchampionships (74). The body weightcategories were revised for the sixth timein January 1998. The current bodyweight (body mass) classes for men are,56, 62, 69, 77, 94, 105, and >105 kg; forwomen, 48, 53, 59, 63, 75, and >75 kg.

Although maximum strength and mus-cle cross-sectional area share a near-lin-ear relationship, strength per kilogramof body mass and body size are not lin-ear. Indeed, relative strength tends tomarkedly decrease with size largely as aresult of the relationship of cross-sec-tional area, muscle volume, and bodydimensions. The cross-sectional area isrelated to the square of linear body di-mensions, and muscle mass is directlyproportional to muscle volume. In turnthe muscle volume is related to the cubeof linear body dimensions (26). There-fore, increases in maximum strength lagbehind increasing body mass. Assumingthat body proportions remain relativelyconstant, smaller athletes typically dis-play greater levels of maximum strengthon a per kilogram of body mass basis(strength : mass ratio) compared withlarger athletes (Tables 2a and 2b).

Appropriately comparing weightliftersof different weights may provide anindex as to which athlete is actually thebetter performer. This type of informa-tion is not only of interest from a scien-tific aspect, but could provide meaning-ful information in determining the bestlifter during weightlifting contests.However, simply dividing the absoluteweight lifted by the lifters’ body mass bi-ases the results in favor of the smallerathlete because it does not take into ac-count the expected decrease in thestrength : body mass ratio with increas-ing body size. Lietzke (39) indicatedthat weightlifting world records wereapproximately proportional to two-thirds of the body mass of theweightlifters (the two-thirds power law).However, this method has been shownto have deficiencies; for example, at-


Figure 3. Vertical ground reaction forces. CON = concentric phase; UW = unweightingphase; ECC = eccentric phase; DDKB = deep double knee bend; SDKB = shal-low double knee bend.

tempts to obviate differences in sizebased on the two-thirds law apparentlywill bias results toward small and partic-ularly middle-sized athletes (28, 29).This deficiency likely occurs because theexact relationship between anthropo-metrics, body mass, muscle mass, andmaximum strength has not been com-pletely determined (28, 29, 34). Further-more, weightlifting is not a pure strengthsport but may be better described as astrength-speed sport in which the abilityto produce a very high external powerappears to be the major factor determin-ing success (17, 32, 34). Clearly peak

power output (or maximum strength)and weightlifting performance amongathletes with widely varying body massesis not a linear function (34).

Realizing the deficiencies in the two-thirds power law, a number of differentmodels for comparison of athletes of dif-ferent body masses have been developedfor both powerlifting and weightlifting(28, 29, 34). These formulae (althoughsuperior to the two-thirds power law) stilldo not completely describe the relation-ship between weightlifting performanceand body size (28, 29, 34). Two compari-

son models commonly used in weightlift-ing are the Sinclair formula (59) and theSiff II formula (58). These formulae, par-ticularly the Sinclair formula, are oftenused in weightlifting contests to identifythe best lifter. Tables 2a and 2b show theresults of the winners of each class for themen and women at the 2000 OlympicGames. In general there is a steady de-crease in the total divided by body mass;however, this pattern is not readily appar-ent using the comparison formulae, espe-cially when considering the performancesof the unlimited class for both the menand women.


Table 2aBody Mass and Performance: Men 2000 Olympics

Class Body mass Snatch Clean and jerk Total (kg) T/kg Sinclair Siff

56 55.62 137.5 167.5 305 5.48 473.43 108.51

62 61.56 150 175 312.5 5.08 447.43 98.95

69 68.78 162.5 195 357.5 5.20 472.20 102.78

77 76.20 160 207.5 367.5 4.82 454.98 98.59

85 84.06 175 215 390 4.64 457.46 99.20

94 92.06 185 220 405 4.40 455.06 98.96

105 104.7 190 235 425 4.06 454.54 99.19

105+ 147.48 212.5 260 472.5 3.2 473.28 101.85

Note: Modified from Stone and Kirksey, 2000 (65). T/Kg = total (Kg)/body mass.

Table 2bBody Mass and Performance: Women 2000 Olympics

Class Body mass Snatch Clean and jerk Total (kg) T/kg Sinclair Siff

48 47.48 82.5 102.5 185 3.90 256.59 105.57

53 52.46 100 125 225 4.29 290.64 116.11

58 56.92 95 127.5 222.5 3.91 272.95 107.59

63 62.82 112.5 130 242.5 3.86 281.65 110.22

69 66.74 110 132.5 242.5 3.63 273.51 106.91

75 73.28 110 135 245 3.34 265.75 104.02

75+ 103.56 135 165 300 2.90 300.96 118.71

Note: Sinclair number listed as 1.0000 after 150.0 kg. Modified from Stone and Kirksey, 2000 (65). T/Kg = total (Kg)/body mass.

By attempting to obviate differences inbody mass, the importance of maximumstrength for weightlifting and weight-lifters can be partially ascertained. Forexample, correlations (Table 2c) be-tween peak isometric force (IPF) from amidthigh position and the snatch andclean and jerk were calculated for 14male and female national- and interna-tional-level weightlifters (51). Relation-ships were compared using nonscaled,allometrically scaled (body mass 0.67),and Sinclair formula values to controlfor size differences. Assuming that scal-ing can obviate body mass differences,comparisons can then be made indepen-dently of body mass. Table 2c indicatesthat maximum isometric strength is

strongly correlated with weightliftingperformance and that this relationship isapparently independent of body mass.Furthermore maximum strength (IPF),even when body mass is apparently obvi-ated, is also strongly correlated withmeasures of explosiveness such as peakpower during countermovement andstatic vertical jumps (Table 2c).

Power. Commonly performed tests ofpower and “explosive strength,” such asa vertical jump, consistently showweightlifters to be among the most pow-erful of athletes (2, 10, 60, 61). Two re-cent studies comparing the power out-put of athletes in different sportssupport this concept. McBride et al.

(41) studied elite Australian weight-lifters, powerlifters, sprinters, and un-trained subjects. Power output, normal-ized for body mass by analysis ofcovariance (ANCOVA), was assessedthrough weighted jumping. Jumps wereperformed at 0, 20, and 40 kg and at 30,60, and 90% of their 1 repetition maxi-mum (1RM) squat from a 90° kneeangle. The results showed that theweightlifters produced the highestpower output at any load (Figure 4).Controlling for maximum strength dif-ferences and using weighted jumping,Stone et al. (69) again found weight-lifters to produce higher power outputsat any percentage of the maximum 1RMparallel squat compared with power-lifter/heavy weight trainers, wrestlers, oran untrained group (Figure 5). Thesedata (41, 69) indicate that weightliftingtraining can be advantageous for whole-body power production. There is no rea-son to believe that these results (i.e., theeffects of weightlifting training) wouldnot be advantageous for a variety ofsports.. The superior power output ofweightlifters is likely partially genetic,but also stems from the type of trainingprograms employed by weightlifters (18,19, 27, 61).

The training programs used byweightlifters (63) and conceptually simi-lar training programs (27) have beenshown to markedly increase strength andpower. It should be noted that in termsof a whole-body movement, the snatchand clean and jerk afford the highestpower outputs recorded in sport (18,19). Examples of the average power out-puts from various competition lifts areshown in Table 3. Note that the poweroutput, particularly in the second pull,for weightlifting movements is far in ex-cess of that produced by the powerlifts(squat, bench press, deadlift). This obser-vation suggests that (a) powerlifting is amisnomer, and (b) if the objective oftraining is to improve whole-body poweroutput, then using high-power–generat-ing exercises such as weightlifting pullingmovements are reasonable.


Table 2cRelationships (Correlations) Between Maximum Strength (Isometric Midthigh

Pull) and Weighlifting Performance (n = 9 Men, 7 women)

SN C & J CMJPP SJPP

Unscaled 0.83 0.84 0.88 0.84

Allometric 0.5 0.5 0.64 0.67

Sinclair 0.79 0.8 0.86 0.86

Note: SN = Snatch; C&J = clean and jerk; CMJPP = countermovement vertical jump peakpower; SJPP = static vertical jump peak power. Data collected fall 2003 and presented at USOCin-house seminar 2004.

Figure 4. Comparative power outputs (41).WL=weightlifters; PL = powerlifters;SPRINT = sprinters; C = control.

Maximum power for nonballistic move-ments appears to occur at about 30–50%of maximum isometric force. For mostnonballistic exercises the maximum iso-metric force is very nearly the same as a1RM value. Thus, a value of 30–50% ofthe 1RM is a very close approximation ofthe optimum percentage. However, thesnatch and clean and jerk are ballisticmovements, and their successful comple-tion is velocity-dependent. Therefore,the optimum percentage-producingpeak power is approximately 70–85% ofthe 1RM for pulling movements. Thisindicates that peak power for the snatchand clean at 70–85% of the 1RM wouldbe approximately 10–20% higher thanthe power outputs observed at maximum(17). Weightlifters spend a considerableamount of training time using loads of70–85% of 1RM, particularly in pullingmovements; this type of training mayoptimize gains in power production.

Logical arguments and evidence from ob-jective studies indicate that training athigh-power outputs will result in superiorincreases in power compared with typicalresistance training methods. Evidence in-dicates that high levels of maximumstrength in association with high-powertraining, or a combination of heavy resis-tance training and power training (as oc-curs among elite weightlifters), can resultin superior power performances (19, 23,27, 61, 63, 69, 76).

Metabolic ConsiderationsCoaches and athletes have often under-estimated the energy cost of resistancetraining, particularly weightlifting. Ad-ditionally it is believed that resistancetraining has no effect in altering bodyfat. Some of these misconceptions mayarise from the commonly held beliefthat the caloric cost of typical aerobicexercise is substantially higher and thatonly aerobic exercise can burn fat. How-ever, these beliefs may not be correct.

For elite weightlifters, during the com-petition phase it is not uncommon to lift30,000–70,000 kg/wk. During the prep-

aration phase of weightlifting volumeloads of >90,000 kg/wk can be associat-ed with energy expenditures as high as600–1000 Kcals/h and >3000 Kcals/wk(37, 52). When peaking/tapering, theenergy cost is somewhat lower. Much ofthe energy expenditure resulting fromweight training and weightlifting takesplace during recovery (7, 8, 43, 56).

Furthermore, as a result of heavy weighttraining, the magnitude of energy ex-penditure during recovery appears to bedependent upon the volume of training(43), and complete recovery may take asmuch as 24–38 hours (56). Therefore,during a high-volume training session,with large muscle mass exercises, it isprobable that most of the energy cost oc-


Figure 5. Comparative power outputs (66).WL = weightlifter; BB/HT = heavy weighttrainer; WREST = wrestler; C= control.

Table 3Power Outputs of Different Exercises During Competition

Exercise

Absolute Power (W)

100 kg male 75 kg female

Bench press 300

Squat 1,100

Deadlift 1,100

Snatch* 3,000 1750

2nd pull† 5,600 2,900

Clean* 2,950 1,750

2nd pull† 5,500 2,650

Jerk 5,400 2,600

* Total pull = lift off until maximum vertical velocity.† 2nd pull = transition until maximum vertical velocity.Note: Modified from Garhammer (18,19).

curs during recovery. The relatively highenergy cost of weightlifting trainingcoupled with an increased mobilizationand use of fats during recovery (30, 42,64) partially explain the relatively lowpercentage of body fat found amongelite weightlifters.

Coaches and athletes often underesti-mate the magnitude and duration of re-covery from weight-training sessions. Itis important to note that recovery fromheavy loads, which can be prolonged,could have effects on subsequent train-ing sessions and may contribute to over-reaching and overtrained states. In thisrespect it is quite important that ade-

quate nutrition is considered. Adequateenergy intake (and necessary nutrients)is necessary to maintain body mass andsupport the extra energy requirementsassociated with training. Consideringthe relatively large total energy expendi-ture, which can occur during weightlift-ing training, caloric intake (food) can bequite high, especially among the largerweight classes (Table 4).

Training the AthleteTraining programs for competition aredirectly aimed at improvements in thesnatch and clean and jerk. These train-ing programs are generally based onwell-known training principles (68).

The training principles are (a) overloadof volume and intensity factors, (b) vari-ation, and (c) specificity.

The overload principle relates to stressingthe biological system beyond the norm.In order to provide a continued stimulusover a period of years, the training vol-ume and training intensity increases. Vol-ume of training is typically estimated asthe volume load (repetitions × mass lift-ed), and training intensity is estimated bythe average weight of the bar per week,month, etc. The volume load can be re-lated to the total work accomplished, andthe training intensity can be related tothe rate at which training proceeds.Training intensity should be differentiat-ed from exercise intensity, which is thepower output of a movement. Relativeintensity is the percentage of the 1RM fora given exercise (lift). Weights equal toapproximately 30–50% of the maximumisometric capabilities usually produce thehighest exercise intensity (i.e., power out-puts). This would be equal to about70–85% of the 1RM snatch and cleanand jerk (17); a relative intensity at whichmost training takes place (79).

Variation relates to the changes in thecomposition of the training program.These changes can include alterations involume, training intensity, and exerciseintensity, as well as exercise selection.Variation is extremely important inorder to avoid the maladaptations asso-ciated with various forms of overtrain-ing (46, 65, 70, 71). Variation of train-ing volume and intensity can be used toachieve desired goals; for example, high-er-volume, lower-intensity exercise maybe used to enhance high-intensity exer-cise endurance and beneficially alterbody composition, whereas high-inten-sity, low-volume training may empha-size increases in maximum strength. Ex-ercise variation would include the use ofdifferent exercises as well as variations ofthe same exercise.

Specificity relates to stressing the appro-priate bioenergetic system and using ap-


Table 4Caloric Expenditure and Consumption of Sports Activities (Elite Athletes)

ActivityExpenditure

(Kcal × kg-1 × D-1)Consumption

(Kcal × D-1)

Men

Untrained ≤40 2,000–3,000

Cross country 50–80 2,500–6,000

Marathon 50–80 2,500–6,000

Basketball 55–70 5,000–6,000

Sprinting (track) 50–65 3,300–6,000

Judo 55–65 3,000–6,000

Throwing (field) 60–65 6,000–8,000

Weightlifting 55–75 3,000–10,000

Women

Untrained ≤33 1,000–1,800

Cross-country 45–60 1,500–3,000

Gymnastics 40–60 1,200–2,500

Sprinters (track) 40–55 2,000–3,000

Throwers (field) 35–50 2,000–3,200

Weightlifters 35–50 2,000–3,200

Note: Expenditure and consumption represent the possible ranges across a variety of train-ing phases (i.e., preparation, competition, peaking). Modified from Stone (62), and food recordsfrom elite athletes at the USOC Colorado Springs, CO (Judy Nelson and Karen Daigle, USOC nu-tritionist, July 2004).

propriate mechanics. The specificityprinciple implies that the greatest train-ing effects will occur if the training liftsare similar to the snatch and clean andjerk. This mechanical similarity includespeak force, rates of force development,velocity, and movement patterns.

Periodization can be defined as a logicalphasic manipulation of training vari-ables, which can result in a decrease inovertraining potential and an increasedprobability of retaining training andperformance goals. The concept of peri-odization appears to be the most effec-tive method of applying the principlesof training to most sports includingweightlifting (46). A periodized pro-gram is divided into specific phases,each of which relates alterations in vol-ume, intensity factors, and exercise se-lection.

Although most coaches use some varia-tion of the periodization concept, thereis no universal agreement on the details(46). For example, during the prepara-tion phase in which training volume istypically increased, some coaches in-crease the number of repetitions per setand others increase the number of sets.Other training differences may includethe number and timing of completecompetition lifts (i.e., squat snatch andsquat clean and jerk) or the number oflifts performed at various relative inten-sities during a mesocycle, particularlythose at 90% or above. In recent years,because of the success of many EasternEuropean teams, many Westernweightlifting coaches have attempted toadopt similar training programs. TheseEastern European training programs aretypically centered on the snatch, cleanand jerk, and squats, with few additionalexercises; the loading is often quiteheavy, with maximum loads (1RMs)being attempted several times weekly. Itis the opinion of the authors that adopt-ing these programs has been no moresuccessful—and in many cases less suc-cessful—than programs traditionallyused in the West. Indeed, our observa-

tion over the last 20 years has been thatcoaches/athletes adopting Eastern Euro-pean methods quickly modify these pro-grams. There are several possible reasonswhy the authors believe that these typesof programs have not been particularlysuccessful in the West:

• Differences in athlete selection. Inthe past, prospective weightliftershave been identified in talent identi-fication programs at relatively youngages in many Eastern Europeancountries such as Bulgaria (12).

• Differences in recovery/restorativepractices. This includes the use ofdrugs.

• Overtraining. Basically, overtrainingcan be described as an imbalance be-tween training (and other stressors)and recovery. Training too often athigh intensities increases the over-training potential. Fry et al. (16)have demonstrated that frequenttraining at high intensities can pro-duce decreases in squat performanceand symptoms of overtraining in aslittle as 2–3 weeks. Assuming theseresults can be generalized toweightlifting training, many West-ern athletes attempting to use East-ern European weightlifting trainingmethods may simply be in variousstates of overtraining.

Special Considerations

WomenPeak Power. Peak power is the highest in-stantaneous power produced during amovement and is a key to weightliftingsuccess (34). Peak power output forwomen is about 65% of men during thesnatch and clean and jerk, and about65–75% of men for various jumpingtasks (19). Both untrained and trainedwomen appear to generate lower poweroutputs per volume of muscle and gen-erate lower peak rates of force develop-ment compared with men (35, 50).However, the power output—particu-larly in unloaded exercises such as jump-ing—for women trained in power and

strength-power events such as throwingand weightlifting appear to be some-what closer to that of their male coun-terparts than untrained women com-pared with untrained males (72).

Upper Body Versus Lower Body. Becauseof the relatively lower strength values forupper-body movements, it is possiblethat by placing more emphasis onupper-body training for women thattraining for weightlifting and othersports can be enhanced. This may im-prove performance in tasks that dependin part or whole upon upper-bodystrength. Part of the reasoning for moreemphasis on upper-body strength train-ing is the assumption that the weakerupper-body musculature may limitstrength gains in the lower body (21).Therefore as a result of the relativelyweak upper-body musculature gains inlifts such as squats, cleans, or snatchescould be compromised. Thus, prepara-tion phases for women weightlifters mayneed extra emphasis on upper-bodymusculature—particularly those fo-cused on muscles involved with over-head support (72).

Menstrual Cycle Effects. Alterations inhormone concentrations can affectphysiological and psychological parame-ters, which in turn can affect force pro-duction parameters (36, 42). It is knownthat anabolic hormones such as growthhormone and testosterone can have pro-found effects on strength and strength-related characteristics such as RFD andpower in both men and women. Indeed,strength gains in women have been cor-related to resting serum concentrationsof both total and free testosterone (24,49). In women the concentrations ofvarious hormones, including testos-terone, are influenced by the menstrualcycle. The menstrual cycle is character-ized by relatively large variations in sev-eral hormones on a regular (or nearlyregular) basis. Because these hormones(e.g., estradiol, progesterone, testos-terone) can have effects on metabolicand neuromuscular function, there is a


potential for training/performance al-terations to be affected during differentphases of the cycle.

Apparently, many women do not believethey function normally during menstru-ation, particularly during physical activ-ity (20). However, most studies usingvery active or athletic women do notshow substantial effects of menstruationor the menstrual cycle on various para-meters of performance. Therefore, thesemore active women may have overcomethe negative aspects associated with themenstrual cycle and menstruation (20,55). However, some data indicate thatendurance performance may be com-promised during the luteal phase amongsome but not all aerobically trainedwomen (38). Furthermore, there is rea-son to believe that maximum strengthand related characteristics may be al-tered during various phases of the men-strual cycle. For example, Masterson(40) found that measures of power per-formance on a cycle ergometer (Wingatetest) were reduced during the follicularphase and enhanced during the lutealphase in fairly active young women. Ad-ditionally, some evidence indicates thatstrength gains can be negatively affectedduring the very early follicular phaseand positively affected during the latefollicular and very early luteal phase(49). The greatest strength gains werenoted (49) during the late follicular andearly luteal phase and were moderatelycorrelated with resting serum estradioland testosterone concentrations. Addi-tionally, Reis et al. (49) suggest that al-tering the number of training sessions(reduced during the luteal phase) duringvarious phases of the cycle may enhancethe training effect. These 2 studies (40,49) indicate that reductions in trainingload may be helpful because trainedwomen may not perform strength- orpower-related activities as well duringthe luteal phase (particularly the lateluteal phase).

As a result of individual variation, onepractical approach for women weight-

lifters would be to consider keeping de-tailed records of their ability to per-form during different phases of theircycle. Over a time period of severalmonths it may be determined howtraining should be altered to match themenstrual cycle phase on an individualbasis. Obviously much more researchin this area is needed.

Children and AdolescentsTraining programs, with some differ-ences based on maturity factors, followthe same basic principles and conceptsregardless of age. The differences forchildren depend on a couple of factors:

• Psycho-physiological factors: The chro-nological age related to age of ex-pected peak performance, generallevel of intelligence, physical andmental maturity, and genetic poten-tial.

• Environmental factors: Current in-volvement in sports and prior partic-ipation in activities that develop co-ordination, agility, and flexibility.For example, activities such as gym-nastics can be excellent prerequisitesto participation in weightlifting.

The starting age for weightlifting train-ing in Bulgaria decreased an average of 2years from 1983 to 1993. The recom-mended age to begin training in thissmall country—which has been highlysuccessful in weightlifting—is 10 years(12). The training plan for these youngathletes has been well integrated withtheir physical development, and eachphase of training is built on the previousphase. Compared with most youngWestern weightlifters, more time wasspent on general physical developmentduring the earlier years, and specializedtraining was added gradually in succes-sive years.

The emphasis for children starting atthis age needs to be on general physicaldevelopment that is compatible withsports-specific fitness early on for atleast 2–3 years. For example, weightlift-

ing developmental fitness for childrenwould include considerable trainingdealing with general body strengthening(e.g., gymnastics, tumbling); endurancefactors; and enhancing cardiorespiratoryability, mobility, and flexibility. Howev-er, this training should not include agreat emphasis on long-term endurancesuch as distance running. One methodemphasizing long-term athlete develop-ment and long-term training plans forweightlifting has been described by Ájanand Baroga (1).

According to Balyi (3), developmentalfactors are absolutely essential consid-erations when training children/ado-lescents. He proposes that 8–12 yearsof training is necessary for a talentedathlete to reach elite levels. This is ob-vious in football and basketball, with 3years participation in middle school, 4years in high school, and generally 4–5years in college before playing profes-sional sports. We often try to hurrythis process in weightlifting (and manyother sports).

It must be remembered that many andlikely most of the athletes participatingin Eastern European weightlifting pro-grams were selected, based primarily ongenetic potential, through a comprehen-sive talent identification search. Fur-thermore, they had previous generalphysical training and had the meansfor—and used—methods of enhancingrecuperation. As previously pointed out,all aspects of the training programs usedby these athletes may not be suitable forWestern athletes, particularly children.However, all too often the Westerncoach applies only a part of the EasternEuropean program, missing the overallconcept of long-term progressive train-ing. Usually, the part that is applied byWestern coaches involves early and ex-clusive high-intensity specialized train-ing, applying it with children/adoles-cents who often have less physical abilitythen their Eastern European counter-parts, who often have used little or noprior progressive building blocks of



training, and/or who put little or no ef-fort toward promoting recovery. Fur-thermore, many children/adolescentsfrom Western countries may be activelyparticipating in several other sports suchas American football, soccer, rugby, orbaseball, thus compounding the recov-ery issue. Therefore, we would arguethat in the United States the “big pic-ture” of the program is generally ignoredor not completely understood (see Part2: Program Design in a future issue).

Injury Potential. Ballistic movements,particularly those associated withweightlifting, have been criticized asproducing excessive injuries (6); howev-er, there is little objective evidence sub-stantiating this claim. Reviews and stud-ies of injury type and injury ratesassociated with weight training andweightlifting indicate that:

• Rates of injury are not excessive andthe incidence of injury is less thanthose associated with sports such asAmerican football, basketball, gym-nastics, soccer, or rugby (25, 64, 78).

• There is no evidence that the severityof injury or incidence of traumaticinjury is excessive (25, 64).

Inappropriate training programs mayincrease the potential for injury. As withadults, resistance-training programs forchildren that follow appropriate train-ing guidelines have a low risk of injury(14). Indeed supervised weightliftingprograms have been shown to have aneven lower rate of injury than otherforms of resistive training (25). This lowinjury rate is related to well-supervisedprograms constructed and implementedby a knowledgeable coach (14).

Considerable controversy and lack of un-derstanding surrounds children andweight-training, especially weightlifting.Little information is available that indi-cates that weightlifting, under proper su-pervision, is any more injurious to chil-dren or adolescents compared with othersports; indeed, the weightlifting injury

rate appears to be lower than in mostsports (25). Pierce et al. (47) reportedthat no days of training were lost as a re-sult of injuries incurred in weightliftingover a period of 1 year’s competition andtraining by 70 female and male childrenranging in age from 7 to 16 years. Theyoung lifters were allowed to performmaximal and near-maximal lifts in com-petition as long as correct technique wasmaintained. Both the boys and girls in-creased strength as measured byweightlifting performance. A more de-tailed study (9) of 3 girls (13.7 ± 1.2years) and 8 boys (12.5 ± 1.6 years) acrossa year’s competition (534 competitionlifts) produced similar results. Both boysand girls showed marked weightliftingperformance improvement and no in-juries requiring medical attention or lossof training time (9). The conclusion ofthese observations was that weightliftingis safer than is generally believed, espe-cially if training and competition are ap-propriate for the age group and are wellsupervised. The authors of these papers(9, 47) emphasized that these resultsmust be viewed in light of the scientificapproach to training and competitionwith these children. Only under theseconditions do the authors suggest that re-sistive training or weightlifting is appro-priate for children—a factor that shouldbe true for all sports.

As with any sport, weightlifting compe-tition and weightlifting training shouldbe carried out with reasonable safetymeasures in place. In normal supervisedenvironments, the potential for injury isremarkably low.

ConclusionWeightlifting is a strength-power sport,and the athletes and their training maybe characterized by the following:

• The physical attributes (somatotype)of weightlifters are similar to thoseof wrestlers and throwers.

• The height : weight ratio of weight-lifters is typically lower than formost athletes.

• Although performance is partially re-lated to body mass, stronger weight-lifters (independent of body mass)lift more in the snatch and clean andjerk.

• The weight lifted in competition ispartially related to body mass andstrongly related to peak power.

• Smaller lifters have a higher maxi-mum strength : body mass ratiocompared with large weightlifters.

• Weightlifters are among the stron-gest and most powerful of all sportsgroups.

• The metabolic cost of weightliftingtraining can be quite high and isoften underestimated.

• Weightlifting training typically fol-lows some type of periodized program.

• Injuries during training and compe-tition are not excessive comparedwith most sports. ♦

References1. AJÁN, T., AND L. BAROGA. Weightlift-

ing: Fitness for All Sports. Budapest: In-ternational Weightlifting Federation,1988.

2. BAKER, D. Improving vertical jumpperformance through general, specialand specific strength training: A briefreview. J. Strength Cond. Res. 10:131–136. 1996.

3. BALYI, I., AND A. HAMILTON. Long-term athlete development: trainabilityin childhood and adolescence. OlympicCoach. 16(1):4-8. 2004.

4. BARTONIETZ, K.E. Biomechanics ofthe snatch: Toward a higher trainingefficiency. Strength Cond. 18:24–31.1996.

5. BOBBERT, M.F., K.G.M. GERRITSEN,M.C.A. LITJENS, AND A.J. VAN SOEST.Why is countermovement jumpheight greater than squat jump height?Med. Sci. Sport Exerc. 28:1402–1412.1996.

6. BRZYCKI, M. Speed of movement anexplosive issue. Nautilus. Spring:8–11.1994.

7. BURLESON, M.A., H.S. O’BRYANT,M.H. STONE, M.A. COLLINS, AND T.TRIPLETT-MCBRIDE. Effect of weight


training exercise and treadmill exer-cise on post-exercise oxygen con-sumption. Med. Sci. Sport Exerc.30:518-522. 1998.

8. BYRD, R., K. PIERCE, R. GENTRY, AND

M. SWISHER. Prediction of caloric costof the parallel back squat in women. J.Strength Cond. Res. 10:184–185. 1996.

9. BYRD, R., K. PIERCE, L. REILLY, AND L.BRADY. Young weightlifters’ perfor-mance across time. Sports Biomech.2:133–140. 2003.

10. CARLOCK, J., S.L. SMITH, M. HART-MAN, R. MORRIS, D. CIROSLAN, K.C.PIERCE, R.U. NEWTON, E. HARMAN,W.A. SANDS, AND M.H. STONE. Rela-tionship between vertical jump powerestimates and weightlifting ability: Afield-test approach. J. Strength Cond.Res. 18:534–539. 2004.

11. CLOSE, R.I. Dynamic properties ofmammalian skeletal muscle. Physiol.Rev. 52:129–197. 1972.

12. DIMITROV, D. Age to begin withweightlifting training. In: Proceedings ofthe International Weightlifting Sympo-sium. A. Lukacsfalvi and F. Takacs, eds.Budapest: International WeightliftingFederation, 1993. pp. 25–30.

13. ENOKA, R.M. The pull in Olympicweightlifting. Med. Sci. Sport. 11:131–137. 1979.

14. FAIGENBAUM, A., W. KRAEMER, B.CAHILL, J. CHANDLER, J. DZIADOS, L.ELFRINK, E. FORMAN, M. GAUDIOSE,L. MICHELI, M. NITKA, AND S.ROBERTS. Youth resistance training:Position statement paper and literaturereview. Strength Cond. 18:62–75.1996.

15. FAIR, J.D. Muscletown USA. UniversityPark, PA: Penn State University Press,1999.

16. FRY, A.C., J.M. WEBBER, L.W. WEISS,M. FRY, AND Y. LI. Impaired perfor-mance with excessive high-intensityfree-weight training. J. Strength Cond.Res. 14:54–61. 2000.

17. GARHAMMER, J. A review of poweroutput studies of Olympic and power-lifting: Methodology, performance pre-diction, and evaluation tests. J. StrengthCond. Res. 7:76–89. 1993.

18. GARHAMMER, J.J. Power productionby Olympic weightlifters. Med. Sci.Sports Exerc. 12:54–60. 1980.

19. GARHAMMER, J.J. A comparison ofmaximal power outputs between elitemale and female weightlifters in com-petition. Int. J. Sport Biomech. 7:3–11.1991.

20. GOLUB, S. Periods: From Menarche toMenopause. Newbury Park, CA: Sage,1992.

21. GOTSCHALK, L., W.J. KRAEMER,B.C. NINDL, S. TOESHI, J. VOLEK,J.A. BUSH, W.J. SEBASTTIANELLI,AND M. PUTUKIAN. Contribution ofupper body training on total bodystrength and power in youngwomen. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc.30:S162. 1998.

22. HAFF, G.G., M.H. STONE, H.S.O’BRYANT, E. HARMAN, C. DINAN, R.JOHNSON, AND K.-H. HAN. Force-time dependent characteristics of dy-namic and isometric muscle actions. J.Strength Cond. Res. 11:269–272. 1997.

23. HÄKKINEN, K. Neuromuscular adapta-tion during strength training, aging,detraining, and immobilization. Crit.Rev. Phys. Rehab. Med. 6:161–198.1994.

24. HÄKKINEN, K., A. PARKARINEN, H.KYROLAINEN, S. CHENG, D.H. KIM,AND P.V. KOMI. Neuromuscular adap-tations and serum hormones in fe-males during prolonged training. Int.J. Sports Med. 11:91–98. 1990.

25. HAMILL, B.P. Relative safety ofweightlifting and weight training. J.Strength Cond. Res. 8:53–57. 1994.

26. HARMAN, E. Biomechanical factors inhuman strength. Strength Cond.16:46–53. 1994.

27. HARRIS, G.R., M.H. STONE, H.S.O’BRYANT, C.M. PROULX, AND R.L.JOHNSON. Short term performance ef-fects of high speed, high force or com-bined weight training. J. StrengthCond. Res. 14:14–20. 2000.

28. HESTER, D., G. HUNTER, K. SHULEVA,AND T. KEKES-SABO. Review and eval-uation of relative strength-handicap-ping models. Natl. Strength Cond.Assoc. J. 12(1):54–57. 1990.

29. HUNTER, G., D. HESTER, S. SNYDER,AND G. CLAYTON. Rationale andmethods for evaluating relativestrength-handicapping models. Natl.Strength Cond. Assoc. J. 12(1):47–57.1990.

30. HUNTER, G.R., C.J. WETZSTEIN, D.A.FIELDS, A. BROWN, AND M.M. BAM-MAN. Resistance training increases totalenergy expenditure and free-livingphysical activity in older adults. J.Appl. Physiol. 89:977–984. 2000.

31. IKAI, M., AND T. FUKUNAGA. Calcula-tion of muscle strength per unit cross-sectional area of human muscle bymeans of ultra-sonic measurements.Int. Zeit. angew. Physiol. Einschl. Ar-beitphsiol. 26:26–32. 1968.

32. KAUHANEN, H., J. GARHAMMER, AND

K. HÄKKINEN. Relationship betweenpower output, body size, and snatchperformance in elite weightlifters. In:Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Con-gress of the European College of SportSciences. Jyvaskala: Finland, 2000. p.383.

33. KAUHANEN, H., K. HÄKKINEN, AND

P.V. KOMI. A biomechanical analysis ofthe snatch and clean and jerk tech-niques of Finnish elite and district levelweightlifters. Scand. J. Sport Sci.6:47–56. 1984.

34. KAUHANEN, H., P.V. KOMI, AND K.HÄKKINEN. Standardization and vali-dation of the body weight adjustmentregression equations in Olympicweightlifting. J. Strength Cond. Res.16:58–74. 2002.

35. KOMI, P.V., AND J. KARLSSON. Skeletalmuscle fibre types, enzyme activitiesand physical performance in youngmales and females. Acta Physiol. Scand.103:210–218. 1978.

36. KRAEMER, W.J. Endocrine responsesand adaptations to strength training.In: Strength and Power in Sport. P.V.Komi, ed. London: Blackwell Scientif-ic, 1992. pp. 291–304.

37. LARITCHEVA, K.A., N.I. VALOVARYA,N.I. SHYBIN, AND S.A. SMIRNOV. Studyof energy expenditure and protein needsof top weightlifters. In: Nutrition, Phys-ical Fitness, and Health: International Se-


ries on Sport Sciences (Vol. 1). J. Parizko-va and V. Rogozkin, eds. Baltimore:University Park Press, 1978. pp. 53–68.

38. LEBRUN, C.M., D.C. MCKENZIE, J.C.PRIOR, AND J.E. TAUNTON. Effects ofmenstrual cycle on athletic perfor-mance. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 27:437-444. 1995.

39. LIETZKE, M.H. Relation betweenweight-lifting totals and body weight.Science. 124:486–487. 1956.

40. MASTERSON, G. The impact of men-strual phases on anaerobic power per-formance in collegiate women. J.Strength Cond. Res. 13:325–329. 1999.

41. MCBRIDE, J.M., N.T. TRIPLETT-MCBRIDE, A. DAVIE, AND R.U. NEW-TON. A comparison of strength andpower characteristics between powerlifters, Olympic lifters and sprinters. J.Strength Cond. Res. 13:58–66. 1999.

42. MCMILLAN, J.L., M.H. STONE, J. SAR-TAIN, D. MARPLE, R. KEITH, AND C.BROWN. 20-hour physiological respons-es to a single weight training session. J.Strength Cond. Res. 7:9–21. 1993.

43. MELBY, C., C. SCHOLL, G. EDWARDS,AND R. BULLOUGH. Effect of acute re-sistance exercise on post-exercise ener-gy expenditure and resting metabolicrate. J. Appl. Physiol. 75:1847–1853.1993.

44. NEWTON, H. Weightlifting?, weightlifting?, Olympic lifting?, Olympicweightlifting? Strength Cond. J.21(3):15–20. 1999.

45. NEWTON, R.U., A.J. MURPHY, B.J.HUMPHRIES, G.J. WILSON, W.J. KRAE-MER, AND K. HÄKKINEN. Influence ofload and stretch shortening cycle onthe kinematics, kinetics, and muscleactivation that occurs during explosiveupper-body movements. Eur. J. Appl.Physiol. 75:333–342. 1997.

46. PLISK, S., AND M.H. STONE. Peri-odization strategies. Strength Cond.17:19–37. 2003.

47. PIERCE, K., R. BYRD, AND M. STONE.Youth weightlifting: Is it safe?Weightlifting USA. 17(4):5. 1999.

48. REISER, R.F., S.L. SMITH, AND R. RAT-TAN. Science and technology to en-hance weightlifting performance: The

Olympic program. Strength Cond.18:43–51. 1996.

49. RIES, E., D. FRICK, AND D. SCHMID-BLEICHER. Frequency variation ofstrength training sessions triggeredby the phases of the menstrual cycle.Int. J. Sports Med. 16:545–550.1995.

50. RYUSHI, T., K. HÄKKINEN, H. KAUHA-NEN, AND P.V. KOMI. Muscle fibercharacteristics, muscle cross-sectionalarea, and force production in strengthathletes and physically active males andfemales. Scand. J. Sport Sci. 10:7–15.1988.

51. SANDS, W.A., M.H. STONE, K.DAIGLE, P. CORMIE, S. MCWHORTER,AND J.R. MCNEAL. Relationship ofmaximum isometric strength to verti-cal jump variables and weightliftingperformance in elite American menand women weightlifters. Presentationat the NSCA National Convention,Minneapolis, July. Conference Abstracts,2004. p. 580.

52. SCALA, D., J. MCMILLAN, D. BLESS-ING, R. ROZENEK, AND M.H. STONE.Metabolic cost of a preparatory phaseof training in weightlifting: A practicalobservation. J. Appl. Sports Sci. Res.1(3):48–52. 1987

53. SCHMIDTBLEICHER, D. Training forpower events. In: Strength and Power inSport. P.V. Komi, ed. London: Black-well Scientific, 1992. pp. 381–395.

54. SCHODL, G. The Lost Past. Budapest:International Weightlifting Federation,1992.

55. SCHOENE, R.B., H.T. ROBERTSON,D.J. PIERSON, AND A.P. PETERSON.Respiratory drives and exercise in men-strual cycles of athletic and non-athlet-ic women. J. Appl. Physiol. 50:1300–1305. 1981.

56. SCHUENKE, M.D., R.P. MIKAT, AND

J.M. MCBRIDE. Effect of an acute pe-riod of resistance exercise on excesspost-exercise oxygen consumption:Implications for body mass manage-ment. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 86:411–417. 2002.

57. SIFF, M. Biomechanical foundations ofstrength and power training. In: Bio-

mechanics in Sport. V. Zatsiorsky, ed.London: Blackwell Scientific, 2000.pp. 103–139.

58. SIFF, M.C. Biomathmatical relation-ship between strength and body mass.S. Afr. J. Res. Sport, Phys. Educ. Rec.11:81–92. 1988.

59. SINCLAIR, R.G. Normalizing the per-formances of athletes in Olympicweightlifting. Can. J. Appl. Sports Sci.10:94–98. 1985.

60. STONE, M.H. Physical and physiolog-ical preparation for weightlifting. In:USWF Safety Manual. J. Chandler andM. Stone, eds. Colorado Springs, CO:USA Weightlifting. 1991. pp. 70–101.

61. STONE, M.H. NSCA position stanceliterature review “explosive exercise.”Natl. Strength Cond. Assoc. J. 15:7–15.1993.

62. STONE, M.H. Weight gain and loss. In:Essentials of Strength and Conditioning.T. Baechle, ed. Champaign, IL:Human Kinetics, 1994. pp. 231–237.

63. STONE, M.H., R. BYRD, J. TEW, AND

M. WOOD. Relationship betweenanaerobic power and Olympicweightlifting performance. J. SportsMed. Phys. Fit. 20:99–102. 1980.

64. STONE, M.H., A.C. FRY, M. RITCHIE,L. STOESSEL ROSS, AND J.L. MARSIT.Injury potential and safety aspects ofweightlifting movements. StrengthCond. 16:15–24. 1994.

65. STONE, M.H., R. KEITH, J.T. KEAR-NEY, G.D. WILSON, AND S.J. FLECK.Overtraining: A review of the signs andsymptoms of overtraining. J. Appl.Sports. Sci. Res. 5:35–50. 1991.

66. STONE, M.H., AND K.B. KIRKSEY.Weightlifting. In: Exercise and SportScience. W.E. Garret and D. T. Kirk-endall, eds. Media, PA: Lippincott,Williams, and Wilkins, 2000. pp.955–964.

67. STONE, M.H., G. MOIR, M. GLAIS-TER, AND R. SANDERS. How muchstrength is necessary? Phys. Ther. Sport.3:88–96. 2002.

68. STONE, M.H., AND H.S. O’BRYANT.Weight Training: A Scientific Approach.Minneapolis: Burgess International,1987.

69. STONE, M.H., H.S. O’BRYANT, L.MCCOY, R. COGLIANESE, M.LEHMKUHL, AND B. SCHILLING. Powerand maximum strength relationshipsduring performance of dynamic andstatic weighted jumps. J. StrengthCond. Res. 17:140–147. 2003.

70. STONE, M.H., H.S. O’BRYANT, K.C.PIERCE, G.G. HAFF, A.J. KOCK, B.K.SCHILLING, AND R.L. JOHNSON. Peri-odization: Effects of manipulating vol-ume and intensity—Part 1. StrengthCond. J. 21(2):56–62. 1999.

71. STONE, M.H., H.S. O’BRYANT, K.C.PIERCE, G.G. HAFF, A.J. KOCK, B.K.SCHILLING, AND R.L. JOHNSON. Peri-odization: Effects of manipulating vol-ume and intensity—Part 2. StrengthCond. J. 21(3):54–60. 1999.

72. STONE, M.H., N.T. TRIPLETT-MCBRIDE, AND M.E. STONE.Strength training for women: Intensi-ty, volume, and exercise factors: Im-pact on performance and health. In:Women in Sports and Exercise. W.E.Garret and D.T. Kirkendall, eds.Rosemont, IL: American Academy ofOrthopaedic Surgeons, 2001. pp.309–328.

73. TITTLE, K., AND H. WUTSCHERK. An-thropometric factors. In: Strength andPower in Sport. P.V. Komi, ed. London:Blackwell Scientific, 1992. pp. 180–196.

74. VIRVIDAKIS, K. The new categories.World Weightlifting. 1:37. 1997.

75. WARD, T., J.L. GROPPEL, AND M.H.STONE. Anthropometry and perfor-mance in master and first classOlympic weightlifters. J. Sports Med.Phys. Fitness. 19:205–212. 1979.

76. WILSON, G.J., R.U. NEWTON, A.J.MURPHY, AND B.J. HUMPHRIES. Theoptimal training load for the develop-ment of dynamic athletic perfor-mance. Med. Sci. Sport Exerc. 25:1279–1286. 1993.

77. YOUNG, A., M. STOKES, J.M. ROUND,AND R.H.T. EDWARDS. The effect ofhigh-resistance training on thestrength and cross-sectional area of thehuman quadriceps. Eur. J. Clin. Invest.13:411–417. 1983.

78. ZARICZNYJ, B., L. SHATTUCK, T. MAST,R. ROBERTSON, AND G. D’ELIA.Sports-related injuries in school-agedchildren. Am. J. Sports Med. 8:318–324. 1980.

79. ZATSIORSKY, V.M. Science and Practiceof Strength Training. Champaign, IL:Human Kinetics, 1995.

Michael H. Stone is currently the Exerciseand Sports Science Laboratory Director atEast Tennessee State University.

Kyle Pierce is a professor in the Kinesiologyand Health Science Department and is theDirector and Coach of the USA Weightlift-ing Development Center at LSU Shreveport.

William A. Sands is the head of SportsBiomechanics and Engineering for theUnited States Olympic Committee.

Margaret E. Stone is currently a track andfield coach at East Tennessee State Uni-versity.


weightlifting: a brief overview - rwl weightlifting inc...

Documents