Journal of Athletic EnhancementISSN: 2324-9080

Reach Us +18507546199
All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.

Research Article, J Athl Enhanc Vol: 6 Issue: 5

A Pilot Comparison of the Hang Clean and Hang Snatch to the Clean Pull and Snatch Pull

Sanders C1, Sevene TG2, Adams KJ2 and DeBeliso M1*

1Department of Kinesiology and Outdoor Recreation, Southern Utah University, USA

2Department of Kinesiology, California State University Monterey Bay, USA

*Corresponding Author : Mark DeBeliso
Department of Kinesiology and Outdoor Recreation, Southern Utah University, 351 W University Blvd,Cedar City, UT 84720, USA
Tel:
435-586-7812
E-mail:
[email protected]

Received: May 22, 2017 Accepted: June 12, 2017 Published: June 17, 2017

Citation: Sanders C, Sevene TG, Adams KJ, DeBeliso M (2017) A Pilot Comparison of the Hang Clean and Hang Snatch to the Clean Pull and Snatch Pull. J Athl Enhanc 6:5. doi: 10.4172/2324-9080.1000269

Abstract

Development of lower body strength and power is a primary goal of athletic-based strength and conditioning programs. Weightlifting and weightlifting derivatives are key components of these programs.

1.1 Objectives: This pilot study compared two variations of weightlifting derivatives on lower body strength and power in female athletes.

1.2 Methods: Athletes (n=21, 19-21 years) were randomly assigned to either the Hang Group-HG (n=11) or the Pull Group-PG (n=10). Weightlifting training took place for 6 weeks focusing on the hang clean and hang snatch with catch, and the clean pull and snatch pull without catch; supplemental resistance exercises were identical between the groups. HG performed hang cleans for weeks 1-3, before transitioning over to hang snatches for weeks 4-6. PG performed clean pulls for weeks 1-3, before transitioning over to snatch pulls for weeks 4-6. The same set, repetition, and loading scheme were used for both groups. Testing was conducted for 1RM box squat (BS), vertical jump (VJ), and standing broad jump (BJ).

1.3 Results: 14 participants completed the study (HG, n=9; PG n=5). Both groups significantly improved 1RM BS scores (HG: 15.8%, PG: 15.5%) and VJ (HG: 12.1%, PG: 16.1%) (p< 0.05). Despite improvements in 1RM BS strength and VJ performance, the BJ did not improve in either group (p> 0.05). There was no significant difference in gain scores between groups for VJ or 1RM box squat.

1.4 Conclusion: Within the parameters of this study, the hang clean and hang snatch with catch, and the clean pull and snatch pull without catch, have similar effects on lower body strength and power. Practitioners may consider these weightlifting derivatives interchangeable choices to increase both lower body strength and power. However, the lack of a catch may be advantageous in terms of reduced joint stress to the athlete and improved time efficiency during teaching and training.

Keywords: Power; Strength; Resistance training; Weightlifting derivatives

Track Your Manuscript

Share This Page