Long-Term Athletic
Development and Its
Application to Youth
Weightlifting
Rhodri S. Lloyd, PhD, CSCS*D,1 Jon L. Oliver, PhD,2 Robert W. Meyers, MSc,2 Jeremy A. Moody, PhD,2
and Michael H. Stone, PhD, FNSCA3
1
Faculty of Applied Sciences, University of Gloucestershire, Gloucester, United Kingdom; 2Cardiff School of Sport,
Cardiff Metropolitan University, Cardiff, United Kingdom; and 3Department of Exercise and Sport Science, Center of
Excellence for Sport Science and Coach Education, East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, Tennessee
SUMMARY
CONSIDERABLE CONTROVERSY
AND MISGUIDED INFORMATION
HAS SURROUNDED THE INCLU-
SION OF WEIGHTLIFTING WITHIN
YOUTH-BASED STRENGTH AND
CONDITIONING PROGRAMS TO
DEVELOP STRENGTH, POWER, AND
SPEED. THIS ARTICLE REVIEWS THE
EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT ITS INCLU-
SION AS A SAFE AND EFFECTIVE
MEANS TO ENHANCE ATHLETIC
POTENTIAL. GUIDELINES ARE PRE-
SENTED TO PROVIDE COACHES
WITH A STRUCTURED AND LOGI-
CAL PROGRESSION MODEL,
WHICH IS ASSOCIATED WITH THE
THEORETICAL CONCEPTS UNDER-
PINNING LONG-TERM ATHLETIC
DEVELOPMENT. IT IS HOPED THAT
THIS REVIEW WILL SERVE AS A
USEFUL TOOL TO HELP STRENGTH
AND CONDITIONING COACHES IN-
TEGRATE WEIGHTLIFTING EXER-
CISES WITHIN TRAINING
PROGRAMS OF YOUNG ATHLETES
IN A SAFE AND EFFECTIVE MANNER.
INTRODUCTION
eightlifting has long been
W used in athletic training pro-
grams to develop strength,
Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association
power, and speed in recreational and
elite level athletes. Weightlifting refers
to the official sport (that includes the
snatch and clean and jerk) and should
not be confused weight lifting, resis-
tance training, or powerlifting (54).
Although the training modality is often
used within elite level sport (30,52), its
inclusion within youth-based training
programs has previously been ques-
tioned over concerns surrounding the
safety and well-being of young athletes
(2). However, recent literature suggests
that injuries occurring as a direct result
from generic resistance training and
specific weightlifting activities in youths
is relatively low (10,20,21,31,45,50,55).
Indeed, it is important for physical
educators, sports coaches, and strength
and conditioning coaches to appreciate
and rationalize the dichotomy that
exists between the risk and reward of
weightlifting exercises, as they do in
many other training modalities and
technical preparation strategies. It is
suggested by some of the leading sports
science authorities, such as the National
Strength and Conditioning Association
(NSCA), Australian Strength and Con-
ditioning Association (ASCA), United
Kingdom Strength and Conditioning
Association (UKSCA), and the British
Association of Sport and Exercise Sci-
ences (BASES), that in the presence of
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com
suitably qualified personnel, resistance
training in general is a safe and effective
practice for young athletes to partici-
pate (4,19,49,55).
MISCONSTRUED RISKS AND
UNDERVALUED REWARDS OF
WEIGHTLIFTING MOVEMENTS FOR
YOUTHS
A major concern related to weightlift-
ing movements for young athletes has
revolved around the potential damage
to the epiphyseal growth plate. Al-
though it is true that this structural
compound is weaker than the sur-
rounding connective tissue, there is no
evidence indicating that weightlifting,
and more generally resistance training,
is especially injurious to the epiphyses
(49) or has a direct correlation with
reductions in eventual growth height in
young athletes (18,39).
Conversely, adaptations to the con-
nective tissues and skeletal system that
can be gained from weightlifting when
young athletes are appropriately su-
pervised will better prepare them to
tolerate the impact and ground re-
action forces that they are likely to
KEY WORDS:
weightlifting; long-term athlete
development; power; youths;
pediatrics
55
Weightlifting for Youth
experience within a sporting environ-
ment. Consequently, instead of think-
ing of the risks associated with
exposing young athletes to weight- greater risk of injury than other activities
lifting, strength and conditioning
coaches, sports coaches, and physical
educators should focus on the risks of
not exposing young athletes to the in weightlifting activities can demon-
training mode to better prepare them
for competitive sporting situations.
Researchers have identified an addi-
tional range of risk factors prevalent to
weightlifting (and resistance training in
general), including unsafe environment
and equipment, excessive load and
volume of training, and limited rest
intervals (25,49). However, as the
authors confirm, these risk factors can
be reduced or eliminated with appro-
priate supervision and instruction from
suitably qualified coaches. As a mini-
mum, coaches should have attained
a relevant strength and conditioning
qualification (e.g., NSCA Certified
Strength and Conditioning Specialist,
UKSCA Accredited Strength and Con-
ditioning Coach awards, or USA
Weightlifting certification).
These qualifications only suggest a suit-
able level of knowledge or competency,
and therefore it is essential that the
coach has the relevant pedagogic
experience and communication skills
to work with young athletes of varying
abilities and personalities. This is espe-
cially true when considering the plan-
ning of weightlifting training sessions,
given the acceptance that strength and
conditioning programs designed for
adults (in terms of loading, frequency,
and intensity) should never be super-
imposed on children owing to clear
physiological differences (19,44,46,49).
A growing body of evidence now exists
to question the previous concerns
surrounding the participation of youths
in weightlifting activities (20,24,25).
Although minimal recent research ex-
amining the safety of youth weightlift-
ing exists, it has been established in
retrospective analysis that weightlifting
is safer than many other competitive
sports and activities (31). Conversely,
there seems to be no evidence to prove
56 VOLUME 34 | NUMBER 4 | AUGUST 2012
that when performed correctly under
the supervision of appropriately quali-
fied personnel, weightlifting carries a
accelerating, decelerating, and jumping.
that youths regularly participate in
(24,31). Importantly, research now
shows that young athletes participating
prevention standpoint. Previous litera-
strate significant gains in strength with
few reports of injury (10,22,50).
Specifically, Pierce et al. (50) high-
lighted that during a year long period
of weightlifting competitions and train-
ing sessions, injuries incurred directly
from weightlifting resulted in no loss of
training days in a sample of 70 boys
and girls (aged 716 years), who
regularly completed maximal and
near-maximal lifts in competition. In
addition to the increases in loads lifted
by the individuals, the lack of reported
injuries further informs the potential
gains and relatively low risks associated
with youth weightlifting. Another
study by Byrd et al. (10) monitored
weightlifting performance of young
athletes (aged 1215 years) over time
and reported significant improvements
in absolute and relative load lifted for
the snatch and clean and jerk and total
load when lifts were combined. Im-
portantly, over the course of 534
competitive lifts and all training ses-
sions, there were no injuries reported
that required medical attention or
forced the athlete to miss training
(10). This provides evidence for the
effectiveness of the training mode
when coached and supervised by
appropriately trained personnel.
It is now recognized that a well-struc-
tured weightlifting program can elicit
positive training adaptations in young
athletes for strength and power (8,9,11).
Currently, there is a lack of published
research investigating the effectiveness of
weightlifting on actual sports perfor-
mance in adolescent athletes. However,
the snatch, clean and jerk, and their
derivative lifts, do replicate the kinetic
and kinematic patterns inherent to lower
limb locomotion, where force application
against the ground via triple extension of
the ankle, knee, and hip is essential
(12,32). The adaptations in strength and
power that result from weightlifting (34)
would suggest potential transfer to
sporting movements such as sprinting,
However, weightlifting should not only
be viewed from a performance enhance-
ment perspective but also from an injury
ture examining the loading during
landing activities has shown that the
ground reaction forces can be up to
7 times body mass (14,42). When
examining the weightlifting exercises in
more detail, although the initial lift from
the ground to shoulder height (clean) or
to above the head (snatch) involves
primarily concentric muscle activity, the
catch phase of each lift involves drop-
ping underneath the bar to support the
load in either a front squat position for
the clean or an overhead position for the
snatch (Figure 1). During the catch
portion of each lift, the primary muscle
action of the lower limbs will involve
eccentric contraction, synonymous with
the muscle actions involved during
landing activities. Properly performed
catch phases produce a smaller impact
force and are more controllable than
typical jump landings (29). Given the
reduced prelanding neuromuscular effi-
ciency demonstrated by younger chil-
dren (47), and the high incidence of
noncontact anterior cruciate ligament
injuries in young women (15), it is
speculated that weightlifting could be
used as an effective injury prevention
strategy by strengthening the movement
kinematics inherent to landing, cutting,
and deceleration.
LONG-TERM ATHLETE
DEVELOPMENT AND
WEIGHTLIFTING FOR YOUTHS
Following the emergence of the long-
term athlete development (LTAD)
model (5) and its acceptance by a range
of sporting organizations (3,9,16),
strength and conditioning coaches are
encouraged to expose young athletes to
specific training stimuli at various stages
of development, where they are most
susceptible to accelerated adaptation
(5). The model has been designed to
combine successful training methods
alongside a greater scientific basis of

Figure 1. Front squat position for the clean (left), and an overhead squat position for
the snatch (right).
pediatric exercise science (5). Specifi-
cally, the model attempts to accommo-
date for variations in biological age, by
objectively assessing rates of change in
stature and body mass (5). Such an
approach enables children to be trained
in accordance with their biological
status as opposed to chronological
age, and it is speculated that with
exposure to the correct training stimulus
during windows of opportunity,
young athletes can reach a greater
physiological ceiling potential (5). These
windows are typically pre- and post-
pubertal for strength, speed, suppleness,
stamina, and skill, and exist in relation to
the onset of peak height velocity (PHV)
(5). PHV refers to the maximum velocity
of growth in stature during a growth
spurt and has been used to characterize
developments in performance relative to
the adolescent growth spurt (40).
The prepubertal window is associated
with age-related neural developments,
whereas the postpubertal window is
a result of altered sex hormone concen-
trations, leading to greater muscle mass
and force producing capabilities (27).
Despite an overreliance on anecdotal
evidence, and a lack of peer-reviewed
scientific research to support the exis-
tence of windows of opportunity (27),
the LTAD model at least offers a struc-
tured approach to youth athletic de-
velopment. Indeed, windows of
opportunity may present unique train-
ing opportunities to maximize strength,
power, and speed gains for young
athletes, and thus the LTAD model or
variations can serve as an acceptable
foundation for training young athletes.
Because of the unique physiological
processes associated with the various
development stages of childhood and
adolescence, and to reflect the different
phases of the LTAD model (5), this
article will review some of the training
considerations inherent to the follow-
ing key phases: prepubertal, circa
pubertal, and postpubertal.
PREPUBERTAL TRAINING
FOCUSFUNDAMENTALS AND
LEARNING TO TRAIN
Higgs et al. (33) indicate that physical
literacy involves the development of
competency in fundamental movement
skills (FMS; walking, running, and
jumping) and fundamental sport skills
(catching, hopping, and galloping),
which when combined, allows the
young athlete to skillfully move in a
range of sporting situations. Previous
research has stated that between the
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com
ages of 68 years and 1012 years,
periods of peak brain maturation occurs
in children (51), and that children
undergo accelerated adaptation of the
neuromuscular system (8). It is largely
accepted that by this time a number of
the neural pathways for FMS will be
defined, which would suggest that from
a weightlifting perspective, the prepu-
bertal years pose a critical timeframe in
which to introduce and reinforce a wide
variety of techniques. This is reinforced
by previous literature that stated the
starting age for weightlifting training in
some Eastern European countries is
approximately 10 years of age and this
approximate age is being used by some
coaches in the United States (54). With
respect to the LTAD model, this time-
frame would encapsulate the FUNda-
mentals and Learning to Train stages
(5). Weightlifting exercises possess
a heightened coordinative demand in
comparison with more basic resistance
training techniques (26), and therefore
exposing children to weightlifting tech-
niques when brain and neuromuscular
system maturation rates are at their
highest, would seem logical. As a con-
sequence of technical development (and
the lack of adequate testosterone con-
centrations to build lean muscle mass),
strength and conditioning coaches
should expect improvements in
strength and power in prepubertal
children during these stages owing to
more effective and efficient neurological
qualities (7).
CIRCA PUBERTAL TRAINING
FOCUSTRAINING TO TRAIN
As children approach PHV, strength
and conditioning coaches should be
aware of the likely disproportionate
growth rates of muscle and skeletal
tissue within both males and females.
During this period, those responsible for
the athletic development of young
athletes should be aware of the potential
physical discomfort that children may
experience during rapid stages of non-
linear growth. Additionally, coaches
should be aware of potential break-
downs in motor coordination as a con-
sequence of learning to use longer limbs,
a process that is often referred to as
57
Weightlifting for Youth
adolescent awkwardness (48). How-
ever, it should be stressed that if external
loadings need to be reduced during this
phase, an element of focus on technical
competency should still be retained
within the program. This period of
natural development would coincide
with the early stages of the Training
to Train phase of the LTAD model (5).
POSTPUBERTAL TRAINING
FOCUSTRAINING TO COMPETE
AND TRAINING TO WIN
Approximately 1218 months after
PHV, children will normally experi-
ence peak weight velocity (PWV) (6),
which is a phase of development
characterized by rapid increases in
muscle mass as a result of increasing
sex hormone concentrations (27).
These hormonal changes will result
in developments in muscle size (in-
crease muscle fiber size) and structure
(increased muscle pennation), and
consequently an increased muscle
cross-sectional area resulting in greater
force producing capabilities (38).
Providing that the young athlete can
demonstrate correct and consistent
weightlifting technique, it is suggested
that to further develop athletic poten-
tial, greater external loads are intro-
duced to provide a progressively
overloading stimulus. In relation to the
LTAD model, this stage of development
is synonymous with the latter period of
the Training to Train phase, and the
beginning of the Training to Compete
and Training to Win phases (5). By the
end of the Training to Compete and
Training to Win phases, male and
female athletes are older than 18 years
and would no longer be classified as
adolescent (56). However, it should be
noted that LTAD models must be
flexible to accommodate for individual
differences in physiological maturation
rates, and should not be limited by an
athletes chronological age. The 3-time
Olympic gold medallist, Naim Suley-
manoglu, set his first weightlifting world
record at just 15 years old, and had he
been limited to specific stages of an
LTAD model, his achievements in
weightlifting may have been curtailed.
Effective strength and conditioning
58 VOLUME 34 | NUMBER 4 | AUGUST 2012
coaches should identify such athletes to beginning at the stage that corre-
and allow them to progress more rapidly
through the stages of an LTAD model to
maximize their athletic potential.
COACHING WEIGHTLIFTING
PROGRESSIONS TO YOUNG
ATHLETES
The snatch and clean and jerk are
complex multijoint exercises that re-
quire an intricate sequence of move-
ments to move the bar from the floor to training (36), the model contains
above the head in 1 (snatch) or 2 (clean
and jerk) movements. When teaching
these lifts to young athletes, it is
imperative that the strength and condi-
tioning coach uses a structured and
logical approach. At all times, especially
in the infancy of learning the lifts, focus
should be placed on technical compe-
tency, as opposed to load lifted. This is
underlined by the suggestion that young
athletes should always start by perform-
ing the lifts with a wooden dowel or
a long piece of PVC piping instead of
a weightlifting bar (26).
Once technical proficiency can be
demonstrated, only then is it recom-
mended that the young athlete uses a
youth-sized weightlifting bar, which
typically weighs 5-10 kg. Coach
expertise and experience should then
be used to decide on when the athlete
is ready to use a full-size weightlifting
bar. Figure 2 shows the progression
from technique work with a dowel to
lifting with a full-size weightlifting bar.
For the purposes of this article, it
was deemed pertinent to formalize a
comprehensive progression model
(Figure 3) that corresponded with the
developmental stages aligned with the
LTAD model (5). It is the intention that
this model will provide coaches with
a strategic approach to developing
weightlifting technique in young ath-
letes. It should be noted that if
a strength and conditioning coach
begins to work with an athlete who
has not completed the earlier stages
(e.g., a 15-year-old who has not been
exposed to the Fundamental Weight-
lifting Skills or Learning Weightlifting
stages), the athlete should enter the
model at the earliest stage as opposed
sponds to their chronological age.
Because of the age-related neural devel-
opments, it is speculated that these
athletes might transition between the
stages of the model more quickly,
progressing through to the stage of
the model that is more aligned with
their chronological age. In accordance
with previous work that has proposed
a progression schematic for plyometric
approximated age ranges for each phase
reflecting the differential rates of matu-
ration for males and females. Regardless
of age or gender, a young athlete must
demonstrate technical proficiency of
fundamental weightlifting skills before
attempting more complex movements.
STAGE 1: FUNDAMENTAL
WEIGHTLIFTING SKILLS (MALES
69 YEARS, FEMALES 68 YEARS)
This stage is relevant for children who
demonstrate the emotional maturity to
listen to and follow instructions (36).
Emphasis within this stage should be
placed on developing movement pro-
ficiency and fundamental weightlifting
skills (FWS) within an environment that
develops agility, balance, coordination,
and kinaesthetic and spatial awareness.
A recent review has highlighted the
importance of FMS development for
children and adolescents (37), and it is
generally accepted that FMS mastery is
important for physical, social, and
cognitive development (37). It is sug-
gested that the strength and condition-
ing coach should not view every exercise
within this stage as having to be specific
to weightlifting. Conversely, for young
children, learning to manage body
weight through fun-based activities such
as gymnastics, climbing, and crawling
activities (Figure 4) will all help condi-
tion the child for later technical speci-
ficity. In addition to developing general
strength, strength endurance, metabolic
conditioning, flexibility, and mobility
should all be targeted within the young
athletes training program (54). With
appropriate exercise selection, the
strength and conditioning coach should
be able to expose the child to such key
movement competencies, such as lower
Figure 2. Bar size progressions for young athletes: wooden dowel (left), junior bar (middle), full-size bar (right).

limb triple extension, scapula stabiliza-
tion, thoracic extension, and core
strength development, in a relatively
unstructured manner. Although the
array of exercises appropriate for chil-
dren at this stage is vast, Table 1 provides
an overview of the possible exercises
that can be integrated within a training
program aiming to develop a range of
key physical competencies linked to the
weightlifting movements. It should be
noted that although the table has been
separated according to body parts for
clarity, many of the exercises would
place multiple demands upon the young
athlete, thereby developing a broader
range of physical literacy. Furthermore,
training sessions within this phase
should take a less structured approach,
with the use of innovative games, to
incorporate the desired movement

Figure 3. Weightlifting long-term progression model.

Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com 59

Weightlifting for Youth
Figure 4. Basic fundamental weightlifting skill exercises: start and end position of a superman exercise (top, left to right), and start
and end position of a crawling exercise (bottom, left to right).
patterns without the expense of a fun
and motivating environment for the
young athlete. It is possible to coach
effectively and make significant progres-
sions in posture and control even in such
unstructured environments.
STAGE 2: LEARNING
WEIGHTLIFTING (MALES 912
YEARS, FEMALES 811 YEARS)
As the young athlete matures and
approaches an age where more struc-
tured training is appropriate, the focus of
training sessions can become more
specific to weightlifting movements.
During this stage, the athlete should be
introduced progressively to the different
phases of each lift (Table 2), with
technical competency serving as the
primary goal at all times. In the authors
experience, children naturally learn
quickly during this stage and can de-
velop these skills at a fast rate; however,
it must be stressed that the strength and
conditioning coach should not treat
young athletes like miniature adults
and should not progress the child to lift
60 VOLUME 34 | NUMBER 4 | AUGUST 2012
heavier external loads at the expense of
technical proficiency, thus increasing the
injury potential for the child.
STAGE 3: TRAINING
WEIGHTLIFTING (MALES 1216
YEARS, FEMALES 1115 YEARS)
The Training Weightlifting stage is a
developmental stage, whereby strength
and conditioning coaches must pay
attention to key growth and matura-
tional processes. During this stage, it is
expected that young athletes will expe-
rience rapid growth in limb lengths,
which may cause discomfort and/or
momentary loss in motor coordination
(48). Consequently, it is imperative that
during this phase, coaches monitor
growth rates and are sensitive to sudden
interruptions in technical competency.
Coaches may wish to use a maturity
offset estimate to monitor the develop-
ment of their athletes that will indicate
physical maturity in relation to the
onset of PHV (43). The maturity-offset
estimate predicts the biological age of
an individual in years from PHVand can
be calculated by using chronological
age, standing height, sitting height, and
leg length within regression analyses
(43). The benefit of such an approach is
that it involves simple and noninvasive
procedures, which should be available
to all coaches. However, caution is
warranted when implementing the
maturity offset, owing to the measure-
ment error associated with the measure
of 61 year 95% of the time (43).
Alternatively, if working with the same
athletes over a prolonged period of
time, coaches in cooperation with a
physician may simply monitor growth
rates of the stature, limbs, and trunk to
identify when a growth spurt is begin-
ning, is at its peak, and is coming toward
an end. During this stage, program
content may fluctuate between techni-
cal competency and external loading;
however, the safety of the athlete must
be paramount at all times. As children
approach the end of this stage, it is likely
that they will have experienced PHV
 Table 1
Example of exercises to develop fundamental weightlifting skills

Upper limb Trunk Lower limb

Pre-weightlifting
Mobility Stability Mobility Stability Mobility Stability power development

Arm circles Scapula Partner medicine Deadbugs Inch worms SL balances CMJ and stick
push ups ball rotations
Arm swings Bunny hops Partner medicine Superman Spiderman Forward lunge SL CMJ and stick
(multi- ball over and crawls
directional) unders
Wall slides and Forward Sitting T-spine Partner/band Under and Reverse lunge CMJ for maximum
doorframe crawling rotations squats overs to balance height
slides cage walks
Wide arm OH Sideways Spiderman Crawling Arabesque Lateral lunge CMJ with shrug for
squat/lunge crawling crawl with Superman maximum height
rotation balances
Y, T, W, Ls Backward Lunge with Partner/wall Super wide SL squat Box jumps
crawling rotation bracing monster and reaches
band walks
Behind neck Mini-band Foam roller Medicine ball Split squat Multi-directional OH medicine
pressing hand slides supported balance mini-band ball toss
side-lying walks walks
extension-
rotations
CMJ = countermovement jumps; OH = overhead; SL = single leg.

and will be undergoing PWV, which
refers to the maximal rate of change in
body mass during a growth spurt,
typically owing to increased muscle mass
(40). As such, the athlete can be exposed
to heavier external loads, as PWV
naturally leads to lean muscle mass de-
velopment owing to increases in muscle-
building hormonal concentrations (40).
It is important to minimize the potential
of long-term dysfunction by coaching the
athlete, and not being misled by excep-
tional sports performances produced by
athletes within this age group.
STAGE 4: PERFORMANCE
WEIGHTLIFTING (MALES 16+
YEARS, FEMALES 15+ YEARS)
The final stage represents the period
whereby the young athlete can be
exposed to more advanced training
program design, focused on both tech-
nical expertise and external loading. It
should be noted that although earlier
stages are more technique focused,
training during these times should still
be structured and follow a periodized
plan. During the Performance Weight-
lifting phase, and to ensure that the
movement velocity is appropriate to the
desired training goal (i.e., speed-
strength or strength-speed), motion
capture devices and accelerometers
may be used to monitor bar velocity
and power outputs (35) to ensure the
maintenance of repetition velocity and
rate of force development. Additionally,
the use of video analysis is encouraged
to monitor technique as technical
inconsistencies become less obvious.
WEIGHTLIFTING PROGRAM
DESIGN FOR YOUNG ATHLETES
When designing weightlifting pro-
grams for young athletes, the variables
of volume, intensity, repetition veloc-
ity, frequency, and recovery must be
considered to ensure optimal athletic
development, and minimize injury risk.
The authors wish to stress that the
following recommendations should be
applied within the context of the
individual needs of the athlete, and
that the following training variables
should at all times be individualized
within a training program. See Table 3
for a summary of suggested training
prescription guidelines.
VOLUME
For young athletes entering the FWS
stage, the volume of exercises would
commonly be higher in comparison
with the later stages owing to the
relatively lower impact forces and joint
loadings experienced during basic
bodyweight movements. The purpose
of the FWS stage is to provide children
with a wide range of movement stimuli,
and therefore for a given exercise,
coaches are advised to prescribe ap-
proximately 24 sets of 612 repetitions.
This should provide the child with
sufficient exposure to aid motor control
development while serving as a suitable
volume for physical conditioning.
For the purposes of concentration
retention and physical literacy devel-
opment, it is suggested that a range
of exercises should be given within

Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com 61

Weightlifting for Youth

Table 2
Suggested top-down progression model for weightlifting exercises (appropriate for Learning Weightlifting, Training
Weightlifting and Performance Weightlifting)
Snatch Clean Jerk

Behind neck press Front squat Military press

Overhead squat Vertical jump and landing mechanics Push press
Overhead squat behind neck press Drop clean Push jerk
Vertical jump and landing mechanics Power position-jump shrug Overhead split squat
Drop snatch Power position-second pull Split jerk footwork line drill
Power position-jump shrug Hang high clean pull Split jerk footwork line drill with dowel
a
Power position-second pull Hang clean Split jerk
Hang high snatch pull First pull Clean and jerk
a b
Hang snatch Clean from below knee
First pull Clean from low block
b
Snatch from below knee Clean from floor
Snatch from low block
Snatch from floor
a
Stage at which the transition phase is introduced to the individual.
b
Stage at which the double knee bend is introduced to the individual.

a single session (610). However, it (i.e., an overhead squat with wooden recommended that children perform
should be noted that if children are dowel), then multiple repetitions might single repetitions and are provided
exposed to very basic introductory be counterproductive for motor con- with real-time feedback to ensure safe
weightlifting exercises within this stage trol development. Instead, it is and correct movement development.

Table 3
Suggested guidelines for training session prescription
Training variable Fundamental Learning Training Performance
weightlifting skillsa weightlifting weightlifting weightlifting

Suggested age ranges (y) Males: 69, Males: 912, Males: 1216, Males: 16+,
Females: 68 Females: 811 Females: 1115 Females: 15+
Volume (total repetitionsb) 3624 3024 2415 186
Total number of exercises per session 610 36 36 25
Intensity (%1RM) Body weight 3050 5085 85100
Repetition velocity (speed of movement) Moderatefast Moderatefast Fastmaximal Maximal
Frequency (sessions per week) 12 12 24 25
Recovery (hours in between sessions) 72 7248 48 4824
a
The values for FWS do not necessarily equate to designated weightlifting progressions, but rather broad-ranging exercises to develop physical
literacy.
b
The total number of repetitions can be divided between different configurations of sets and repetitions based on the goal of the training
session, and phase of the periodized plan.

62 VOLUME 34 | NUMBER 4 | AUGUST 2012

When prescribing training volume for
the Learning Weightlifting stage, the
current article proposes performing
multiple sets of 35 repetitions, volumes
that have previously been suggested as
most effective for young athletes to
learn the snatch and clean and jerk (26).
However, within each set, individual
repetitions should be interspersed with
feedback because incorrect form within
the first repetition of a set will typically
lead to poor technique for the re-
mainder of the set. Table 3 shows that
with an increase in training age as
children move from Learning Weight-
lifting through to Performance Weight-
lifting, total volume for a given exercise
and total number of exercises within
a single session both reduce; however,
these are in accordance with a concom-
itant increase in training intensity.
INTENSITY
For children entering the progression
schematic, body weight will serve as the
prescribed training intensity. This is to
ensure that young athletes do not
attempt loaded exercises before move-
ment competency can be demonstrated.
However, it is suggested that some
loading may be necessary to feel the
bar, even in children, when considering
learning proficient weightlifting tech-
nique. On entering the Learning
Weightlifting phase, it is suggested that
the intensity of training sessions should
be based upon percentages of the
athletes 1 repetition maximum (1RM).
Despite previous concerns, maximal
strength testing in children (albeit
using fixed-resistance training ma-
chines) has been proven to be safe
and reliable, provided appropriate
protocols are implemented (23). Al-
ternative means to predict resistance
may include the Daily Adjusted
Progressive Resistance Exercise or
the Oddvar Holten Diagram Curve;
however, the 1RM method is most
commonly used. It should be acknow-
ledged that methods of predicting
1RM values from higher repetition
ranges possess less accuracy, in
particular when repetition ranges
exceed 10 (23). The decision on which
method to use should be based on the
training age, ability, and experience of
the young athlete; however, coaches
and young athletes should at all times
ensure that safety is paramount. Using
percentages of 1RM loads is deemed
preferable as opposed to an athlete
lifting the most weight they can for
a given set of repetitions (e.g., 10RM),
to avoid constantly training the ath-
lete to failure. Previous reviews have
highlighted that such an approach
runs the risk of decreasing resting
levels of testosterone and increasing
resting cortisol concentrations (albeit
for adult populations), which are
counterproductive for strength and
power gains (53,57). Especially when
working with young athletes, it is
recommended that intensity is never
increased at the expense of technical
competency. Table 3 shows that
training intensity increases in accor-
dance with increasing training age,
with athletes in the Performance
Weightlifting category regularly lifting
loads of 85100% 1RM.
REPETITION VELOCITY
Due to rate of force development being
integral to explosive weightlifting per-
formance (34,54), it is imperative that
high repetition velocity is maintained.
For this reason, it is suggested that
coaches should integrate fast velocity
movements within every stage of the
progression model. Although certain
exercises within the FWS phase may
require slow, controlled movements,
an element of high-velocity move-
ments should still exist with basic
vertical jumps serving as a suitable
example. As athletes progress through
the progression model, and enter the
Training Weightlifting and Perfor-
mance Weightlifting phases, the coach
should expose the athlete to heavy
loads ($80% 1RM) to maximize power
output, maximal strength, muscle
cross-sectional area, and maximal neu-
ral activation (13). For experienced
athletes in the Performance Weightlift-
ing stage, the use of supramaximal
loads may also be used to further
stimulate maximal motor unit recruit-
ment (e.g., first pulls performed with
a 120% 1RM load). However, to
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com
expose the neuromuscular system to
a range of stimuli across the force
velocity spectrum, and to avoid over-
training symptoms (28), it is suggested
that such loadings are used for brief
periods of time within an overall
periodized program.
FREQUENCY
In accordance with previous literature,
it is proposed that training frequencies
for youths should not exceed 23
one-hour weightlifting sessions per
week (26). However, to maintain per-
formance quality and athlete enthusiasm,
it is reasonable to suggest that multiple
sessions of shorter duration (i.e., 35, 30-
to 40-minute sessions per week) could be
an alternative approach, especially with
younger athletes. As athletes progress
toward the end of the progression
model, training frequency may rise up
to approximately 5 sessions per week,
dependent on the training block within
a periodized training program. However,
the volume loads associated with such
programs would only be conducive to
individual athletes of the appropriate
training age, and such frequencies should
never be superimposed on athletes of
a young training age.
RECOVERY
Due to weightlifting exercises and
their derivative lifts being whole-
body, multijoint multi-muscle move-
ments (32), the need for adequate
intra- and intersession rest is essential.
As is common with generic resistance
training methods for youths, an
intersession rest period of 48 hours
is recommended (19); however, for
athletes within the Performance
Weightlifting phase, the minimum rest
period may on occasions be reduced.
Although children may not show
symptoms of delayed onset of muscle
soreness because of their reduced
body mass and increased pliability of
muscle tissue (17), they will likely
require more recovery time between
consecutive training sessions to adapt
to training-induced physiological
stresses, and to allow for natural
growth processes to occur (1,46).
Therefore, it may not be as easy to
63
Weightlifting for Youth
monitor training readiness therefore
in youths, and consequently it is
recommended that the strength and
conditioning coach should always use
a common sense and flexible ap-
proach to training program design.
One option available to the coach
could be the use of the Profile of
Mood States questionnaire, which
has proven useful for assessing and
preventing overtraining in young
athletes (41). However, such ques-
tionnaires do not reflect the extent of
fatigue at a neuromuscular level,
rather they provide only perceptions
of fatigue. Consequently, neuromus-
cular monitoring, possibly via mea-
surement of the reactive strength
index (ratio of jump height and
ground contact time) during a re-
bound-based test, could be a relatively
simple method of quantifying actual
neuromuscular fatigue (36). Regard-
less of the monitoring tool selected,
coaches should be aware of the
symptoms of overtraining, such as:
decreased performance, persistent
fatigue, susceptibility to upper re-
spiratory tract infections, disruptive
sleep patterns, mood swings, and
sudden weight loss (1,41).
SUMMARY AND PRACTICAL
APPLICATIONS
The current article has reviewed the
suitability of weightlifting for long-
term athletic development. Despite
previous misconceptions, weightlift-
ing for youths is a safe and effective
training modality to enhance physical
literacy, muscular strength, and ex-
plosive power. This article has also
speculated on potential injury pre-
vention benefits that weightlifting
may provide to young athletes and
confirms that the previously reported
risk factors can be reduced or elimi-
nated with appropriate supervision
and instruction from appropriately
qualified coaches. It would appear
that pre-pubertal age-related neural
developments and postpubertal matu-
rity-related increases in sex androgen
concentrations might offer suitable
windows of adaptation to maximize
athletic gains through weightlifting.
64 VOLUME 34 | NUMBER 4 | AUGUST 2012
The progression model provided
Michael H.
within the article offers coaches a log-
Stone is the
ical and sequential development tool
Exercise and
to follow, which is in accordance to
Sports Science
the theories of long-term athletic
Laboratory
development. The training prescrip-
Director in the
tion guidelines included within the
Department of
model should always be integrated
Kinesiology,
with the needs of the individual
Leisure, and Sport
athlete in mind, and at no stage should
Sciences at East Tennessee State
strength and conditioning coaches
University.
treat children like miniature adults.
REFERENCES
Rhodri S. Lloyd 1. American Academy of Pediatrics.
is the Program Intensive training and sports specialization
Director for the in young athletes. Pediatrics 106:
Sport Strength and 154157, 2000.
Conditioning de- 2. American Academy of Pediatrics. Strength
grees at the Uni- training by children and adolescents.
versity of Pediatrics 121: 835840, 2008.
Gloucestershire. 3. Badminton England. Long Term Athlete
Development. Leeds, United Kingdom:
Coachwise Ltd, 2006. pp. 12.
4. Baker D, Mitchell J, Boyle D, Currell S,
Wilson G, Bird SP, OConnor D, and Jones
Jon L. Oliver is
J. Resistance training for children and
a lecturer in Sport youth: A position stand from the Australian
and Exercise Strength and Conditioning Association
Physiology at the (ASCA). 2007. Available at
University of www.strengthandconditioning.org.
Wales Institute Accessed: July 13, 2011.
Cardiff. 5. Balyi I and Hamilton A. Long-Term Athlete
Development: Trainability in Childhood and
AdolescenceWindows of
OpportunityOptimal Trainability. Victoria,
British Columbia, Canada: National Coaching
Robert W. Institute British Columbia & Advanced
Training and Performance Ltd, 2004. pp. 18.
Meyers is a se-
nior lecturer in 6. Beunen GP and Malina RM. Growth and
physical performance relative to the timing
Strength and Con-
of the adolescent spurt. Exerc Sport Sci
ditioning, Reha- Rev 16: 503540, 1988.
bilitation and
7. Blimkie CJR and Bar-Or O. Trainability of
Massage at the muscle strength, power and endurance
University of during childhood. In: The Child and
Wales Institute Cardiff. Adolescent Athlete. Bar-Or O, ed. Oxford,
United Kingdom: Blackwell Science, 1996.
pp. 113129.
8. Borms J. The child and exercise: An
Jeremy Moody overview. J Sports Sci 4: 420, 1986.
is Program Direc- 9. British Gymnastics. Long Term Athlete
tor of the Strength Development. Leeds, United Kingdom:
and Conditioning, Coachwise Ltd, 2006. pp. 12.
Rehabilitation and 10. Byrd R, Pierce K, Reilly L, and Brady J.
Massage degrees at Young weightlifters performance across
the University of time. Sports Biomech 2: 133140, 2003.
Wales Institute 11. Channell BT and Barfield JP. Effect of
Cardiff. olympic and traditional resistance training
 on vertical jump improvement in high
school boys. J Strength Cond Res 22:
15221527, 2008.
12. Chiu LZ and Schilling BK. A primer on
weightlifting: From sport to sports training.
Strength Cond J 27: 4248, 2005.
13. Cormie P, McGuigan MR, and Newton RU.
Developing maximal neuromuscular power:
Part 2Training considerations for
improving maximal power production.
Sports Med 41: 125146, 2011.
14. Dufek J and Bates B. The evaluation and
prediction of impact forces during
landings. Med Sci Sports Exerc 22:
370377, 1990.
15. Elliott DL, Goldberg L, and Kuehl KS.
Young womens anterior cruciate ligament
injuries. Sports Med 40: 367376, 2010.
16. England and Wales Cricket Board.
Planning for Long Term Success: The
Long Term Athlete Development Model for
Cricket. Birmingham, United Kingdom:
ECB, 2005. pp. 124.
17. Eston R, Byrne C, and Twist C. Muscle
function after exercise-induced muscle
damage: Considerations for athletic
performance in children and adults. J Exerc
Sci Fit 1: 8596, 2003.
18. Falk B and Eliakim A. Resistance training,
skeletal muscle and growth. Pediatr
Endocrinol Rev 1: 120127, 2003.
19. Faigenbaum AD, Kraemer WJ, Blimkie CJ,
Jeffreys I, Micheli LJ, Nitka M, and Rowland
TW. Youth resistance training: Updated
position statement paper from the National
Strength and Conditioning Association.
J Strength Cond Res 23: S60S79, 2009.
20. Faigenbaum AD and McFarland J. Relative
safety of weightlifting movements for youth.
Strength Cond J 30: 2325, 2008.
21. Faigenbaum AD, McFarland JE, Johnson L,
Kang J, Bloom J, Ratamess NR, and
Hoffman J. Preliminary evaluation of an
after-school resistance training program for
improving physical fitness in middle school-
age boys. Percept Mot Skills 104:
407415, 2007.
22. Faigenbaum AD, McFarland JE, Keiper FB,
Tevlin W, Ratamess NA, Kang J, and
Hoffman JR. Effects of a short-term
plyometric and resistance training program
on fitness in boys age 12 to 15 years.
J Sports Sci Med 6: 519525, 2007.
23. Faigenbaum AD, Milliken LA, and
Westcott WL. Maximal strength testing in
healthy children. J Strength Cond Res 17:
162166, 2003.
24. Faigenbaum AD and Myer GD. Resistance
training among young athletes: Safety,
efficacy and injury prevention effects. Br J
Sports Med 44: 5663, 2010.
25. Faigenbaum AD, Myer GD, Naclerio F, and
Casas AA. Injury trend and prevention in
youth resistance training. Strength Cond J
33: 3641, 2011.
26. Faigenbaum AD and Polakowski C.
Olympic-style weightlifting, kid style.
Strength Cond J 21: 7376, 1999.
27. Ford PA, De Ste Croix M, Lloyd RS, Meyers R,
Moosavi M, Oliver J, Till K, and Williams CA.
The long-term athlete development model:
Physiological evidence and application.
J Sports Sci 29: 389402, 2011.
28. Garhammer J. A review of power output
studies of olympic and powerlifting:
Methodology, performance prediction, and
evaluation tests. J Strength Cond Res 7:
7689, 1993.
29. Garhammer J and Takano B. Training for
weightlifting. In: Strength and Power in
Sport. Komi PV, ed. Oxford, United
Kingdom: Blackwell Scientific Publications,
1992. pp. 357369.
30. Gee TI, Olsen PD, Berger NJ, Golby J, and
Thompson KG. Strength and conditioning
practices in rowing. J Strength Cond Res
25: 668682, 2011.
31. Hamill B. Relative safety of weight lifting
and weight training. J Strength Cond Res
8: 5357, 1994.
32. Hedrick A and Wada H. Weightlifting
movements: Do the benefits outweigh the
risks? Strength Cond J 30: 2634, 2008.
33. Higgs C, Balyi I, Way R, Cardinal C, Norris
S, and Bluechardt M. Developing Physical
Literacy: A Guide for Parents and Children
Aged 0 to 12. Vancouver, British Columbia,
Canada: Canadian Sports Centres, 2008.
pp. 140.
34. Janz J, Dietz C, and Malone M. Training
explosiveness: Weightlifting and beyond.
Strength Cond J 30: 1422, 2008.
35. Jennings CL, Viljoen W, Durandt J, and
Lambert MI. The reliability of the Fitrodyne
as a measure of muscle power. J Strength
Cond Res 19: 859863, 2005.
36. Lloyd RS, Meyers RW, and Oliver JL. The
natural development and trainability of
plyometric ability during childhood.
Strength Cond J 33: 2332, 2011.
37. Lubans DR, Morgan PJ, Cliff DP, Barnett
LM, and Okely AD. Fundamental movement
skills in children and adolescents. Sports
Med 40: 10191035, 2010.
38. MacIntosh B, Gardiner P, and McComas
AJ. Skeletal Muscle: Form and Function.
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2006. pp.
321.
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com
39. Malina RM. Weight training in
youthGrowth, maturation and safety: An
evidenced based review. Clin J Sports
Med 16: 478487, 2006.
40. Malina RM, Bouchard C, and Bar-Or O.
Growth, Maturation, and Physical Activity.
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2004. pp.
4177.
41. Matos N and Winsley RJ. Trainability of
young athletes and overtraining. J Sports
Sci Med 6: 353367, 2007.
42. McNitt-Gray JL, Hester DM, Mathiyakom
W, and Munkasy BA. Mechanical demand
on multijoint control during landing depend
on orientation of the body segments
relative to the reaction force. J Biomech
34: 14711482, 2001.
43. Mirwald RL, Baxter-Jones AD, Bailey DA,
and Beunen GP. An assessment of
maturity from anthropometric
measurements. Med Sci Sports Exerc 33:
689694, 2002.
44. Mountjoy M, Armstrong N, Bizzini L, Blimkie
C, Evans J, Gerrard D, Hangen J, Knoll K,
Micheli L, Sangenis P, and Van Mechelen
W. IOC consensus statement: Training
the elite child athlete. Br J Sports Med 42:
163164, 2008.
45. Myer GD, Quatman CE, Khoury J, Wall EJ,
and Hewett TE. Youth versus adult
weightlifting" injuries presented to United
States emergency rooms: Accidental
versus non-accidental injury mechanisms.
J Strength Cond Res 23: 20542060,
2009.
46. Oliver JL, Lloyd RS, and Meyers RW.
Training elite child athletes: Welfare and
well-being. Strength Cond J 33: 7379,
2011.
47. Oliver JL and Smith PM. Neural control of
leg stiffness during hopping in boys and
men. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 20: 973
979, 2010.
48. Philippaerts RM, Vaeyens R, Janssens M,
Van Renterghem B, Matthys D, Craen R,
Bourgois J, Vrjens J, Beunen G, and Malina
RM. The relationship between peak height
velocity and physical performance in youth
soccer players. J Sports Sci 24: 221230,
2006.
49. Pierce KC, Brewer C, Ramsey MW, Byrd
R, Sands WA, Stone ME, and Stone MH.
Youth resistance training. Prof Strength
Cond J 10: 923, 2008.
50. Pierce KC, Byrd R, and Stone MH. Youth
weightlifting: Is it safe? Weightlifting USA
17: 5, 1999.
51. Rabinowickz T. The differentiated
maturation of the cerebral cortex. In Falkner
F and Tanner J. (eds.) Human Growth: A
65
Weightlifting for Youth

Comprehensive Treatise, Vol. 2, Postnatal

Growth: Neurobiology. New York, NY:
Plenum, 1986. pp. 385410.
52. Simenz CJ, Dugan CA, and Ebben WP.
Strength and conditioning practices of
National Basketball Association strength
and conditioning coaches. J Strength
Cond Res 19: 495504, 2005.
53. Stone MH, Chandler TJ, Conley MS,
Kramer JB, and Stone ME. Training to
muscular failure: Is it necessary? Strength
Cond J 18: 4448, 1996.
54. Stone MH, Pierce KC, Sands WA, and
Stone ME. Weightlifting: A brief overview.
Strength Cond J 28: 5066, 2006.
55. Stratton G, Jones M, Fox KR, Tolfrey K,
Harris J, Maffulli N, Lee M, and Frsotick SP.
BASES position statement on guidelines
for resistance exercise in young people.
J Sports Sci 22: 383390, 2004.
56. Stratton G and Williams CA. Children and
fitness testing. In: Winter EM, Jones AM,
Davison R, Bromley PD, and Mercer TH,
(eds.) Sport and Exercise Physiology
Testing, Vol. 1, Sport Testing Guidelines.
Oxon, United Kingdom: Routledge, 2007.
57. Willardson JM, Norton L, and Wilson G.
Training to failure and beyond in
mainstream resistance exercise programs.
Strength Cond J 32: 2129, 2010.

66 VOLUME 34 | NUMBER 4 | AUGUST 2012