There is conflict between recognized Strength and Conditioning professionals and organizations regarding the most effective methods of teaching the power clean weight training exercise. The area of greatest conflict is related to the effectiveness of whether to specifically introduce and segmentally practice the Double Knee Bend technique or not. Sixty collegiate football players with novice power clean experience were randomly assigned to one of three groups: (1) a group in which the double knee bend technique was taught and practiced segmentally (DKB); (2) a group which was instructed in the same way as the DKB group except that the double knee bend was not specifically taught or practiced segmentally(NDKB), and (3) a control group (CG) which was exposed to an orientation session similar to the first two groups, but was not specifically instructed in the power clean technique. Subjects in all three groups were video taped performing the power clean with a standardized weight both prior to and following a seven week training session. Each video taped trial was randomly assigned to an expert reviewer for qualitative analysis in a blind review. Reviewers rated the three upward movement phases as well as the total upward movement phase of the lift using a published check list and rated the performance from one to five with five being the best technique. The result of the ANOVA and a Scheefe test showed that the two treatment groups both demonstrated significant improvement pre to post test in the power clean technique p<0.01. The control group did not significantly improve over the course of the same training period. In comparing the two treatment groups, the between groups analysis (DKB) and (NDKB) were not significantly different. These results suggest that the double knee technique does not need to be specifically taught or segmentally practiced in order to improve power clean technique among college football players with novice power clean experience. / Ed. D.

This study examined the impact of load on lower body performance variables during the hang power clean. Fourteen men performed the hang power clean at loads of 30%, 45%, 65%, and 80% 1RM. Peak force, velocity, power, force at peak power, velocity at peak power, and rate of force development were compared at each load. The greatest peak force occurred at 80% 1RM. Peak force at 30% 1RM was statistically lower than peak force at 45% (p = 0.022), 65% (p = 0.010), and 80% 1RM (p = 0.018). Force at peak power at 65% and 80% 1RM was statistically greater than force at peak power at 30% (p < 0.01) and 45% 1RM (p < 0.01). The greatest rate of force development occurred at 30% 1RM, but was not statistically different from the rate of force development at 45%, 65%, and 80% 1RM. The rate of force development at 65% 1RM was statistically greater than the rate of force development at 80% 1RM (p = 0.035). No other statistical differences existed in any variable existed. Changes in load affected the peak force, force at peak power, and rate of force development, but not the peak velocity, power, or velocity at peak power.