Kinetic comparison of the power development between power clean variations
- PMID: 23689341
- DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31829a36a3
Kinetic comparison of the power development between power clean variations
Abstract
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.
Similar articles
-
Portions of the force-velocity relationship targeted by weightlifting exercises.Sci Rep. 2024 Dec 28;14(1):31021. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-82251-8. Sci Rep. 2024. PMID: 39730831 Free PMC article.
-
Weightlifting pulling derivatives: rationale for implementation and application.Sports Med. 2015 Jun;45(6):823-39. doi: 10.1007/s40279-015-0314-y. Sports Med. 2015. PMID: 25689955 Review.
-
Jump Shrug Height and Landing Forces Across Various Loads.Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2016 Jan;11(1):61-5. doi: 10.1123/ijspp.2015-0028. Epub 2015 May 1. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2016. PMID: 25932750
-
Mechanical Demands of the Hang Power Clean and Jump Shrug: A Joint-Level Perspective.J Strength Cond Res. 2018 Feb;32(2):466-474. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001636. J Strength Cond Res. 2018. PMID: 27669182 Clinical Trial.
-
Mechanical power production assessment during weightlifting exercises. A systematic review.Sports Biomech. 2023 May;22(5):633-659. doi: 10.1080/14763141.2020.1747529. Epub 2020 Apr 27. Sports Biomech. 2023. PMID: 32336212
Cited by
-
Propulsion Phase Characteristics of Loaded Jump Variations in Resistance-Trained Women.Sports (Basel). 2023 Feb 9;11(2):44. doi: 10.3390/sports11020044. Sports (Basel). 2023. PMID: 36828329 Free PMC article.
-
Effect of Accommodating Elastic Bands on Mechanical Power Output during Back Squats.Sports (Basel). 2018 Nov 22;6(4):151. doi: 10.3390/sports6040151. Sports (Basel). 2018. PMID: 30469523 Free PMC article.
-
The Optimal Load for Maximal Power Production During Lower-Body Resistance Exercises: A Meta-Analysis.Sports Med. 2015 Aug;45(8):1191-205. doi: 10.1007/s40279-015-0341-8. Sports Med. 2015. PMID: 26063470
-
Portions of the force-velocity relationship targeted by weightlifting exercises.Sci Rep. 2024 Dec 28;14(1):31021. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-82251-8. Sci Rep. 2024. PMID: 39730831 Free PMC article.
-
Weightlifting pulling derivatives: rationale for implementation and application.Sports Med. 2015 Jun;45(6):823-39. doi: 10.1007/s40279-015-0314-y. Sports Med. 2015. PMID: 25689955 Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Research Materials
Miscellaneous