Suchomel, TJ, Wright, GA, Kernozek, TW, and Kline, DE. Kinetic comparison of the power development between power clean variations. J Strength Cond Res 28(2): 350- 360, 2014-The purpose of this study was to compare the power production of the hang clean (HC), jump shrug (JS), and high pull (HP) when performed at different relative loads. Seventeen men with previous HC training experience, performed 3 repetitions each of the HC, JS, and HP at relative loads of 30, 45, 65, and 80% of their 1 repetition maximum (1RM) HC on a force platform over 3 different testing sessions. Peak power output (PPO), peak force (PF), and peak velocity (PV) of the lifter plus bar system during each repetition were compared. The JS produced a greater PPO, PF, and PV than both the HC (p > 0.001) and HP (p > 0.001). The HP also produced a greater PPO (p > 0.01) and PV (p > 0.001) than the HC. Peak power output, PF, and PV occurred at 45, 65, and 30% 1RM, respectively. Peak power output at 45% 1RM was greater than PPO at 65% (p = 0.043) and 80% 1RM (p = 0.004). Peak force at 30% was less than PF at 45% (p = 0.006), 65% (p > 0.001), and 80% 1RM (p = 0.003). Peak velocity at 30 and 45% was greater than PV at 65% (p > 0.001) and 80% 1RM (p > 0.001). Peak velocity at 65% 1RM was also greater than PV at 80% 1RM (p > 0.001). When designing resistance training programs, practitioners should consider implementing the JS and HP. To optimize PPO, loads of approximately 30 and 45% 1RM HC are recommended for the JS and HP, respectively.

This review article examines previous weightlifting literature and provides a rationale for the use of weightlifting pulling derivatives that eliminate the catch phase for athletes who are not competitive weightlifters. Practitioners should emphasize the completion of the triple extension movement during the second pull phase that is characteristic of weightlifting movements as this is likely to have the greatest transference to athletic performance that is dependent on hip, knee, and ankle extension. The clean pull, snatch pull, hang high pull, jump shrug, and mid-thigh pull are weightlifting pulling derivatives that can be used in the teaching progression of the full weightlifting movements and are thus less complex with regard to exercise technique. Previous literature suggests that the clean pull, snatch pull, hang high pull, jump shrug, and mid-thigh pull may provide a training stimulus that is as good as, if not better than, weightlifting movements that include the catch phase. Weightlifting pulling derivatives can be implemented throughout the training year, but an emphasis and de-emphasis should be used in order to meet the goals of particular training phases. When implementing weightlifting pulling derivatives, athletes must make a maximum effort, understand that pulling derivatives can be used for both technique work and building strength–power characteristics, and be coached with proper exercise technique. Future research should consider examining the effect of various loads on kinetic and kinematic characteristics of weightlifting pulling derivatives, training with full weightlifting movements as compared to training with weightlifting pulling derivatives, and how kinetic and kinematic variables vary between derivatives of the snatch.

No description available.