What makes a good coach?

The following was written by my coaching partner, Coach Zhang, co/author of several other articles on my blog. He has also trained in China and we have coached together for nearly a decade.

How can you tell if someone is or will be a good coach? What elements of their personalities, experiences, and abilities can you look at in order to form a solid first impression? Let’s start with one extreme and work backward.

A great coach is someone whose wisdom can simultaneously contradict, validate, and reframe an athlete’s perspective. They have come to that wealth of knowledge from a lack of ego. They are self-evidently excellent at their craft and don’t need fancy certifications or titles to prove it for them. They may not have many followers on social media but excel at building trust and community without the help of an algorithm. They recognize that the art of coaching is a function of one’s own development as a person, so their wisdom often extends into broader life.

But for how many coaches is this currently true? I can only name a few. None of them is famous, and for the sake of my own development I’ll always need to set the bar high enough that I don’t consider myself one. It follows that I am extremely wary of internet-famous coaches; social media has a way of providing followers to those who can attract as opposed to those who can give.

I want to provide an example of a question whose different answers can help illustrate the many levels of pure coaching ability: Should you pull with your weight on your heels?

  1. A new coach may teach people to pull from their heels. They don’t know why other than the fact that it is what they were told.

  2. A coach with some experience may begin to doubt themselves. They may begin to doubt themselves as they realize their athletes are having trouble fully extending, or consistently jump backward/forward. This doubt may extend to derision for their old style as they become an adopter of the new.

  3. A coach worth their salt will have tried both and likely come to the conclusion that pulling from the heels does not work. Maybe this coach has also sought out outside information and can offer some context. 

  4. A truly good coach can explain, without judgment or harshness, why it is worth keeping a more forward balance on the foot, and will teach it smoothly. If they are a student of the sport, they may understand the historical and practical reasons why people like to teach heel-centric pulling. If they were never taught heel-centric pulling, as is the case for many foreign coaches, they may try it anyway in the interest of experimentation. They know from experience that a priori reasoning may not lead to the right conclusion if one’s premises are wrong.

In the case of coaches 3 and 4, we begin to see contradiction, validation, and reframing. These are people from whom we can actually learn.

What we seem to have in the West are highly esteemed coaches who have not advanced beyond stage 1. They are as full of confidence as they are of contempt for anyone training under a new or different style. These are the coaches who say that Chinese technique simply won’t work with longer-legged lifters. They say that technique only needs refinement after a lifter has gotten strong. They may justify the poor technique of their athletes by saying it’s the athlete’s individual needs that necessitate inefficient lifting (reflect on the cruelty of this statement: you are so uniquely bad you need to lift badly too).

Sure enough, the field begins to move on from them. When a “new” style seems to work, they will say that it’s what they taught all along. And the irony is that these styles, whether it is ball-of-foot-centric pulling or internal rotation overhead, were the norm the whole time in every successful country elsewhere. It was never new; rather, the “old” style was taught in isolation away from what worked. Other times, these ideas truly are new to the whole world. Take the concept of RPE, whose application to strength sport only came in the last decade. How many weightlifting coaches do you know programming with RPE? But how many powerlifting coaches do you see using it? Every PL coach I know sees RPE as a godsend, yet WL coaches are generally still in the dark. PL coaches often take inspiration from WL, and the recent trend toward higher frequency in the PL world is owed in part to this. Every powerlifter knows who Lu Xiaojun is. However, weightlifters seem to hold little but derision for powerlifters. A prohibitive culture is passed down from above.

Let’s focus on the good coaches once more. Every fellow coach who has earned my respect has this one trait, among a few others, in common: openness. You can see it in the communication they have with their athletes; are they collaborative or directive relationships? They are open to athlete feedback. They are open to feedback from other coaches, and often seek them out. They are open to ideas from other sports. They apply and study in reciprocal fashion, and they can learn something from anything.

Some years ago, I showed my coach in Shandong a video of a high-level American lifter jerking: with their extreme lean-back and external rotation above, it looked like they were bench pressing the bar in a split. I was hoping to goad him into passing judgment on this lifter due to my immaturity. After all, what better validation is there for my own ideas than to have a bonafide Chinese coach on my side? Though he initially disapproved, he then asked me if I had personally tried this style, and innocently wondered if this lifter was using their superior upper body strength to their advantage. 

This openness extends to demeanor. It seems there is a problem among famous Western coaches who try to cultivate an unkind, hardcore, or otherwise abrasive public image--it’s their team, their style, we get results, unfollow if you don’t agree. What is the likelihood that this coach is open to new ideas? The teams under these coaches learn similar behaviors. Meanwhile, every good coach I have ever worked with made sure to foster a healthy training environment. (A rule of thumb: there are many serious women in their gyms, who often contribute immensely to the community atmosphere. Bad training environments tend to preclude women.) After all, a cohesive community with strong core values keeps people coming back to train. On the other hand, cortisol kills gains.

But I don’t want to sound like “niceness” indicates a good coach either. Rather, it was common among the worst coaches I have worked with to try to be too nice, and it seems to be an attempt to cover up the fact that they don’t actually know what to critique--or worse, they haven’t learned how to give feedback period. It is in their gyms that communities will initially form because of the positive training environment, but the more serious athletes end up leaving when they realize they haven’t made progress. And without veteran lifters who can serve as effective ambassadors and mentors, the community falls apart anyway. What’s more, I have seen these “nice” coaches get just as defensive upon being challenged as the more abrasive ones. It seems that underneath lies the same incompetence.

I once witnessed a coach backstage point to Yatsek and whisper to his youth lifter a few times, verbatim, “Isn’t he scary? Aren’t you glad you’re with me?” As I am Yatsek’s coaching partner and am constantly subject to his taciturn exterior (he’s a very warm person; he’s just Polish), this naturally piqued my curiosity and so I turned to look. The coach and lifter were from a prestigious local team with their own facility and so on. Just from this young athlete’s technique, it was clear that this coach was doing them a disservice. And besides simply being an odd thing to say, the coach’s defensive statement was preemptive; we had been nothing but accommodating to this pair, sharing a platform with them.

It was clear the real sentiment behind the comment: I am intimidated by this man’s ability. It was also clear the real reason for the comment: Yatsek’s youth lifter looked excellent. There was a certain gravity to their attitude in the warm-up room because Yatsek takes his athlete seriously and together they have learned that this is what she prefers. The effort it takes to build this kind of connection with an athlete reflects a sincere and secure kindness that can subvert a first impression. In other words, find a coach who is kind enough to take children seriously.

Thanks Eddie. As my coaching partner, you have to make me look good.
— Coach Yats

Passion is also key. When watching someone coach, do they seem to “wake up” the moment they get into the gym? Do they share in the joy and the pain of their athletes, or does it all seem a few layers detached? Is the coach sitting down, on their phone? When you watch training videos, do you see the coaches providing feedback after reps, thereby allowing the athlete to improve within a set and not just session-to-session? When an athlete seems to be upset, is the coach communicating with them, or on the other side of the gym?

I once heard something that has stuck with me to this day. “Treat everyone like they have the potential to be a champion.” This is a ridiculous statement on its face and of course we shouldn’t be so delusional. But then--why not? In a country whose weightlifting athletes are almost entirely recreational, we don’t have the luxury of picking talents out of a line-up of farmers’ children and discarding the rest. As a Western coach, even if your intention is to produce champions, you have to make it worth it to keep coming back to you, and not move on to some other sport. I make it a point to be impressed by the progression of my newer athletes. Sure, I have seen it happen a million times, but they have only seen it once. And to a good coach, it should never get old.

Here is another story: I was coaching a lifter at a state championship some time ago. We shared a platform with a new lifter, there alone, whose technical inconsistency meant he was missing easy warm-ups. I asked him how long he’d been lifting as a segue into potentially helping him out, as he looked frustrated. He said, “About four weeks.” Four weeks? This raised several questions: as a coach, how could you let this lifter compete after a month of training? A judoka would still be learning to fall at this stage in their training--would you send them into combat? Third: where was the coach himself? Sure enough, his coach was the head of another big-name local team, but hadn’t even bothered to show up until five minutes before this lifter was due to step on the platform--and when he finally appeared, it was with nary a word to his athlete. Instead, he went around speaking to higher-level athletes on other teams. I ended up handling his athlete for him in the first half of the meet, and it’s unclear if he noticed.

And then the fourth question: where was this (USAW international) coach’s passion? For all we knew, his athlete could have been a champion. But one cannot make a champion without being accountable to them, and choosing to hold yourself accountable to someone who may not be able to do anything for you in return takes passion. Look for a gym whose coaches are passionate about developing beginners and youth, and whose veterans started at that gym. If the vets mostly started elsewhere and the beginners seem to be there no longer than a month before another batch rotates in, this is a sign you are looking at a gym whose coaches are more interested in marketing to big names than actually coaching.

What about a coach’s raw technical intuition? Unfortunately, this seems to be an area where a coach will simply have “the eye” (“the sense” of what to fix) or not at all. Either way, developing the eye takes a long time. But this is also why I place this last in a list of things that make up a good coach: do it long enough and you’re going to get good. One’s experience is the key, and the so-called “soft traits” like openness, accountability, sincerity, and passion allow one to accumulate experience long enough to get good (not to mention faster, too). Some coaches stagnate--in my opinion there is something about their development as a person outside of the gym that prevents them from taking in and synthesizing new information beyond a certain point. Perhaps they received official validation too early in their career, or they are too invested in dogma to break through to the next level. Other coaches are content with anonymity if it means they can continue working their craft in peace, free from the demands of a follower base; as mentioned before, the best coaches I have ever worked with have almost no name-recognition in the US.

This may have lead you to some critical thoughts about your own coach, or if you are one of my athletes, about me. That’s okay. A good coach is able to welcome feedback and above all recognizes their responsibility to improve. If there are things on which you don’t quite see eye-to-eye with them, please make these things known. The long-term goal of every coach is to form partnerships with athletes in which we grow too.

If you are a coach yourself, I hope this was helpful. Coaching is a multifaceted art, and the client-coaching relationship inherently contains a dynamic of power that we must honor by holding up our end of the bargain. I’ve found that the best thing I can do for my athletes is to set a good example of how to meet challenges in the gym, if not in life. Getting stronger shouldn’t just happen in the training hall--it’s a metaphor, after all.

Anyway, link in the bio for coaching.

Just kidding.

Eddie

eddie@coachpapayats.com






China Weightlifting Camp 2019


This year again our grassroot youth weightlifting program has been invited to train with one of the most highly skilled coaches in the world.

We are starting a fundraiser, and after seeing your votes, we will do Online Technique Reviews.

Rules are very simple:

  1. Donate at least $100 (but of course more is appreciated) to PayPal yats@coachpapayats.com

  2. Pick 3 exercises where you think you need guidance the most (snatch, clean, squat, jerk, snatch pull, front squat ). Clean and jerk are 2 separate exercises.

  3. Prepare up to 2 video lifts per exercise - for example snatch 80kgx2, or snatch 85kgx1 and 90kgx1.

  4. Send me the videos. If it’s not a big problem for you, I prefer that you create a Google Photos album and add yats@coachpapayats.com as a collaborator. This way I can comment on the videos directly and you have control of your privacy. I can also do it over YouTube, Instagram, Vimeo, etc.

  5. Please send lifts that are characteristic of your usual technique (i.e no super heavy misses). I suggest between 70%-90% of your max.

  6. I will show you the 3 biggest areas for improvement exactly the way I coach my athletes face to face. Simple explanations and demonstrations, just like Chinese coaches do. No writing essays.

  7. You can ask me up to 3 clarification questions via email.


Please allow a few days for my response. I am not sure how many people will contact me at once, and every individual evaluation will take a little bit of time.

Thank you for supporting us. By contributing, you’re helping us all to grow as coaches and lifters. In return, I will be bringing more FREE high level and detailed content to you.


Strength vs technique dilemma

What is the strength vs technique debate? In characterizing any debate, I try to take every position at its word without reducing it to something more assailable. The problem with this debate is that no one’s position is particularly clear even though it seems everyone has heard of the debate and seems to weigh in somewhere on the spectrum.

If you define the argument as “is strength more important than technique?” and vice-versa, then the terms are so loose as to be meaningless. Obviously, both are important. If you define the argument as “beginners should worry about strength (or technique) first,” maybe we can begin to lay out some arguments, but we return to the same basic conclusion. You need good technique to express and develop strength safely, and some requisite level of strength in the right areas to learn good technique. Can we rephrase the question to investigate deeper, and let it lead us to a more insightful conclusion?

The most defined version of the argument I’ve heard is “most missed lifts are due to a lack of strength, and not technique” or vice-versa. I hope I am not misquoting, but I have heard this nearly verbatim. The problem with this argument is that there is a clear answer once again if you introduce the variable of training age and its interaction with specific areas of development.

  • A beginner lifter with some strength background is likely missing 100% of their failed lifts due to poor technique.

  • An intermediate lifter with good technique and a good squat and yet who has never bothered to train their lats may miss 70% of their failed lifts due to a lack of strength in a specific area.

  • And if one has come of age as a weightlifter in the YouTube era in which videos of elite lifters are ubiquitous, you may reasonably believe that most of their lifts are failed due to not having additional strength. Extrapolating from them to your own situation is not reasonable, however.

Our priors are biased toward what we have seen and our own stage of development. If we cut through these biases, we can see that every lifter will have their own needs and sets of weaknesses.

And speaking of our priors, it is my impression that most amateur lifters are content with chaining themselves to the squat rack. They are not often comfortable with improving or possibly do not know how to improve their technique themselves.

It’s quite uncommon for me to see the mythical lifter (or even anyone close) who can clean and jerk their front squat. Even when I have had the chance to start working with these lifters, their chances on any given rested day of making a clean and jerk near their front squat is usually less than 20%--suggesting to me that their weakness, even with highly efficient lifters, can still be technique. After some time together, I have seen them improve these chances to around 60%.

This does not mean I have them neglect their strength work in the meanwhile. This is a common assumption made by many lifters choosing a side: that things are zero-sum, and you must choose one over the other. I’ll put it this way: strength phases are some of the best opportunities to make technical improvements because intensity on the classic movements is typically reduced. As a result, even with a reputation for being exceedingly technical, I have my athletes spend a plurality of the year in strength phases.

However, if you assume things are zero-sum, you are more likely to slack off in these phases, or worse, use your newfound strength to bully the weights around in an aggressive but non-technical fashion.

Let’s further strengthen the case for technique development. Not only is it 1) something lacking in most amateur athletes and 2) not exclusive from strength gain, it simply takes less time to develop good technique than good strength provided you and your coach are serious.

Strength and hypertrophy are adaptations that take years even on the best possible program. On the other hand, it is possible to get many beginners moving more precisely than some national-level lifters in a matter of weeks.

Given that you can make improvements in both areas concurrently, we can evaluate the validity of both extremes of the spectrum. Someone who believes that strength can only come after technique, provided they are actually learning good and not bad technique, only loses a few months. Someone who believes that technique comes after strength will be lifting poorly for years. Now, these are theoretical extremes and most people don’t belong to either stance. Just note that one hypothetical extreme is less dangerous than the other. What about in practice: how often is it that you meet a lifter whose technique improves greatly year after year and yet their classic lifts and strength movements do not improve? This is uncommon in my experience. On the flipside, how often is it that you meet a lifter who does not significantly improve technically even as they get stronger?

If it is possible to do both, why do we tend to see the second category of athlete so much more often? Unfortunately, coaching quality has to be called into question here. The state of coaching in the US is such that many of the most technical athletes we have ever met were self-coached.

So at the heart of the question of “strength or technique?” lay a deeper question: how do you recognize a good coach? Stay tuned.


This post was written by my coaching partner, Coach Zhang. I don't offer any online coaching right now, but he has a small number of spots available. Email him at eddie@coachpapayats.com Ask him some questions even if you're not interested in online coaching.

Selecting the split, the squat, or the power jerk

A very common question we get asked is regarding how Chinese coaches decide an athlete’s jerk style. The answer, as briefly as possible, is there isn’t exactly a choice. Most Chinese weightlifters will train all three, sometimes even in equal proportion depending on the stage of development and training phase. The lifter then goes with the lift that most consistently yields the highest results.

But we wouldn’t be very helpful if we left it at that. Let’s go into why a lifter would train each lift even after they have settled on their chosen jerk style.

In most Chinese schools and under most coaches, the “default” jerk style is still the split, meaning power and squat styles are taught as a means of improving the split. This is for good reason--an excellent split is probably more technically demanding than an excellent snatch or an excellent clean.

As a result, the power jerk becomes an accessory, meant to teach two things primarily: completing the extension, and timing the push of the arms and drop under. These are two extremely neglected components of every jerk, and we see serious errors here in about 80% of the athletes who come to us.

Secondarily, the power jerk can help to teach a balanced split jerk, where the body’s center of gravity does not move fore or aft of where it started (an all-too-common mistake among even high level lifters). However, this task usually falls to the split jerk, which provides instant feedback as to where the bar ended up relative to where you started.

Interestingly, power and squat jerkers are sometimes seen using the split as an accessory as well. In a recent training hall video, Tian Tao can be seen warming up with split jerks in the background. Here, the reasons are more variable. Sometimes the coach simply wants to introduce a novel stimulus and keep the brain active (split jerkers who switch to power for a while and then switch back can attest to the benefits here).

Other times, the power/squat jerking athlete may do something better with the split than they do in their preferred style. In my own athletes, I have seen the split jerk help my power jerkers with the timing: the split jerk requires more thinking between extension and drop under. Getting the extension right in the split jerk makes extending in a power jerk much easier (and vice versa, interestingly).

Sidenote: Contrary to popular expectation, it was my coach’s view (and gradually my own as well) that most of the time, those who cannot split jerk and must power jerk are just clumsy or did not learn the split under a watchful eye. There are exceptions, notably in the athlete who can’t withstand the shearing force in the front knee when landing a split, but these are rare. In the amateur Western weightlifting world, it’s my opinion that most power/squat jerkers just want to look like their heroes.

This is all to say that most of us would benefit by including every style and being especially conscious of where we are technically lacking and how each style can transfer back to our home style. But you are probably not a native squat jerker, no matter how much you want to believe : )

This post was written by my coaching partner, Coach Zhang. I don't offer any online coaching right now, but he has a small number of spots available. Email him at eddie@coachpapayats.com Ask him some questions even if you're not interested in online coaching.

Re-Think Your Squat/Strength Program

To answer one of the most common questions we get, this post is for everyone who wants some basic guidelines on how to customize their programming for increasing strength.

Choosing the right training volume for strength

Let’s get it out of the way: there is no magic number or prescription to increase your squat. When people hop on popular strength-specific programs like the Russian Squat Routine (RSR) or Smolov and see results, the results usually aren’t due to the lifter hitting all the right percentages and all the right sets. In other words, the designer of the program did not use some secret sauce in writing every number exactly as specified. These programs work because most of the time the workload is a simple increase from what the lifter was performing previously.

For example, the RSR is a 3x/week program that has athletes perform 15-18 working squat sets for the first 5 weeks before a test. Smolov has athletes squatting 4x/week for a total of 26 sets a week for 4 weeks (numbers are approximate.) These are large and enormous volumes, respectively: it’s extremely unlikely that an athlete was already performing close to this amount of workload prior to starting one of these programs.

Often times, when following a squat routine, athletes simply move squats to beginning of their session, or add another session dedicated to just squats.

This is why programs work--which is to say that you don’t need to have an elaborate program to progress. Setting aside a few training mesocycles for strength does not necessarily require drastically changing your current program if you are happy with it.

Role of hypertrophy

Not all work is the same. For any given athlete, the primary contributor to strength is muscular cross-sectional area. We’ve seen too many times to count the lean, skinny weightlifter who’s trained for years and only pushes heavy triples and below in the squat. When they ask us what they should do, the answer is clear. It is time to look not just like a weightlifter, but like one who lifts weights.

The physiological difference between a rep at 80% intensity and 100% is not muscle fiber recruitment. Rather, it’s rate-coding, the frequency at which the CNS sends impulses to the muscle, which then modulates the strength of contraction in each individual fiber. Remember our goal is hypertrophy: if we already are at full recruitment at 80%, and we can do more reps/sets at 80% than at 90%, then this is likely why hypertrophy happens best toward the lower end of the intensity window. Because we can do more work/volume at full recruitment.

With this in mind, take time out of the year to really build the foundation of muscle size. Include it alongside the usual work you do at high intensities.

Increase or decrease training volume?

Don’t just track your training: quantify it. The easiest way to do this is just via the number of weekly working sets. Divide this into squat volume, pulling volume, snatch volume, and clean and jerk volume. Include hypertrophy work in its respective categories as well.

If you haven’t made progress in some time and all the other bases are covered (not fatigued, recovering well, not super stressed out, uninjured, protein and calories high enough), just increase your number of weekly working sets by 15-20%. Stay there for a 4-6 week cycle, deload (in earnest), and see if you’ve improved. If not, increase again.


If your legs are small (or even if they aren’t; they’re probably smaller than you think), the increase in weekly volume should come from the addition of hypertrophy work. And alongside the increase in sets, increase the number of reps per set. Start spending most of your time in the 8-12 rep range. For some exercises you could see as many as 20 reps per set.

And make sure that legs/quads are doing the work - if your lower back and glutes are more fatigued than quads after hypertrophy squat session, that means you’re leaning forward and cheating, and your legs won’t grow.

It doesn’t take a max-out session to assess progress. If anything, this “all-out-testing” usually is a detriment to progress. When starting a new cycle, just repeat a given load at a given rep range, and see if things feel lighter or if you feel like you have more reps in reserve now compared to then (another good variable to track).

What about if you don’t have your other bases covered, or if they are but you generally feel beat up? In these cases it can often be wise to decrease training volume, if not just to avoid injury, then to clear up fatigue which could have masked progress for the past few cycles.

Common mistakes in program design and execution

For straight forward strength work, we like the RPE system, it’s fairly easy to understand.

The most common mistake we see in strength work is spending too much time above RPE 9 (less than 1 rep in reserve, no matter how many reps in the set). It’s simply too difficult for most people to maintain good positioning (see above about switching quads to glutes and lower back) at that kind of relative intensity. It’s also a bottleneck for overall set-to-set training quality: opening a workout with a nasty grinder of a working set drastically reduces the chance that you’ll be able to hit anything nicely afterward.

When training in China (actually training, not just watching these lifters flex for Instagram), you’ll find that most athletes spend the majority of their squatting and pulling time around RPE 7-8. In fact, on top sets, Chinese lifters can often be seen giving fellow athletes a little pull on the bar when the rep starts grinding. This (usually) isn’t done to boost each others’ egos. They know that ugly slow RPE 10 reps aren’t always appropriate at that point in the training cycle, and want to maintain good positions.

Another common mistake, this one on the program design side, is a lack of targeting for weak points. Often, poor execution of lifting can be linked to poor program design. If a lifter has trouble keeping the knees forward in the back squat, it doesn’t make sense to have them pulling 3x/week. Their weakpoint is most likely their quad strength (which again is rooted in hypertrophy), for which they need targeted programming. Conversely, if a lifter is extremely upright in the squat and has trouble keeping their heels down, it doesn’t make sense to have them performing cyclist squats at the end of every session. But we see either this mismatch between athlete and program or worse, a lack of intentional consideration for weakpoint improvement in maybe half of the athletes who ask us strength-related questions.

And lastly is a mistake in one’s understanding of training. Weightlifting at the professional level is full of calm people who are comfortable with unbelievable levels of monotony. Weightlifting at the amateur level tends to attract a kind of analytical and neurotic personality type who makes adjustments to training every time they read another article (this one included).

What we are trying to say is that the basic concept underlying weightlifting--more work--is the most important thing. Most of the time you need to do a little bit more and just keep doing the same thing. Not too much more, just a little bit. And maybe the reason that new exercise from your favorite weightlifting guru works is that you added more work.

Your Brothers in Strength,

Coach Zhang: eddie@coachpapayats.com

Coach Yats yats@coachpapayats.com


Jerk Technique Q&A Part 2

Today, we are continuing what we started in Part 1 of the series.

What cues do Chinese coaches use for dip and drive? 

Cueing is an interesting thing to write about in a vacuum.

Chinese coaches will adapt their cues and generate completely novel ones for each individual athlete, depending on they are capable of internalizing. Moreover, you may already know that what sets good technical coaches apart is not their super sweet secret cues--they are often pretty generic, actually--but their willingness to stay with an athlete and drill their positions until they are perfect, often with non-verbal physical manipulation. So this is to say that we can't really list a bunch of fancy cues and expect them to be helpful.

Please watch a quick video below that shows practical application in Chinese weightlifting, and visually answers the last question from today’s blog post.

Lu Li Qi is one of the best professional coaches on the face of the earth. At the same time, nobody knows she even exists. Marketing is the king of weightlifting coaching these days.

However, we can give you a sense of what most Chinese coaches look for in the dip/drive:

1. Lower back tightness

2. Tightness between the shoulder blades

3. Breathing

4. Head stays back, chin tucked down

5. Balance towards the ball of the foot

6. Rhythm of the dip (smooth but short acceleration into the bottom)

7. Completely vertical torso throughout the dip and drive

8. Complete extension before splitting (or squatting)


To achieve any of these with a given athlete, you may have to get creative as a coach. The vertical torso in the dip and drive in our experience is the most difficult to master for amateur athletes, followed by the rhythm of the dip.

We’ve found that the best ways to work on these aspects of the jerk simply involve a lot of silent drilling in front of a mirror, without much cueing beyond the initial explanations.


How many degrees should the back and front foot be internally rotated? 

There is going to be some variance between schools and individual coaches on this matter, but for the most part the feet are taught to land straight without any rotation. If the back foot land with external rotation, the athlete receives correction, but if they land with a small degree (~5-10 degrees) of internal rotation, the coach will often let it slide.

The reasoning for the straight feet mostly involves preventing the knee collapse or instability that comes with excessive rotation.

From speaking to coaches, this is more of a minor point.

Front foot hitting floor first, back foot first, or both at same time in split? 

Same time.

In slow motion videos, you will see that good heavy jerks sometimes have the back foot land first. However, the time discrepancy between the back foot and front foot landing is so small that intentionally teaching a back-foot-first jerk will increase this discrepancy and throw off the timing (assuming that back foot first is even the correct way to do it?)

As with most modern Chinese coaches, we teach a simultaneous planting.

Should the intent be to to send barbell straight vertically, or slightly backwards behind the head? 

The intention should be a vertical path. However, this is another question where the intention of teaching is slightly different than the end result in practice.

The bar does need to go from the front rack position to a position over the traps, so there may seem to be a necessity for a very small backward displacement of the bar. At the same time, even the most technically precise lifters catch the jerk with a very small amount of forward torso displacement and/or lean.

Between these two factors, the net horizontal displacement should be imperceptible.

Watch the video from the beginning of the article again - the barbell definitely goes too far back.

If you enjoyed this article, please share it with your weightlifting friends by clicking the button below.

Jerk Technique Q&A Part 1

We have received many questions about jerk technique via email or social media. Part 1 will deal with some of most common issues.

Does constant split jerking (same leg forward) result in musculoskeletal  imbalances that could cause problems down the road?

This isn't an issue for the majority of lifters, so don't worry if you aren't actually seeing or feeling any imbalances between legs, for example when you squat. Typically Chinese professional weightlifters are accumulating enough overall bilateral volume (through squats, pulls, other classic lifts, jerk dips, power/squat jerks, training 9-12 sessions/wk) such that any additional work done by the front leg in the jerk is comparatively minimal. We'd estimate the additional work on the front leg in a typical training program to be less than 5%. This figure will seem small but remember that the back leg in a balanced split jerk should still be taking around 50%  of the load. With such a small figure it's unlikely that split jerking will add enough work for the front leg to outdevelop the back leg and most coaches in China aren't concerned.


Most Chinese professionals do perform some unilateral work, but not to correct imbalances caused specifically by the jerk.

For those of you who are not Chinese professional weightlifters and/or accumulating extremely high amounts of volume, it may be that the proportion of your jerk training is higher relative to your other movements. In this case, the additional volume on the front leg may be 10 or 15% more than the back leg, which may make some imbalances apparent. What we recommend in this case is to add a few sets of unilateral work of your choice at the end of a squat session. For example, a rear leg elevated split squat. If you are a busy person with life/family outside of weightlifting, you can just do them at home in your living room, no need to waste precious gym time, or go heavy on these.

Another corner case: a lifter may develop imbalances more easily if they always catch their jerks leaning forward, thereby placing most of the weight  on their front leg. For such a lifter, correct this problem first  even if they do not exhibit imbalances.

Our 11 year old lifter training in China under Coach Tao Chuang. Front foot is a little too close, thus more weight is placed on front leg. If coach didn't correct this immediately, it could lead to some balance issues in the future.

Our 11 year old lifter training in China under Coach Tao Chuang. Front foot is a little too close, thus more weight is placed on front leg. If coach didn't correct this immediately, it could lead to some balance issues in the future.

 

Here is a special exercise one can place at the end of a clean&jerk-focused session. You should perform it with alternating legs, but add maybe just one additional set to the weak side. This is also a great movement for learning to stay vertical and keeping your back leg involved in the split:

If you feel you technique is really bad, you can actually do this exercise between your jerk sets, during rest time.

 

Does balance shift from heels in dip to toes on a properly extended drive?

Let's get the first thing out of the way: stay away from your heels  in the jerk. Balance over the heels in the jerk makes a vertical dip and drive extremely difficult to achieve. To get any height in the drive will require you to unconsciously rock your weight over to the toes anyway, introducing another variable you'll have to control.

This isn’t to say that your jerk should live over the toes, either. It’s not as common, but a jerk that dips forward too much will send the lifter forward as well, often resulting in a miss behind.

The optimal balance for most lifters is over the ball of the foot or slightly behind, but still ahead of the midfoot. Experiment a little bit and find the balance that allows you to feel your quads  the most, as they are the prime movers.

 

How long should the split be?

 

The short answer is "long enough to find balance between the front and back legs."

 

You can get within the ballpark this way. Stand over a chalk line with your midfoot. Find a split where your shin is vertical. Mark where your heel is on the platform with chalk. Without changing the split length or position of the front shin, adjust your back leg front or back such that the load feels evenly distributed between both legs. Your back leg should not be straight, so make sure there is a slight bend in the knee while you adjust. You shouldn't drop the back knee to the point where thigh is vertical. When you find the position for both feet, mark the platform where the toe of your back leg is.

Practice the split without weight. When you land in the jerk, your split should be sufficiently balanced and comfortable that you don't feel the need to drop your back leg further to catch the weight.

You can play with chalk marks on the platform, and try hitting them each time... but don’t worry if you don’t land your feet exactly on the marks... as long as your position is balanced front/back, knee/ankle don’t collapse, torso is vertical, that’s what we are the most happy about...

 

Flaring the knees during the dip of the jerk (or general problems with the dip)

 

The knees should follow the toes in the dip phase of the jerk. The toes should be turned out slightly, between 10-30 degrees.

To go into more detail on a related topic: a common problem in the jerk dip is when the knees go out in the descent, but then collapse inward during the drive. It's a subtle one. The first priority in fixing it is to slow down  the dip, as many of these cases are caused by rushing the dip and trying to reverse into the drive too eagerly. It is also possible that the stance is too wide, or the toes and/or knees are going outward too much in the dip to begin with. You can experiment with these factors but we almost never recommend lifters standing outside hip width or turning their toes past 30 degrees.

If these are still problems, try adding in 3-5 sets of jerk dips to your squat sessions using between 90-110% of your best jerk. Don't focus on the power of the drive; just get your positions consistent, intentional, and vertical with each dip. Allowing your knees to track the way they should without valgus collapse. Hips should stay right underneath the shoulders.

Again, if you are a busy with life/work/family, you can just practice jerk dips at home in front of the mirror, only pretending that you have barbell on your chest , just go slow, don't explode... professional Chinese weightlifters often practice "empty" lifts between sets. You can aim for 50 reps total.

 

We will provide more answers to jerk technique questions in Part 2...

 

How to breathe in the Chinese weightlifting system

Lately Yatsek and I have received a few questions, similar to each other in nature, from followers regarding the difference between Chinese and Western styles of breathing or “bracing” under load.

The Western style--really an average of varying opinions--ostensibly teaches a neutral spine, deep breaths, and some degree of “pushing the belly out” before contracting the abdominal muscles.

The Chinese style--also an average of opinions, maybe more standardized across coaches--seems as though as it teaches one to hold the spine more extended, use shallower breaths, and to “suck in the stomach” before contracting the abs. I’m careful to use the words “ostensibly” and “seems as though” because in truth, these styles do not differ substantially neither in the end result nor the internal feelings one should have when bracing.

 

Put another way, it is not the case that one style teaches a completely neutral spine, no lumbar extension, super deep breaths while another teaches tiny breaths under hyperextension while forcefully sucking in the abs. Some differences do exist, but these are small. Other differences are illusory.

 

Before I go into the meaningful differences, it’s helpful to have a general framework  for how the abdominal muscles and breathing contribute to holding positions under load. Imagine a half-inflated balloon in your hand. What happens when you squeeze this balloon? It will pressurize and become rigid. The balloon is your torso and the hand is your abs. This is one of the many mechanisms by which having strong abs  can protect your lumbar spine and its extensors under load. Using your abs to increase intra-abdominal pressure affords your torso extra rigidity without increasing the muscular demands on your erectors. A belt is a mechanical means of allowing you to pressurize even more.


So what happens to breathing and abdominal contraction when one hyperextends the back? You can try this out on your own. It should feel harder to use your abs when you are hyperextended simply because your abs are now trying to contract from a more stretched position. Turned the other way, with posterior pelvic tilt and a rounded back, your abs can squeeze extremely hard but now your erectors are in a weak, stretched position. This is no way to carry a load either.

 

This leaves us with two options. A neutral back position, fairly straight in its curvature, allows you a nice balance of abdominal contraction (not trunk flexion) and back extension. However, if you deviate from this slightly by allowing a small amount of hyperextension in the lumbar and thoracic spine, you can just about maintain the same amount of ab squeeze while achieving a slightly more upright back position.

In a Chinese-style back squat, this is key to maintaining good position. Because upright positions tend to preferentially activate the quads over posterior muscle groups, transferability to the classic lifts when performing them in the Chinese style is also improved.

 

It is important, however, to emphasize how small this amount of hyperextension is. It is entirely possible to extend too far,  lose the ability to contract the abs, and subsequently lower your intra-abdominal pressure as established above. This becomes especially apparent under load and, as someone who used to squat like this, noticeably fatigues your lumbar extensors in a way that risks injury.

How much is enough? Find a neutral spine at the top of an unloaded squat and monitor how that feels. Now hyperextend as much as you can and feel that out. The right position, depending on mobility, is usually around halfway to totally hyperextended. It could be that you are very mobility-limited, in which case it might be two-thirds of the way. On the other hand you may be hypermobile or passively anteriorly pelvic tilted, in which case it’s just a touch. In any case, it’s almost never all the way. That may feel appropriate if you are trying to combat severe butt-wink, but in that case improving your flexibility should take priority over your breathing habits.

 

Now what about how big of a breath to take? Enormous breaths that push the belly out can also compromise one’s intra-abdominal pressure. This stretches out the abs, specifically the transverse abdominis,  to the extent that they can’t easily activate. Using the balloon metaphor, imagine simply filling up the balloon up with a little bit more air but being unable to squeeze it with your hands. The overall pressure increase from a little more air is less than if you hadn’t taken that air but used your hands to squeeze it. This is where that “ostensibly” qualifier comes in handy. Most experienced Western coaches I’ve spoken to don’t cue this. They advocate for more moderated breathing.

 

That brings us to the Chinese cue of “sipping air” and what appears to be Chinese lifters sucking in their abs--the “vacuum” appearance--before descending in a squat. Sipping air should not feel the same as shallow breaths. In other words, you should still take in enough air to feel solid; it just might be less air than you think if you are used to taking big breaths with the belly out and it may feel more like breathing into the chest than the stomach. With these kinds of breaths, some lumbar extension, and a lean enough physique (emphasis here), breathing may well appear to come from sucking the abs in. This isn’t really what’s happening; it’s likely you just haven’t seen that many shredded Chinese lifters with 8-packs using this kind of breathing to squat 4x body weight. That’s okay, one day it will be you (usual disclaimers apply).

 

In short: find a neutral spine, extend just a little bit. Breathe in enough to feel safe but still be able to squeeze your abs--no more than that. Descend but stay upright throughout using the additional extension. Enjoy the fruit of your labor (reading through this article).





 

Chinese Snatch Technique Seminar - Basic Concepts

During our fundraising seminar, we had to erase and re-engineer pulling technique of 20 different people.

We believe Chinese technique differs a lot from American technique, and we wanted to present people with alternative  point of view.

On paper, it looks certainly the same: keep bar close, use your legs, good back position, extend... nothing new under the sun...

So, when you hear Chinese repeating: close, fast, balanced... it's not that Americans teach far away, slow, and unbalanced... the difference is in actual execution,  correction, and programming based on weakness...

For example:

  1. Bar close means bar lightly touching along thighs, not just one place of contact, then it stays close to abdomen, chest, and even face... So if you bump or brush the bar, you don't keep it close enough to your thighs.
  2. Fast is only important after reaching perfect power position.
  3. Chest is open and back arched throughout the whole movement, not just at starting position.
  4. Proper extension doesn't mean exploding, it means actually joint straightening at knee and hip, you can add speed later.

The main technique teaching tools are:

  • snatch high pull from the hang (finish with elbows up)
  • snatch deadlift from the floor (finish in full extension on balls of feet and shrug)
If you cannot perform snatch deadlift or snatch high pull correctly, you are not snatching correctly.

Please watch the video to observe major technique concepts.

For most people, Chinese power position (more crouching) was something different from what they were used to - no surprise here, as everyone hears "stay over the bar longer" all the time.

Notice that there are a lot of minor technical details, and many cues are visual or tactile, not just verbal. We don't like to listen ourselves talk.

Goal #1 was to teach everyone to achieve decent power position and extension, and we think we were successful. Other small details, like arm bending, not keeping the bar super close, chest closing, etc. can be adjusted easily by training in front of the mirror by athletes themselves.

So if you take away only one thing from this post, think: power position every time!!!

Thanks again for supporting our youth weightlifting program and all generous donations!

Intro to Squat Technique by Wu Jingbiao

This video was published with permission of Wu Jingbiao,  current World Record Holder in Snatch 139kg at 56kg bodyweight.

I tend to listen to technical advice from guys with slimmer built like him... just my bias. 

Subtitles by our mutual friend - Qiushi. 
Please follow his Instagram accounts: @jingyi_weightlifting_club and @wu_jingbiao_weightlifting

Major points from video:

  • Wide squats with toes out targets inner quads
  • Narrow squats with toes parallel target quads and glutes
  • The narrow/wide squats are assistance exercises - check out my previous blog post here and here
  • Hip muscles (tight) prevent from collapsing in deepest position (going lower without control doesn't mean better)
  • Back is tight - no surprises here, you'll hear him saying "yao bei" many times throughout video
  • Torso upright - again, not a surprise
  • Keep air in your chest

If you want to ask a question related to this video, I will try to forward it to Jingbiao with help of Qiushi.