Weightlifting Overhead Pressing Derivatives (WOPDs)

Weightlifting Overhead Pressing Derivatives (WOPDs)

Overview

  • This review examines weightlifting overhead pressing derivatives (WOPDs).
  • WOPDs can improve weightlifting and sports performance.
  • WOPDs require rapid force development, similar to sporting tasks.
  • WOPDs enhance power development and maximal strength.
  • WOPDs provide training stimulus variation due to technical demands.

Key Points

  • WOPDs can improve both weightlifting and sports performance.
  • WOPDs offer training variation due to technical and coordination demands.
  • WOPDs require rapid force development through a closed kinetic chain.

Introduction

  • Weightlifting initially included exercises like one-hand snatch/clean and jerk, and two-hand press.
  • The program was limited to three lifts: two-hand press, the snatch and the C&J.
  • The press was removed from competitions in 1972, leading to modern weightlifting (snatch and C&J).
  • Weightlifting derivatives include catching, pulling, and pressing variations.
  • The jerk involves vertical bar acceleration via hip, knee, and ankle extension.

History of Overhead Pressing

  • Overhead pressing derivatives have historically been significant in weightlifting.
  • There are two stages: before and after the press abolition.

Before Abolition

  • The press was considered a gold standard for strength.
  • The clean and press was adopted as a measure of overall strength at the Amsterdam Olympics in 1928.
  • The IWF abolished the press in 1972 due to judging disparities and lower back injuries.
  • Competitors improved their total score with a good press.
  • Training volume comprised of: 30% pressing exercises, 22% snatch, 16% C&J, 17% squats, 13% snatch and clean pulls, and 2% other complementary exercises.

After Abolition

  • Success is now determined by the snatch and C&J.
  • Coaches and lifters needed to change methodologies to improve speed-strength.
  • Classic pressing exercises were replaced by push press, push jerk, and other jerk derivatives.
  • Roman suggested an exercise ratio of 27% snatch, 26% C&J, 10% press, 20% squat, 15% pulls, and 2% other exercises.
  • Current literature suggests including WOPDs for technique, coordination, and power development.

Previous Literature

  • Previous literature focused on standing press, push press, and jerk techniques.
  • Weightlifting manuals provide exercise technique information.
  • Limited research exists on the kinematic and kinetic variables of WOPDs.
  • Garhammer reported high power outputs in the jerk thrust.
  • Recent research reports high power outputs (3000–5600 W) in the push press exercise, similar to values reported for exercises with similar lower-limb kinematics, such as the jump squat or power clean.
  • Deeper research is needed to understand WOPDs' kinetic and kinematic mechanisms.

Methodology

  • A search of electronic databases was conducted to identify publications on weightlifting overhead pressing deriva-tives up to May 2018. 15 different keywords were used.
  • Inclusion criteria:
    • Full-text, research articles exploring and analyzing any WOPDs.
    • Research articles must have reported insight into either kinetics or kinematics of the exercise/s analysed.

Results

  • Identified 13 independent studies.
  • Quality scores ranged from 3 to 6 points.

WOPDs: Description, Variations, Mechanisms

  • Standing Press:
    • Non-ballistic exercise.
    • Upper body muscles (shoulder girdle and deltoids).
    • Pure upper-body maximal concentric contraction.
  • Push Press:
    • Ballistic exercise.
    • Flexors and extensors of the lower body and upper body muscles (shoulder girdle and deltoids).
    • Impulsive triple extension (ankles, knees and hips) characterized by a SSC of the lower body transmitted through the trunk to an upper body concentric contraction.
  • Jerk:
    • Ballistic exercise.
    • Flexors and extensors of the lower body and upper body muscles through the trunk for stabilization.
    • Impulsive triple extension (ankles, knees and hips) characterized by a SSC of the lower body transmit-ted through the trunk and a posterior knee rebend-ing to catch the bar under in the overhead position. The trunk, lower and upper body are working to find balance and stabilization once the lifter is under the bar.

Standing Press

  • Involves upper body muscles with trunk and lower body stability.
  • Common for strength and hypertrophy rather than power development.
  • May be more applicable to sports performance than bench press due to closed kinetic chain force development.

Push Press

  • Involves lower body dip and thrust movements, transmitting forces through the trunk to upper extremities.
  • Critical for developing high power outputs.
  • Allows greater power application during triple extension with less mechanical cost than the jump squat. (\text{Power} = \frac{\text{Work}}{\text{Time}})

Jerk

  • Involves half-squat, thrust, and drop under the bar.
  • Key variables include vertical movement, optimal time-duration, and half-squat displacement.
  • Thrust propulsion phase shows the highest bar speed and power outputs.

Potential Benefits of WOPDs

  • Improving weightlifting performance.
  • Motor control and coordination.
  • Achieving high levels of power development.

Weightlifting Performance

  • The jerk is complex with a high failure rate.
  • Greater time devoted to the jerk would be beneficial.
  • Useful to increase the use of WOPDs in order to achieve greater levels of strength, barbell velocities and, consequently, power output.

Motor Control and Coordination

  • WOPDs require force development through the kinetic chain.
  • WOPDs strengthen muscles and optimize motor control and coordination.
  • WOPDs requiring speed, acceleration, timing and coordination.

Enhancing Power Development in Sports

  • WOPDs develop high levels of maximal strength and power.
  • WOPDs are mechanically similar to many sporting tasks.

Implementing WOPDs

  • Programming depends on the sport, objective, and time of year.
  • Benefits are best attained by strategically using weightlifting exercise variations.
  • Correct technical execution and progression are critical.
  • The process starts from the development of the slowest and least complex exercise to progress to more difficult exercises
  • WOPDs from the back may be a useful strategy for the general sports population.

Conclusion

  • This review provides information on WOPDs, including mechanisms, benefits, and guidelines.
  • The use of WOPDs is a useful and well-supported strategy to improve weightlifting performance.
  • Potential benefits include improved motor control, coordination, power development and maximal strength in the sport population.
  • WOPDs may be seen as clear enough reasons to implement them in sport training.

Limitations

  • Limited research and poor progression.
  • Limited exercises have been studied to date, which consequently leads to a lack of understanding regarding the kinetic and kinematic data on the full range of WOPDs.
  • Lack of information regarding the longitudinal training effects that may result from implementing WOPDs, which should be researched in the future.