Blog

It is not uncommon to go through the day and encounter a reference to “stem cell” therapy as a health-care solution, whether you are reading the newspaper, listening to radio or podcast interviews, or even having a casual conversation with friends and colleagues. Stem cells are certainly the medical “flavor of the month,” particularly with a growing aging population that desires to stay young, healthy, and active. In the realm of professional sports, stem cell therapies are attracting more and more attention for orthopedic injuries and soft-tissue strains as a means of extending professional careers and also returning athletes to the field or court of play in a shorter period of time. Regardless of what you have heard about this “technology,” stem cells are here to stay and will become a bigger part of health care, whether you are scoring touchdowns in the Super Bowl or hoping to walk your dog in the park in your retirement years.

Stem cell therapies as they relate to orthopedic injuries fall under the category of orthobiologic interventions. Our clinical and practical involvement with orthobiologics spans several decades. The term “orthobiologics” refers to the use of biological substances to assist in the faster and more complete healing of musculoskeletal injuries. These substances are used to improve the healing of fractured bones and injured muscles, tendons, cartilage, and ligaments, and are obtained from substances that occur naturally in the body. When orthobiologic substances are applied in relatively high concentrations, they can potentially speed up the healing process. Common forms of orthobiological interventions include:

• Visco-supplementation products
• Corticosteroids
• Bone graft preparations
• Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections
• Growth factors
• Stem cell therapies

It is important to note that there is significant overlap between these interventions, as many of the compounds in these processes can involve growth factors, stem cells, and other regenerative substances. We have also seen prolotherapy injections and food supplements identified as orthobiologics and they are often deemed “regenerative” approaches. Figure 1 identifies numerous types of orthobiologic treatments being used in modern regenerative medicine. It is important to note that a universal classification method for these categories has not been adopted, and we are simply attempting to display and document these approaches for discussion purposes.

It is worth acknowledging that while many of the innovations with regard to stem cell therapies are rapidly evolving, in the realm of orthopedic injuries, very little research has been documented that supports its efficacy and sustainability in human populations. The research around conventional orthobiologic interventions, such as the use of platelet-rich plasma, has been much more robust and supportive—PRP has been in practice for many more years and is significantly less expensive than current stem cell treatments.

The research around conventional orthobiologic interventions, such as the use of platelet-rich plasma, has been more robust and supportive than that of stem cell therapies. Share on X

At the 2018 NFL Combine, we had the pleasure of viewing Dr. Brian Cole’s presentations on orthobiologic interventions in sports injuries. It was interesting to hear that while he uses stem cell therapies for various cases, he had very positive comments on his experience with, and continued use of, PRP injections, despite the trend towards embracing stem cells for regenerative medical procedures. Accordingly, Dr. Cole reported that PRP only had 20 million Google searches in 2017, while stem cells had 94.5 million. Hence, stem cells continue to be the preferred search for the modern patient despite the efficacy documented in research for PRP.

While the administration and evaluation of various orthobiologic approaches continue, there has been very little investigation into the processes that surround regenerative medicine. In particular, the specifics of the physical rehabilitation and return-to-play process associated with orthobiologics have not been identified in any great detail, but only in concept. In 2018, a study published in the Journal of Orthopedics and Trauma, by McKay et al., titled “Rehabilitation Following Regenerative Medicine Treatment for Knee Osteoarthritis – Current Concept Review” identified a conceptual rehabilitation approach following orthobiologic interventions, but only outlined a relatively general timeline for integration of individual therapies and exercises.¹ One of the most significant statements made in the study was:

“Limitations of our study include a large portion of the studies reviewed were not done concurrently with orthobiologic intervention. There is minimal research in the field of rehabilitation of patients post orthobiologic intervention with KOA although there is significant literature in the use of regenerative medicine in patients with KOA.”

Thus, the study was essentially a review of individual therapies and interventions in isolation that were not necessarily part of an orthobiologic procedure, and not evaluated as part of a broader, organized process. A more comprehensive and integrative rehabilitation approach that identifies specific protocols (timing, volumes, frequency, intensities, durations, etc.) for various orthopedic injuries and orthobiologic interventions must be developed to help guide both physicians and physical therapy professionals through the entire regenerative medicine process.

Provided below is an outline for a process directed at providing support for the administration of orthobiologic interventions. While we are learning more and more every day about the technologies and timelines around orthobiologics, our primary efforts are focused on surrounding every aspect of the orthobiologic treatment with a supportive environment for full and active recovery of the patient. Through daily hands-on experience, we are becoming more adept at solving the problems of when, how much, and how frequently when it comes to physical therapy interventions, the use of electrical stimulation, and the introduction of voluntary exercise.

Initiating Effective Assessment Protocols and Diagnoses

One of the most eye-opening trends that we experienced while being associated with a regenerative medicine practice, particularly when stem cell therapy was advertised as a potential solution, was the high incidence of patients who simply had poor quality of previous care and substandard assessments of their true condition. Due to their less-than-fulfilling experiences with other health-care practitioners, they were attracted to the allure of new and innovative “stem cell” therapies to resolve their chronic pain and discomfort. Hence, one of the key components of a complete orthobiologics support system is initiating the process with a comprehensive evaluation of the patient to identify the true cause of their discomfort, as well as assessing the efficacy of previous diagnoses and rehabilitation efforts. Provided below are some of the more common “gaps” that we have seen in the continuum of care of new patients when reviewing their history.

Inadequate or Non-Existent Imaging

A surprising number of patients inquiring about the possibility of stem cell therapy did not have adequate imaging to support their initial diagnosis. Although they were told they might have damage or degeneration to bone, ligament, tendon, or other connective tissues, there was rarely adequate imaging to support these diagnoses. Health-care practitioners were going on “hunches” or their regular stream of treatment, rather than digging deeper into the true causes of their patients’ discomfort and dysfunction. Needless to say, one of our first recommendations for these patients was to seek a referral for appropriate and current imaging to provide a clearer “picture” of their true status.

Narrowly Focused Source Identification

When asked about their previous examinations by physicians and physical therapists, it was very common for patients to relay that the exam only focused on the specific location where they were experiencing pain. Patients with knee pain were only assessed and/or treated at the knee joint. Low back pain assessment and treatment focused only on the lumbo-sacral region. When we incorporated functional movement and postural assessments—thus taking a more comprehensive and global examination of skeletal and soft-tissue structures—clearer patterns of etiology began to emerge that assisted in both an accurate diagnosis and effective treatment planning.

No Previous Experience with Conventional Orthobiologic Interventions

While stem cell therapy appears to be the “shiny object” that attracted people to our support services, it was interesting to note that many patients had no prior knowledge of other types of orthobiologic treatments for their condition. Perhaps the name “platelet-rich plasma” was too difficult to understand, or their referring physician did not have enough information on the technology to make an informed referral for the process. Nonetheless, it became clear that patients needed much more information on the options that were available to them.

Additionally, patients needed enhanced awareness of the variability in quality of orthobiologic options from practitioner to practitioner, as well as what actually constituted a stem cell product. Many of our patients were under the assumption that PRP treatments were, in fact, stem cell therapy. The lack of education around these various treatments has only created more confusion around nonsurgical options for patients.

A general lack of clarity and regulation around the orthobiologic industry has led to poor decision-making, less-than-positive outcomes, and misleading marketing. Share on X

Furthermore, in the case of PRP injections, some patients expressed disappointment with the ineffectiveness of their previous experiences with PRP, only to find out their injections were either prolotherapeutic (Dextrose) or not guided by either ultrasound or fluoroscope. A general lack of clarity and regulation around the orthobiologic industry has led to a combination of poor decision-making on the part of patients, less-than-positive outcomes for numerous procedures, and misleading marketing by unscrupulous practitioners.

Facilitating Appropriate Structural Alignment, Stability, and Mobility

While we all recognize that individual human beings can exhibit various degrees of variability when it comes to posture and movement, there are some basic truths and realities around skeletal alignment, joint stability, and overall mobility that must be followed as part of a comprehensive orthopedic rehabilitation and physical therapy process.

We know that skeletal and joint alignment can significantly influence motor control and muscle length-tension relationships through the detection of mechanical stimuli via the muscle spindles² and golgi tendon organs.³ In addition, synovial joints are recognized as sensory organs that provide continuous feedback about position sensing and degree of limb movement.⁴ Misaligned joints and skeletal structures have significant implications for movement efficiency, human performance, and joint wear and tear, as well as pain and discomfort in all populations. If an individual’s skeletal structure is not aligned properly within specific relative tolerances—and stable within that operating range—neuromuscular output capabilities inclusive of power and balance will be greatly compromised. Additionally, articular cartilage, menisci, joint capsules, ligaments, and tendons will continue to be unduly stressed and micro-traumatized regardless of the efficacy of the orthobiologic intervention applied prior to rehabilitation, due to the nature of unbalanced forces across the joint.

“Injuries and disorders that directly damage the joint structure or lead to joint instability are highly associated with osteoarthritis (OA).”⁵

As such, it is imperative to ensure the skeletal structures and joints are optimally aligned both prior to and following an orthobiologic intervention. It is no different than adjusting wheel alignment following the installation of new tires on a high-performance motor vehicle. This is done to ensure maximum traction and stability at high speeds, as well as manage appropriate and even wear of the tires for safety and longevity. Cars and humans share many of the same requirements for both healthy and safe locomotion, particularly at high levels of performance.

Cars and humans share many of the same requirements for both healthy and safe locomotion, particularly at high levels of performance. Share on X

Ensuring for appropriate ranges of motion and mobility in a joint system is also critical for managing stressors through a load-bearing system and kinetic chain. Restricted range of motion in a load-bearing joint can lead to a significant shifting of load to unaccustomed muscles and joints. We in the rehab industry commonly refer to this as “compensatory loading” and this phenomenon leads to a lot of overuse type of injuries.

“An injury causing inherent losses in passive tissue stiffness (specifically disc or ligament) results in joint laxity that necessitates higher levels of muscular activation/stiffness to ensure sufficient stability.”⁶  

Both chronic and acute injuries can result from these compensational shifts created by restricted ranges of motion. Following orthobiologic interventions, the gradual but deliberate achievement of full ranges of motion is critical to the successful outcomes where efficient and effective output is required by the patient during movement.

Implementing Adequate, Timely, and Progressive Loading

Once the primary physical therapist determines that a patient is exhibiting appropriate measurables in the realm of alignment, stability, and mobility, the next phase in the progression of care is the “loading” phase. Within the realms of rehabilitation and physical training, we often hear the term “loading” used to describe the volume and intensity of work being done by a patient or athlete. In many cases, the obvious definition of “loading” for the layperson is using some form of external resistance or weights to load an individual.

While conventional resistance training can be part of the progression, we must recognize that there is a specificity to loading that must be embraced throughout the process. Much of this specificity relates to the individual circumstances of each patient, including previous volumes and levels of function prior to the orthobiologic intervention, as well as expected function following completion of the rehabilitation process.

If a 20-year-old competitive male swimmer is being admitted for an orthobiologic procedure for a shoulder injury and has accumulated a significant training history prior to the appointment, his loading progression following the procedure will look significantly different than a 60-year-old female shoulder patient with little or no formal physical training in her history. Add into the mix the fact that the 20-year-old swimmer wants to be ready for the Olympic trials in eight months, and we have an even more ambitious progression of work.

It is imperative that any decided-upon loading progression does not delay, impair, or spoil the work of the orthobiologic procedure. For example, once patients are discharged from a PRP injection session, they are typically provided with basic guidelines for the first 3-5 days to maximize the efficacy of the procedure.

• Abstain from taking anti-inflammatory or anti-coagulation medication such as aspirin or common nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) such as ibuprofen, naproxen, or Celebrex.
• Immobilize the joint with a brace or sling to prevent disruptions to the treated tissues.
• Avoid any strenuous exercise or lifting.
• Keep the injection site clean and dry to avoid infection.

However, beyond these general guidelines, it is extremely difficult to find any specific information on types of exercises and densities (volume, intensity, frequency) of loading for different populations for the broad range of orthobiologic procedures available to patients. When it comes to exercise, we have heard of physicians restricting patients from exercise for as long as 3-4 weeks, if not longer. Much of this can be chalked up to a lack of knowledge on the part of physicians around progressive exercise and a tendency to back off and opt for the most conservative approach. However, this extremely risk-averse approach can lead to protracted healing times and unsatisfactory results on the part of the patient.

When physicians restrict patients from exercise for weeks after a PRP injection, it can lead to protracted healing times and unsatisfactory results. Share on X

In a recent case that involved a PRP injection in the sacroiliac joint area, one of our patients complained about excessive stiffness and a lack of mobility through the region, accompanied by some soreness 3-4 weeks following the procedure. When we questioned her about her exercise activity during this period, she said that she was told to do very little, with the exception of walking and stretching. This individual was previously very active and a regular gym user. It was clear to us that her lack of resistance training for the last month was contributing to her stiffness and, to some degree, atrophy of certain muscle groups in and around the treatment site. As such, our immediate recommendation was to get back into a regular exercise schedule with some specific guidelines around progressing gradually and limiting unilateral or split-stance lower body work for the initial phase of training. Not only was our recommendation met with immediate joy, but also some significant results in a very short time.

Using the ‘Right’ Tool at the ‘Right’ Time

Practitioners in the rehabilitation realm often push their certifications in specific methods front and center or their use of a specific technology or modality as the magic solution to every patient’s ailment. Very infrequently do we hear about the process and decision-making behind the timing and implementation of various tools and toys. Within the realm of orthobiologic support, the application and timing of the tools and techniques must be exceptionally precise and well-coordinated.

Within the realm of orthobiologic support, the application and timing of the tools and techniques must be exceptionally precise and well-coordinated. Share on X

One of the modalities that we have seen enhance the entire orthobiologic support process is electrical stimulation, in various forms. In the early stages of an orthobiologic intervention, electrical muscle stimulation (EMS) can be used to manage muscle tension, minimize atrophy, enhance local and peripheral circulation, and minimize pain. Electrical stimulation has also been shown to boost the efficacy of stem cell therapy for nerve regeneration⁷ and influence stem cell behavior through the use of electrical fields in vivo and in vitro.⁸ Unlike ice and anti-inflammatory medication that may limit circulation or interfere with the healing process, electrical stimulation can facilitate the natural process of healing without introducing risk in and around the treatment site.⁹ Even in cases where a temporary cast, brace, or sling is required in the first week following a treatment, electrical stimulation can be safely integrated as part of the recovery and regeneration process to maintain muscle strength and improve overall outcomes.

As the patient transitions out of the early healing phase following an orthobiologic procedure, electrical stimulation can be combined with exercise (superimposed electrical stimulation) to further enhance recruitment and overcome the natural tendency for inhibition following an injury and associated orthopedic procedures.¹⁰ The use of electrical stimulation also supports the initial priorities of managing and maintaining alignment, mobility, and stability with joints during the reintroduction of high volumes and loads of exercise.

Other tools are used throughout the process to continue to manage pain and discomfort, malalignment, instability, joint restrictions, and overall output (strength, power, velocity). This may include, but is not limited to, specific soft-tissue techniques, manual therapy protocols, dry needling, IMS, proprietary ultrasound techniques, and various forms of stretching. The tools used in a session are ultimately at the discretion of the practitioner, but detailed guidelines around the use of each strategy have been identified for every injury scenario and orthobiologic procedure as part of our process. While some practitioners may have the ability to implement all of these tools at any given time, the process may necessitate a system of close cross-referrals to ensure that the patient is getting the best treatment at the right time.

We have branded the process “Force Balance Technique” (FBT)™, as illustrated in Figure 2. Mechanical techniques are closely integrated with neuromuscular loading strategies to effectively treat chronic injury and safely support the regenerative qualities of orthobiologics, if needed. A typical session involves the close interaction of mechanical interventions—i.e., massage, joint mobilization, IMS, acupuncture, fascial release, etc.—with superimposed EMS neuromuscular loading. Adjustments on a table may be quickly followed by a loading procedure on the gym floor to not only test the intervention, but also quickly solidify a desired movement pattern.

In the case of a knee or hip injury, efforts to loosen overactive musculature in the lower kinetic chain through dry needling can be followed immediately by an appropriate loading in a squatting or deadlift exercise to evaluate strength through a given range of motion, as well as determine if pain is still present during a loaded scenario. For soft-tissue injuries in a running athlete, we often place the athlete in an acceleration or upright running activity following a minor adjustment on the treatment table to monitor gait characteristics at various velocities. This process could have the athlete moving back and forth over several repetitions until the right “balance” of mechanical and neuromuscular loading is achieved for that particular session. We commonly refer to this interplay as “hardware and software upgrades” when discussing it with patients.

Throughout the entire session and process, patient data and measurables are constantly being collected and reviewed, with video assessments performed for every movement to capture movement in action for the patient’s electronic records. Team members can review this information at any time during the process to evaluate patient progress.

The ‘Art’ of Orthobiologic Support – Knowing When to ‘Push’ and When to ‘Pull Back’

It is not uncommon for patients referred to us following orthobiologic intervention to have questions about why their procedure has not yet resulted in an improvement. The typical clinical expectation is that we will see reduction in pain and improvement in function within 4-8 weeks, although this is dependent on the composition of the injection and the structure(s) involved.

We typically see a reduction in pain and improvement in function within 4-8 weeks, although this is dependent on the composition of the injection and the structure(s) involved. Share on X

Often, upon further examination, we find that the practitioner who conducted the orthobiologic procedure has either advised the client to do nothing or simply not given them any specifics on loading or stretching principles to assist in healing. As a result, it is not uncommon to see patients with moderate functional deficit and pain due to malalignment and/or mobility issues that were not addressed properly pre-procedure.

The typical example is a medial compartment of the knee pathology (meniscal tear, OA) injected in the presence of a moderate ankle pronation and/or ipsilateral pelvic rotation left unbalanced. As we mentioned earlier in this article, this logic and/or careless attention to detail is one common and easily remedied factor that leads to poor regenerative outcomes and, ultimately, frustration and great expense for the patient.

While we understand that exceptional care and due diligence are required during the early stages following application of orthobiologics to maximize efficacy, placing appropriate stress on the patient in a timely fashion is also required to create positive adaptations and facilitate healing.

Exercising the “art” of orthobiologic support requires strong and frequent communication between all practitioners. We have both “mechanical” and “neuromuscular” practitioners working in the same room with patients, interacting during a treatment session to identify opportunities for strengthening the patient while at the same time establishing boundaries around specific ranges of motion, velocities, and loads. In some cases, additional imaging may be required to validate a diagnosis or give practitioners confidence that the correct path has been chosen in treatment planning. However, moving a patient from left to right along our treatment continuum is an objective in every session. If one step backward has to be performed in order to ultimately move the patient 2-3 steps forward and beyond, all team members are consulted on the decision.

Figure 3 illustrates the conceptual flow of the process around orthobiologic support and “Force Balance Technique.” While it is convenient to depict the process in a relatively linear fashion, the reality is that the process can sometimes be fraught with roadblocks, challenges, chaotic events, and spontaneous decision-making on the spot. The two factors that almost always guide us along the correct path are “experience” and “communication” by team members.

The two factors that almost always guide us through the gray areas of health care and rehabilitation are the experience and communication of team members. Share on X

There will not always be research papers and user manuals to guide you through a process that is rarely black and white. The teams that can navigate successfully through the gray areas of health care and rehabilitation will always have much more success than those that do not have the same levels of experience and communication. While many physical therapy practices claim to operate under a multidisciplinary approach, very few effectively integrate expertise under one roof and operate in the interdisciplinary fashion required for successful orthobiologic outcomes.

The Process Moving Forward

When we recently outlined our orthobiologic support algorithm in a formal presentation to a group of local physicians, they were extremely happy to have the ability to refer nonsurgical patients to a well-organized approach to rehabilitative care. One of the doctors even said, “This is great… But shouldn’t all physical rehabilitation occur within the integrative model that you have just outlined? It just makes sense!” Our reply was, “…well, yes.”

Unfortunately, we had to remind the doctor how fractured the current system is, with many disciplines competing with one another rather than finding common ground and supporting each other for optimal results. Although many view orthobiological innovations as the panacea of nonsurgical regenerative treatment, we must be careful to pay special attention to the entire process around patient care. A quick- fix, shotgun approach will only result in recurring orthopedic problems that will inevitably end in more invasive surgical procedures.

Our intent is to educate practitioners and patients on the need for a systematized approach to rehab inclusive of orthobiologic intervention when appropriate and necessary. Share on X

Our intent moving forward is to educate both practitioners and patients on the necessity of a systematized approach to rehabilitation inclusive of orthobiologic intervention when appropriate and necessary. Unfortunately, proper source identification via thorough assessment and treatment planning are not the rule, and work has to be done to articulate the minimum steps necessary to ensure rehabilitative and regenerative efficacy.

Once we all understand the importance of a progressive and integrative approach, consistent results will be achieved in a timely manner. In a time when instant gratification is attained through personal technology hundreds of times per day, the necessary steps must be taken to gradually support the relatively new orthobiologic technologies available to individuals. Knowledge will ultimately be the most valuable technology that we can offer.

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

1. McKay J., Frantzen K., Vercruyssen N., Hafsi K., Opitz T., Davis A., and Murrell W. “Rehabilitation following a regenerative medicine treatment for knee osteoarthritis–current concept review.” Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma. 2019; 10: 59-66.

2. Bewick G.S. and Banks R.W. “Mechanotransduction in the muscle spindle.” European Journal of Physiology. 2015; 467(1): 175-190.

3. Jami, L. “Golgi Tendon Organs in Mammalian Skeletal Muscle: Functional Properties and Central Actions.” Physiological Reviews. 1992; 72: 623-666.

4. Chen C.C. and Wong C.W. “Neurosensory mechanotransduction through acid-sensing ion channels.” Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine. 2013; 17: 337-349.

5. Blalock D., Miller A., Tilley M. and Wang J. “Joint Instability and Osteoarthritis.” Clinical Medical Insights into Arthritis and Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2015; 8: 15-23.

6. McGill S.M. and Cholewicki J. “Biomechanical Basis for Stability: An Explanation to Enhance Clinical Utility.” Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy. 2011; 31: 96-100.

7. Du J., Zhen G., Chen H., Zhang S., Qing L., Yang X., Lee G., Mao, H.Q. and Jia X. “Optimal electrical stimulation boosts stem cell therapy in nerve regeneration.” Biomaterials. 2018; 181: 347-359.

8. Tang M., Yan X., Tang Q., Guo R., Da P. and Li D. “Potential Application of Electrical Stimulation in Stem Cell-Based Treatment against Hearing Loss.” Neural Plasticity. 2018: 1-6.

9. Yamabata S., Shiraishi H., Munechika M., Fukushima H., Fukuoka Y., Hojo T., Shirayama T., Horii M., Matoba S. and Kubo T. “Effects of electrical stimulation therapy on the blood flow in chronic critical limb ischemia patients following regenerative therapy.” SAGE Open Medicine. 2016; 4: 1-10.

10. Paillard T., Margness E., Maitre J., Chaubet V., Francois Y., Jully J.L., Gonzalez G. and Borel L. “Electrical stimulation superimposed onto voluntary muscular contraction reduces deterioration of both postural control and quadriceps femoris muscle strength.” Neuroscience. 2010; 165: 1471-1475.

Dean Kotopski, BScPT, RMT, CAc/IMS, MCPA, is the Clinical Director of Performax Health Group in Burnaby, British Columbia. Dean is a 30-year veteran of physical rehabilitation, with certifications in physiotherapy, massage therapy, acupuncture, and IMS. Dean began his professional career as an auto mechanic at the age of 18, with a passion for movement and all things mechanical. His enjoyment of athletics and academics soon led him to pursue a career in physical rehabilitation. He has significant experience supporting numerous regenerative therapies including PRP and stem cells of all derivation, and he developed “Force Balance Techniqueä,” a process around physical rehabilitation and orthobiologic support, over the past 10 years. His clients range from general population patients to world-leading professional athletes. For more information on Dean, please visit: www.PerformaxHealthGroup.com

Throughout my years at Triton Regional High School, I have noted a huge disconnect between our track program and other sports. Unfortunately, the divide has appeared to grow larger in recent years. Like many programs, our school has not acquired as many multisport athletes as we would have liked. Filling out sprint lineups is especially hard in the short sprints when you have a small team.

We have, however, had tremendous luck with soccer athletes. Soccer players comprise a huge portion of our track and field team and some are standouts, especially in the 400m. Exception aside, we have not had perennially strong 100m runners or 4x100m relay teams. Our football team was 0-12 this year and our track team has had lineup holes for years. When you have a small team (usually around 40 boys), these holes become extremely hard to combat, especially when facing larger programs.

Some of this is the culture of our school. A lot of our athletes run two seasons of track, which comes across as “cultish.” Some of it, quite honestly, is the fact that I am an elementary school teacher and have no presence in the high school during the school day.

Attacking the Speed Drought for Your School

I have begun attacking this “need for speed” issue directly this year with Freelap timing system MPH club T-shirts. Any male athlete that runs the times below enters a different MPH club and earns a T-shirt.

20-mph club = 1.07-1.11 seconds (per meter in splits)

21-mph club = 1.02-1.06 seconds

22-mph club = 0.98-1.01 seconds

For the female athletes, we have 18- and 19-mph clubs.

18-mph club = 1.18-1.24 seconds

19-mph club = 1.12-1.17 seconds

The purpose of this is not only to celebrate our athletes’ development through quantifiable data, but also increase awareness of what our track team is about and what it can offer our athletic program. The unspoken message of the T-shirts is: “We prioritize speed development.”

All of this is great, but these numbers are still meaningless without anyone seeing them in action. We decided to brainstorm and attack these issues. In the end, we felt that we needed to host an event that started to break down this mentality. It needed to be simple and easy to run. That’s when the answer hit us.

Promoting the Combine

Early in March, before spring sports started, we held a combine. Joe Colbert, our head track coach, organized it, and it was communicated to all coaches in the building. Flyers were put out for athletes.

Our primary goal was to dispel the notion that the track athletes at our school are second-tier athletes who are incapable of playing ball sports in the spring. This goal comes off as a little self-serving at first glance, but as a whole, I feel that sometimes track is viewed solely as “running” rather than “sprinting.”

Our primary goal with the combine was to dispel the notion that our track athletes are second-tier athletes incapable of playing ball sports, says @grahamsprints. Share on X

Our user fee is also set at $350 per season. At some point, as a track team we have to advertise that we have value. We try to do everything with a high level of focus and intensity, and I am sure other teams see our “standing around” as a lack of productivity. When it comes to speed training, the illusion of hard work through constant motion is not a recipe for success.

I can’t say I am surprised by this. Think about most mainstream movies that include track and field: The characters in those movies are often portrayed as lovable rejects without any real athletic ability. For them, participation is really just a recreational thing to advance the plot.

Our second goal was to create a community-type feel that helps bring the program together in a show of solidarity. A great athletic program has sports that complement and support each other. We should encourage our athletes to play multiple sports and to be well-rounded. The combine idea was the perfect place to start and the timing was good with the coinciding NFL Combine.

Most people are familiar enough with the NFL Combine to know some of the tests, so we knew this would potentially draw some athletes in. Each year at the Combine, a few unknown athletes rise from relative obscurity and raise their draft stock. Clearly, these tests hold value when assessing an athlete’s skill set, although they don’t guarantee the intangible skills needed to play the sport are present. Regardless, I would say there is an acceptable range of numbers at each position. You won’t find many NFL running backs running over a 4.70, just like you won’t find many offensive linemen bench pressing 225 for only 10 reps.

There are extreme outliers in testing such as this who don’t support the narrative of the combine being a reliable measure. Kevin Durant famously failed to bench 185 pounds for even one rep at the NBA Combine. Tom Brady is best known for being a late-round draft pick who presented as goofy and unathletic at his combine day.

A great #athleticprogram has sports that complement and support each other, says @grahamsprints. Share on X

We must be careful not to attribute these exceptions to the athletes that we coach. Becoming stronger, faster, and more explosive should always be an attractive goal. Improvements on tests with developing athletes do translate into improvements in their sport. At the very least, we thought it would be interesting to see the talent we have in our building on display. 

Athlete Reception (Before the Test)

For the sake of this article, I will talk mostly about the experience on the second day of testing, which was for the boys. Nineteen girls did the combine; however, all 19 were track athletes. Initially, I was surprised, but then I heard rumblings of conversations along the lines of, “This is a track thing. I play softball. I don’t need to do this.”

This is problematic, but also perhaps kind of normal. No one said this would be a quick fix. Every sport can benefit from an increase in speed, strength, and athleticism. While skills in each sport may be specific, the training with plyometrics, weights, and speed does not need to be that varied.

On the boys’ side, the athletes I coach had mixed feelings heading into testing day. They felt that although they would fare well in the 40-yard dash, they would not perform well in the other areas. This concerned me because I know the athletes I coach are more than just fast. They have developed into pretty well-rounded athletes who can move very well and although they don’t look like the average gym rat, through their training they have become at least “strong enough.” Sprinters need to be confident and I hoped that this test would aid in developing some of this. 

The Tests We Used

Since this was our first year doing the combine, there were some kinks. However, the kinks were consistent, and the numbers still accurately reflected the abilities of the athletes in attendance.

We had volunteer coaches at each station who tested and recorded the athletes. There were groups of 8-9 athletes at each station. The day ended with the 40-yard dash to spotlight the speed portion (although I’ll lead the test list with its description below).

• 40-Yard Dash
• Bench Press
• Standing Broad Jump
• Vertical Jump
• 5-10-5 Shuttle

40-Yard Dash

I used two Freelap transmitters and six chips to administer this test. Going by Tony Holler’s setup guidelines, I placed one transmitter 5 feet past the start line and the other 3 feet past the finish. This allowed for dash times similar to a hand time. Even though this was not a true FAT (fully automated time), it was consistent with all athletes. This enabled a much more efficient testing of 35 athletes, as I am not always accurate with a stopwatch.

We did this testing on our gym floor in sneakers. Sure, the sneaker times are slower than if athletes wore spikes or cleats, but on this surface, it’s what we had to do. It also ensured that no one had an advantage because of footwear.

The athletes were put through the procedure by four female track athletes. They instructed the boys to put the chip on correctly, ensuring it was clipped to the belt under the belly button. Any time that was run with a chip not under the belly button would be thrown out. All times were considered valid during the testing because the chips were worn correctly.

Of the top 10 athletes by 40-yard times, nine had run at least one season of track and field and the top five have all run two seasons of track (this was during our off-season and it shows what consistency with speed work can do).

1. 4.44
2. 4.58
3. 4.62
4. 4.67
5. 4.72
6. 4.72
7. 4.72
8. 4.73
9. 4.74
10. 4.74

One observation noted in this test was the ability of the track athletes to relax at top speed compared to the other athletes. Several kids nearly fell over due to coordination erosion near the end of the dash, but no hamstrings snapped. There is nothing beyond top speed, so once they achieve it, they must own it and run free of tension. This is something that needs to be communicated often.

I think the 40-yard dash is the perfect blend of acceleration ability and max velocity mechanics. Most high school athletes are at top speed by 40 meters, but hopefully, good acceleration technique has gotten them there. Repeated reps and practice of this will pay off.

This is not to say that there was not visibly raw talent just outside of the top 10 that I would love to get a chance to work with. The fact remains that speed is the hardest biomotor ability to develop. If your athletes aren’t sprinting regularly, then this area is simply not being maximized.

If an athlete isn’t running track and field, you have to wonder where they get their speed training, says @grahamsprints. Share on X

Selfishly, it was nice to get confirmation that consistency in speed training works. If an athlete isn’t running track and field, you have to wonder where they get their speed training. At least the coaches of the other sports seemed to take notice.

Bench Press

Based on anecdotal evidence, if there is one thing high school boys love, it is the bench press. It is often perceived as easy to do, although I think ego and a lack of coaching sometimes get in the way of valuable long-term development on this exercise. There is more of a technical underpinning than people think.

We maybe bench pressed three times during the indoor season and most of it was tempo training. We do upper body assistance work like landmine presses, recline rows, and push-ups, so I knew that they would be fine. Our 300m and 400m runners might typically be lankier because of the demands of their event (SAID principle), but they are far from frail. I poked my head in and also saw our throws/weight room coach, Katelin Invernizzi, talking about the importance of a good bench setup. She highlighted hand placement on the bar, specifically discussing how to use the knurling to make sure hands are evenly placed.

The rules were that they needed to maintain the three points of contact: Upper back, glutes, and feet. The biggest errors that we typically see at the high school level are feet and/or butt coming off the bench and floor (absent leg drive or too much leg drive), wrists being bent back with knuckles facing the wall behind them, and hands haphazardly placed on the bar. We also had them set up with their eyes directly under the bar to avoid hitting the rack when pressing upwards.

We had to keep in mind that we didn’t know what these kids were capable of on the bench press. For safety reasons, we set the testing weight at 75% of their body weight. This kept it safe and made it possible for almost every athlete to get a recorded score. The athletes weighed in and then used a percentage chart to find their testing number. For example, a 200-pound athlete used 150 pounds on the bench for as many reps as possible. A 120-pound athlete used 90 pounds. If the number came to 137.5 pounds, then they simply rounded up to 140. This equalized the test based on their size.

This goes back to our philosophy that being strong enough is a good goal to have. I want my athletes to raise their numbers, but not chase numbers in the weight room, says @grahamsprints. Share on X

When I walked into the gym on testing day, there were screams of encouragement emanating from the weight room. On each rep, the bar had to touch the chest or a “no rep” was given. To the track athletes’ surprise, they fared quite well. This goes back to our philosophy that being strong enough is a good goal to have. I want my athletes to raise their numbers, but not chase numbers in the weight room. 

Standing Broad Jump

On this test, we had a section of a rubber rollout runway. The athletes had to snap down quickly, jump as far as they could horizontally off two legs, and stick the landing. We gave them three jumps and recorded their best one. This is a terrific test for lower body power.

The downside of this test was that a lot of athletes have not mastered the basics of plyometrics, so as I watched from afar, some of their landings elicited a cringe or two from me. I know that the teenage body is fairly resilient, and they would survive a couple of jumps for the sake of some fun and competition. In the future, I will advise that not sticking the jump should result in a “no measure.”

Vertical Jump

We do not have a vertical jump testing apparatus, so we had to resort to an imperfect test here. The athletes started against the wall, reached as high as they could, and made a chalk line. The coach watched for a full reach from each athlete.

The athlete then jumped as high as possible and used the chalk to mark the wall at the apex of their jump. The coach at the station then measured the difference between the two marks for their jump height. Athletes got two jumps. If their second jump was better than their first, they were given a third attempt.

Was this test an accurate reflection of their vertical jump? Probably not, due to the positioning next to the wall not allowing for a full extension of the arm overhead. The arm had to come out diagonally and was probably shortened by about 2 inches. However, the test protocol was consistent for all athletes and it served its purpose.

20-Yard Shuttle (5-10-5)

The 5-10-5 drill is set up with three cones. The cones were set up in a straight line 5 yards apart. The middle cone served as the start and finish. The athlete started at the middle cone and sprinted 5 yards to the first cone. Whatever cone they touched, they would run back in the other direction to the furthest cone and then finish by running to the middle cone. This was timed by stopwatch, but you can do it with electronic timing if you have enough time and/or equipment.

The limitation faced in this test was the absence of 5-yard lines, as on the turf of a football field. Ideally, the hand should tap the cone and the foot should also touch the line that the cone is on. The athletes from sports where change of direction is a focus did very well here. The track athletes were in the mix as well. Change of direction (COD) requires a high ceiling of speed and acceleration ability with eccentric strength.

Post Combine Analysis – Overall Scores and Rankings

After administering the five tests, our jumps coach, Tyler Colbert, came up with a method to rank each athlete’s total testing result. He is also the one responsible for logging practice data into a Google sheet for record-keeping. The winner of each event was awarded a percentile rank of 100. For example, the boy’s broad jump winner jumped 8’-11”. This is 107 inches. The second-place boy jumped 8’-8”, or 104 inches. If we divided 104 by 107, we get 97%, which was his percentile rank. This system worked well for some events and not so well for others.

In both the female and male combines, the winner of the bench press won the whole competition. This seems to be due to a huge difference between some of the rep numbers. Twenty-one reps against 35 would yield a percentile rank of 60%, No other event influenced the total score as much. To get a 60% on the long jump, an athlete would only need to jump 5’-4”, which would have been last place. Even still, it was a great way to come up with a scoring system in a short amount of time. Looking ahead to next year, we may rework this.

Benefits and Reception of the Combine

As mentioned before, the energy level and competitiveness were incredibly high all day. Numerous athletes jogged back after their 40-yard rep, proclaimed their time, and challenged the others to beat it. The broad jump and bench press areas were loud and full of encouraging words.

This combine really highlighted the track team’s speed and technique. The following Monday, our track season opened, and we had quite a few last-minute sign-ups. Both of our teams fielded the largest turnout in a decade. Our boys’ team has 60 athletes on it this spring. Were there some athletes who performed well enough on the five tests but still didn’t enroll in a spring sport? Yes, but as a whole, I feel this combine did wonders to break down misconceptions about what the sport of track and field is all about.

As a whole, the combine did wonders to break down misconceptions about what the sport of track & field is all about, and we had the largest turnout for our track teams in a decade. Share on X

Although the testing scoring and conditions may have been imperfect, it largely went unnoticed by the athletes and we didn’t hear a single complaint. We are two weeks into our outdoor season now and the morale and attitude of the track teams have been as high as ever. This could be for many reasons, but I would like to think that they stand a little taller and prouder knowing that they stack up well against athletes from other teams. We have begun setting goals and I am pleased to see that they have lofty but achievable ones.

More athletes have achieved 20-, 21-, and 22-mph status than ever before. Some of it has to do with our training evolving, but some of it has to be from feeling good. As Tony Holler always alludes to, dopamine is a wonderful thing. Our sprint sessions often have a football-practice-type feel to them, with rap music blaring and kids yelling to encourage everyone.

Below are the top speeds in mph of our male sprinters during this spring season, which are our fastest Freelap times ever attained.

1. 22.14
2. 21.93
3. 21.5
4. 21.5
5. 21.3
6. 21.15
7. 21.1
8. 21.1
9. 21.1
10. 20.9
11. 20.71
12. 20.52
13. 20.15

Wrapping Up a Successful Day

The biggest piece of evidence that this was a success comes from a football player in his first full year of track. He ran a very respectable 4.87 40-yard dash at the combine to finish 12th. He immediately made the decision to come out for outdoor track. He has slowly started to improve his sprint mechanics, he earned a spot in the 4x100m relay pool, and he has a great attitude. It doesn’t hurt that his 40-yard time will be retested 3-4 times this season. I hope he lets his teammates know about his speed gains.

His comment after the first week of track was, “I really messed up not doing this my freshman and sophomore year.” Perhaps, but he is here now, and I know his work this season with us will help our football team in the fall.

The combine was one of the best ideas our athletic department has ever had. If you are having trouble bridging the gap between different sports at your school, I think this is a great place to start. Track and field doesn’t have to be relegated to the status of a second-class citizen.

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

In conventional gait analysis, a person will run on a treadmill at a given speed while a clinician makes subjective observations or collects additional evidence, typically slow motion video. Analysis performed at an indoor, static location certainly has its place and can be appropriate when control over conditions is required. But for any runner, real performance most likely occurs outside the confines of a clinic, lab, or store—on the tracks, roads, or trails where they run their regular workouts.

Today, when I perform a full gait and biomechanical analysis at my clinic, I always include a portion of the analysis in an indoor controlled environment and also an outdoor assessment. The indoor section allows me to collect high frame-rate video of the sagittal and frontal planes with the runner in situ and also conduct multi-pace testing with the ease of a treadmill’s speed adjustment.

But the real “acid test” for me is sending the runner outside to run a predetermined course with the same wearable sensors that they wore on the treadmill. In this part of the analysis, I can see how their running gait responds in a real environment where their feet stay stationary during the contact phase, and the terrain includes uphills, downhills, and potentially even technical underfoot conditions.

The Evolution of Wearables

The workflow that I use today is the result of seven years of continuous iteration and refinement focused on what really adds value to the assessment interpretation and ultimately to the runner’s future direction. During this same period, the development and application of wearable technology in this niche have multiplied with more and more products entering the market, and more acceptance of the value of wearables among gait analysts.

When I began helping Garmin (the arm formerly known as Dynastream Innovations) in 2012, Garmin’s footpod measured high-level metrics such as pace and cadence. When I worked as a consultant in gait analysis for dorsaVi in 2016 and 2017, we were refining the application of vertical ground reaction force numbers. And today, wearable solutions can now measure a multitude of direct and derived parameters indoors and outdoors, including:

• underfoot pressure
• power
• pronation excursion
• pronation velocity

RunScribe

From a clinical standpoint, one of the biggest values in gait analysis comes from recording bilateral data, where we can then compute percentage asymmetry values between the left and right sides. When comprehensive bilateral data collection is combined with a wearable solution that measures accurately and reliably in any environment, the scope of what’s possible significantly expands. In this realm, RunScribe is a technology that’s always stood out for me.

As a gait analyst who’s performed more than 2,600 assessments using wearable technology, I need a wearable gait analysis solution to tick certain boxes. It needs to be light and small, quick and easy to attach and detach, and—most importantly—be completely unnoticeable by the runner. In addition to having a long battery life, I also need the sensor to be:

• able to start and stop recording autonomously
• easy to charge
• fast and reliable at offloading data
• inexpensive enough that if I lose a unit or two, I’m not dropping to the floor with chest pains

RunScribe has continually delivered on all of these fronts and is my go-to solution when I’m monitoring runners in the field away from treadmills and electricity. So much so that, for a recent trip to Kenya to work with the top running training group there, I packed only RunScribe sensors. The pods worked perfectly every day—even as the relentless red dust built up, I was able to perform some really insightful outdoor analysis.

“As a physiotherapist and athlete, I love biomechanics,”  NN Running Team physiotherapist Marc Roig Tio said, reflecting on this process. “I always try to understand it better, both for helping my athletes and to try to run faster myself. Until now, biomechanical analysis was only done in the lab, with lots of limitations to understand what happens in outdoor running. With RunScribe, I can record the data of a full marathon, a speed work session, and many more without disturbing the athlete, just putting the sensors on the laces. And I get valuable info, especially on symmetry and running efficiency.”

Remote Gait Analysis with RunScribe

Working closely with Tim Clark, RunScribe’s founder and CEO, during the past 14 months, it became clear that, while outdoor analysis was a great application in itself, there was another step forward that made total sense for using RunScribe. This next logical evolution was remote monitoring and analysis, where the runner can collect their own gait data anywhere in the world and have it analyzed remotely by a highly experienced assessor.

A runner can collect their gait data anywhere in the world and have it analyzed remotely by a highly experienced assessor, says @malckentrun. Share on X

In effect, I’d been trying out this case since 2016. I was sending RunScribe footpods out to runners across North America; they would collect their data and then send the pods back to me for interpretation. Formalizing this into a dedicated RunScribe feature was a logical progression.

Why Do Runners Use Runfisx?

In March 2019, my company Runfisx partnered with RunScribe to offer remote gait analysis to runners around the globe. Runners anywhere in the world who have RunScribe footpods (or who can purchase or borrow a set) can allow Runfisx to connect to their online account to enable the interpretation. The process requires:

• A minimum of eight workout datasets collected with RunScribe pods
• Treadmill video including side and rear views
• Connecting the data to Malc at Runfisx

Runfisx then issues a report including the data analysis and interpretation.

Performing remote gait assessments with RunScribe, I’ve seen certain trends in what runners are seeking from the service. Most of the runners I’ve helped have a history of running injuries—either a recurring issue or a variety of potentially related issues. They have invested in a set of RunScribe pods to try and understand why they are getting injured. In some cases where gait is a key factor, the analysis can stand alone as a way to understand the issues. In other cases, the analysis can form a complementary interpretation that integrates with the work of the runner’s local clinician.

We’ve also provided analysis and feedback to runners who respect the importance of “prehab.” In these cases, they often have a target race looming in the future and are keen to ensure that they stay injury free all the way to the starting line.

Another topic that we’ve been dealing with for both rehab and prehab cases relates to shoe comparison. Often, when we’re assessing the data collected by the runner in their own time, they will have worn different shoes during the workouts. Naturally, part of the analysis includes a comparison of the runner’s gait metrics in each pair of shoes. For some runners, this will vary little from one shoe model to another while for other runners, the change in gait metrics in different shoes can be very pronounced.

For one of our runners based in Hawaii, Todd Corliss, this was a key part of his assessment. Todd had been recording data in a variety of different Altra running shoes. There was a significant difference between his gait metrics in two of the three shoes, a variance which held true in controlled conditions during treadmill workouts. He was able to use this insight to gain real value in understanding which model of shoes worked better for him.

The Objective

Tim Clark and I have seen that, while more and more advanced running metrics would appear to be a good thing, in reality, many runners struggle with knowing how to interpret the data and get meaning and value from it. The same question kept arising, which is also the question associated with a lot of advanced wearable tech: Now that I know that my number is this or that, what does it mean? Is this good or bad? What do I need to change?

By taking the lessons learned through developing several running wearable tech products and integrating them with the knowledge gained from thousands of wearable gait analyses, our objective is to provide actionable meaning to runners around the world who are committed to using wearable technology to understand better how to stay injury free and perform their best. For us, every time we can help one more runner understand their gait and go on to reduce their chance of injury, it’s a win!

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

Many strength coaches stress performing a triple extension during dynamic barbell movements such as cleans and snatches. After all, if the triple extension is good enough for powerful Olympic-style weightlifters, it must be good for any athlete who wants to run faster, jump higher, throw farther and, well, do just about everything better. Not quite.

I’m here to tell you that the triple extension is not what elite weightlifters are doing, and it’s not what the coaches of other athletes should be teaching. Further, triple extension exercises such as pulls adversely affect the technique of the full movements and do not produce as much power. As for hang power cleans, I’m not a fan, as those who’ve read my work already know. So, what is a triple extension?

The triple extension is often defined as “achieving full extension of the ankles, legs, and hips to produce maximum power.” Frequently accompanying such a definition is a photo of a weightlifter rising on their toes, fully extended with their shoulders shrugged. Sometimes these photos show the lifter with their feet several inches off the floor, supposedly confirming the belief that weightlifting is simply “jumping with weights.”

Another aspect of triple extension mythology is the belief that the only purpose of lifting the barbell from the floor is to get it into position to finish the lift. Thus, it would make sense to ignore the first pull altogether and concentrate on cleans, snatches, and pulls from the mid-thigh. Let’s break down all this nonsense, starting with power.

Power Is Power

One familiar equation used to represent power in weight training is force x velocity x distance/time. Another is force x velocity. However you define it, the bottom line is that you can have more power or less power, but you can’t have explosive power or non-explosive power. Power is power. With that understanding, consider that the maximum power production for snatches and cleans is not produced at the top of the pull.

If you watch modern elite weightlifters, especially the Chinese women, they go up on the balls of their feet as the bar passes knee level. This approach is in contrast to the proponents of triple extension, who recommend staying flat-footed until the legs have fully straightened after the bar passes the knees. Why should we care?

When the legs are straight, neither the gastrocnemius calf muscle nor the smaller soleus calf muscle can contribute much to the bar’s vertical movement. Stand up, lock your knees, and try to jump—not much happens as far as the calves contributing to force production. Further, this technique causes the barbell to drift away from the center of mass.

Let’s try another experiment. Grasp a stick and stand sideways, next to a mirror, legs straight. Place the stick on your mid-thighs. Look at the end of the stick, and then come up on your toes. You’ll see the bar move forward. As such, triple extension forces the athlete to use a different bar path than the full lift. Elite performance requires consistent technique. Why perform exercises that have a different movement pattern than the primary lift you want to improve? It would be like an NFL quarterback practicing with a fully inflated football in practice and then throwing a deflated one in a game!

#Tripleextension forces a different bar path than the full lift. Why perform a different movement pattern than the primary lift you want to improve? Share on X

There is an argument that using the calves early creates a dampening effect, reducing the force produced by the quads. It’s not true. The soleus assists with knee and hip extension (pulling the shin backward) and contraction of the gastrocnemius enables the quads to more effectively transfer additional force into the floor. These actions, along with the contributions of the elastic properties of the plantar fascia that is activated when the heels raise, combine to maximize power production well before full extension.

Lifters don't jump upward with a barbell during a snatch or clean; they contract the flexion muscles and jump down. Share on X

Some coaches note that in watching elite lifters, their feet leave the floor, giving evidence that the pull is a jump—again promoting the idea that lifters are jumping upward with a barbell. No, they are not. At this point in the lift, these athletes are actually contracting the flexion muscles and “jumping down.” 

If you look at sequenced photos of lifters performing a snatch or clean and use their torso as a reference point, you’ll see that although their feet may leave the ground, their torso descends. Thus, it’s not that a lifter pulls the barbell to a specific height and then lets gravity do the rest; the athlete actively moves under the bar before it achieves maximum height.

During the initial pulling portion of a clean or snatch, especially when using heavy weights with quality barbells, the ends of the barbell are lower than the center. As the lifter moves under the bar, the ends of the barbell are higher than the center. This action occurs because the lifter is pulling their body under the bar, resulting in an upward force on the barbell. With a pull exercise, whether it’s performed from the floor or the blocks, this whipping action does not occur. 

 

A Brief History Lesson

This knowledge about lifting technique is not a sudden revelation. In a 1974 Russian sports science textbook, translated by sports scientist Bud Charniga, researchers analyzed the speed at which weightlifting superstar David Rigert moved his body. They calculated that during the non-support phase (when the feet don’t apply force into the floor), gravity could influence a free-falling object (in this case, Rigert) to drop 21 centimeters (8.2 inches) in 0.2 seconds. In fact, he dropped 59 centimeters (23 inches) in this amount of time! How is this possible?

Charniga explained that Rigert defied gravity because he used the barbell to pull himself down and flexed the hips, knees, and ankles—along with relaxing the extensor muscles used to lift the barbell during the initial pull off the floor. For these reasons, Charniga emphasized in his teachings that no jumping occurs in weightlifting—it’s the opposite of jumping.

As for hang power cleans, the effects can be even worse because the barbell’s initial movement is often diagonal, not vertical. This is especially true with the way many coaches teach the hang power clean.

In an attempt to have their athletes use their lower back muscles to produce force, many coaches teach athletes to start the hang power clean by extending their shoulders well in front of the bar. Besides not effectively using the power of the quadriceps, this starting position places high compressive forces on the spine. By having the shoulders so far in front of the body’s center of mass (which is about in the middle of the foot), the bar’s initial movement primarily is diagonal, not vertical.

After launching the bar off the thighs with this hip thrust, the lifter has to pull the bar backward (in a looping motion) that further increases the stress on the spine. The torture isn’t over, as now the athlete must receive the bar and stop suddenly rather than absorbing and redirecting the force as would occur in a full clean.

Triple Extension and Partial Lifts

Finally, there’s the idea that you can break apart the classical weightlifting exercises into their component parts. As such, we could duplicate a clean and jerk by combining exercises like a deadlift, hang clean, front squat, military press, and lunge. Sure—and the sky is blue because it reflects the ocean. Except for the hang clean, these movements are performed relatively slowly and don’t use the elastic properties of the connective tissues.

The strength developed with slow movements won't necessarily enable athletes to display their strength quickly. Share on X

We can trace this problem down to the cellular level as it involves the sarcomere, the primary contractile element of the muscle. With a focus on relatively slow, partial-range exercises, we create a different training effect on the sarcomeres than we would if we focused on dynamic, large amplitude movements such as a clean or a snatch. Although this discussion deserves an article by itself, you need to understand that the strength developed with slow movements will not necessarily enable athletes to display their strength quickly.

Another troublesome aspect of this blind devotion to triple extension is the suggestion that coaches are focusing on just producing force. Athletic fitness involves more than the ability to produce force; athletes also must absorb, store, and redirect force.

Athletic fitness involves more than the ability to produce force; athletes also must absorb, store, and redirect force. Share on X

When we see an athlete make a sudden change of direction in competition and injure their ACL or ankle, we hear comments from sports coaches and strength coaches like, “Such is the nature of sports.” Or, with female athletes, these injuries are falsely attributed to their inferior anatomy or hormone fluctuations that make them more fragile in the first place. How else could they explain why the majority of ACL and ankle injuries are non-contact?

Athletes can achieve physical superiority by ignoring the functional training hype about the #tripleextension and doing Olympic lifts as intended. Share on X

In their effort to bring attention to their programs (or ignorance), many coaches have been giving out bad advice about how to perform dynamic exercises. Do the Olympic lifts the way they were intended, ignore the functional training hype about the triple extension, and watch your athletes achieve physical superiority.

Header photo by Viviana Podhaiski.

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

Charniga, Andrew, Jr., “The Ankle and the Asian Pull.” European Weightlifting Federation Scientific Magazine. No 12: January-April 2017.

Anderson, Frank C., and Pandy, Marcus G., “Storage and Utilization of Elastic Strain Energy During Jumping.” Journal of Biomechanics.

Van Ingen Schenau, G.J., “From Rotation to Translation: Constraints on Multi–Joint Movements and the Unique Action of Bi-Articular Muscles.” Human Movement Science.

Roman, Robert A., “The Training of the Weightlifter in the Biathlon,” Moscow, FIS, 1974. Translation by Andrew Charniga, Jr.

Formicola, Donato, Ph.D., “The Biomechanics of the Sacromere, The Origin of Muscular Force: Part Three.” European Weightlifting Federation Scientific Magazine.”

Lyons, Todd, Dynamic Fitness Equipment, Personal Communication, March 2019.

If you asked me in 1997, as a college freshman, where I thought the profession would be today or where I would be, I would not have even been close with my prediction. Over my two decades in the field, I have witnessed the growth and power behind social media, the rise of entrepreneurism, multi-level marketing companies selling every kind of magic potion or piece of equipment you can think of, endless specialized certifications in every possible category that falls under the fitness/performance umbrella and beyond, online coaching/mentoring with Skype for a price, and so much more.

I am excited for the profession. I am happy to see the earning potential giving people financial opportunity and the freedom to live more-balanced lives. I am also worried about how fast and business-driven the industry is becoming. The industry is getting divided by letters after our names and/or the products and associations we pay for or potentially earn a profit from.

Filter the Online Information and Get Real Education

I am not an expert and I am far from perfect. I make mistakes, I have weaknesses, I miss the target sometimes. My focus is simply to do what I personally have to do to make fewer mistakes, strengthen my weaknesses, and make my misses less noticeable. I am just a coach with lots of experience at many levels and positions throughout this field who pays attention to the current trends. I am not someone who dictates or forces.

I want to help influence conscious, educated, and open thinkers. I just want to share my views and opinions with an industry that is being driven more by quick business and financial potential and less by results and long-term success. Don’t get me wrong, everyone deserves to maximize their business potential, but I see the process of success skipping major steps for quick dollars. There is a lack of education, experience, and guidance.

As an example, to get a driver’s license, you first need to pass a written test before you can get your driver’s permit. Then, there is a specific amount of time you have to wait before you can attempt to get your license. The fitness industry is quite the opposite now for many entering the field. It’s like you can just go pick out a car of your choice and it drive away. Some people can get away with this, but too many of them crash and burn after that fresh car smell disappears.

A good coach is simply a good coach based on metrics like results and progress, says @GYM_Ferris. Share on X

I do not think you have to train 10,000 sessions or hours before you can write, speak, or educate. I just do not want coaches thinking they have to write and speak to be successful. A good coach is simply a good coach based on metrics like results and progress. I have learned over the years and changed my opinion on many things. I truly believe writing and speaking can actually help you become a better coach, but you have to do it at a pace that works for you. I am 19 years in and would say that is a major weakness for me. I am okay with it. I know what I bring to the table, and I know what I need to do to continue to develop.

The lack of education and training experience is very troublesome. Ask a coach to show you what their training model is, and many will show you pictures from their Instagram account, where they’re in some weird pose doing a duck-face Zoolander look with some crazy filter and a hashtag. The videos and content you can see on social media are frightening. Form, exercise selection, etc. are all ignored and get camouflaged by music and filters. We need structure. We need results. If we don’t have them, we will continue to be an entertainment industry instead of a results industry.

Are coaches educated enough? Are coaches experienced enough? Have coaches been in the game long enough to teach or mentor? Are coaches doing business with good morals? I am not here to judge anyone. I am not here to point fingers. I am not here to dictate. I am simply here to share and hopefully help shed light on topics that will push our industry, as a whole, in the right direction. I want to see everyone succeed.

The videos and content on social media are frightening. Form, exercise selection, etc. are all ignored and camouflaged by music and filters. We need structure. We need results, says @GYM_Ferris. Share on X

You Have to Go on Your Own Journey – Not Someone Else’s

The journey to be a successful coach is simply not the same as it once was. That is both a good and bad thing. Going to college to receive an undergraduate degree, doing multiple internships, going to grad school, and working multiple side jobs to make ends meet is a story many of us in the industry share and tell with our own twist to it. If you wanted to work in the college or professional ranks, you simply had to do things a specific way.

The independent coaching and specialized fields are growing fast, with private coaching, boot camps, sports performance, fat loss experts, boutique fitness instructors, and more. I do not expect it to stop. The consumer seems to enjoy the options. Instead of fighting or arguing against it all, can we help make it better? Can we raise the bar on the foundation of education for all? We will not be able to do it by ignoring it. The way we can address it probably starts with networking and helping locally.

My journey is my own. It helped mold me into who I am today. When I help mentor coaches, I do not want them to go through what I went through. I want to help them avoid mistakes, save time, and save money. I want to take the guesswork out of as much as possible.

I did not sleep in my 20s. I did not make much money in my 20s. I am partially to blame for that because I was not thinking outside the box much and my time was simply limited. I bartended 2-3 nights a week until 2 a.m. and clocked in to work as a coach at 7 a.m. with an oversized Dunkin Donuts coffee in my hand.

Back in 2002, there were maybe three sports performance training gyms around the Philadelphia area. I was a young and hungry intern looking to make his mark at the best one. I knew this was my shot. What other options did I have? Not many. I could not scroll on my Nextel back then and just browse whatever I wanted.

I had no network. I had no real idea of where the industry would lead me. I was just going along for the ride. I had my foot in the door working for a very successful sports agent, Steve Mountain, and I knew I had to put in the time or else I would probably end up applying to the local YMCA or LA Fitness for an entry-level position. That would mean walking new people through the introductory machine workout series for eight hours a day at minimum wage.

Let’s face it: Many of us came from an era where we felt like we were Frodo Baggins on a long, risky, uncertain journey to Mount Doom where, if he was wearing a Fitbit, it would have hit 100,000,000 steps easily. In today’s world, you can just deliver that ring via FedEx while swiping right or watching a Netflix series.

I guess you can say I profited from my experience in the NBA, which helped transition me easily into private practice through access to a strong network of players, coaches, and agents. I did not have a business model. I just had clients, day in and day out. I just coached. I still coach. I just do it with a better training model, supported by a better business model that makes those I work with better and allows me to have a life.

How the Iron Game Has Changed for Coaches

The industry has changed so much, especially for the people entering it now. For many, their coaching timeline is to retire from the coaching floor in five years so they can focus on their business and brand, and write their book. Yes, that is probably an exaggeration, but I think you get my point. Nobody I entered the field with was writing a book or blogging much 20 years ago. We were just coaching every single day because we loved it. We were not really business people and that was probably missing from our undergrad curriculum.

I do not know about you, but my college experience was pretty science-based and did not address much about the potential career paths or business reality that we would have to face. I think the business side today is so much better. We can create careers for people instead of jiggling and bouncing jobs. But the timeline is being pushed too fast. This is why we continue to see coaches and businesses fail. There is no model. There are no results. There is just a surge of something, and it dies out because it was just some hot trend. This is not an easy field to succeed in if you do not have the education, experience, training model, and business model to keep you in the game.

In today’s world, you can quit your 9-5 job on Friday, take an online trainer course on Saturday morning, order equipment with one-day delivery on Amazon, wake up on Sunday morning, and post on your social media that you are starting a boot camp in your garage Monday morning. PS—If you like and share the post, you get a discount on a supplement line that has a top-secret proprietary blend that is yummy in the tummy.

The initial earning potential of a coach/trainer is much better today and that is truly great to see. I do not want to see future generations go through what many of us went through. I want to see careers and lifestyles improve for everyone. Balance was and still is a struggle for many. We work odd hours, weekends, and holidays with no set income. There needs to be a business model that complements your training model so you can maximize your life-outside-work model. This will be different for everyone, but there are ways to get it done and do it with respectful business morals.

There needs to be a business model that complements your training model so you can maximize your life-outside-work model, says @GYM_Ferris. Share on X

Upon entering the field, imagine not training anyone for your first four years. You simply studied, observed, assisted, and volunteered. That is not the case anymore. Now you can just jump in with minimal experience and call yourself whatever title you want. We have to find a way that education, exposure, and experience can be gained the right way. We need young coaches to be okay with being Robin before they can be Batman.

We rush things because social media is so fast and so many “online” specialists are trying to sell you what they think is right. One’s personal opinion and experience is not the end all, be all. I simply suggest you follow, read, and invest in more than one certification and/or coach. Too often, I see people calling something or someone “the best.” That has no validation for me when you have only learned from one source.

We need to help create conscious, educated thinkers, instead of just following a format because that is how “someone” built success in the ’60s, ’70’s, or ’80s. Everyone’s starting point is different today, depending on where they are in life, as well as their educational journey, personal experiences, finances, and location. I was once told that if I wanted to train celebrities, I should move to L.A. If I wanted to train Amish people, I should move to Lancaster, Pennsylvania. It makes a lot of sense when you think about it.

Preparing the Future by Enjoying Coaching Every Day

I look to help build and influence coaches to have an old-school mentality with a new-school way of thinking. Evolution is a part of life and we all must recognize that what got us here will not keep us here. We have to continue to push forward together. This is not about us. It is about the people who invest their time and money in us. We have to raise the bar of professionalism in all spectrums of what we do.

I look to help build and influence coaches to have an old-school mentality with a new-school way of thinking, says @GYM_Ferris. Share on X

I have discussions with high school kids and young professionals all the time, and I am not even sure a four-year college degree in exercise science is even the answer if you just want to go work in the private sector. If you really want that college experience, I honestly recommend a degree in another field and possibly getting a minor in the field. Or just study a recommended list of material, intern at a few places, and find a few solid mentors to study under. Save the student loan money if you can. You can be a really successful coach with the right guidance and experience.

It is still very uncomfortable for me to have these conversations because when people look up to you for your guidance and opinion, you do not want to let them down or mislead them. Where is the industry going to even be in 10 years? I have no idea. I just know that if you can produce results and treat people well, the odds are in your favor to succeed.

The journey, the ups and downs, the success and failures, will be different for all of us. It took me almost 20 years to get to a well-balanced business model. My passion is coaching, and I do it 40+ hours a week via private sessions, small group, team training, and mentoring. I hit the trails or golf on the weekends and spend time with my beautiful wife. I am doing what I always wanted to do, and I hope to inspire and help others get to where they want to be. I am a success story. I am proof that you can make a career in this field if you work hard, have good business morals, and do things the right way.

Have an Open Mind and Eyes

I respect thinkers. I respect other professional views. I am open to discussions and professionally debating. Our industry needs help. You can be part of the problem or part of the solution, and I choose to be part of the solution. I want to listen to what others say because they come from an education and experience journey that I did not have.

Your success defines my success, and I will do all I can to help you succeed, says @GYM_Ferris. Share on X

In the comment area below, I ask that you respond and share your answers and thoughts. This is not about being right; this is about being helpful to others. My hope is that this will open the eyes of many out there who are starting out or are simply lost. The purpose of training is to train with purpose. Your success defines my success, and I will do all I can to help you succeed.

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

Midway through the first day of classroom work for my U.S. Soccer D License, there was a mutiny. The course instructors—a sage pair of A-Licensed coaches with decades of experience in U.S. Soccer—were whiteboarding the course curriculum and underlying methodology when, one by one, the two-dozen club coaches in the room began to revolt. We’re not talking about a minor quibble here or a semantic objection there—what ensued was a four-hour debate, calling into question the basic foundations of the program and threatening to derail the entire course.

The issue? Play-Practice-Play.

Known as PPP, the play-practice-play paradigm is a core element of U.S. Soccer’s “grassroots” initiative, largely inspired by the soccer development model in the Netherlands and U.S. Soccer’s Director of Sporting Programs, Nico Romeijn. Very simply, it’s a prescriptive model for organizing every practice session in the mode of that titular format:

• Play 1: Kids arrive at the pitch and immediately begin playing a scrimmage or largely uncoached series of small-sided games.
• Practice: Roughly one-quarter to one-third of the way into practice, the coach progresses into a game-inspired training session.
• Play 2: For the final third of practice, there is a full-sided scrimmage played to standard goals, ideally keying on the focal concepts from that practice portion.

And that’s it. Nothing more.

The question then raised (repeatedly, and in many cases, rather stridently), was the obvious one: If the players don’t actually have the technical skills, tactical understanding, or physical literacy to effectively perform in Play 1 or Play 2, when exactly are you supposed to teach those qualities?

Why PPP? A Digression

The D License (part of U.S. Soccer’s licensing pathway and traditionally geared for club or school coaches working with players above the age of 13) requires two full weekends of classroom and field work, separated by eight weeks of remote, mentored sessions and weekly homework projects.

During the two-month gap separating that spirited opening session and our final weekend of on-field evaluations, I took my youngest daughter out to practice pitching on what also happened to be the first day of fall practices for the local recreational soccer league. While she worked on locating her fastball and change-up, out on the grass in the distance a team of U14 girls launched their new season in two lines of eight players, with a girl from each line dribbling one at a time, down and back through five linear, evenly spaced cones. Each turn through the cones took 30 seconds or more, leaving over three minutes of inaction between low-intensity reps. The girls waiting in line were volleyball-bumping their soccer balls, chatting, or cloud-watching.

Closer to the softball infield, a team of U12 boys opened their season by taking several painfully slow laps around the full field complex, consuming anywhere from 12-18 minutes. With his gassed players sprawled out and sucking wind, the coach then spent the next 15 minutes lecturing his new team on a personal list of in-game pet peeves and everything they were absolutely not to do during the forthcoming season (defenders turning the ball towards the middle, attackers being called offside due to lazy positioning, being whistled for an illegal throw-in by lifting a back foot, and so on).

Rec soccer is the entry point into the sport for most players, yet 30 minutes into day one of a new season, one team still hadn’t touched the ball and the other was just killing time. Share on X

In a word, these practices sucked. Sucked to watch, and judging by the body language of the players, sucked to be captive to. Yes, these were recreational practices led by volunteer coaches, but recreational soccer remains the entry point into the sport for a majority of players. Here we were, 30 minutes into day one of a new season, and one team still hadn’t touched a ball while the other was already killing time.

The scenarios in those recreational practices are exactly what the PPP model is meant to prevent. What if, instead of bumping and setting their balls at the back of a line or lying half-dead and listening to a lecture, these players had showed up and immediately begun playing? Wouldn’t that make them more likely to:

• Make a continuing effort to arrive on time or perhaps even show up early?
• Be engaged from the moment practice begins, rather than needing to be herded and prompted?
• Have numerous live touches on the ball in a range of numerical alignments?
• Develop game-relevant fitness?

Most importantly, wouldn’t that be a sport they’d want to continue participating in? After all, it’s a game: You’re supposed to play it, and it’s meant to be fun.

Learning by Doing vs. Learning Then Doing

To support the philosophical foundations of PPP, in the D Course we watched a short video clip of a street soccer game being played in a dirt alley. Pickup style, with players spanning different ages and genders, all adapting to the constraints of the space while showing the creativity, decision-making, spacing, technical flair, and combination play characteristic of the beautiful game.

In addition to being more fun (and thus encouraging a higher percentage of youth players to stay in the sport), PPP is also designed to address a perceived shortcoming of high-level U.S. soccer players: They’ve been “overcoached” to the point of robotic predictability. So while the country produces instinctive and creative athletes on the basketball court and football gridiron—sports where it’s common for five or six kids to find a hoop or patch of grass and play their own version of the game—the U.S. has not managed to develop an Iniesta or Modrić or Pogba, those alchemic creators who capitalize on patterns and combinations in the game before others even recognize those elements exist.

U.S. Soccer designed play-practice-play to address the perceived shortcoming that high-level U.S. soccer players have been ‘overcoached,’ says @CoachsVision. Share on X

In the new grassroots initiative, U.S. Soccer hopes to inspire more pickup-style games and improve the country’s aggregate soccer IQ.

For those of us watching the video in the D Course, there was a natural follow-up question: How did the kids in that street soccer game learn to play a fluid, technical, and competent version of the game?

Yes, we can point to slick pickup basketball as a model for how players can test drive 1v1 moves, succeed and fail on their own terms, and flourish in a free-flowing and self-directed version of the sport. But what differentiates a fast-paced and electric pickup hoops game from a ball-hogging hack fest of chucked bricks and vigorously disputed traveling calls?

Answer: Well-coached players who bring their relevant skill sets to the pickup game.

I grew up playing pickup basketball on everything from school blacktops to community center gyms to a dank grid of courts below the freeway underpass, and my running mates were future high school, small college, and Division One players. A big reason we could seize and hold any court was that from third through eighth grade, our age group’s basketball team had a pair of outstanding coaches (one a former D-1 player himself) who taught us how to box out, set a pick, run a basic motion offense, fill the lanes on a fast break, make a proper bounce pass, and so on. Because we’d been taught how to play, we had the ability to jump into a pickup game and play with creativity and freedom. And because we knew how to play with creativity and freedom, we could then bring those elements back to our high school, small college, and D-1 teams.

Perhaps you see what I’m getting at.

What does a pickup version of soccer look like if you have a dozen kids whose parents did not grow up watching or playing the game, who have not yet learned basic technical and tactical skills, and who do not ever practice the sport on their own time?

Suffice it to say, we’re not talking about el jogo bonito.

The coaches rising up as part of the D Course mutiny had seen that scrimmage. It’s slow-motion kickball, with players setting off on a desultory hike for each successive ball booted way out of bounds. It’s a tiny fast kid dribbling up one sideline with a bumblebee clump from both teams trailing a pace behind. It’s toe kicks and bickering about handballs.

That game is the reason these coaches have jobs. They are paid to eliminate that version of the game via the design and purpose of their practices, not to use those practices to replicate it.

The Middle ‘P’ Is for Practice

As taught by U.S. Soccer, there are five basic elements for the “practice” portion of PPP, which should be present in every practice session:

1. It must be organized (planned).
2. It must be game-like (meaning there are opponents attacking and defending; the flow of play is directional; and there should be no interior cones, zones, or restrictions).
3. There must be repetition (a chance to rehearse and improve).
4. It must be challenging (a balance between success and failure).
5. There must be proper direction (coaching).

Challenging point No. 2 was where our D-Course mutiny truly gathered force.

Stealing the ball is far easier than dribbling, passing, or trapping it. So how do you develop the latter fundamental skills if there is always an opponent kicking the ball away from the players’ feet? How do you teach spacing to young kids who don’t understand positional terminology without utilizing artificial landmarks like cones and zones? How do you develop passing techniques if there is always a goal and kids never stop cracking off shots? What if you happen to believe non-directional games like rondos and keep-away encourage possession, first touch, and 360-degree field awareness? If players start playing the moment they arrive, how do you conduct a functional warm-up?

Making it clear that they were channeling U.S. Soccer’s current perspective and not necessarily their own longtime coaching methods, the answers from our course instructors were:

• There will always be a defender in the game, so learning to dribble, pass, and trap with a defender present IS learning to dribble, pass, and trap.
• If kids only understand spacing by being restricted to the boundaries of a coned-off zone, they don’t truly understand spacing.
• Why wouldn’t you want your players cracking off shots every chance they get? Scoring goals is the object of the game.
• Sorry, that one’s a sticky wicket, but non-directional rondos and keep-away without goals do not meet the game-like criteria for a core practice activity in PPP.
• Players U10 and below can hit the ground running. If your players are older and you have an injury-prevention warm-up you believe in, do what you have to do when you have to do it.

Some of these answers make a great deal of sense when you think about them, some make sense in certain contexts, and some are completely unsatisfactory. Among our group in the licensing course, a Los Angeles-based coach took great pride in teaching individual ball skills to his teams of top flight teenage boys, and in that technical aspect, he dug in his heels to strenuously oppose PPP.

“What if I want to teach my boys how to do a step over? In this model, you’re telling me that I can’t do that in a practice session. You’re telling me we can’t slow down, remove the opposition, and teach the technical moves that will help them be more sophisticated and complete players. There’s no way this can work.”

Paradigms Come and Paradigms Go, But the Coach Is Still the Coach

It’s a good question, actually. How, in fact, do you teach a step over?

The answer is the usual one: It depends.

Personally, I learned the step over the same way I learned a crossover dribble in basketball: On my own. On the basketball court, playing the position I wanted to play required the ability to break down a defender, so I spent countless hours in my backyard practicing an arsenal of moves that I could use in a game.

So, if your players can already do a step over, easy enough, you don’t need to teach it. If they can’t do a step over, but also can’t dribble from Point A to Point B without falling headfirst over the ball, easy again, you have far more pressing needs and don’t need to teach it. If you have the time and ability to teach 1v1 moves in practice and your players are able to use that coaching to effectively execute those moves on the field, awesome, do your thing.

Coaching sports—like playing them—is about problem-solving. Just as we don’t want robotic and predictable players, we don’t want robotic coaches; there is no single solution that will be effective across the board and there is no model that will apply to every situation.

Coaching sports—like playing them—is about problem-solving. Just as we don’t want robotic and predictable players, we don’t want robotic coaches, says @CoachsVision. Share on X

As an absolutist structure to follow for a calendar years’ worth of practices, PPP is, to say the least, highly debatable. As a lens to scrutinize your own practice design, PPP can be very useful to help sharpen your purpose and approach:

• In this session, are your players learning to play at speed, or are these skills they can only replicate in static situations?
• Are there elements of attacking, defending, and transition that apply directly to the dynamic elements of the game?
• Are they learning to make their own decisions in the context of the game, or do your players need to be “joysticked” by a coach to make effective plays?
• Is this 90-minute session any fun? Would they want to come back and do the exact same practice again?

If you coach a rambunctious gaggle of 8-year-olds, PPP might very well be an effective method to harness that energy and structure the bulk of your practices. If you coach a group of steely-eyed 14-year-olds who show up each day expecting you to push them one step closer to a spot on the next high-level team… perhaps PPP is a changeup you toss in every so often for variety’s sake. The model is something that you can use all of the time, some of the time, or not at all (but if not at all, you ought to have sound reasoning for why not at all).

Several years ago, when I took the E License course, U.S. Soccer taught a completely different, progressive plan for structuring training sessions:

1. Warm-up
2. Small-sided activity
3. Expanded small-sided activity
4. Game

In those small-sided activities, the coach targeted a skill or game moment and tried to impose conditions to emphasize it. The topic given to me for the final project of my E License evaluation was “coaching the wide midfielders to receive and turn.”

Quite a specific topic, as were the rest. For our field evaluations in the E Course, each coach invented a technique-specific game that highlighted their topic with a baroque set of rules, constraints, and scoring systems that were, theoretically, meant to inspire repeated execution of that focus skill.

Perhaps at some point you’ve tried inventing such a game for your own players—perhaps it even worked. In my experience, however, each time I create a unique game with its own set of rules, scoring systems, and constraints, I then have to spend 15 minutes that I will never get back explaining those rules, scoring systems, and constraints, all while my once-warmed-up players gradually become de-energized and confused.

Typically, those players then pepper me with very logical questions about hypotheticals, contingencies, and gray areas in the rules I hadn’t anticipated. Then, they play this inventive new game at ~60% speed because it’s very hard to sprint all-out while simultaneously figuring out new rules. Ultimately, the big takeaway becomes the efficient ways they learn to cheat the game and rack up easy points, rather than getting any better at the focus skill.

Two major lessons from that practice model:

1. The only way to effectively play a game is to understand the rules. If you stick to rules the players already (mostly) know—meaning the standard laws of the game—your players will spend more time playing at speed and you will spend less time in formal arbitration over esoteric rules or exhorting your players to please, please, please compete with game intensity.
2. While manipulating games to emphasize a focus topic may not work too well, having a focus topic for every practice session gives shape to those sessions and provides building blocks from week to week.

Having a focus topic for every practice session gives shape to those sessions and provides building blocks from week to week, says @CoachsVision. Share on X

Though U.S. Soccer no longer promotes that system, I like the flow of it and often plan practices with that four-part structure. Tellingly, though, while I have never once considered replicating my final E Course session for one of my own practices, I have used variations of my PPP design with players ranging from U10 Recreational All Stars to U14 competitive players, with equally positive results.

Improving the State of Youth Soccer

Let’s get real. Players get better in practice, but they aren’t made there. Athletes who already have the physical skills and mental attributes to excel at the game also tend to succeed on the training pitch—but it is not an A/B test where those players would be X-amount better if one practice model had been applied versus another.

Those who lament the state of youth soccer in the U.S. have ample avenues for complaint: Club soccer is cost-prohibitive; the pressure for early specialization discourages talented multi-sport athletes; there are major issues with burnout, overuse injuries, and competitive stress; and so on.

In my lifetime, however, I’ve seen an exponential improvement in youth soccer. Growing up in a mid-sized city in the 1980s (Eugene, Oregon) and playing on the most advanced teams in the area from first grade through high school, my teammates and I could name exactly three soccer players: Pele, Juli Veee, and the guy Stallone played in Victory. I had my driver’s license before I had a soccer coach who’d ever set foot on a soccer pitch as a player, being coached instead by a succession of volunteer dads who’d never so much as seen a soccer match on television, then a middle school wrestling coach, then a freshman cross country coach, and finally a high school coach who’d played the sport but didn’t care one bit for teaching it to teenagers.

As the game has exploded in the U.S. over the past three decades, the question is not so much how to improve the state of youth soccer, but how to do so in a more sustainable way. U.S. Soccer’s grassroots framework and PPP model are positive steps in that direction, recognizing that there is an entire generation of players who have grown up practicing two, three, or even four times a week in order to play a weekly game that’s shorter than any one of those practices. Correspondingly, there is a generation of soccer parents who believe that training for the sport should resemble SAT test prep—they associate drills with a concrete ROI and scrimmaging as a cousin to recess. When they pay club fees and fill out coaching evaluations, they envision a coach running a soccer boot camp, not one standing out of the way while the players just… play.

As the game has exploded in the U.S. over the past three decades, the question isn’t how much to improve the state of youth soccer, but how to do so in a more sustainable way, says @CoachsVision. Share on X

Consequently, as an extracurricular activity, youth soccer is often described with phrases like: it’s a grind, it’s a long haul, it’s stressful, it’s exhausting, it’s tedious. These descriptions, however, are a response to the practice demands of the sport, not the game itself. Coaching, again, is problem solving. If your players love to come to practice—Bingo! You’re probably doing something right. If they begin associating the sport with a boring, obligatory, time-consuming grind, it’s worth considering ways for them to play more with methods like PPP. After all, it’s a game, you’re supposed to play it, and it’s meant to be fun.

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

Chances are, you’re already using biofeedback and don’t know it. Or like most coaches, you’re familiar with it enough to do something proactive but not enough to feel like you’ve reached its full potential. We believe in using technology, but only enough to make a difference, not so much that we feel dependent on it or it slows us down (although sometimes this is unavoidable). In our experience, athletes love technology and we value data. But we don’t want it to get out of control and turn into another selfie experience.

In the last two years, we’ve invested heavily in technology to get more information on our athletes so we can design better workouts and improve our results. We learned that technology that provides a measurement has helped us tremendously. Each passing week and season, we get a little more versed in its role and its shortcomings. Trends don’t always dictate action, but when science and experience link up, it’s hard to ignore.

Differences Between Biofeedback and General Feedback

Perfectly defining biofeedback is not easy, and the things we’re doing with biofeedback only scratch the surface. I’m not even sure everything we label biofeedback qualifies as such but, for now, it’s close enough. A good definition for biofeedback is included in the article “Biofeedback for Sport and Performance Enhancement.” Although I recommend reading the article, I’ll save you the exploratory search and include the definition here:

“Biofeedback training is a technique of gaining control of self-regulation, based on information or feedback received from the athletes’ body and mind.”

When you hear the term biofeedback, most coaches think about relaxation drills to lower heart rate or hooking up an athlete’s brain to help them discover how to get into the zone. Honestly, we don’t teach many sport psychology methods for relaxation at our facility, but we’ve used stress monitoring for years with heart rate variability apps. We should not stigmatize biofeedback as a way to teach athletes how to deal with nerves. We should see it as a method to connect the real world to what athletes experience internally.

#Biofeedback connects the real world to what athletes experience internally, says @ExceedSPF. #athleteperformance Share on X

There’s a difference, however, between helping a minimally-trained athlete understand their body and using biofeedback to pull the last bit of performance out of a well-trained elite athlete. Using technology and common sense to monitor and manipulate an athlete’s program constantly (relax, it doesn’t have to be changed every day because of a bad HRV score or jump performance) takes experience using the technology and a lot of time to understand the data and what it’s telling you. But it’s application is invaluable.

We’re not trying to redefine biofeedback, but when we add a direct measurement, good training has the potential to be great training. While coaches have always used feedback from their eyes, direct measurements cut the middleman out of the equation. It doesn’t hurt our ego if an athlete is independent. We should be nudging them forward and not hand-holding all the time. At our facility, you’ll see Sean and me coaching—you’ll also see independent training when an athlete is properly educated.

General feedback is any information given to the athlete while biofeedback comes from a specific measurement added to the mix. General feedback is important, but without measurement it’s limited. We do both, and the results are far better than they would be if we excluded either one.

Barbell Tracking: Getting the Most of Every Rep

Don’t worry, we won’t bore you by rehashing the same ideas that are in just about every velocity based training (VBT) article released. We want to make a point about taking the next step rather than simply copying the latest fad. Plenty of research and coaching blogs talk about bar speed and getting athletes better just by showing them their velocity readings. Using velocity feedback helps, but why not crank it up a notch and consider barbell tracking as a whole?

Biofeedback on distance and bar path could be just as valuable to coaches and athletes. Arguably, a beginner athlete might not need to focus on velocity when they’re not sure how to set up their feet, but a tool that provides more information about depth and bar path could prove very beneficial for engraining a pattern. Although it’s not always about more information, when is the right information ever wrong?

Video 1. Coaches care about three goals during lifts, which become very simple when the loads become heavy. Having an athlete maintain technique, effort, and awareness of fatigue is everything when working with large groups.

Just the other day, a research article on feedback using GymAware was pushed on social media, promoting the idea that giving the athlete more information increases their power when training. I like that. Although you shouldn’t need a piece of technology to tell you when to pull a kid back and polish up technique, you can easily display such information to the athlete using the right tool. We love autoregulation and have plenty of ready-to-go templates for athletes who earned their right to self-select (some of) their programming. Using a GymAware keeps everyone honest, including the coaches.

We care about accountability—making an athlete value the disciplined lifting requirements that differentiate an athlete who is just doing a workout from the athlete mastering their training. In the short run, using GymAware makes an athlete compete and instantly aware of what they’re doing. In the long run, with back-end reporting, we see the little differences that show they achieved the desired result.

Biofeedback isn’t only for the athlete to get higher wattage. It also lets the coach see if the athlete is adhering to the instructional side of training and how coachable they are. We’ve used the GymAware system for a while now and realize it’s not new, but we’ve seen trust foster when an athlete knows what we say matches up with what the device’s readings.

Digital Pacing and Conditioning with LED Rabbit

If you’ve ever been tested in a group setting or competed in race events, you’ll know a lot about pacing. Biofeedback with pacing works. Instead of showing an athlete what they can do, the feedback helps an athlete become aware of how fast they should go. Pacing with technology is chasing a ghost you can never beat, but you’re not truly competing with a machine.

Instead of showing athletes what they can do, #biofeedback helps them become aware of how fast they should go, says @ExceedSPF. #athleteperformance Share on X

In our experience, a percentage of athletes fail conditioning tests due to their ignorance and a lack of understanding about the pace needed to pass. With the LED Rabbit, we now have a way to add instant visual feedback as an athlete learns and practices pacing. Nothing is wrong with an old school stopwatch and whistle, but making an athlete feel like they’re in a video game beats them sitting on a couch all day.

LED Rabbit offers instant visual feedback to help athletes learn and practice pacing, says @ExceedSPF. #athleteperformance #biofeedback Share on X

At the gym, we joke about how athletes will start calling shuttle tests the light test instead of the beep test in a few years. The basic timed beep is biofeedback, but adding LED lights moves a program from medieval to high tech. The solution is literally “flashy,” but don’t confuse engaging for entertaining. Light pacing systems are perhaps one of the best ways to connect athletes to what they’re doing when implemented properly.

Track and performance coaches will be most intrigued by the light system. Having pacing lights for long sprints (400m) and endurance work requires a curb to have LED lighting, but you can do so much more. Performance coaches can use the LED Rabbit to set and keep athletes on pace. Conditioning tests are the most difficult to sell to athletes, but nearly any team coach worth their salt wants to know if the athletes are just as fit as they are fast. And besides, although disheartening to some extent, it’s easier to sell a coach and team on fitness rather than speed.

Video 2. Pacing shuttle tests with smart LED systems will not be the trend—it will be the future as the research supports the approach. Adding pacing improves the workout, as better data is not just about accuracy, it’s about knowing how an athlete can push themselves.

We have some great ideas for the future, such as using the LED Rabbit as a coaching tool. While we trust our eyes and have video, having a light system for an athlete is like a metronome for a musician. We’ve barely even started with light-pacing and other technologies and plan to watch this space as it grows and matures. After one trial, the value was obvious. And we expect creative coaches to find a way to make this even more useful and effective in the next few months. 

EMG: Are Your Muscles Firing?

Everyone in this profession has heard an athlete or fellow coach ask about a muscle not firing properly. If someone knows or feels that a muscle is not functioning, then let’s stop the guesswork and see for ourselves. If you don’t trust the research and are suspicious of the information shared by the lab coats, try getting your hands on electromyography (EMG) equipment and experiment for yourself.

#EMG #biofeedback is fantastic for experimenting with exercises when research isn't available, says @ExceedSPF. #athleteperformance Share on X

We are no strangers to EMG but don’t use it often and don’t claim to be scientists. We do have access to equipment that we could use for lab experiments, but as coaches we care about simple and easy wins. In our experience, EMG is strictly for research and simple biofeedback; it’s not a perfect monitoring tool yet. For something to be used as an everyday monitoring tool, it must check a few boxes:

• Simple set up and implementation
• Quick feedback and easy to interpret data
• Group-friendly

EMG isn’t going to solve every problem, but we’re huge fans of getting your hands on a device and experimenting with a few exercises “to get to the bottom of things,” pun intended, with all the glute activation hype.

Exercise selection and EMG are tied together a little too much, but where there’s smoke, there’s sometimes fire. Enough science behind EMG tells us that it’s acceptable to trust the measurements from experiments. The only problem is that not every exercise is researched, especially with machines and movements that are less common.

Here at Exceed, this is our second year using Athos. We just got the second generation product, and clearly they’ve upgraded the shirt and pants. Coaches who are engaged enough to purchase an EMG system are probably smart enough to know the difference between in-the-trenches use and a formal research study. Watching a screen change colors is not coaching and certainly not science. When you have a specific purpose, however, EMG feedback is fantastic.

Video 3. Knowing when muscle activity is absent is just as valuable as knowing when the muscle contracts. Using wearable EMG to assess a movement’s effectiveness is an established practice, but real-time feedback is just as exciting.

Early return to play is the area we expect to see the product working well for us in the future. An injured athlete is desperate for answers and is a far more willing participant with wearable technology. From working with athletes in the past, we’ve also learned they can have trust issues and sometimes feel betrayed by their bodies. EMG can reduce issues athletes have with confidence by showing that they can get their injured muscles working as well as the muscles that help reduce injuries. Right and left symmetry is tricky and requires analysis on the back end with the portal, but with early stage rehab, the app is straightforward enough.

Heart Rate Monitoring: What’s Old Is New Again

It’s true, heart rate monitoring is old news. Some coaches have chosen not to worry about it and have gone “organic,” trusting an athlete’s ability to listen to their body. Other coaches are like lab technicians and spend enormous amounts of time hooking up gear to their athletes looking for a magic number to crack the code. Don’t be in a tribe or camp that’s polarizing. Don’t be obsessed with heart rate data or ignorant of the research. Heart rate data helps model performance and recovery and is one of the most well-established ways to monitor training.

Directly providing feedback to athletes has been done with cycling mounts and wrist watches. These are great options for endurance athletes, but what about rowing circuits or tempo runs over longer distances? Mounting flat screens or even small displays isn’t a real solution for everyone. A more connected solution is smart glasses. The Google Glass attempt failed to hit the mainstream, and the ReconJet product line died, but we’re hoping that the Solos product pans out.

Instantaneous heart rate is very useful for conditioning, showing an athlete the actual work they’re producing rather than the “perception deception” that often occurs on days where they may be a little tired and experience unrealistic indications of fatigue. Though smart glasses aren’t for everyone, they’re likely to become more common, so it’s best to prepare for them.

Jumping and Speed Performance: Adding Intelligence to Effort

Last is the most obvious way to gauge effort and improvement, providing feedback for jumping and sprinting. It’s useful to know how fast an athlete is or how well they jump out or up. The two questions coaches must consider are whether they want to test athletes frequently and whether they want to enter the realm of training with velocity and distance. The technology to do both exists, but the bandwidth for coaches working with groups in real time is challenging and may not be for everyone.

Biofeedback doesn’t need to occur in every session. In fact, running on full throttle all the time can burn out an athlete. It’s not necessary to always use adrenaline for the dirty work—and it’s a little reckless in our book. Sprinting, while far more complex, is actually easier to manage than jumping.

While IMUs are viable and marketed as a jumping solution, they only estimate performance and don’t provide an accurate way to monitor jumping in the wild. In an isolated test, sure you can test an athlete, but coaches want to see information in real time with high accuracy. What is the solution? Know how much information is enough to get better, not to feed a curiosity addiction.

There’s a lot of excitement over flying sprints or short sprints, but what about the work between high-intensity training days? From middle school to pros, we see what happens when you gaslight everything all the time. The cost of sprinting on the body is enormous, so sprinting fast without chasing personal records is a responsibility we bear for our athletes in the long run.

Knowing an athlete's best current performance & what relative #speeds they respond to is everything, says @ExceedSPF. #athleteperformance #biofeedback Share on X

Using speeds between all-out and barely stimulatory is about 10%, so the margin of error is wide for coaches to get results without sprinting all-out. Athletes have different responses to effort: some improve technique, some maintain it, and of course, some fall apart. Knowing an athlete’s best current performance and what relative speeds they respond to is everything.

Although it takes longer and requires more work, programming speed and timing is only the starting point. True, arousal and adrenaline help, but so do rest and recovery. Timing is not only about bringing the best out of an athlete for one session but also knowing how to “release the hounds” properly for the whole season. Timing and monitoring are extremely helpful as feedback tools because, as many coaches know, our 70% and their 70% and their friends’ 70% are often vastly different.

Video 4. Force analysis is great for planning, but simple measures like height are valuable as well. It doesn’t matter which testing system you use for immediate feedback, though deeper analysis does require more information than contact mats provide.

At our facility, we have a considerable number of athletes who roll through each day. It wouldn’t benefit them, or even be possible for that matter, to test and monitor them using all of our technology everyday. Depending on the time of year, we treat them on a case by case basis, at least in a global view, considering the level of athlete, the frequency of their training, and sometimes just for the hell of it.

We test some athletes as a monitoring tool. Some of them train using technology to ensure effort and purpose. And others train and test periodically just to ensure they’re “trending” positively. There are many ways to use jump and sprint testing as biofeedback tools. There is no if, just how you want to do it.

Don’t Only Keep it Simple, Keep it Transparent

There are plenty of other options, including video feedback (which we swear by), but that would take an entire article to cover fully. We wanted to show how simple additions of the appropriate technology could improve a workout. Technology doesn’t make your job obsolete; it makes you more effective and more productive. If you add one piece of technology to training to help with feedback, you’ll start to see the results pile up. Don’t forget that feedback includes human interaction, as honest reminders of effort and timely compliments can mean everything to an athlete. Let the sports technology do the monkey work and focus on doing what you do best as a coach.

#Technology doesn't make coaches obsolete, it makes us more effective and productive, says @ExceedSPF. #athleteperformance #biofeedback Share on X

Nobody wants to make things unnecessarily complex, but the human body is a very complicated organism. While we never try to dumb down the process at Exceed, we understand that if the information is not bite-sized, it will likely backfire. We have rarely experienced a paralysis by analysis from information overload, but we do see an argument that too much feedback all the time can get messy. You don’t need to ensure everything all the time, but we never like making absolute statements of what we believe without getting a number we can trust.

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

I frequently hear coaches repeat the mantra that kids are not miniature adults, only to see them then turn around and program exercises and practices using adult-driven ideas rather than youth-centered principles. Don’t believe me? Raise your hand if you (or someone you know) work with prepubescent children and use any of the following approaches:

• Foam rolling.
• Functional movement screens.
• Standards to advance young athletes from one phase of training to another, such as every athlete must be able to complete 20 push-ups before they can bench press.
• Words and phrases like “mental toughness,” “grit,” and “drills.”
• Using the term “elite” for youngsters under 12 years of age.
• Cherry-picking the “best athletes” for your U-10 team while the others ride the bench.
• Having an “A” and a “B” team.

OK, you can put your hand down now. While there are many examples in our current sports/strength and conditioning cultures, these seven “deadly” sins illustrate the point that many coaches say they are youth-centric, but what they do tells a different story.

Many coaches say they are youth-centric, but what they do with their youth athletes tells a different story, says @rihoward41. Share on X

Where is the evidence for these practices? While some of these approaches have not necessarily been shown to be detrimental, their use has no evidence grounded in science and could be more harmful than beneficial. Since there have not been controlled studies conducted in the prepubescent population, we can’t be sure yet, as there is no evidence one way or the other. These pursuits, however, are based on adult thinking, showing that coaches don’t always really mean it when they say kids are not miniature adults. Just because it works for high school, college, and pro athletes, does not necessarily mean it is applicable for youngsters (hence the mantra in the first place, kids are not miniature adults).

Each of the following seven practices (which match up to the seven bullet points above), are evidence-based and help kids reach their potential. To be truly youth-centered, consider using the following practices:

Let Kids Solve Movement Problems

Get kids to move and encourage movement in all three planes of motion. For this first recommendation, letting kids solve movement problems achieves the same benefits for them as foam rolling does for adults: increased blood flow, improved movement, increased range of motion, and decreased risk of injury. Once they can master movement in all three planes separately, have them move in a combination of planes.

Let kids move in all of these scenarios: on their own, with some guidance, and under direct supervision. Encourage them to move regularly. Move with them! Many kids do not get the opportunity to move often enough. Help them increase their movement vocabulary before prescribing more work for them where they do not get to move, such as some popular mobility and flexibility techniques that are intended for adults but may not be justified for use with children.

Use Your ‘Coach’s Eye’ to Observe Foundational Movements

Screening only a few movements will not tell the whole movement story and has not been shown to be valid and reliable in kids. Instead, consider whether kids can adequately master motor skills in the locomotor, object control, and body awareness categories. These are important first steps before you attempt complex movements incorporating more than one motor skill.

For example, kids should be able to run well and kick well before attempting to run and kick (you remember playing kickball in elementary school recess and some kids would miss the ball, right?). Kids should also focus on the seven primary movements: hinge, squat, lunge, brace, rotate, push, pull (and many coaches now include carry). Also consider adding movements kids can use for sports and for the rest of their lives (swimming, biking, etc.).

Promote Opportunities for Kids to Develop Competence in All Fitness Attributes

Trainable health-fitness attributes include muscle strength, muscle endurance, flexibility, and cardiovascular endurance. Skills-fitness attributes include “ABC-PS”: Agility, balance, coordination, power, and speed. Always incorporate motor skills. When including strength movements, remember it is difficult within the construct of strength to compare a measure of relative strength (strength per body weight, such as a push-up) to a measure of absolute strength (strength moving an external object, such as a bench press). The two are not necessarily related. If you are truly building movement vocabularies for kids, you will find a way to include both exercises at the level that best matches each child’s ability.

Focus on the Phrase ‘Physical Literacy’

Use sports, fitness, activities, and free play to find what works best on any given day. Make sure to provide youngsters with opportunities to move in a variety of ways on a variety of surfaces under a variety of conditions (this is why drills are not always effective). Let them try different things and figure it out their way. Build off of successful movement. Use positive cueing (keep your head up instead of don’t look down, for example).

Provide youngsters with opportunities to move in a variety of ways on a variety of surfaces under a variety of conditions, says @rihoward41. Share on X

Replace ‘Elite’ with Words Like ‘Wellness’ and ‘Balance’

These terms apply to physical, mental, social, technical, and tactical abilities. Our role is to build successful movers. Some of us do that through sports, some through physical education, some through strength and conditioning, and some via positive parenting. All of us are in this together to help kids be successful movers from cradle to grave, not to be on the championship U-10 A team.

Focus on holistic development for every child, and balance their physical, emotional, social, psychological, and educational wellness. The wellness wheel is flat if you don’t help kids develop all aspects of wellness. Remember, they are kids. Some play sports. Some play video games. How are you getting them to be healthy, fit, ready to learn, and the best they can be?

Teach Kids Every Position in a Variety of Sports (and How to Play on Their Own)

Since the majority of coaches are not tracking peak height (and weight) velocity, it is difficult to tell whether your tallest player at age 10 will be the tallest player at age 16, for example. Why not teach every player every position and have league rules that dictate that every player must play x number of plays at y number of positions?

Be sure that kids learn to play different positions in a variety of sports. At best, every player can grow and develop and be ready to play the position that best matches their stature. At worst, every player develops a sense of what each different position is like. This may benefit their “field sense,” which is their awareness of their surroundings and anticipation of what will unfold on the field of play.

Instead of an ‘A’ and a ‘B’ Team, Mix Kids of All Abilities Together

Since you are coaching a team (remember, Together Everyone Achieves More), make it a team effort. Have the kids with a specific skill set work with those that are still learning. Rotate kids of different abilities into different roles so they become successful through the teamwork the group can instill. We love to watch the videos on social media showing someone who we would not expect to succeed having their shining moment due to the selflessness of their teammates. Why not make this a common occurrence?

Further Considerations

When we repeat that kids are not miniature adults, here are some developmental considerations so that we can make the right decisions for strength and conditioning and sports practice:

Physical: Children’s growth and development is nonlinear, meaning it does not always follow a straight path. Watch kids who seem to have a decrease in performance (especially during their growth spurt, which is why it is called “adolescent awkwardness”). Meet them where they are across the developmental continuum.

They do not have the fully mature physical size, strength, and stamina of an adult, so they should not be trained the same way. Always err on the side of caution. Kids have thinner skin (literally). Children breathe in more air per pound of body weight, while taking fewer overall breaths per minute. Children have less fluid in their bodies, so fluid loss has a bigger effect. They often believe they are not working as hard as they are, so coaches should monitor them and provide adequate rest breaks.

Emotional: Children feel less of a sense of control in many situations, understand less about certain situations, and have less experience at bouncing back from challenging situations, so mental stress can be harder on them. They may not feel situations with the same intensity as adults. That does not mean they need to be mentally tougher—it means they are kids. Coaches must recognize where each athlete is on the developmental continuum for physical, emotional, and social growth. That said, kids need to be able to fail, and know that is often how learning occurs.

Kids need to be able to fail, and know that is often how learning occurs, says@rihoward41. Share on X

Social: Kids tend to be self-centered, developmentally—meaning they focus mainly on themselves. Their own personality is not yet fully developed. Their role models are adults, usually their parents. They have not yet developed empathy. Youngsters need a caring, child-centric coach who understands the developmental differences and needs of kids.

When coaches focus on the physical, emotional, and psychosocial developmental needs of kids, it cultivates a kids-first culture and ensures that their physical literacy through sport, fitness, and play is nurtured. Youngsters exposed to this type of environment are more likely to be motivated to participate since their needs are being met. Kids also will drop out less as they will be having fun (not having fun is the No. 1 reason kids stop playing sports; not playing and getting yelled at are two reasons kids don’t have fun).

This approach provides kids with a wide variety of movement opportunities across a broad spectrum of sports. Since fitness, play, and fun are included, aspiring athletes will have a reduced risk of injury. Since all kids are given consistent opportunities to enhance their movement capabilities, they will develop the movement competence and self-efficacy that is so important for them to want to continue to move in sports and throughout their lives.

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

Conditioning for baseball pitchers has long consisted of work that is non-specific to the demands of the game. Often, what you find on baseball fields all over America is a combination of long, slow, distance work or high-intensity interval-type sprints with incomplete recoveries. Not only are these not specific to the energy system needed for the sport, but they compete with adaptive reserves that could be more useful in other processes.

In truth, any talk of energy system development with baseball athletes should start and stop with the alactic system. The question becomes whether there is a purpose for developing the oxidative or anaerobic-glycolytic systems in baseball. The oxidative and anaerobic-glycolytic energy systems may have their place in other sports, but I tend to disagree that they are useful for baseball athletes.

The oxidative and anaerobic-glycolytic energy systems may have their place in other sports, but I tend to disagree that they are useful for baseball athletes, says @ZachDechant. Share on X

All too often, coaches judge the training for a sport by “how much?” and “how hard?” If it doesn’t max out those two qualities, then training was a waste of time. Possibly the most misunderstood concept in training athletes is that of developing energy systems or “conditioning.”

Energy systems do not work independently, despite what virtually every student in an exercise science class is taught. All three energy systems are always active in every aspect of performance. One doesn’t kick in at a certain time and shut off at another time in succession. Each system’s contribution varies according to the intensity and the duration of the activity being performed. So, if all systems are active at any one point, why wouldn’t it be beneficial to train all three systems?

One reason is adaptive reserves. It makes little sense to spend a large amount of time on training something that contributes very little, if at all. Athletes only have so much energy to adapt to training stimuli. When more and more gets added to their plate, they lose the ability to adapt to a specific stimulus, and this, for a pitcher, should be alactic power. Over the course of long seasons, high volumes of non-specific work will take their toll on the body.

Physical and Mental Demands of Pitching

With that in mind, let’s look at the average action of a baseball pitch. A pitcher’s total motion is usually in the range of about 1.0-1.5 seconds in duration, from initial movement to ball release. The ball is thrown back and the next pitch is started on average around the 12- to 15-second mark. This is a 1:10+ work-to-rest ratio if we’re being conservative, but it could easily be higher. If we look at the standards for work-to-rest ratios according to the NSCA guidelines, this places pitching in the alactic zone.

Pitching isn’t always an all-out maximal effort throughout the motion, either. If we compare throwing a pitch to another 1- or 1.5-second event, for most athletes this would be a 7- to 10-meter sprint. The sprint, however, is an all-out maximal effort event. Pitching—and this is very dependent upon the individual—is often a controlled buildup of momentum and energy into a maximal effort at release.

Coaches have traditionally adored running pitchers to no end in season. After all, they need their legs under them to be able to pitch, right?! Baseball has long been a slave to the belief that pitching is built around a foundation of running to condition the body. General running is not specific, nor is it complementary to speed or the power development needed by pitchers. Too much long, slow, distance work or too many lactate-producing interval runs can compromise gains on the other end of the spectrum.

What about high heart rates in games…

What about the case of the heart rate? Heart rates do often climb, with starting pitchers in the 140-170 bpm range. However, studies have shown that elevated, in-game heart rates are more associated with perceived stress and anxiety when on the mound than to physical activity. In fact, one study on heart rates during pitching showed the highest heart rates were during home games in the first two innings, followed by a gradual decrease each inning thereafter. Compared to road games, there was a significant difference. Again, this shows how much emotional excitement in front of the home crowd affects heart rates.

Well, we run them to clear lactate from previous starts…

Yes, the old theory of running endlessly to clear lactic acid out of the arm is still around. A pitcher’s effort generally lasts less than 1.5 seconds, with long rest as detailed above. This does not even come close to a buildup of lactate. Soreness in the throwing arm following an outing does not come from lactic acid buildup. Lactate is actually a good thing when it comes to energy system development, but that’s for another time.

Pitcher soreness comes from the massive stretch shortening cycle, as well as eccentric forces placed upon the arm and body, not lactic acid buildup, says @ZachDechant. Share on X

Pitchers become sore from the massive stretch shortening cycle, as well as eccentric forces placed upon the arm and body from rapid acceleration and deceleration. Huge distraction forces up to 1x bodyweight are placed upon the shoulder during every throw.

What is the role, if any, that each energy system can play in the grand scheme of the pitcher?

Benefits of the Aerobic System for Power Athletes

The aerobic energy system is built for the long haul for low-intensity bouts. It was previously thought that the aerobic system kicked in around 90 seconds to two minutes into exercise, but it is now known that the aerobic system is present from the get-go and much more important than originally thought. The benefits of a properly functioning aerobic system often go beyond long-distance running sports. There are several advantages to developing the oxidative system.

Vagal Tone and the Parasympathetic Nervous System

One of the biggest benefits of aerobic training pertains to autonomic nervous system regulation. The autonomic nervous system (ANS) makes up one part of the body’s nervous system. The ANS is broken into two parts: the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems.

The sympathetic nervous system (SNS) is known as “fight or flight.” This system is related to stress. The SNS runs overtime when stress is present, whether in the form of competitions, strenuous training, money problems, relationship issues, etc. For the most part, the SNS is overly active in most Americans due, more than anything, to our thoughts. But you can see that high-intensity training and competitions also fall under the umbrella of the SNS, which relates back to athletes. The SNS runs overtime for baseball athletes who play multiple competitions per week.

On the flip side, we have the parasympathetic nervous system (PNS). The PNS is known as “rest and digest.” The PNS is where we want athletes to be when not training or competing. It stimulates recovery in the body and athletes make gains when recovering, not when training. Low-intensity aerobic methods stimulate the PNS. A foundation of aerobic development helps the body recover from sympathetic stressors. It helps to lower everyday energy usage and prepare for future stressors.

A 2012 study by James, et al. demonstrated that subjects participating in severe exercise bouts experienced an increased sympathetic influence on the heart and a decreased parasympathetic tone. It was shown that intense repeated training stressed the subject’s ability to engage the parasympathetic nervous system and maintain homeostasis.

ATP Replenishment

Another huge benefit of the aerobic system is its ability to regenerate ATP and the removal of waste products during bouts of alactic work. The aerobic system is hard at work during short, high-intensity bouts of alactic training. Rest periods rely on the aerobic process to replace substrates essential to the replenishment of ATP. A large foundation of aerobic development can mean a more powerful alactic system, especially when it comes to alactic capacity, or the ability to reproduce high-powered outputs for a long duration. This doesn’t necessarily affect the game of baseball, but a very small case could be made for pitchers.

While the aerobic system can play a vital role in energy-system-dominant sports, it’s still not a main player in the sport of baseball, says @ZachDechant. Share on X

While the aerobic system can play a vital role in energy-system-dominant sports, it’s still not a main player in the sport of baseball. Athletes can achieve the necessary aerobic adaptations with work that doesn’t stray far from the ultimate goal of speed and power development.

Guidelines for Movement Circuits and Dynamic Warm-Ups

Two great methods for creating an underlying foundation of aerobic capacity are movement circuits and extended dynamic warm-ups. These are excellent for pitchers on the day following a start or high-intensity mound effort. Keeping the heart rate elevated in the range of 120-150 bpm for 20-30 minutes can create a low-intensity aerobic capacity adaptation.

A quality movement series the following day restores ranges of motion throughout fascial and muscular systems. It pushes lymph throughout the body, which aids in the elimination of waste products and supplies the tissues with oxygenated blood.

It’s no surprise that a one-sided asymmetrical activity would cause motion adaptations, so using movement circuits the following day helps to kill two birds with one stone. Not only do we stimulate recovery processes in the body, but we can do so while training and developing the oxidative system to a small degree and assisting the body’s ability to easily return to a parasympathetic state.

A properly put together, daily, dynamic warm-up can stimulate a foundation for aerobic adaptations.

Parameters:

1. Heart rates maintained at 120-150 bpm even during rest periods.

2. Lower reps – generally between 5 and 10, at most.

a. Usually no more than 5 each side.
If reps are too high, heart rates will climb, and lactate accumulation can begin to outpace elimination. We don’t want that happening at this time.

3. Rest periods

a. HR stays above 120 bpm.

4. Movements

a. Total body compound movements.
b. We often superset a lower movement, upper movement, core, and mobility movement for multiple sets. You may ask how we do a large compound movement but then suggest a lower, upper, and so on. An upper body movement may be a push-up with rotation or push-up into a DB Row. These use the entire anterior and lateral chain, in many cases. Five reps per side and most athletes’ heart rates will climb. Use a short rest that allows it to drop back to the 120-bpm mark before the next movement begins.

Tempo Runs and Pitchers

Tempo runs are low-intensity sprints performed at 65-75% of max speed. They are essentially between full-out sprints and jogging. They were termed “tempo runs” by the great Canadian sprint coach Charlie Francis. He utilized tempo runs as not only a form of aerobic development for sprinters, but a means of recovery in his high/low system of programming.

Tempo runs are an excellent means of recovery work on low-intensity days. Staying in the 65-75% range for max speed is essential for nervous system recovery. Francis’ beliefs focused on eliminating the middle ground of sprinting at 76-95% intensities. These intensities are too slow to be utilized for speed development, and too fast for recovery. They become too intensive to recover from quickly and create residual fatigue for the next high-intensity day. When that happens, the main work can suffer. Tempo runs give athletes a more specific training effect without substantial nervous system fatigue.

1. Aerobic Development

Tempo runs give athletes the benefits of cardiovascular development in a fashion more complementary to the rest of their training. They are essentially short sprints followed by rest intervals long enough to keep lactate at bay.

2. Capillary Density

A huge benefit that Charlie Francis touted with tempo runs was increased capillary density. Low-intensity tempo runs build a larger capillary network throughout the muscle. Increasing capillary density provides several benefits to baseball athletes.

a. Staying Warmer
Increasing capillary density creates more heat throughout the muscle and allows for the muscle to stay warmer longer. This is hugely important for Olympic-level sprinters, as their training runs often require 10-20 minutes of rest to ensure full recovery. The ability to stay warm is key. With baseball, this is an absolute no-brainer. Pitchers are always active while on the mound, but they have long periods of sitting and waiting to go out for the next inning.
b. Blood Flow and Nutrient Transfer
Enhanced capillary density improves blood flow throughout the muscle complex. Increasing blood flow not only enhances heat, but also improves oxygenation and nutrient transfer. Nutrient transfer is important not just for the benefits of more nutrient availability on the good side, but also the removal of waste products on the bad side.

Tempo Parameters

Rest Intervals

I prefer a walking rest interval based upon distance during tempo runs. This is generally a 1:2 ratio in terms of yardage. Take the distance of each rep and walk half that between each run. If athletes do 100-yard tempo runs, I have them walk to the 25-yard line and back for their rest interval, for a total of 50 yards.

Intensity

The intensity is the most important element of tempo runs. Athletes should stay within the zone of 65-75% of maximum speed. Calculations can be made based upon an athlete’s best 60-meter time or other sprint time, but I find it unnecessary to do a bunch of calculations. I rely on the athletes to determine their own 65-75%. The best indicator of proper intensity is an athlete being able to perform the first rep and the last rep at the same intensity. An athlete running too fast will begin to fatigue, and the last reps will be slower and more tiring than the first. Tempo runs should be almost refreshing to the body. Fatigue should not be a large factor.

Total Volume

The total volume depends on goals, but I often stay between 1,000 and 1,600 total yards of volume. At times, we may work up close to 2,000 yards, but those times are few and far between. Charlie Francis used 2,000+ yards as his standard for 100-meter sprinters. Coaches should build volume gradually, just as they would with any other new stimulus.

Distance

Each run varies from 50 to 100 yards, but a variety of distances can be effective.

Location

In general, tempo runs should be performed on a softer surface. Grass makes for the best surface to eliminate any repetitive pounding that many baseball athletes may not be used to.

Alactic Methods and Training Concepts

The anaerobic-alactic system is our bread and butter when it comes to baseball development. The alactic system is also known as the Phosphagen, or ATP-PC system. This system relies on few processes to rapidly produce energy for explosive efforts, but it comes at the cost of being very short in duration. For baseball athletes, that cost rarely comes into play, as the alactic system usually reaches its limits after 10+ seconds.

The ultimate goal for baseball is producing higher alactic outputs, says @ZachDechant. Share on X

Alactic means and methods consist of short-duration movements dealing with strength training, jumps, medball throws, sled pushes, sprints, etc. The duration, intensity, and rest intervals of each determine whether it is truly alactic or not. Training for strength, speed, and power is generally considered alactic. The ultimate goal for baseball is producing higher alactic outputs.

1. Strength Training

a. Dynamic effort
• 40-70%
• Maximal acceleration
• 1-3 reps
• High number of sets

b. Rep and max effort

• 70+%
• 1-5 reps
• Low to moderate number of sets

2. Speed Training

a. 5-50 yards
b. Acceleration and maximal speed runs
c. Full recoveries
• 1 min. per 10 yds

3. Medball Throws

a. Maximal intent throws
b. 3-5 reps per side
c. Full rests intervals
d. Movement patterns
• Rotational
• Linear forward/backward
• Specific

4. Jump Training

a. 1-5 reps
b. Maximal intent
c. Full rest intervals
d. Variety of movements available
• Double leg
• Single leg
• Alternating






Anaerobic Lactic System

The anaerobic lactic system is the second part of the anaerobic system. It is also known as the lactic or glycolytic energy system. This system is responsible for energy production following the slowdown of the alactic system at around 12 seconds. It produces ATP faster than the aerobic system, but again, comes at the cost of its duration and by-products.

I’ve seen graphs that state baseball is 80% alactic, 15% anaerobic-glycolytic, and 5% oxidative. This is ridiculous. The lactic system has nowhere near a 15% contribution for baseball athletes.

The lactic system rarely, if ever, gets used on the baseball field, says @ZachDechant. Share on X

The lactic system rarely, if ever, gets used on a baseball field. Plays on a baseball field rarely exceed 10 seconds and when they do, athletes get more than enough rest to return to the alactic system. Yes, there are exceptions to every case, but it is rare (if ever) that the lactic system would play a role in a baseball athlete’s training.

I often think of the lactic system as the middle ground that so many “conditioning drills” get built around. The middle ground refers to intensity and rest intervals. Intensities are in the 75-95% range with rests that don’t fully restore an athlete. Intensities over 75% stimulate the nervous system and therefore cannot be classified as recovery or restoration, yet aren’t fast enough to stimulate alactic power or true speed training.

The 300-yard shuttle is a staple for professional baseball organizations in spring training. Rest intervals are incomplete and do not allow for full short-term restoration. They are often classified as a 1:3 work-to-rest ratio, which, as we know from above, is nowhere close to the game of baseball. A 60-second, 300-yard shuttle is commonly given three-minute rest intervals before repeating. And these become tough runs made with large buildups of lactate.

The lactic system makes up much more than its fair share of “baseball conditioning.” If you’re running sprints or drills that last over 10 seconds with incomplete recoveries, then you’re training the lactic system. Not only is this training not specific to the demands of the sport, but it can actually hamper the development of the aerobic system and the ability of the body to recover.





All this means no bow-and-arrow sprints, no ladder poles, no 300-yard shuttles. Those may have their purpose at one time or another, but continually conditioning baseball athletes with this type of running has no purpose.

Parting Thoughts

Conditioning a pitcher to throw 90+ pitches is not all that energy-system-dependent, as many believe. The real conditioning is skill-specific. The ability to throw 90 pitches in a game doesn’t come from road work and miles on the legs. It comes from building throwing workloads gradually and the ability of the body to handle those workloads. We can take anybody who is in shape and it won’t mean they can throw 90 pitches in a game.

On the flip side, you see many out-of-shape guys who can still dominate on the mound. Conditioning is general and doesn’t aid that aspect. Any talk of baseball and energy systems should basically start and stop with alactic development. Are there benefits that can be derived from the other energy systems? Yes, but in the grand scheme of things, the benefits derived from other energy systems are small and often secondary training effects.

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

Cornell, David J., et al. “In-Game Heart Rate Responses Among Professional Baseball Starting Pitchers.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2017; 31(1): 24-29.  doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000001465.

Haff, Greg, and N. Travis Triplett. “Essentials of Strength Training and Conditioning.” Human Kinetics, 2016.

James, D.V., Munson, S.C., Maldonado-Martin, S. and De Ste Croix, M.B. “Heart rate variability: effect of exercise intensity on postexercise response.” Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 2012; 83(4): 533-9.