Blog

Episode 14: Boo Schexnayder

Joel Smith: Just Fly Performance Podcast, Podcast| ByMark Hoover

Irving “Boo” Schexnayder is one of the leading authorities on training design for track and field. He is the founder of Schexnayder Athletic Consulting and brings 39 years of experience in the coaching and consulting fields to the organization. Boo recently returned to the LSU Track and Field coaching staff, first serving as throws coach in 2018 and now serving as the strength coach for the track and field program.

In addition to his two stints at LSU, Schexnayder coached at Louisiana-Lafayette and Blinn Junior College, and he trained 19 NCAA Champions during his collegiate coaching career. He was a part of 12 NCAA Championship teams and a pair of Juco National titles and helped develop a multitude of conference champions and All-Americans.

Boo discusses his innovative, no-nonsense style of coaching track and field athletes. He goes in-depth into his ideas on the use of three- and four-day practice plans and their effects on the CNS. He discusses using lactate as an anabolic agent and how this influences rep ranges in strength sessions, and he explains how to set up a barbell session to create the perfect amount of lactate for strength building in speed and power athletes.

In this podcast, Coach Boo Schexnayder discusses with Joel:

Mistakes he believes are made in strength training with track and field athletes.

Optimal intensity zones to use for weight training during the competitive season.

Ideas about the effects that barbell training has on speed.

Ideal mesocycle length and deloading for speed-power athletes.

The path he took to develop his popular jumps training system.

Proper management of energy systems for the 400m athlete.

Podcast total run time is 57:09.

Keywords: potentiation, jumping, track and field, energy systems, speed and power

Episode 13: Jeff Moyer

Joel Smith: Just Fly Performance Podcast, Podcast| ByMark Hoover

Jeff Moyer is the owner and Director of Programming at Dynamic Correspondence (DC) Sports Training in the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, area. Moyer is a 2004 graduate of Hartwick College with degrees in history and education. He is a certified strength and conditioning specialist (C.S.C.S.) with the NSCA, a certified special strength coach through Westside Barbell, and a certified precision nutrition coach. He also spent several years apprenticing with Dr. Michael Yessis and completed a fellowship at EliteFTS. Coach Moyer has worked in private, high school, and collegiate settings, and he was a contributing author for two books on athletic development.

Moyer was a two-sport athlete while at Hartwick (track and football). He has also coached football and basketball at every level from youth to collegiate.

Coach Moyer has a wide variety of expertise, and he talks about his experiences with the 1×20 program, the research and implementation of cueing for skill acquisition, and the use of vision training, among other topics. He gives his thoughts on strength training that will allow for maximal adaptation to sport-specific performance.

In this podcast, Coach Jeff Moyer discusses with Joel:

His successful use of the 1×20 strength training system with athletes of all levels.

His philosophy coaching technical changes to athlete movement skills that transfer to sport performance.

The use of internal and external cues to maximize skill acquisition.

The differences between the threshold for adaptation compared to recovery.

How to develop and implement a vision training program to enhance performance.

His opinions on the main sprinting technique deficiencies in today’s athlete.

Podcast total run time is 1:05:42.

Keywords: 1×20, vision, GHR, sensory information, sprint technique

Sprinting in Team Sport: The Butt-Kicking Epidemic

Blog| ByCameron Josse

Sprinting is arguably the most central-nervous-system-intensive exercise that the human body can perform. As a consequence, there are many elements that go into performing a sprint with efficient form. So, I believe that coaches must take the time to seek out and try to learn from the best sprint coaches in the world if they are to properly understand how to program, diagnose, and alleviate issues associated with slow speeds, improper technique, or injury prevalence.

Where do strength and conditioning professionals learn to teach the basic barbell lifts like a squat, bench press, or deadlift? The smart ones draw from powerlifting, because no other discipline pays more attention these lifts. This is also true of incorporating Olympic weightlifting movements. Strength coaches will learn from Olympic weightlifting coaches, many of whom also hold certifications from organizations like USA Weightlifting.

In the weight room, it’s very dangerous to expose a player to high resistance loads with inefficient form, and the same holds true when exposing a player to high speeds on the field. In fact, many coaches are reluctant to have their players sprint beyond 10–15 meters for fear of hamstring injury. However, with proper programming and an understanding of sprint biomechanics, you will find that you can greatly reduce athlete risk and they will be able to attain the rewards of more speed, better elastic ability, and greater robustness.

One major issue I believe is sort of epidemic in team sports, leading players down the fast track to hamstring and hip problems, is “butt-kicking” or “kicking out the back.” Share on X

In this article, I want to talk about one major issue that I believe is a sort of epidemic in team sports—one leading players down the fast track to hamstring and hip problems. I call it the “butt-kicking epidemic,” also known as “kicking out the back.” This butt-kicking issue almost always occurs when athletes enter phases of maximum speed (where the body position becomes more upright). Upright sprinting mechanics have been written about extensively, yet still seem to elude many coaches working with team sport players.

My goals with this article are to:

Present and discuss the butt-kicking problem.

Show examples of athletes I’ve trained who have displayed this issue in differing forms and degrees.

Discuss what I did to help alleviate the issue.

Breaking Down the Butt-Kicking Problem

As a starting point for understanding the butt-kicking issue, we can briefly discuss the gait of upright sprinting, which involves five major landmarks:

Touch-Down: When the foot first touches the ground.

Stance Phase: When the foot fully supports the player’s body weight, ending when the foot starts to leave the ground again.

Toe-Off: When the foot is last in contact with the ground before swinging back to start another sprint cycle.

Swing Phase: When the foot is no longer in contact with the ground and moves forward to prepare for another touch-down.

Flight Phase: When neither foot is in contact with the ground, including the swing phase.

The butt-kicking problem occurs when a player exhibits one or more of the following:

An overextended lower back (excessive arching) and/or an emphasized anterior pelvic tilt (duck butt position) heading into touch-down.

Too much forward leaning throughout the entire sprint cycle.

The heel striking far in front of the center of mass during the stance phase.

The heel colliding into the buttocks far behind the center of mass during the swing phase.

Video 1. This is one of my athletes exhibiting what I call the “classic butt-kicker issue,” where all these problems are on display.

You can easily bring one or more of these issues to light by using the ALTIS Kinogram Method, which simply relies on photographs to determine technical issues in sprint performance. The Kinogram Method can help coaches see different points of the sprint cycle to determine where certain problematic areas may or may not exist for each individual player. The kinogram typically observes five key landmarks for this purpose, each existing within the gait of a sprint cycle. For consistency, I will use ALTIS’ definitions of each landmark:

Toe-Off: The last frame before the athlete’s support-leg foot is in contact with the ground.

Maximum Vertical Projection (MVP): The maximal height of vertical projection, as defined by the position where both feet are parallel to the ground.

Strike: Because of the relative difficulty in defining this position, ALTIS has determined that using the opposite leg is more efficient. They define the “strike” position as when the opposite thigh is perpendicular to the ground.

Touch-Down: The first frame where the swing-leg foot strikes the ground.

Full-Support: The frame where the foot is directly under the pelvis—the toe of the foot should be plumb vertical with the anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS) of the pelvis.

Given these definitions, let’s first observe a kinogram of one of my athletes. This athlete is a professional rugby forward who I believe shows safe, efficient sprinting technique:

Rugby Forward Kinogram — Image 1. Kinogram of one of my athletes, a professional rugby forward. The kinogram consists of photos of each landmark—I believe he shows safe, efficient sprinting technique.

The technical points I’ll discuss in this article are largely based on the work of Dr. Ken Clark, as well as educational principles from ALTIS. In the above kinogram, the rugby forward shows facets of good technique including:

A nice upright torso, with a neutral pelvis.

Good frontside lift of the lead leg, shown by how the knee punches toward the hip during toe-off.

Not overextending with the trail leg at toe-off. As the kinogram sequence continues, we can thus observe that he drives the lower limb of the trail leg forward toward the lead leg in good sequence.

The Importance of Proper Frontside Lift

Good frontside lift allows the player to attack down into the ground from a greater range of motion, effectively applying greater force into the ground on initial contact. Ken Clark has presented research showing that efficient sprinters who attack from above are able to apply greater vertical force in the first half of ground contact, as opposed to sprinters with poor frontside lift. Image 2 below exemplifies this. While both sprinters will have similar force application in the second half of ground contact, the green box highlights how the initial impulse is much higher for the one who attacks from above.

Attack From Above — Image 2. While both of these sprinters will have similar force application in the second half of ground contact, the green box highlights how the initial impulse is much higher for the one who attacks from above.

Attacking from above tends to coincide with a powerful hip drive and stiff ankle contact, resulting in efficient elastic recoil with minimal strain on the hamstrings. Keeping the force application elastic at higher speeds helps spread the stress across more connective tissue, incorporating better use of the tendons and fascia with less localized trauma to the posterior chain. When performed properly, athletes look like they are bouncing down the runway rather than forcing their way.

Video 2. This is a clip of some of my athletes performing sprints with good frontside lift. (Yes, some other issues may be on display here, but for the purposes of this article, I am focusing on the butt-kicking problem).

In contrast, poor frontside lift reduces the available range of motion at the hip upon entering ground contact, so force will be lower. Additionally, the body posture will feature a pelvis rotated toward the ground (excessive anterior tilt) rather than a neutral position. This posture effectively puts greater eccentric strain on the hamstrings, causing them to absorb more force directly into the muscle, resulting in greater tissue trauma. Heel striking too far in front of the body as a result of this posture forces the hamstrings to operate first as a braking system and then as a propulsive system. Essentially, the hamstrings are being forced to help prevent the athlete from falling on their face, which means double the responsibility and a greater risk of damage.

Essentially, poor frontside lift forces the hamstrings to help prevent the athlete from falling on their face, which means double the responsibility and a greater risk of damage. Share on X

Image 3 below shows two pictures of the same athlete performing upright sprinting—one picture in which he has poor frontside lift and another where he attains better posture to attack from above. The sequence associated with poor frontside lift represents the “butt-kicking” problem. To prevent confusion, it’s worth explaining that it’s not that the heel of the trail leg should never come near the buttocks. Rather, the problem occurs when the heel approaches the buttocks too far behind the center of mass, thus exemplifying an anteriorly rotated pelvis, reduced frontside lift, and excessive eccentric strain on the hamstrings.

Attack Ground From Above — Image 3. Two very different kinograms for the same athlete performing upright sprinting. You can see how the bottom series showing poor frontside lift also reveals the “butt-kicking” problem in the last photo of the sequence.

It’s not that the heel of the trail leg should NEVER come near the buttocks. Rather, the problem occurs when the heel approaches the buttocks too far behind the center of mass. Share on X

Over the rest of this article, I’ll highlight three athletes who came to me with different archetypes of the butt-kicking issue, and I’ll discuss the strategies I used to help reinforce better technique. All three had long histories of hamstring tweak/strain problems. Upon enforcing some technical improvements, we were able to train consistently for several months in the off-season periods at very high speeds without any hamstring issues. I am certainly grateful for the mentors whose works I have studied to help educate me on this easily fixable technical issue.

1. The Classic Butt-Kicker

The Classic Butt-Kicker has all the problems associated with the butt-kicking epidemic. Their hips point toward the ground, they have excessive arching at their spine, their trail leg swings all over the place behind the body, and they do all they can to stay on their feet and not fall on their face. When coaches see this happening, they can pretty much guarantee that the player will eventually strain their hamstring.

Classic Butt Kicker Kinogram — Image 4. The Classic Butt-Kicker has all the problems that I associate with the butt-kicking epidemic. If you see this with your athlete, you can pretty much guarantee the player will eventually strain their hamstring if they don’t improve their frontside lift.

With this player (an NFL linebacker), I realized I had to come up with a way to get him to understand good frontside lift. What I came up with is an exercise that I call the Medicine Ball Knee Punch Run. In this exercise, the player holds a light medicine ball (5–10 lbs.) in front of his torso, slightly above the navel. I then ask him to try and sprint forward while attempting to punch his knee toward the medicine ball so that the thigh contacts the ball.

As a quick side note, even if the thigh does not fully contact the medicine ball, the intent of the exercise can help the player understand what a good frontside lift feels like. Also, having the weighted ball in the front of the body allowed for him to automatically adopt a neutral pelvic position and activate his core.

Video 3. The first part of the clip shows the athlete performing the Medicine Ball Knee Punch Run exercise. The second part then shows him sprinting without the medicine ball. Notice how the player was able to maintain an upright torso, neutral pelvis, and good frontside lift in the subsequent sprint after being primed with the medicine ball drill.

Technique Improved 1 — Image 5. This shows a kinogram of the same athlete after a few weeks of using the Medicine Ball Knee Punch Run drill in training.

2. The Forward-Leaner Butt-Kicker

The Forward-Leaner Butt-Kicker is able to maintain a neutral posture in terms of the alignment between the spine and the pelvis but simply tilts too far forward, so the hips still point toward the ground at toe-off. This typically results in a player who tries too hard and leans their body weight toward the finish line rather than keep true to the technique of the maximum speed phase.

To help alleviate this issue, I reviewed three primary principles of acceleration from ALTIS:

Projection: The body angle and force application of each step during acceleration, resulting in the displacement of the athlete across the ground. During early acceleration phases, force application is more horizontal in nature. With each subsequent step, the force application becomes more vertical until reaching top speed. With the butt-kicking problem, athletes attempt to apply horizontal force into the ground for too long, negatively affecting the rhythm and rise.

Rhythm: The stride rate, which gradually gets faster as speed increases. Every step should be a little bit faster than the one before it. Stuart McMillan refers to the rhythm of acceleration as a crescendo, where the sound of each step during early acceleration is further apart, and the gap between the sound of foot contacts will get narrower as speed increases.

Rise: The projection angle of the body will gradually rise with each step until the athlete is fully upright when approaching top speed. I like to use the analogy of a plane taking off. There is a smooth, gradual change in the angle of the plane as it starts to leave the ground. Likewise, when athletes sprint. As the speed output increases, the body angle should get progressively more upright with each step in a way that matches the optimal angle of projection and the rhythm of acceleration.

For this athlete, I assumed that he was struggling with the principle of rise. He just could not grasp the concept of allowing himself to sprint in an upright position. So, I presented him with a simple focal point. I told him to imagine that he is climbing a set of stairs that leads gradually into the horizon. I have never seen anyone run up a set of stairs with an excessive backside-swinging butt kick. Therefore, my hope was that he would contemplate this image and realize that no one will naturally run up a set of stairs without proper frontside lift.

Frontside Lift Coaching Cue #1 – Imagine You’re Climbing a Set of Stairs Gradually Leading Into the Horizon

It took this player a bit of time working with this cue to see improvement. I also used the Med Ball Knee Punch Run drill with him.

Technique Improved 2 — Image 7. This image portrays the athlete’s technique improvement over time. I used the cue mentioned above, as well as the Med Ball Knee Punch Run drill, to understand and utilize proper frontside lift in his sprint.

3. The Over-Arching Butt-Kicker

The Over-Arching Butt-Kicker has a unique form of the butt-kicking issue because the athlete is usually able to show nice bounce on ground contact and put decent vertical force into the ground. However, as seen in the kinogram below, frontside lift is limited because the athlete is simply overextending the spine, forming an excessive arch position. Therefore, the hips continue to point toward the ground rather than straight ahead, negatively affecting the elastic recoil on ground contact. In addition, the hamstrings still have to take on a substantial damaging load with this issue.

This particular athlete is a very reactive, explosive player, so I had to try and find a cue that would speak to him and get him to understand what I was looking for. The previous cue of climbing a set of stairs into the horizon was not working with him, so I quickly thought of attacking the same problem from a different perspective.

I realized that his excessive arching was due to him trying to force his way down the field, unnecessarily prolonging his ground contact times by thinking he was really propelling himself forward. But at top speed, we want fast ground contact times, and we want the athlete to really float across the field with great vertical force application on each step. So, I gave him a different cue.

Every athlete has a different brain, so coaches need to constantly look at how to educate them from various vantage points to solve problems. Share on X

I told him to imagine he was sprinting over hot coals getting hotter and hotter; that he had to make it through to the finish but didn’t want to spend time on the ground because he’d burn his feet. This cue registered to him that it wasn’t just about fast feet; it was also about putting enough force into the ground to make it the whole way.

Frontside Lift Coaching Cue #2 – Imagine You’re Running Over Hot Coals Getting Hotter with Every Step

Amazingly, this cue worked immediately with him and the kinogram below shows his very next repetition. The over-arching disappeared, as he was able to focus on the “pop” in each step rather than straining to get to the finish line. While the first cue did nothing for him, the next cue helped instantly. Every athlete has a different brain, so coaches need to constantly look at how to educate them from various vantage points to solve problems. This athlete reminded me of that important lesson.

Technique Improved 3 — Image 9. The cue of “imagine you’re running on hot coals getting hotter and hotter” worked almost magically for this athlete. He learned to focus on the “pop” in each step rather than straining to get to the finish line, and the over-arching disappeared.

Thigh Separation as an Important Indicator

One of the lessons I learned from Dr. Ken Clark is that the touch-down phase of a kinogram provides a very clear indication of poor posture when sprinting at high speed. Image 10 below reveals how an excessive thigh separation heading into touch-down is a result of the butt-kicking issue. Vertical force application is poor, so the athletes are unable to effectively cycle their legs around, resulting in heel striking further in front of the center of mass and mayhem for the hamstrings.

Excessive Thigh Separation — Image 10. I learned from Dr. Ken Clark that a kinogram’s touch-down phase provides a very clear picture of poor posture when sprinting at high speed. Notice how an excessive thigh separation heading into touch-down is also a result of the butt-kicking issue.

In contrast, minimal thigh separation upon entering the touch-down phase indicates decent vertical force production, where the athletes are able to spend more time in flight and cycle the legs around, as shown in Image 11. These athletes are able to remain more elastic at ground contact, taking strain off of the hamstrings and spreading it more effectively across various connective tissues. Once I see improvements in thigh position at touch-down, I feel much better about introducing longer distances and higher speeds in my programming because I know the risk of hamstring injury has drastically subsided.

Save the Hamstrings

My hope is that the butt-kicking problem becomes common knowledge for coaches of any sport involving sprinting. The more that coaches are aware of the high-risk positions and then equipped with potential solutions to alleviate them, the safer all our athletes will be. That said, the butt-kicking problem is just one station along the railroad line of keeping players safe, but it’s my first stop when introducing athletes to any form of sprint training. I believe it’s really the most common issue with poor sprinting. In my experience, it’s everywhere. The exception is typically an athlete that has been exposed to a well-structured track and field program.

The more that coaches are aware of the high-risk positions leading to butt-kicking, and then equipped with potential solutions to alleviate them, the safer athletes will be. Share on X

It’s our duty as coaches to help our athletes learn how to sprint fast in the fastest and safest way possible. If we ignore safety, a high number of injuries will inevitably ensue. I don’t have social media anymore, but if I did, I’d tag this article with the hashtag #savethehamstrings. Let’s work together to end the butt-kicking epidemic and save the hamstrings.

Since you’re here…
…we have a small favor to ask. More people are reading SimpliFaster than ever, and each week we bring you compelling content from coaches, sport scientists, and physiotherapists who are devoted to building better athletes. Please take a moment to share the articles on social media, engage the authors with questions and comments below, and link to articles when appropriate if you have a blog or participate on forums of related topics. — SF

References

Clark, K.P. Speed Science: “The Mechanics Underlying Linear Sprinting Performance.” PowerPoint Presentation.

Episode 12: JB Morin

Joel Smith: Just Fly Performance Podcast, Podcast| ByMark Hoover

JB Morin is a renowned French researcher who is a full professor at Université Côte d’Azur in Nice, France. Morin is also Director of the Masters in Sports Performance and Training Science Associate Dean for Research in the Faculty of Sport Science there. JB’s field of research is mainly human locomotion and performance, with a specific interest in running biomechanics and maximal power movements (sprint, jumps). He has published approximately 110 peer-reviewed journal articles since 2004.

Morin is one of the foremost experts in speed, acceleration, and vertical jump training, providing some of the most in-depth applied studies available. JB gives incredible insight into all aspects of his research and its applications. He also talks about his findings on force-velocity profiling and overspeed training in jumping, and he goes into great detail on the use of ankle training and how to maximize acceleration efficiency to improve performance. Morin explains his findings on sled training and what volume and intensity affect performance most effectively.

In this podcast, JB Morin discusses with Joel:

His findings on using force-velocity jump profiling to correct athlete imbalances.

His inexpensive apps that will allow coaches to assess jumping ability and force production.

Programming to increase lower leg training stiffness to improve performance.

His research on how the ratio of force in sprinting can help coaches determine which specific aspects of sprints need to be further developed to maximize outcomes.

JB has also been interviewed about elite sprint kinetics and training on SimpliFaster.

Podcast total run time is 44:51.

Keywords: speed, acceleration, vertical jump, force, overspeed

Episode 11: Carl Valle

Joel Smith: Just Fly Performance Podcast, Podcast| ByMark Hoover

Carl Valle has been training high-performance athletes since 1997. He has coached track and field at every level, from high school to the Olympic level in the sprints and hurdles, and he has worked with great athletes who have been All-Americans and school record holders. A technology professional, Coach Valle has expertise in performance data, as well as an understanding for the practical application of equipment and software. Carl is currently the lead sport technologist for SpikesOnly.com, and he focuses his time on testing elite athletes and using technology to help everyone at any level of human performance reach their goals.

Coach Valle shares information on jump testing and evaluation, and he discusses how and when to use jump testing as part of a yearly plan to balance injury reduction, while at the same time maximizing athletic performance. He gives his insight on how to effectively and efficiently coach and use measurements and evaluation of jumping in a sports performance program. Coach Valle reflects on the use of jump testing in team sports as well as track and field.

In this podcast, Coach Carl Valle discusses with Joel:

The use of force-velocity testing to balance an athlete’s strengths and weaknesses.

Embedding jump tests into daily warm-up sessions to improve efficiency.

The use of multiple versus single jump testing.

What he sees as the relationship between athletic structure, vertical jump performance, and sprint testing.

Coach Valle is the lead writer for SimpliFaster. A list of his articles can be found here.

Podcast total run time is 1:00:02.

Keywords: vertical, athletic preparation, jump testing, force-velocity

Episode 10: Ryan Horn

Joel Smith: Just Fly Performance Podcast, Podcast| ByMark Hoover

Ryan Horn is in his sixth season as the Director of Athletic Performance for the Wake Forest basketball program. Horn’s work has been highlighted by the Demon Deacons’ return to the NCAA Tournament in 2017 and helping to develop 2017 NBA first-round pick John Collins, among other athletes. Coach Horn joined the Demon Deacons in April 2014 after working under head coach Danny Manning at Tulsa, where he helped the Golden Hurricane win the 2013–14 Conference USA regular season and tournament championships—the program’s first title since 2003. He has also made stops at VCU, Robert Morris, and Liberty. Horn has worked with a wide variety of sports, including men’s and women’s soccer, field hockey, and golf.

Coach Horn chats about his technology utilization and gives his insight on the use of advanced technology to test and monitor athletes for maximum performance. He shares the steps he believes coaches must take before they begin to use some of the technological options available to them. Horn gives his expert understanding on developing the strength levels appropriate for the basketball athletes who often come to him with a large deficit, as well as energy system development for his athletes’ needs.

In this podcast, Coach Ryan Horn discusses with Joel:

How to train basketball athletes based on sport-specific needs analysis.

His use of the kBox to develop eccentric strength.

The more advanced technology he uses to test athletes, as well as less-expensive alternatives.

His thoughts on monitoring athletes and his ideas on doing so at any cost level.

Ryan Horn has also been interviewed for the Freelap Friday Five on SimpliFaster.

Podcast total run time is 59:24.

Keywords: plyometrics, technology, athlete monitoring, basketball, kBox

Maximizing Recovery and Monitoring with Robin Thorpe

Freelap Friday Five| ByRobin Thorpe

Dr. Robin Thorpe spent the last decade working as a senior performance scientist and conditioning coach at Manchester United Football Club of the English Premier League. He worked with the first team delivering performance and conditioning support to players while overseeing and managing fatigue, recovery, and regeneration practices throughout the club as Head of Recovery and Regeneration.

Dr. Thorpe completed an applied Ph.D. with Liverpool John Moores University investigating methods of fatigue and performance monitoring, which has led to a number of original articles published in peer-reviewed journals. Much of his work to date has centered around a model of monitoring the player response to stress in order to maximize athlete availability, training load prescription, and recovery and reduce injury and illness risk. Dr. Thorpe also holds the position of Visiting Research Fellow at Liverpool John Moores University.

He has worked with many high-profile athletes and assisted in the preparation of the Mexican national football team leading up to the 2018 FIFA World Cup. In May of this year, Dr. Thorpe accepted a position as Director of Performance & Innovation at ALTIS, working with elite track and field athletes in the lead-up to the Olympic Games (Tokyo 2020). As part of his role, he serves as the Director of the ALTIS LIVING LAB, which integrates applied and academic sports performance research in the field to push the boundaries of sports innovation science and knowledge to athletes, coaches, and the industry as a whole.

Freelap USA: Recovery is a wide topic today, and many coaches are afraid for athletes to get tired. When is it okay for athletes to be fatigued, and how does this encourage positive adaptations? It’s important to be fresh for quality sessions, but sometimes you have to push through fatigue. Can you give some pointers on when it’s okay to train through fatigue?

Robin Thorpe: Professionalism in sport has provided the foundation for elite athletes to focus purely on training and competition. Furthermore, high-performance sport and the importance of athletes’ success have led athletes and coaches alike to continually seek any advantage or edge that may improve performance. Enhancing recovery through training and performance may provide numerous benefits during repetitive high-level training and competition, and the rate and quality of recovery in the high-performance athlete may be as important as the training itself.

Nevertheless, there are other factors that coaches should consider. During periods of high training loads and intensive competition, the first thing they often do is attempt to minimize the resultant fatigue and enhance recovery. However, there will be times during a season/pre-season when this initial perspective may not be optimal for overall performance, and there will certainly be times where this approach may diminish some positive physiological adaptations.

There are times when minimizing fatigue and enhancing recovery may not be optimal for an athlete’s overall performance and may even diminish some positive physiological adaptations. Share on X

An important consideration during a large proportion of the training and competition season is whether to maximize recovery or adaptation. Pre-season and often the initial phase of the competition season (team sports) are periods when coaches/practitioners periodize load aimed at maximizing various physiological adaptations. During this time, the balance and relationship between adaptation and recovery is crucial, given the higher training loads/potential injury risk experienced by athletes. It is known that the use of certain recovery modalities (cold water immersion) and nutritional strategies (antioxidants) has reduced training-induced adaptation, particularly related to strength and resistance exercise¹. However, the same modalities (cold water immersion) have also shown to improve aerobic-related adaptation².

This poses another question, as most team sports seldom rely or train one single physiological-based system (for example, the demands of sports such as soccer involve a combination of energy systems utilization), and a “black or white” physiological emphasis approach is limiting and difficult to navigate when prescribing methods to maximize training-induced adaptation. On the other hand, individual-based sports, which can be separated largely between strength/power and endurance, would be more suited to this approach of using “recovery” modalities (or adaptation enhancement modalities) to elicit greater training adaptations. Therefore, during periods of adaptation-related training, some of these modalities or approaches should be avoided.

This trade-off relationship between adaptation and recovery can be difficult to establish/quantify, especially when evaluating potential injury risk for athletes. Fatigue monitoring can help to identify at-risk individuals and to understand and quantify the extent of the stress experienced by the athlete. Athletes will respond differently to varying external loads and stress; therefore, a “one size fits all” approach or solely measuring external load may negate important intelligence relating to how athletes respond and their subsequent fatigue status. Establishing individual “response fingerprints” can enable a surveillance system that provides insights on whether to promote stress/adaptation or recovery in order to maximize the training-performance process.

Another factor to consider is the technical emphasis of the training session. In team sports, coaches often demand high-quality technical/tactical sessions, which they believe to be crucial for subsequent global performance. For example, if this type of session is to be programmed during a period when physiological adaptation is a key component (pre-season or closely following competition early in the season), a decision must be made as to which is the most important factor to promote—i.e., enhance acute recovery to maximize the quality of the technical session or maximize adaptation-related stress for a more physiological gain. A response monitoring framework (discussed later) can help guide some of these decisions, which will be highly individual.

Freelap USA: Cryotherapy is a very complex interaction with athletes, as it may help with local pain but is also known to interfere with the recovery process. When is it fine (if ever) to add cold therapy, and when should we look to other options? What about heat?

Robin Thorpe: First of all, it is important to acknowledge the differences between the various methods of “cryotherapy.” For example, local cooling, cold water immersion (CWI), and whole-body cryotherapy (WBC) are all frequently used in elite sport during acute injury, rehabilitation, and performance recovery settings, which arguably could be displayed on the same continuum of mechanical micro-trauma to structural disruption. Many of these methods are labelled and positioned under the same umbrella of “cryotherapy”; however, the physiological response produced from each of these methods can vary in level and may even vary in physiological response altogether. This largely relates to the states of matter of each method and also the laws of thermodynamics and temperature transfer.

The consensus for “cryotherapy” use in both clinical and performance settings is to first reduce skin temperature, which acts as the first mechanism to reduce peripheral and deep tissue temperature, reduce blood flow, and elicit an analgesic effect³. Cold water immersion will reduce deep tissue temperature at a greater level than local cooling (ice packs) for the aforementioned reasons (law of thermodynamics)³, although local cooling is still widely used ahead of water immersion as the primary method, particularly in clinical/injury/rehabilitation situations. Ultimately, if the aim is to reduce tissue temperature, blood flow, and pain sensation, cold water immersion seems to be the most potent long-standing option compared to local cooling³. Whole-body cryotherapy has often been the preferred method of cryotherapy in recent years, although limited evidence of its efficacy exists⁴. Recent work has shown that cold water immersion improved measures of recovery to a greater extent than whole-body cryotherapy, and there may even be questions relating to whether or not whole-body cryotherapy reduces tissue temperature altogether.

Another question that practitioners should consider is whether cooling is the preferred option for performance recovery, and should it even be in the timeline post injury, says @DrRobinThorpe. Share on X

Another question that practitioners should consider is whether cooling is actually the preferred option for performance recovery, and should it even be in the timeline post injury. Recent work⁵ has shown the application of heat therapy to be favorable over cooling during the healing process post injury. It seems there is an optimal time to cool and heat during the timeline of injury and performance recovery. Certainly, for performance recovery, monitoring of recovery/fatigue/response can guide the prescription of cooling or heat. In team sport, and particularly soccer, the recovery strategy will alter and vary depending on the training stress induced.

We can subdivide fatigue into:

- Mechanical stress – induced by high eccentric contractions predominantly derived from persistent acceleration/deceleration soccer-specific movements or prolonged high-speed running. Common symptoms including inflammation, edema, soreness, and stiffness.

Metabolic fatigue – induced by high metabolic cost involving various energy systems. Symptoms include acidosis, glycogen depletion, oxidative stress, and potassium accumulation⁶.

Understanding these origins can help determine whether or not cooling or heat is the preferred method to improve these systems and processes. Each physiological stress involves a unique recovery timeline to return to homeostasis. This is separated into either a reduction in blood flow (cooling) or an enhancement in blood flow (heat), dependent on the type of physiological stress.

Freelap USA: Monitoring jump training isn’t as easy as it looks in the real world. How do you get athletes to buy into jump testing or any type of test for that matter? Eventually you have to collect some sort of data to track athletes, and that requires participation.

Robin Thorpe: The monitoring of jump protocols has been a popular method to evaluate the force application of athletes for many years, and now with the advancement of technology in sport and the affordability of force platforms, many professional sports teams and practitioners use jump protocols to evaluate the physical status of athletes.

A new “plug and play” era has probably had a negative effect on how the assessments and technology are applied in elite sport at the highest level. It’s not always a simple process to implement assessment protocols into a real-world high-performance setting; however, ensuring the importance of the assessment protocol, timing of the test, and standardization is paramount if the data is to be used to complement the performance and coaching process. In recent years, it seems that this part of the process has been neglected, and the importance has moved toward the actual technological tool itself or the visualization of the data. Arguably, the most important factor (assessment protocol) is overlooked, which may be one reason why many performance/fatigue monitoring frameworks have struggled to impact decision-making and the training process.

Many performance/fatigue monitoring frameworks have struggled to impact decision-making and the training process because they overlook the assessment protocol—the most important factor. Share on X

Another factor may be that communication to key stakeholders as to the extent and true capabilities of technology and subsequent information has been exaggerated or misinterpreted, subsequently elevating expectations from various stakeholders and ultimately under-delivering on the outcome of the sports science/performance process. In order to minimize some of these issues, there are four areas (Four Pillars of Confidence) that should be considered prior to implementing any assessment or monitoring tool in a high-performance environment: validity, reliability, sensitivity, and usability.

For example, a monitoring tool needs to have acceptable repeatability in order to be used for subsequent sensitivity to load/stress/competition. Furthermore, just because a monitoring tool is repeatable in another sporting environment doesn’t necessarily mean it will be repeatable in all environments. Therefore, test/retest estimates should be established in each setting. Jump monitoring is just one tool that coaches can use as part of a battery of tests. It is important to ensure each monitoring tool provides a clear indication of the system investigated.

From experience, individualized feedback has generally maintained compliance from an athlete standpoint, and informal, quick, verbal feedback has typically shown to be beneficial in elite team sport athletes. Ultimately, coach buy-in leads to athlete and other practitioner compliance; therefore, relationships and establishing how the coach synthesizes information should be an important factor to consider during the first stage of reporting and feedback processes.

Freelap USA: Some coaches like to lift the day after the game, while some want to facilitate recovery. With research supporting multiple options, how does a soccer (team sport) program best get in its weekly lifts?

Robin Thorpe: Coaches can achieve a resistance exercise session and facilitate recovery simultaneously. There is some evidence that increasing testosterone and, in turn, enhancing the testosterone-cortisol ratio may be a favorable endocrinological environment to facilitate general recovery⁷. Resistance exercise will likely increase testosterone, so amalgamating the two processes without further reducing recovery may be an efficient option as part of the performance and training cycle. Furthermore, the active nature of resistance exercise will increase global blood flow, which may be favorable for metabolic clearance and subsequent general recovery.

In soccer, it is the tissues and systems of the lower limbs that may experience mechanical damage, metabolic, and/or neuromuscular fatigue. Therefore, resistance exercise of the upper limbs (still an important physical performance attribute) would be a suitable option to potentially improve both endocrinological processes and performance strength adaptation together. The use of resistance exercise during a recovery-themed day can be advantageous, as it creates a cultural emphasis of active-based modalities rather than passive. It seems passive recovery modalities such as massage, manual therapy, and sequential pneumatic compression are becoming more and more popular with athletes and some practitioners, even considering the general and often lack of evidence supporting benefits to enhancing recovery. An active practitioner-guided, self-managing athlete inside and outside the training facility may be a more favorable concept and culture for high-performance environments and teams.

The use of resistance exercise during a recovery-themed day can be advantageous, as it creates a cultural emphasis of active-based modalities rather than passive, says @DrRobinThorpe. Share on X

The day following the game is also normally a lower load day, so resistance exercise load would not compound any other on-field/conditioning load already programmed. When technical/tactical sessions induce high load, resistance load must be carefully adjusted to manage the overall global stress of the athlete. It’s important to ensure that load is quantified during both on-field technical/tactical and resistance sessions.

Session ratings of perceived exertion (S-RPE) have been shown to provide a standard measure to use interchangeably. However, during intensive periods of competition, general/mental/neuromuscular fatigue may be high and, therefore, adding extra nervous system resistance exercise may not be suitable. Monitoring response/fatigue status and the various elements of recovery and physiological systems is a recommended approach to quantify the extent of fatigue and ensure that this resistance exercise is applied during suitable timepoints and avoided at others.

Freelap USA: Load management is often about reducing total stress or manipulating eccentric demands, but what about biochemical strain? A lot of coaches deal with athletes who are burned out on training because they are going hard on a bike or even a pool session. How do we manage the training load psychologically?

Robin Thorpe: First of all, “load management” isn’t solely about reducing stress or “putting on the brakes.” “Load management” also includes increasing the load or stress depending on the situation or the athlete’s current physical/fatigue status. As previously stated, the athlete’s “response” to load will vary largely and during different periods; therefore, this ought to be assessed and monitored.

A balance between match/training load and recovery is paramount in order to optimize training responses and adaptation in athletes. Overtraining and/or fatigue accumulation can be the result of an increased training load, whereas detraining may be the result of a reduction in training load. Given the importance of recovery within the training process, attention in the literature has increasingly centered upon developing noninvasive monitoring tools that serve as valid and reliable indicators of the response/fatigue status in athletes.

A balance between match/training load and recovery is paramount in order to optimize training responses and adaptation in athletes, says @DrRobinThorpe. Share on X

In order to serve as a valid indicator of fatigue/response in elite sport, prospective tools should be simple, quick, inexpensive, and easy to administer. Furthermore, potential measures should be sensitive to training load, and their response to acute exercise should be distinguishable from chronic changes in adaptation. In team sports such as soccer, any fatigue/response assessment must be non-exhaustive and quick and easy to administer to ensure frequent application over the long and congested competitive period.

Recent investigations with elite soccer players have shown that perceived ratings of wellness and ANS-derived heart rate (HR) measures were sensitive to both daily and within-weekly changes in training load⁸. Perceived ratings of wellness, HR-response indices, and potentially structural extensibility assessments may be useful as a fatigue/response monitoring framework in elite athletes. Practically, the initial use of perceived ratings of wellness can also create avenues for the further assessment of these physiological/anatomical systems.

For instance, elevated perceived muscle soreness may prompt further investigations into strength and/or extensibility-focused structural assessments. Such approaches may be used in order to explore potential anatomical disruption. Moreover, these assessments may also lead to further evaluation of the autonomic nervous system via HR-response quantification. For example, during periods of fixture congestion, players may suffer from potential debilitating symptoms associated with overreaching. Further investigation via the use of heart rate indices may provide greater insight into the responsiveness of the autonomic nervous system. This information can then be used to better guide training load/recovery intervention prescription for these individuals.

Monitoring the external load of athletes is a more common approach to athlete status evaluation and is certainly beneficial in order to understand the varying load elements. However, each athlete, and at varying timepoints the same athletes, is likely to respond differently. Monitoring “response to load” or fatigue provides information to coaches and practitioners to prescribe and modify training to provide an “optimal load” on an individual basis.

Cycle and pool sessions are popular training methods on recovery days due to their lower mechanical load and the variance from normal training environments. However, like any other training modality, the manipulation of intensity/time can provide higher physiological demands. Typically, in team sports training load is monitored by ratings of perceived exertion (RPE), heart rate, and global positioning systems (GPS), and this should not stop on recovery days, resource permitting.

RPE is a valid tool to track the physical and mental impact a recovery session (pool or bike) may have on the athletes. Furthermore, during times of increased competition or psychological demand, it is important to consider the mental fatigue of the athletes. This can also be exacerbated during periods of high-pressured competition and technical/tactical overload.

Simple perceived ratings of wellness questionnaires have shown to be valid and sensitive in elite individual and team sport athletes. Therefore, utilizing this method and including a questionnaire relating to mental fatigue may be a suitable starting point to track this key factor. However, validation and sensitivity research are yet to be completed within this particular area. Other methods, like heart rate variability, may also provide some beneficial insights into mental/cognitive fatigue via the autonomic nervous system, but more work is required on this topic.

The ALTIS/Brains Bioceutical Living Lab brings together interdisciplinary experts to co-create, explore, experiment, and evaluate—in real-world environments—new ideas within the natural training and competition environment of elite athletes.

References

1. Peake, J.M. “Independent, corroborating evidence continues to accumulate that post-exercise cooling diminishes muscle adaptations to strength training.” The Journal of Physiology. 2019 Dec 25. doi: 10.1113/JP279343.

2. Chung, N., Park, J., and Lim, K. “The effects of exercise and cold exposure on mitochondrial biogenesis in skeletal muscle and white adipose tissue.” The Journal of Exercise Nutrition and Biochemistry. 2017; 21(2):39–47. doi: 10.20463/jenb.2017.0020.

3. Rupp, K.A., Herman, D.C., Hertel, J., and Saliba, S.A. “Intramuscular Temperature Changes During and After 2 Different Cryotherapy Interventions in Healthy Individuals.” Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy. 2012; 42(8):731–737. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2012.4200. Epub 2012 Mar 23.

4. Costello, J.T., Baker, P.R., Minett, G.M., Bieuzen, F., Stewart, I.B., and Bleakley, C. “Cochrane review: Whole-body cryotherapy (extreme cold air exposure) for preventing and treating muscle soreness after exercise in adults.” Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine. 2016; 9(1):43–44. doi: 10.1111/jebm.12187. Epub 2016 Jan 14.

5. Hoekstra, S.P., Wright, A.K., Bishop, N.C., and Leicht, C.A. “The effect of temperature and heat shock protein 72 on the ex vivo acute inflammatory response in monocytes.” Cell Stress Chaperones. 2019; 24(2):461–467. doi: 10.1007/s12192-019-00972-6. Epub 2019 Feb 12.

6. Nédélec, M., McCall, A., Carling, C., Legall, F., Berthoin, S., and Dupont, G. “Recovery in soccer: part I – post-match fatigue and time course of recovery.” Sports Medicine. 2012; 42(12):997–1015. doi: 10.2165/11635270-000000000-00000.

7. Yarrow, J.F., Borsa, P.A., Borst, S.E., Sitren, H.S., Stevens, B.R., and White, L.J. “Neuroendocrine responses to an acute bout of eccentric-enhanced resistance exercise.” Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 2007; 39(6):941–947. doi:10.1097/mss.0b013e318043a249.

8. Thorpe, R.T., Atkinson, G., Drust, B., and Gregson, W. “Monitoring Fatigue Status in Elite Team-Sport Athletes: Implications for Practice.” International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance. 2017; 12(Suppl 2):S227–S234. doi: 10.1123/ijspp.2016-0434. Epub 2017 Jan 17.

Episode 9: Ryan Banta

Joel Smith: Just Fly Performance Podcast, Podcast| ByMark Hoover

Ryan Banta is a track and field coach at Parkway Central High School in Chesterfield, Missouri. His athletes have achieved 109 school records, 3 top four finishes at the state championships, 5 district championships, 180 state semi-finalist (sectionals), 122 state qualifiers, 2 state records (3200 and 4×800), 14 national ranked events, 57 All-State performances, 10 state championships, and 11 runner-up performances, and two were Gatorade athletes of the year. Ryan is a USATF level II coach in the sprints, hurdles, relays, and endurance, and he recently earned a USTFCCCA track and field technical coaching certification. He also an author and speaker. His book, The Sprinters Compendium, is available here.

Coach Banta is an expert at training sprinters, as well as speed endurance athletes. He goes in-depth on his methods and how his experiences learning the “Formula One” model at ALTIS have shaped his coaching methods and his team’s culture. Ryan explains how he breaks his programming into specific daily goals and builds these goals into every aspect of the training day, from warm-up to finish. He describes how he adjusts the techniques he has taken from higher level programs to the high school level. Coach Banta has been successful instituting universal high-performance warm-up protocols with large groups of athletes, and he gives insight into building a high-performance team culture at the high school level.

In this podcast, Coach Ryan Banta discusses with Joel:

How programming can be built around a “performance therapy” model in preparation for avoiding injury and using readiness protocols.

The use of manual massage and other recovery techniques in the high school setting.

His insights into programming and using track movement-based protocols to improve the performance of high school football athletes.

His plans for training “speed-oxidative” athletes who are very fast-twitch by nature.

Coach Banta has written multiple pieces for SimpliFaster: Click here to read them.

Podcast total run time is 1:01:24.

Keywords: culture, speed training, performance therapy, acceleration, recovery

Episode 8: Dan Fichter

Joel Smith: Just Fly Performance Podcast, Podcast| ByMark Hoover

Dan Fichter owns and operates Wannagetfast Power and Speed Training, a performance training business in Rochester, New York, that offers training to elite athletes from pro hockey players to the Olympic level. He is also the Head Football Coach at Irondequoit High School. Coach Fichter has a bachelor’s degree in Physical Education and a master’s degree in Liberal Studies from SUNY College at Brockport. Dan was elected to the SUNY Brockport Athletic Hall of Fame in 2007 for his accomplishments on the football field. He also spent time playing professionally in the CFL and Arena League.

Coach Fichter gets deep into his philosophies on using isometrics in his program, including the neurological aspects of the training and the importance of correct technique. He examines how his background led him to his current protocols in programming isometric work for his speed/power athletes. He also talks about the emphasis he puts on the brain and visual training, and its effects on transfer to the field for an athlete.

In this podcast, Coach Dan Fichter discusses with Joel:

The use of vision-based training to increase the strength of an athlete in various areas.

His insights into research using the brain to stimulate increased athletic performance.

The use of higher intensity weight training to produce maximal recovery.

How super slow training affects motor learning in a speed/power athlete.

Coach Fichter wrote “Training the Reflex System” for SimpliFaster.

Podcast total run time is 50:06.

Keywords: vertical, isometrics, vision, motor learning, AMT

A Ladder System for Training Speed and Power In-Season

Blog| ByCarmen Pata

For me, in-season training has always been a double-edged sword. We walk a fine line between providing enough of a stimulus to continue making improvements in the speed-strength and power aspects of the force-velocity curve while keeping the volume-load low enough to keep the athletes fresh for competing at a high level. Since our athletes usually have heard that in-season lifting is a maintenance program, it does take them a while to come around to the idea of getting positive work done in the gym during the season.

We keep pushing the athletes during their competitive season because I believe in momentum—not just the measurable version of momentum from physics, but the immeasurable version of cognitive momentum. While cognitive momentum is not easily measured, it is easily seen during a game.

We see cognitive momentum all the time in games when it looks like one team can’t do anything wrong, and the other team can’t do anything right. Without momentum, even when the play calls are correct, someone either is physically out of position or mentally makes a mistake. Either way, the play is broken and not performed correctly. Or the call is correct, and the players execute it correctly, but the other team makes a great play to stop it.

While the team without momentum always seems to be out of position, the team that has it always is in the right place at the right time. That, my friends, is the power of cognitive momentum, and it has nothing to do with mass or velocity. It has everything to do with confidence.

Confidence is contagious, and it has a very specific feedback loop. We can thank evolution for this. I don’t need to tell you that life is risky. If we were constantly trapped in our own heads, overthinking every situation or making every choice by relying on the fight or flight mechanism in the limbic area of our brains, humanity would have faded out long ago.

Evolution gave us an advantage with our brains and social behavior. With these two gifts, we can learn and rationalize our choices, which let us dictate how much of our time and resources we’ll apply the next time the same opportunity occurs. Let me show you what I mean.

Cognitive Momentum Loop — Image 1. This entire momentum loop starts with what you believe. If you’re certain that you’ll be successful, you will tap into this certainty and use all of your potential and effort.

When someone believes they will be successful, has great effort, and takes massive action, of course they’ll find success. When someone is skeptical and filled with uncertainty, they never put great effort into their actions. And they get mediocre results, at best. In both of these examples, the outcomes will match the person’s belief, which reinforces the feedback loop. In other words, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

Momentum in the Weight Room

While admittedly I’m biased, I believe this feedback loop starts in the weight room because we have absolute control of the results we get while lifting. The athlete controls their effort. The athlete controls their recovery and nutrition. The athlete controls the outcomes.

There is far more control in the weight room than the competition arena where the coaches control the substitutions and play calls. The refs play their part, too. And while they never seem to make the right call, they keep both sides equally unhappy. So, the big question is, how do we keep people certain about what they’re doing in the weight room?

We never talk about in-season lifting as a maintenance program. In-season lifting is all about speed and power development, says @CarmenPata. Share on X

First, we never talk about in-season lifting as a maintenance program. In-season lifting is all about speed and power development. Our athletes constantly get feedback about their speed and power by using my favorite tool in the weight room, the GymAware.

GymAware accurately measures bar speed or power for almost any lift, but we stick to our big three: squat, bench, and clean pulls. After our warm-ups, all returning athletes will go through what I call a ladder. They take one attempt at a given weight and record their speed or power result.

Video 1. One of our tight ends performs the squat ladder in week 9. (By the way, this is a 35-pound PR for him).

When using the ladder progression with in-season athletes, there are three rules the athletes must follow.

1. Effort. They must hit their normal squat depth every rep. The athlete must have a controlled descent and then move the bar up as fast as possible.

1. Cut off. Each phase has a minimum speed. Each athlete keeps going until their velocity is at or close to the minimum speed, or they cannot make the next weight increase.

Stay healthy. There is a lot to account for during in-season training, and I know that some days the residual soreness of the prior game or a new illness or injury affects people. If an athlete feels terrible, they can stop at any time.

When the athletes follow these rules and continue to perform their ladders, training session after training session, two important things happen. First, the athlete will touch all the points on the force-velocity curve within the workout. Well, maybe they won’t hit the true maximum force part of the curve if they follow that day’s recommendation for the minimum speed. Assuming they do, they will hit strength-speed, power, speed-strength, and speed ranges, which are exactly what I’m looking to develop.

Once athletes work up the ladder, we know what weight gets them into each force-velocity zone & the weight to train in these zones the next session. Share on X

Second—and most important—we now can implement a personalized training program in a group setting. Meaning, once the athletes have worked their way up the ladder, we know what weight will get them into each of the force-velocity zones. And I know that the weights to train in the next training session in these zones might be the same, or they might change.

Pata Ladder Table — Table 1. Example of a ladder system. The data points are for the same in-season athlete from two different weeks.

In the above example, the athlete’s program called for them to continue the ladder until they hit 0.5 m/s and then do reps on the minute with the weight that corresponded to or around 0.75 m/s. During the first week, their training weight was 315, but during week two they were at 225. You can see the difference between weeks one and two. This athlete had a few things going on, but the big thing was that they had significantly more plays going into week two than they did at week one.

Programing with the GymAware takes a little learning on everyone’s part. Still, whatever we’re working on developing with the current block, the athlete eventually understands that their program will adjust to where they are at when they walk into the gym. All the athlete has to do is adjust their program based on the results of their current ladder.

Using the above example, if we were to program the athlete’s week one weights on week two, we would have physically and mentally crushed that player. On the flip side, had I used their week two weights in week one, there wouldn’t have been enough of a stimulant to provide a positive training effect.

Just by following the ladder and velocity-based sets & reps, many athletes hit new maxes in the middle or end of their season, says @CarmenPata. Share on X

The crazy thing is that, even though the athletes only get one rep at each weight on the ladder, time and time again it’s proven to be enough stimulant to hit new PR’s in-season. Let me say that again. Just by following the ladder and the velocity-based sets and reps, we have multiple athletes hit new maxes in the middle or end of their season. Considering that my in-season training emphasis is on developing speed-strength and power, not maximum strength, I’ll take new PRs as a nice side effect.

Predicting Readiness and Game Performance

When I first started using the ladder system with our teams, we were experimenting with the idea of velocity-based training. Our priority was keeping people in their velocity zone, but we also happened to keep track of the velocities of everyone’s warm-up weights.

The ladder idea was born by an accident that has become one of the happiest I’ve experienced in the weight room. It wasn’t until we started plotting these data points that any of us understood what we had in front of us: a force-velocity curve specific to each individual athlete waiting to be discovered. Sure, it took a little Excel magic to make it look pretty, and it took time to evolve to its current form. Now, by the end of each training session, we generate reports that look like the one below.

Pata Athlete Readiness — Image 2. At the end of each training session, we generate reports like this for each athlete.

Depending on people’s backgrounds, this report either has too much or too little information on it. For my staff, we are most interested in the actual data that is hiding within the curve itself. The red line is the average personal velocity for each of the weights, and each dot represents the specific result and day we tested the ladder. As I said, that’s the data my staff members like to dig into—but our sport coaches are more interested in the predicted status of the athlete.

The predicted athlete status concept took some time to develop. We started looking at the massive amount of data sets and then asked how the data we had correlated with the athletes’ performance in practices and games. After all, our job is to make sure our athletes are playing to the best of their ability, so why wait until practice or a game to find out they weren’t playing very well? We had the tools in front of us with the GymAware data and the observational data the sport coaches gave us on how their athletes performed. Now, we just needed to put it all together to create a model that could predict game performance.

Pretty cool, right? Yeah, I think so too.

Performance and observational data let us create a model to predict game performance, says @CarmenPata. Share on X

If you’ve ever worked with athletes in the middle of their season, you know there will always be fluctuations in their performance. The grind of the season wears people down, and there are always small nagging injuries. Then there are the outside influences like sleep, family life, and in my world, academic pressures.

All of these factors and others combine to make subtle changes in an athlete’s day-to-day performance. The question we kept trying to answer is: What is an acceptable drop in performance? Looking back at all our empirical and anecdotal evidence, we came up with four categories to rate the athletes.

Status Spectrum — Image 3. We use these four categories to rate each athlete’s performance and predict their upcoming game performance.

It’s very rare for athletes to rate in the top GOLDEN category. Typically, we’ll see this with student-athletes who compete in the fall sports. I wish I could say the only reason they perform greater than 110% of their average is that I’m that good of a coach, but I can’t.

Usually, the athlete didn’t do much if anything over the summer and is experiencing super-compensation from training. We’ve also seen athletes who took their training very seriously have a great week. Whatever the reason, they feel that they’re on top of their game, and if they test into the GOLDEN category, everyone expects big things from them at the next game.

Primarily, we see athletes in the GOOD category. There might be a little drop in their numbers, but it’s within the expected range. They are in-season, and accumulated fatigue is a real thing, but they should be able to live up to their practice and game expectations.

When the fatigue is too much, we see people slide into the CAUTION group. We hear back from their coaches that they were a “half-step slow.” Typically, these athletes haven’t recovered and need a little more rest to get back into the green GOOD category. That means taking fewer reps at practice or even having a day off. This was a hard sell to coaches at first, but now they understand that a tired athlete is a slow athlete, and sometimes rest is best.

That brings us to the last group: the red, DANGER category. This group is now significantly slower and weaker in the weight room. At this point, their coaches usually say they’re a step or two behind. When we have athletes in this category, our first move is to have a conversation with them to help everyone understand why. We’ve come to learn that when people are in the DANGER category, there may be a few things going on. Typically, it’s any combination of the following:

- They are sick, either expressing or just starting to show symptoms.

- They are injured, and we know about the injury, or they were trying to “grind through” it without seeking treatment.

- They are overly stressed.

- They are not eating or drinking correctly. Or they’re hungover.

- Their training is not correct. Either they are under- or over-trained.

They didn’t give their normal effort.

Hopefully, we can have an open and honest conversation about what is causing their decreased performance. Most of the time, this helps us correct the problem within a week by making routine adjustments to the athlete’s daily schedule. Some of the adjustments can be as easy as going in for treatment for an injury, changing what they’re eating and drinking, or taking a day off to get physically or mentally right.

Whatever the underlying reason for their decreased performance, we can only find out why they are in the DANGER category if there is a conversation. This helps the coaches plan for poor practice and game performance. Also, because they do not see as big of a role for the game, they take fewer reps in practice. Believe it or not, that’s OK since fewer reps mean fewer exposures to injuries. We’ve also seen an increased injury rate for the people in the red group. I’d rather see a reduced week of practice instead of a week (or more) with them sitting in the training room rehabbing.

Wrapping Up

I admit, my take on in-season lifting is different than that of many others. While we all do what we think is best for the athletes we work with, this is where momentum comes back into play. If you’re constantly telling your athletes that the only goal is to maintain their strength or speed during the season, you’re setting their belief patterns.

At the start of this article, you saw how beliefs lead to action. If the athletes believe what happens in the weight room is not important, whatever actions they take will never be done with great effort. They believe it’s OK just to have an OK lift since we’re not pushing to get better. That cycle of belief and action creates momentum heading down a path that I don’t ever want to go.

On the other hand, if your athletes believe in the mindset of attacking everything they do, that will create momentum, which will take you down a different path. The belief in attacking a workout, even in the middle of the season, puts the focus back on the athlete to control the things that they can control.

The belief in attacking a workout, even in the middle of the season, puts the focus back on the athlete to control the things that they can control. Share on X

I’ve been involved with sports long enough to understand that one of the hardest things to do is get in the gym and attack a workout while in the middle of the season. But that’s exactly what I ask athletes to do. Sure, we can go through all the physiological changes I expect the athletes to get from the program, but the greatest transfer of this style of in-season training happens to the little grey and white cells that reside between their ears.

It’s about building momentum into the next game. Instead of focusing on all the things they cannot control, we constantly reinforce that when they learn how to push and fight through a workout, they will push and fight through a close game.

Very few, if any, of the thousands of athletes I’ve worked with initially had the mindset of always attacking their workouts. Luckily, this is a teachable trait as long as someone is around repeatedly telling them that giving up is not OK. I believe the trait that humans have that separates us from all other life is the dignity of choice. We can decide what we believe and decide how much action to take because of that belief. From everything I’ve witnessed in my life, the only real choice for any issue is taking the easy way out or the hard way out.

You see it in sports all the time. A team gets down, and they choose to give up—the easy way out. Their effort disappears. Their intensity disappears. Their will to win disappears. In my experience, this is what happens to people who haven’t learned how to get through hard times, like attacking a lift even when they don’t want to.

Momentum in sports starts in the weight room. It’s up to the coaching staff to decide which direction the momentum will take the athletes and team—down the path of the easy or hard way out. Remember, all it takes to build momentum is a push from the coaching staff.

Performance Habits and Decay: How Poor Oral Health Impacts Athletes

Blog| ByScott Cornell

Serious athletes are always looking for ways to get a leg up on their competition. This often means using the best equipment, practicing hard and on their personal time, and getting the nutrition their bodies need to function at their very best.

Another part of a serious athlete’s regimen is refueling their bodies after an intense workout with one of several types of sports drinks. While these sports drinks are advertised as an essential part of an athlete’s lifestyle, you might be surprised to learn the key ingredient in most sports drinks is none other than sugar—and lots of it. Four of the market’s leading sports drinks have more sugar than a conventional full-size candy bar.

That’s not to say that sports drinks aren’t a viable drink for athletes—but they’re better suited for serious, intense athletes who need to refuel after a grueling training session, practice, or game. These drinks, while tasty, are not beneficial for youth and high school athletes in many cases.

And the amount of sugar they pack isn’t ideal for anyone’s oral health. The common denominator with sports energy drinks, regardless of who consumes them, is the amount of sugar and its effects on an athlete’s teeth and gums. And while teeth don’t help an athlete run, skate, jump, kick, swing, or lunge, oral health care can have an impact on the entire body.

Poor oral health can lead to a sub-par performance when you hit the court, floor, ice, or diamond. Share on X

One path to poor oral health is not supplementing sports drinks with water. Another is not taking care of your teeth as you should, whether it’s proper brushing and flossing or wearing a mouth guard and the right headgear while competing. Regardless of the reason, one thing is certain: poor oral health has the potential to lead to a sub-par performance when you hit the court, floor, ice, or diamond. This post will examine why. Let’s dive in.

How Big of an Issue is Poor Oral Health for Athletes?

You might be surprised that elite athletes have some of the worst oral health issues, even if they brush and floss. According to a report from the UCL Eastman Dental Institute published in the British Dental Journal, elite athletes—such as Olympians and professional athletes across 11 sports—had tooth decay, gum recession, and acid erosion.

Specifically, the study surveyed 352 high-caliber athletes while also asking how they cared for their teeth. According to the report, the vast majority of athletes brushed their teeth twice a day, flossed, didn’t smoke, and visited the dentist regularly. Yet, a routine dental checkup on all of the athletes discovered the following:

Nearly half of all the high-caliber athletes studied showed signs of untreated tooth decay
A majority of the athletes had gum inflammation, which is an early sign of gum disease

And about one-third of the athletes revealed that their oral health issues harmed their training or performance.

One-third of the athletes reported that oral health issues hurt their training or performance. Share on X

So if oral health habits are on point, what is behind these dental issues? Three things: sports drinks, sports bars, and energy gels. Specifically, 87 percent of the athletes surveyed reported regularly consuming sports drinks, and 59 percent and 70 percent ate sports bars and energy gels, respectively. The study verified the increased risk of oral health issues that may arise when athletes consume these regularly without taking additional steps in routine dental health practices.

We’ll get into how these sports drinks, sports bars, and energy gels can affect the teeth in a later section. We’ll also tell you what athletes can do to offset some of the effects of consuming these items.

The good news from the study is that the majority of the athletes surveyed said they were willing to do more to care for their mouth should they continue consuming drinks, bars, and gels with their training regime. And that’s a good thing—because a healthy mouth equals an overall healthy body. We’ll explain more throughout this post.

Sports Drinks 101

Because four of the market’s leading sports drinks have more sugar in one individual 20-ounce bottle than a conventional candy bar, the effects on your teeth can be significant if you’re not careful when drinking them. A 20-ounce bottle of Gatorade, which falls under the PepsiCo umbrella of entities, contains 34 grams of sugar, or about one-third of the daily recommended intake.

PowerAde—the sports drink owned by Coca-Cola—has the same amount of sugar in the same sized bottle. Then there’s Vitaminwater, which sounds much healthier than it is. In fact, it’s not much better when it comes to sugar quantity, as a 20-ounce bottle contains about 32 grams of sugar. We’ll round out this list with chocolate milk, which is advertised as the best post-game beverage for youth teams. Depending on the brand, however, a bottle can contain up to 44 grams of sugar—an even higher amount than Gatorade and PowerAde.

We’re not saying that you should eliminate sports drinks from your practice or game routine, but it’s important to know what you’re consuming—especially as it plays into an athlete’s overall oral health. It’s why following some of the tips and suggestions in this post is important. It’s also why water—that’s right, good ole’ H2O—is by far the best sports drink, whether it’s the only beverage an athlete drinks during play or it’s part of what they consume overall.

Common Oral Health Issues and How They Occur

Everyone knows that sugar is bad for the teeth, but do you understand why? Or how it impacts them?

While sugar is just one piece of the puzzle to bad dental health, it’s a very important piece. Essentially, the mouth is a bacteria battleground. And though this may seem somewhat gross, not all types of bacteria are bad.

One type of mouth bacteria produces acid when it comes in contact with sugar, like the sugar in the sports drinks, sports bars, and energy gels. The acid removes minerals from tooth enamel via a process called demineralization. Tooth enamel serves as a protective outer shell on your teeth. It protects your teeth from hot and cold temperature extremes and tooth decay while keeping the teeth bright and white.

Now, it’s worth noting that your saliva is always acting to offset demineralization via remineralization, which is a process of replacing lost minerals and strengthening tooth enamel. Too many acid attacks in a short time, however, can render remineralization useless. When this occurs, the tooth enamel gradually weakens and tooth decay begins to set in.

If tooth decay is not treated quickly, it can increase to the point where more than a filling may be necessary to correct the issue. In severe cases, decay can spread down to the deepest layers of the tooth, requiring intensive dental procedures, such as root canals.

Gum disease also can have far-reaching consequences. It occurs over time when plaque begins to build up on the teeth, usually due to poor brushing and flossing habits. When we leave plaque untreated, it hardens over time and may cause gum inflammation and bleeding. These are often characteristics of the early stages of gum disease, or gingivitis. If left untreated, they can lead to periodontal disease.

The good news is that we can often reverse gum disease when caught in its early stages. If we don’t catch it soon enough, the whole-body health effects associated with periodontal disease can be very significant. These include bad breath, tooth loss, sensitive teeth, and pain while chewing. And then there are more serious side effects—hormonal changes, a greater risk of developing diabetes, heart disease, and increased risk of stroke.

Common ways to reverse early gum disease include gum cleaning, typically by a dentist, and combining a water flosser with plaque-removing mouthwash in one’s oral care routine.

Effects of Oral Health on Athletic Performance

Think oral health doesn’t have any effect on athletic performance? Think again. And we’re not talking about missing a shift in a hockey game when you get high-sticked in the mouth and need to stop the bleeding. A visit to the dentist can fix that. Poor overall oral health is much more difficult to correct, which is why it’s important to prevent these issues before they become severe.

Here are some of the detrimental health effects poor oral health can have on athletic performance.

Oral health affects the entire body. Poor oral health can have a trickle-down effect on the entire body. Evidence suggests that tooth decay and gum disease can lead to a greater likelihood of infections and inflammation throughout the rest of the body—conditions that could halt an athlete’s training, practice, and play while treated.

Tooth decay and gum disease cause infections and inflammation that can halt an athlete's training, practice, and play while treated. Share on X

And when we say oral health, we’re not just talking about brushing and flossing. We mean wearing a mouth guard and appropriate protective headgear while participating in sport to prevent dental injuries. Any dental issue—whether it’s trauma from an injury or poor oral health—can impact the entire body.

Poor oral health affects overall wellbeing, quality of life. Another key inhibitor of exceptional athletic performance is mental health. Yes, athletes need to be mentally tough, capable of shaking off bad pitches, bad shots, or poor play to rise above the competition. And to be mentally tough, athletes need the right amount of sleep to help their bodies recover and have the ability to “get in the zone” when they need to. Remember, poor oral health impacts the entire body—mentally and physically. If an athlete’s mood and confidence are off, their performance can suffer accordingly.

Sleep issues. An athlete’s body needs sleep to recover, and tooth issues can greatly impact healthy sleep patterns.

Serious health issues. As noted in the above section, periodontal disease can wreak serious harm to your body. It can lead to an increased risk of developing heart disease, suffering from a stroke, or developing diabetes. Even serious, well-conditioned athletes may experience these harmful side effects.

How Athletes Can Limit Tooth Decay and Oral Health Issues

If you’re working with serious athletes who need or choose to refuel with something high in sodium and glucose after a workout or during practice or competition (like the market-leading sports drinks), know that they aren’t immune from oral health issues that can come from sugar-heavy beverages.

The good news is that there are a variety of ways to combat tooth decay and gingivitis that may result from an uptick in sugar consumption. Here’s a look at how athletes can help reduce their risks of oral health issues when sports drinks, sports bars, and energy gels are part of the norm.

Wash sugar down with water. Tooth decay occurs when sugars produce acids that help accelerate tooth decay. However, if these sugars can’t stick around inside the mouth, they can’t do the damage they would when left to linger. On this note, one of the easiest things athletes can do to reduce their risk of tooth decay is to chase high-sugar drinks with water. The water dilutes the sugars and rinses them from the mouth.

Brush regularly. Dentists recommend that everyone brush at least twice a day and floss at least once each day. Many of us associate basic brushing and flossing with removing food debris that’s lodged between teeth. But they also help remove sugars, plaques, and bacteria from the mouth before they have a chance to do too much harm.

Keep in mind that many elite athletes will shower after an intense training session, practice, or game. To keep their oral health in top-notch condition, athletes also should make brushing a part of their post-practice and post-game routine. Doing so helps remove sugar and bacteria before they have a chance to fester and do true harm. What’s more, if you brush after consuming something high in sugar, the experts say not to brush right away. Instead, they recommend waiting a while to brush; and brushing after showering does this.

Don’t chew tobacco. Though not nearly as many athletes chew tobacco as they did years ago thanks to its well-documented health effects, it remains commonplace in some sports. In addition to increasing the chance of developing heart disease, stroke, and certain types of cancer, smokeless tobacco leads to a greater likelihood of cavities, teeth abrasion, staining, foul breath, loss of jaw bone, gum disease, and other oral health issues. Nearly four percent of all American adults use smokeless tobacco in some way.

Wear a mouth guard. As noted, good oral health means more than just brushing, flossing, and taking care of your mouth—it also means taking steps to minimize the risk of dental injuries. Poor oral health has an impact on the entire body, and sports-related stress can lead to issues such as teeth grinding and dry mouth. So while some athletes wear missing teeth like a badge of honor, know that not taking care of injuries can potentially impact the entire body.

The good news is that you can take steps to prevent oral injuries, and wearing a mouth guard is arguably the easiest and most effective way to do so. For the best protection, a custom-made mouth guard is the ideal preventative solution. For athletes who wear helmets, ensuring the equipment fits properly is another key to preventing dental injuries. An improperly fitting helmet can jostle and move around on the head, which could lead to injury.

See the dentist regularly. Everyone should see a dentist for routine cleanings and checkups at least twice a year, or once every six months. For those with oral health conditions, visiting the dentist quarterly may be suggested.

Seeing the dentist is important for several reasons. One, a dentist will assess the overall condition of the mouth and often catch small issues that can be corrected before they turn into much more significant issues that aren’t as easily—or affordably—corrected. Dentists also monitor levels of tooth decay and gum recession to identify any problems they need to address. And they’ll take the time to remove gum disease-causing plaque buildup that’s festering inside the mouth.

While many of us may view the dentist as nothing more than a tolerated inconvenience, regular visits are essential to maintaining good oral health and continuing to perform at a high level.

Don’t smoke. Though smoking is typically associated with lung issues, it also can wreak havoc on the mouth. Smokers are much more likely to experience periodontal disease as plaque and tartar buildup more quickly thanks to all of tobacco’s ingredients. Smoking also restricts blood flow in the gums, leads to a greater likelihood of developing oral cancer, and can cause bad breath and teeth staining. The vast majority of competitive athletes don’t smoke, but those who do can expect oral health issues, regardless of how often they see the dentist or how dedicated they are to their oral health routine.

Closing Thoughts

We’re not trying to scare you into ditching sports drinks, sports bars, and energy gels altogether. This post intends to let you know what’s inside the food and beverages you consume and how their ingredients might impact your oral health if you’re not careful.

Yes, these sports energy products have their benefits, especially for serious, hard training athletes. But when consuming high quantities of sugar becomes a regular occurrence, it’s important to know how to keep the mouth healthy. Doing so could be the difference between making the team or getting cut and winning the gold medal or no medal at all. Poor oral health can cost you more than you might think.

Episode 7: Jimson Lee

Joel Smith: Just Fly Performance Podcast, Podcast| ByMark Hoover

Jimson Lee is an accomplished masters track and field athlete, coach, and founder of the website speedendurance.com, based out of London, U.K. He brings more than 25 years of competitive experience to the table, including 10 years as a masters athlete (35+). Coach Lee was a two-time MVP at McGill University. He is a World Regional Masters double Gold Medalist and Canadian Masters Championships double Gold Medalist for both 200m and 400m (2000). Jimson has a Bachelor of Science degree in Physiology from McGill.

Coach Lee talks about his competitive background and his transition from a younger jumper to an accomplished masters-level sprinter. He goes in-depth on various training methods and modalities to use to overcome the challenges that athletes encounter as they age. Lee discusses his philosophies on training 400-meter athletes. He also gives his thoughts and impressions on what he has learned about the short-to-long versus the long-to-short methods of training track athletes.

In this podcast, Coach Jimson Lee discusses with Joel:

How to train masters athletes in comparison to younger athletes.

His thoughts on protocols after a personal record performance.

The current state of track and field and what can be done to save the sport.

His thoughts on training for top speed in the 400-meter run.

Coach Lee wrote the article “Jamaican Sprint Success: Thanks to an American?” for SimpliFaster.

Podcast total run time is 49:38.

Keywords: Masters, sprinting, 400m, short-to-long, recovery

Episode 14: Boo Schexnayder

Episode 13: Jeff Moyer

Sprinting in Team Sport: The Butt-Kicking Epidemic

Breaking Down the Butt-Kicking Problem

The Importance of Proper Frontside Lift

Thigh Separation as an Important Indicator

Save the Hamstrings

References

Episode 12: JB Morin

Episode 11: Carl Valle

Episode 10: Ryan Horn

Maximizing Recovery and Monitoring with Robin Thorpe

References

Episode 9: Ryan Banta

Episode 8: Dan Fichter

A Ladder System for Training Speed and Power In-Season

Momentum in the Weight Room

Predicting Readiness and Game Performance

Wrapping Up

Performance Habits and Decay: How Poor Oral Health Impacts Athletes

How Big of an Issue is Poor Oral Health for Athletes?

Sports Drinks 101

Common Oral Health Issues and How They Occur

Effects of Oral Health on Athletic Performance

How Athletes Can Limit Tooth Decay and Oral Health Issues

Closing Thoughts

Episode 7: Jimson Lee

COMPANY

Coaches Resources

CONTACT INFORMATION

SIGNUP FOR NEWSLETTER