Blog

One of the biggest issues we have in the strength and conditioning field is that we use words and phrases that we don’t clearly understand as speakers or that our audiences understand—or both. This lack of understanding occurs because we don’t present the concept in the language of the population we are trying to serve. The unintended consequence is the creation of a divide among professionals in the industry when, in fact, we are trying to unify groups around a solution. Long-term athlete/athletic development (LTAD) is one of these concepts.

A lack of understanding occurs if we don’t present a concept in the language of the people we serve, says @rihoward41. Share on X

For example, I recently gave a presentation with LTAD in the title at a national conference for fitness professionals. I should have thought ahead and recognized that the audience might not be that well-versed in my topic. I should have asked key questions, like: Was my audience aware of LTAD? Did they know the key components of LTAD? Were they wondering how LTAD could help them increase their presence and their results? I realized my mistake with the title at the beginning of the presentation, when I asked the audience of around 50 fitness professionals “who is familiar with the term LTAD?” and only three hands went up.

How could I suggest implementation strategies to a group who did not know what the presentation was about in the first place? Luckily, most attendees were fast learners. At the end of the presentation, they responded that they had a practical understanding of LTAD and, by the end of the conference on Monday, they recognized how they could implement LTAD strategies. I had increased their awareness, and I’m very excited that opportunities continue to grow to spread the message of how LTAD is a cradle-to-grave framework to foster physical literacy.

Why Isn’t LTAD a Household Term?

Regarding the acronym itself, why doesn’t the term “LTAD” resonate more broadly? Some might say it’s merely an awareness problem, but many attendees were familiar with concepts within LTAD—such as giving kids time for free play, encouraging kids to play a variety of sports, teaching the importance of strength and conditioning, and recognizing the need to create a successful cradle-to-grave model to promote lifelong movement opportunities. Many professionals within our field recognize the underlying principles of LTAD, but do not know that there is a framework that organized these concepts collectively as LTAD.

Many professionals in the field know the concepts within #LTAD without knowing the term ‘LTAD,’ says @rihoward41. Share on X

There is a lack of awareness of LTAD’s magnitude, sometimes brought about by misperceptions. The Dictionary.com definition of awareness is “knowledge or perception of a situation or fact.” The difference between knowledge and perception is critical. The English Language Learners Dictionary’s definition of perception is “the way that you notice or understand something using one of your senses.” The expression that “perception is reality” highlights the uphill struggle when the perception of LTAD does not match the reality. Part of the problem is the term “LTAD,” which conjures perceptions of who LTAD targets, who is responsible for LTAD implementation, and what outcomes LTAD produces. Here are a few examples of perception problems:

• • The perception of “long-term” as only being the length of the sports career rather than the ability to provide the skills needed to be physically active throughout the entire course of life. Experts suggest that activities for adults should be “lifetime activities”; that is, mainly sagittal plane movements for which no prior skill development is necessary, such as walking, jogging, hiking, swimming, and then adding tennis and golf. In reality, LTAD helps us all develop the skill set needed so that we can decide which activities to participate in, and to have the confidence and competence to engage in these successfully. Lifetime fitness activities should include sports and any other activity of an individual’s choosing.

 

• • The perception of the term “athlete” for many refers only to an eliteathlete, so they believe: LTAD is only about sports; LTAD does not work for the entire population; or LTAD is not appropriate for specific areas, such as physical education. LTAD subscribes to the definition of athlete as anyone with a body, promoted by The Aspen Institute’s Project Play and Dan Bowerman from Nike. LTAD is a cradle-to-grave framework for every person to enhance the development of not only physical skills, but also psychosocial, technical, and tactical elements of performance and activity.

 

• The perception of development through play. We often hear “gurus” say, “just let them play; they’ll figure it out!” Would we ever say, “just drop them off at the library, they’ll learn to read!!”? It is important to note that play is not just about organized sports, either. Due to the reduced time kids get in recess, PE, and free play, and the extended time some kids spend in youth sports, we need to highlight that there are three types of play and we need to ensure that kids have an opportunity to play sports, get recess every day, and have time to just be kids.

Perception Matters

This lack of understanding—or better yet, lack of willingnessto see things from all angles—is leading us down a slippery slope. If we can’t look at concepts and ideas from a variety of perspectives, how can we expect to provide the best information to our athletes? This means our perception needs to be broadened. Sometimes, we get caught up in our own world and do not consider other perspectives. As an example, sport science research is too often viewed as a nuisance by coaches who think academics sit in their ivory towers with no understanding of what it’s like to be in the trenches.

Researchers, on the other hand, too often view the “data” coaches collect as not meticulously kept or controlled, and therefore believe the results might not be as accurate as needed and not generalizable to the general athletic population. There are plenty of researchers that have “boots on the ground” and many coaches who compile excellent quantitative and qualitative data. To change the cultures of youth sports and strength and conditioning, we all need to open our minds to share the facts about research and coaching to encourage collaboration in the best interest of youth positive development.

Let’s Meet Our Audience Where They Are

We have a perception problem! If we are truly going to make a difference with LTAD, we need to better meet our audience where they are, using language that solidifies our value proposition (in parentheses in the section below) to:

1. Change the culture of youth sports (make all sports fun again for all kids).
2. Provide developmentally appropriate opportunities to participate (provide curriculum and practice plans for coaches and PE teachers).
3. Collaborate with all stakeholders to improve opportunities for kids to be physically active (you’re part of the solution—let’s work together!).

These strategies must include collaboration with physical educators to relate LTAD to physical literacy, obesity rates, and lifetime physical activity (increase the value and perception of PE). Let’s get coaches, physical educators, administrators, and parents working together on redeveloping the community feeder pattern that links the before, during, and after school opportunities for all kids to be physically active, including through sports (let’s get more kids physically active). With increasing attention finally being paid to mental health, share with parents the benefits of positive youth development provided through sports, PE, and play (sports for healthy minds and healthy bodies).

To engage parents, we know that they want what is best for their kids. We know that the current pay-to-play, early sports specialization model excludes many kids. It is also not leading to elite sports performance as much as we think—the U.S. is ranked 39th in per capita Olympic medal count. Make parents part of the solution by dispelling the myths around early sports specialization, pay to play, and “elite” travel teams. Show them what you do and how it develops athleticism for their kid to develop sports skills appropriately and have every chance to continue participation for a lifetime. (We work together to make your child the best he/she can be.)

We also need to show the disparity between what happens in sports and what happens in academics. Would we ever ask kids to specialize in one academic subject in elementary school? Would we ever cut students from science class? Where are the weekend math tournaments that require extensive travel? What school offers only one subject?

Granted, both sports and academics need a complete change of focus, but establishing a youth-centric approach to both can build success in the long run. Healthy minds and healthy bodies has been our slogan since the Roman era, so the value proposition for sport and education is clear: Sports and fitness lead to better citizens, higher graduation rates, longevity, and a host of other benefits. These benefits are somewhat dependent on the quality of the sports and fitness program, so LTAD can play a significant role in showcasing the features of a quality sport and sports coaching framework.

#LTAD can play a key role in showcasing the features of a quality sport & sports coaching framework, says @rihoward41. Share on X

Specific to coaching, LTAD encompasses all aspects of coaching, but is not simply coaching (coaching is critical to the success of kids). As a cradle-to-grave model, coaching is essential for those participating in a sports program. If the current adult-driven sports model is not corrected, it will be difficult to get all coaches on board with multi-sport participation, getting all kids to play (and not always sports), and creating a cradle-to-grave system for integration of parents and kids to embrace a physically active lifestyle.

Coaches play an important role in sports, but we know that LTAD extends beyond sports and beyond athletes’ careers in sports. We need to increase coaching education efforts to become more consistent with what we call LTAD and how it is delivered to coaches. There are multiple versions of LTAD in the U.S., with different versions within national governing organizations. To increase awareness and improve perception, we need edification of terms and language to help coaches deliver quality instruction to athletes in their charge.

LTAD as a Unifying Strategy to Increase Sports Participation and Physical Activity

The lack of opportunities for kids to participate has been labeled a social justice issue. Two key areas of focus are the economic disparity and the lack of PE requirements. The economic disparity issue was recently a feature story in The Atlantic. The reduction in the number of youngsters playing sports is directly related to economic inequality—in wealthy areas, youth sports participation is actually rising, whereas in poor neighborhoods the participation rate is declining. The data indicate that 34% of children from families earning less than $25,000 played a team sport at least one day in 2017, versus 69% from homes earning more than $100,000.

The PE issue is underscored by the fact that only six states require PE every year, with cuts hitting the most economically disadvantaged areas most. Related to sports participation, the LA Unified School District found that only 77% of students graduated, and those that graduated had an average 2.1 GPA. Athletes, on the other hand, had a 92% graduation rate, and a 2.8 GPA. The concomitant health risks associated with lack of exposure to physical education cannot be ignored. All students need to learn the value of being physically active, and taking care of oneself.

It is time to remove silos and promote long-term athletic development (#LTAD) as a unifying strategy, says @rihoward41. Share on X

It is time to remove silos and promote LTAD as a unifying strategy. The platform of LTAD has opportunities for coaches, teachers, parents, administrators, and all other stakeholders to not only delineate their roles more effectively, but to also see how to collaborate with other stakeholders in the best interests of kids. Somehow, coaching has become like politics—we take a stand on something based on our perceptions and we blast those that don’t share the same view. All that does is dilute our efforts to grow our profession. It is time to stop and hear each other out!

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

Have you ever wondered why one of the most holistic assessments of human physiology is currently restricted to a handful of sports science labs, hospitals, and research centers? I’m referring to cardio-metabolic analysis, the only known non-invasive method capable of analyzing how a person’s cardiovascular, pulmonary, and metabolic systems operate both individually and in unison¹. Due to its ability to accurately assess the energy consumption and substrate utilization of the human body (i.e., percentage contribution of fats and carbohydrates in the human body), cardio-metabolic analysis has long been considered the gold standard assessment for developing physical exercise and nutritional programs². However, despite its well-established value in performance optimization, very few athletes and coaches are aware of its benefits and even fewer use it in their training.

Cardio-metabolic analysis is the best assessment to develop physical exercise & nutritional programs. Share on X

But why is it that such a holistic and foundational assessment remains so inaccessible³? The reason is due to cost-prohibitive devices with cumbersome operation processes, the time requirements to conduct a cardio-metabolic test, the discomfort caused by the headgear of traditional metabolic analyzers, and the immobile nature of existing solutions that are unable to collect data from real-life training conditions⁴. These are enough complications to make even the most data-driven coach contemplate whether or not to prescribe the test, and to make the average athlete dread the thought of going through it. Specifically:

• A medical grade cardio-metabolic analyzer costs more than $30K and requires specialized training to operate.
• Interpretation of the data generated from such a device and the development of physical exercise and nutritional regiments based on the information gathered requires a degree in exercise physiology, as well as experience from tens (if not hundreds) of tests.
• Running a test (including the syringe calibration of the flow sensor) and crunching the data can take up to one hour.
• The immobility of most devices—and the unreliability and fragility of the few portable options that exist—have made real-life cardio-metabolic testing unrealistic, therefore restricting it to the lab. As a result, the substantial differences in an athlete’s physiological response between the lab and real-life training conditions have also led many coaches to distrust many of the insights of indoor cardio-metabolic testing and resort to less sophisticated but outdoor-based forms of assessment.
• The discomfort most mouthpieces inflict on test subjects has led athletes to develop an aversion towards the assessment and coaches to be skeptical about prescribing it.

Consequently, the lack of a convenient and cost-effective solution results in the average team resorting to unreliable assessment methods for prescribing training and nutrition.

What Is Cardio-Metabolic Analysis?

Cardio-metabolic testing, also known as VO2max testing, ergospirometry, cardiopulmonary exercise testing, or metabolic testing, is largely misunderstood and underutilized. The sheer number of names is silent proof of how fragmented and limited its utilization is, and speaks to the mystery around the metrics. The clear definition of cardio-metabolic testing is the measurement of the oxygen uptake (VO2), carbon dioxide production (VCO2), and ventilation (VE—total air volume exchanged with the environment) of a person through the continuous analysis of his inspiratory and expiratory gases⁵. By combining these three basic cardio-metabolic parameters, as well as those used to derive them, we can assess the cardiopulmonary response of an individual and his energy consumption (i.e., number of kcal expended in a period of time), and determine the contribution of the two major fuel sources (i.e., carbohydrates and fats) in his energy mix.

Overall, cardio-metabolic analysis has not only been restricted to very few sophisticated and well-funded athletic organizations, but the interpretation of the information it generates has also been superficial. Not only are coaches and teams avoiding cardio-metabolic analysis, but the very few who do apply it underutilize the data it can offer³. However, recent technological advancements in sensing technology have managed to overcome the obstacles posed by existing devices and are bringing cardio-metabolic analysis to the core of athletic training. The following case study describes how PNOĒ—the world’s first portable, low-cost, and medical-grade cardio-metabolic analyzer—has managed to make the most insightful and advanced assessment accessible to a football academy in Athens, Greece.

Energy Efficiency: The Mother of All Metrics

A famous football (soccer) team based in Athens, Greece, has utilized cardio-metabolic analysis to evaluate its players while playing on the pitch. The affordability and robustness of PNOĒ allowed the coach to concurrently assess a group of athletes playing the sport and measure their fuel efficiency and substrate utilization during real-life training scenarios. They measured fuel efficiency by combining data from PNOĒ, which provided information on the metabolic cost of the physical activity performed (i.e., the chemical energy consumed) and a power meter, which provided the amount of mechanical work generated.

By calculating the ratio of mechanical over metabolic power, the coach was able to derive the amount of chemical power converted to useful mechanical propulsion: or, in other words, the gross fuel efficiency of his athletes⁶. Substrate utilization was also measured directly through PNOĒ through the respiratory exchange ratio (RER)—the gold standard metric for measuring the contribution of fats and carbohydrates to each individual athlete’s energy mix⁷.

Fuel efficiency stands out as the most central metric, as it is directly associated with most key elements of an athlete’s performance, including fatigue, fitness level, technique, mobility during the game, etc. For instance, fatigue accumulation, and the concomitant loss of motor control, or low fitness levels constitute factors that lead to higher metabolic costs for the same mechanical power generation (i.e., same body movement), resulting in reduced efficiency.

Fatigue is generally defined by two conditions:

1. an inability to maintain the target mechanical power; and
2. a decrease in muscular performance and efficiency while maintaining the same amount of power output.

While a) can be easily monitored (i.e., measurement of pace, power output, etc.), b) can only be assessed with the direct measurement of fuel efficiency. Moreover, since it’s not easily assessed, b) can prove to be one of the most dangerous drivers of fatigue accumulation and, as a result, a major driver of sport injuries.

The general mechanisms correlating reduction in fuel efficiency—i.e., increase in metabolic cost for the generation of the same mechanical power output—and the occurrence of injuries are:

1. progressive motor recruitment (i.e., impairment of Type I muscle fibers and the progressive recruitment of energetically less efficient Type II muscle fibers);
2. progressive loss of motor control; and
3. compensatory response of surrounding muscles; all of which are directly linked to injury occurrence while directly and nearly instantly impacting the fuel efficiency of an athlete^8,9.

Therefore, by measuring fuel efficiency in real-life conditions in specific time intervals (e.g., every two weeks) or after important events (e.g., after a game or a week of intense training), a coach is able to collectively monitor the fatigue accumulation of his team.

Substrate utilization revealed the movements and exercise intensity levels at which each athlete’s metabolic condition shifted predominantly from fat to carbohydrate oxidation. To understand the importance of this phenomenon, we must look into the basic mechanisms according to which our body’s fuel sources are utilized. Our body relies primarily on a mixture of fat and carbohydrates to power its energy needs. Fat, a fuel source oxidized through an aerobic process (i.e., a chemical reaction that involves O2), is usually the predominant energy source during light and medium exercise intensities. Carbohydrates, on the other hand, are a fuel source that can be oxidized by both aerobic and anaerobic processes (i.e., a chemical reaction that doesn’t involve O2), and are usually the predominant energy source during higher-intensity exercises.

Aerobic metabolism does not generate any fatigue, but it evolves slowly and cannot immediately cover the entire energy demands of an exercise. On the contrary, anaerobic metabolism can be very rapidly initiated to cover energy demands, but generates fatigue. Therefore, aerobic metabolism is the predominant energy mechanism during light and medium-intensity workouts or steady state exercises, whereas anaerobic metabolism is the predominant energy mechanism during high-intensity workouts, or when exercise intensity changes (in other words, during the transient phase from a lower to a higher intensity exercise state during which aerobic metabolism has not yet been able to “catch up” with energy demands). Therefore, the ability to rapidly engage aerobic metabolism in response to an increase in energy demands and develop it such that it can cover high levels of energy demand is the ultimate goal of most athletes. This is what we refer to as a “strong” aerobic base.

Returning to our Greek football team, the direct measurement of carbohydrate and fat oxidation—and, consequently, the interplay between aerobic and anaerobic metabolism—provided for the first time the ability to measure real-time fatigue accumulation, as well as how aerobically “fit” each player is. And, all of this executed within the conditions and movements they are regularly exposed to.

Lastly, the combination of fuel efficiency and substrate utilization can be used to accurately assess the nutritional requirements of an athlete. Specifically, by monitoring energy expenditure (i.e., kcal/min) and substrate utilization (i.e., contribution of carbohydrates and fats to energy mix) through gas exchange, an athlete’s diet can be precisely formulated to achieve a specific weight goal or induce a desirable metabolic adaptation (i.e., make the athlete a more efficient fat burner). This is possible by establishing a correlation between the athlete’s mechanical power output (measured through motion sensors) and cardio-metabolic profile (measured through gas exchange analysis).

Cardio-metabolic analysis metrics help target decision-making for athletes’ nutrition & training. Share on X

Following a number of assessments utilizing a cardio-metabolic analyzer and a power meter, the athlete’s energy expenditure profile (kcal/min) can be strongly correlated against biometrics such as mechanical power output and/or heart rate that can be gathered throughout their entire training session or even the entire day. As a result, by monitoring mechanical power output and/or heart rate, a coach or performance specialist can reliably and non-invasively “recreate” the athlete’s metabolic response and therefore derive their nutritional needs^10,11.

Results and Interpretation

The assessment consisted of two 15-minute sessions during which a small group of European football players wore PNOĒ masks and played. In between the assessment sessions, the players underwent a two-hour training session. The PNOĒ online platform allowed the collective analysis of cardio-metabolic and biomechanical information for the calculation of fuel efficiency and substrate utilization.

For each athlete, fuel efficiency and substrate utilization was compared between the two assessments in time intervals where levels of mechanical power output were comparable—i.e., power was used as a benchmark for intensity. The analysis was conducted on the PNOĒ online platform, where biomechanical and cardio-metabolic data were collectively analyzed in order to quantify the level of fatigue accumulation based on fuel efficiency and substrate utilization. Analysis of the data revealed the following insights:

• Players with higher contribution of carbohydrates in their metabolic activity during the first assessment incurred a higher reduction in fuel efficiency between the two assessments.
• Players with lower fuel efficiency during the first assessment were able to maintain lower mechanical power outputs during the second assessment.
• Players with high fuel efficiency had higher contribution of fats in their metabolic activity (i.e., a greater portion of their energy consumption was covered through fat oxidation) and were able to maintain higher levels of mechanical power output during the second assessment.

Repeating the same assessment protocol can reveal how different training routines induce changes in fatigue accumulation among players. Moreover, creating a baseline assessment protocol consisting of two 15-minute assessments and a two-hour training session in between allows for the quantification of fatigue accumulation during a tournament or intense training season. Specifically, the repetition of the baseline assessment protocol before and after the tournament or intense training season should reveal the level of fatigue each player has incurred in their cardio-metabolic system.

Why Measure in Real-Life Conditions?

The traditional method of assessing the cardio-metabolic condition of an individual is through a standardized protocol of increasing intensity on a form of cardio equipment (i.e., treadmill or cycle ergometer). Although the benefits of standardization allow for easier comparison between tests, the drawbacks mentioned below have led many professionals to question the validity of indoor testing:

1. Many athletes are not used to running on the treadmill or cycling on a stationary bicycle. As a result, the inability to move freely and naturally gives a distorted picture of cardio-metabolic data, prevents subjects from reaching high-intensity exercise states, and, in some cases, can even cause injuries.
2. Movement and, by implication, muscle engagement during an actual sport (i.e., in the case of football, repeated alteration between different running speeds and directions) can be substantially different compared to a treadmill or stationary bicycle, leading to substantially different levels of energy expenditure and substrate utilization.
3. Environmental conditions such as temperature, wind, and humidity can affect a person’s cardio-metabolic state substantially, rendering the controlled lab conditions misleading.

About PNOĒ

PNOĒ has addressed the limitations posed by traditional cardio-metabolic analyzers by creating the first portable, low-cost, affordable, and medical-grade cardio-metabolic analyzer. Its key advantages are:

• Requires no cumbersome calibration—for those who have experience with cardio-metabolic analyzers, PNOĒ doesn’t require the notorious 3-liter calibration syringe.
• Begins measuring in less than three minutes and is fully operated through a smartphone that projects real-time cardio-metabolic data.
• One-hundred percent cloud connected and transmits real-time cardio-metabolic data to the PNOĒ online platform, which can be accessed from anywhere around the world.
• Accuracy has been validated against clinical gold standard metabolic analyzers.
• Can be used in the field to assess athletes in the sport and environment they train in, to provide training recommendations that are sport- and environment-specific.

Several high-profile fitness centers, sports teams, and research groups around the world currently use PNOĒ, and its advantages are effectively addressing the problems that have kept cardio-metabolic analysis confined. Athletes and coaches who implement PNOĒ in their training regimens and take cardio-metabolic analysis into real training conditions are now gaining access to a wide spectrum of unique insights and metrics, and reporting substantial changes in performance. From our vantage point, PNOĒ has achieved two big wins: 1) it made cardio-metabolic analysis accessible to the average athlete; and 2) it made cardio-metabolic analysis sport- and environment-specific, consequently rendering its insights directly applicable and far more impactful.

PNOĒ makes cardio-metabolic analysis accessible to the average athlete, and environment-specific. Share on X

Conclusion

Cardio-metabolic analysis constitutes the most foundational assessment of human physiology. Its metrics provide unique insights into an athlete’s fitness and allow for targeted decision-making regarding their nutrition and training program. Decades of research have amassed unequivocal evidence indicating the breadth of information a single 15-minute cardio-metabolic test can reveal and point to the necessity of this type of assessment—not just for athletes, but also for the general population.

2016 was a landmark year for cardio-metabolic testing, with the American Heart Association elevating VO2peak to a vital sign and calling for its wide adoption in everyone’s health checkup¹². Acknowledging the value that cardio-metabolic testing brings to the world of sports and public health, PNOĒ is helping to remove the operational barriers that have kept this assessment restricted to the lab for so many years and is now making it accessible, not only to the everyday athlete, but soon to the general population as well.

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. Guazzi, Marco, et al. “Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing.” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, vol. 70, no. 13, 2017, pp. 1618–1636., doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2017.08.012

2. Myers, Jonathan, and Euan Ashley. “Dangerous Curves.” Chest, vol. 111, no. 3, 1997, pp. 787–795., doi:10.1378/chest.111.3.787.

3. Forman, Daniel E., et al. “Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing: Relevant but Underused.” Postgraduate Medicine, vol. 122, no. 6, 2010, pp. 68–86., doi:10.3810/pgm.2010.11.2225.

4. Diamond, Edward. “Developing a Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing Laboratory.” Chest, vol. 132, no. 6, 2007, pp. 2000–2007., doi:10.1378/chest.06-2413.

5. This Joint Statement of the American Thoracic Society (ATS) and the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) was adopted by the ATS Board of Directors, March 1, 2002 and by the ACCP Health Science Policy Committee, November 1, 2001.

6. Coyle, Edward F., et al. “Cycling Efficiency Is Related to the Percentage of Type I Muscle Fibers.” Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, vol. 24, no. 7, 1992, doi:10.1249/00005768-199207000-00008.

7. Scott, CB and Djurisic, Z. “The metabolic oxidation of glucose: thermodynamic considerations for anaerobic and aerobic energy expenditure.” JEPonline11: 34–43, 2008.

8. Jones, Andrew M., et al. “Slow Component of V˙O2 Kinetics.” Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, vol. 43, no. 11, 2011, pp. 2046–2062., doi:10.1249/mss.0b013e31821fcfc1.

9. Jones, Andrew M., et al. “Slow Component of V˙O2 Kinetics.” Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, vol. 43, no. 11, 2011, pp. 2046–2062., doi:10.1249/mss.0b013e31821fcfc1.

10. Brage, Søren, et al. “Estimation of Free-Living Energy Expenditure by Heart Rate and Movement Sensing: A Doubly-Labelled Water Study.” Plos One, vol. 10, no. 9, 2015, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0137206.

11. Haskell, William L., et al. “Simultaneous Measurement of Heart Rate and Body Motion to Quantitate Physical Activity.” Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, vol. 25, no. 1, 1993, pp. 109–115., doi:10.1249/00005768-199301000-00015.

12. Ross, Robert, et al. “Importance of Assessing Cardiorespiratory Fitness in Clinical Practice: A Case for Fitness as a Clinical Vital Sign: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.” Circulation, vol. 134, no. 24, 2016, doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000461.

Apostolos Atsalakis graduated as valedictorian from Cambridge University with a Masters degree in Nanotechnology. He received a BS & MS degree in Applied Physics from the National Technical University of Athens. He is the inventor of several patents, he has been the speaker in several conferences and an author of articles in high impact scientific journals. IOP (Institute of Physics) has offered him the position of a reviewer in the high impact journal Nanotechnology. In the past, he worked as an analyst in the banking sector and as a business developer in a European based e-commerce startup that attracts thousands of users daily.

Medicine balls. Everyone is familiar with them and loves to incorporate them in some type of way. Whether you slam them, throw them off a wall or in the air, or do some circus trick with them, medicine balls are fairly universally accepted in some manner. Maybe it’s time more people started testing with them as well. They are already a staple in most training programs, so using them to test and assess seems like a natural progression.

Using #medicineballs to test and assess seems like a natural progression from training with them, says @ShaneDavs. Share on X

Testing them is a little less straightforward than you may think, however. Of course, you could grab a piece of paper and a tape measure and get some decent objective data, but I think there is a better way. Now, with the help of the Assess2Perform Ballistic Ball, it’s possible, scientifically validated, and, dare I say, easy.

This piece covers the three most common medicine ball tests, a couple variations of each to consider, and how to analyze the performances. If you do not currently have access to a sensor-based MB, you can still take away some practices for standard MB testing.

Why Test with Medicine Balls?

We can gain a lot of information using medicine ball tests. We can see how an athlete responds to a testing environment, how they move in more complex coordinated patterns than simply jumping or squatting, and how they respond to training, all with a fairly safe and practical method. The load is light (ballistic) and the information we gather reinforces our training or helps to make the necessary changes.

Testing isn’t just about measuring. It is a means to accountability, not only for the coach in making sure what they do is actually effective, but also for the athlete. Without numbers, how do we know athlete efforts are as they appear? How do we know that their Wednesday afternoon effort is on par with their ability or peak values?

Testing can give valuable insight into program data or simply incentivize, encourage, and motivate your athletes to “give their best,” so to speak. At Exceed, we’ve tested jumping and sprinting for a long time now, and when our college and professional athletes return after the season they know there will be testing. Now, thanks to the Ballistic Ball, we can add medicine balls to the mix.

The main reason for adding the med ball tests is the simplicity and safety involved, but here are other quick reasons that you’ll love them too.

• Max effort testing can be risky, but it’s much less risky with medicine balls.
• Testing with medicine balls requires very little set-up time.
• Science supports MB throws and they are practical to do in or out of the lab.
• Athletes enjoy throwing medicine balls because it is primitive and engaging.
• Any time you add metrics or tech to a movement, athletes try harder. It’s science.
• MBs bridge the gap between lifting and sport coaches. Testing with a med ball can better display some need for training to the sport coach.

It’s not so much about improving the tests we all love so much. Ask any coach or trainer and they’ll most likely agree that sprint, jump, and lift tests are a standard and effective collaboration. They are pure, direct, specific, and undeniable, but medicine ball testing isn’t about better or worse—it’s about different and more. We can test a sprint as long as the athlete is fresh, injury-free, and motivated, and jumps are a great addition but practically limited to the lower body.

Medicine balls won’t replace your #combine tests, but they are no longer on the ‘B Team’ either, says @ShaneDavs. Share on X

On the contrary, the posterior scoop toss (between the leg overhead throw), for example, coordinates almost every joint at max output. I am absolutely not arguing against using those tests in any way—we do so practically every day in some manner—but adding the medicine ball tests reveals a greater amount of information and touches on some unique patterns and qualities hard to quantify in the traditional tests. Medicine balls are not going to replace your combine tests, but they are no longer on the “B Team.”

Medicine Balls: Is the Science There?

There is enough science and research out there for a coach to do their homework and make some decisions on whether med balls, both as a test and training method, are for them. Exceed’s approach to new tests or technologies is to use them and get a lot of data and familiarity with the data, and then worry about interpreting it when you have enough. Studies are fickle in that often the conclusions differ based on test subjects, methodology, and a number of other factors. Arguably, the best practice is then to test the movements that make sense for your clientele with a premium placed on execution and replicability, and your data will ultimately determine the effectiveness of their use. In my opinion, the med ball tests are much more about long-term development than short-term novelty, so treat your “study” in that manner.

Certain sports are more conducive to medicine balls simply in terms of game-like motion. Including MB work in special-strength phases for throwing or rotational sports (such as baseball, handball, golf, hockey, and the throw events in track and field) would seem obvious enough. But how do the medicine balls fare in sport specificity studies? Findings vary, believe it or not, and although some research states that including medicine ball training in unison with a traditional baseball off-season program would yield an increase in power or velocity, another study on medicine balls in training argues that no velocity improvements were noted on post-intervention testing.

You can probably find research to validate any point if you look closely enough, but the majority of research is in favor of throwing med balls in an attempt to improve velocity. Even beyond baseball studies you can find good cases for including the throws, such as a study on handball athletes who improved throwing velocity by incorporating MBs into their training routine.

Regardless of what sport you train for, testing athletes with medicine balls seems like an appropriate method provided you know the limitations and drawbacks of testing in general, and specifically with medicine balls. Scientifically, a coach would want medicine ball training to improve performance, evaluate talent, and demonstrate reliability when testing. The science is rather specific to what medicine ball testing does well, such as power testing with overhead athletes, and what the complexities (contradicting science) of sports movement can create at times. The science supports testing with medicine balls, but most of the research is on chest throws, while other movements are working their way into more validity.

A coach will have to make the decision to invest in a Ballistic Ball versus testing with a tape measure or radar gun. With research on reliability of testing medicine balls with different weights, we avoid measuring lightweight balls, as of today, and typically use a 10- to 13-pound ball. Lightweight balls are population-specific but the athlete being tested should use an appropriate load. Based on current science, the ball is scientifically validated for testing and adds context to the throws by showing how an athlete generates their power. We still measure for distance, but velocity is a better measure and can be much more “facility friendly.” Find out what works best for you and use additional measurements along with the A2P Ball to ensure redundancy for an auditing system.

The Perfect Testing Protocol

Not to harp on how to avoid testing mistakes, but not having a standard approach to testing makes gathering quality information from your data difficult. In fact, the hardest part about data collection may not be the analysis at all, but the policing of the protocol. Athletes inherently want to win and will do anything to find a loophole or a “rule-bending” way to exploit the technology. If a gap or weakness in the protocol exists, the cunning athlete will find it immediately and take advantage.

You can see a common example of this by watching an athlete cheat a mat-based vertical jump. They swing their legs forward and land in a very deep squat, keeping their feet in the air as long as possible. When the protocol is “Jump up as high as you can,” this seems like a logical way to be in the air as long as possible. By stating rules and criterion more definitively, it helps to eliminate these issues but can drastically alter the cheaters’ jump heights. If the coach/test administrator is not diligent in policing the test, athletes will find a way.

Along the same lines, the testing protocol must have meaning to the athletes and it must be replicable. Be firm in your standards but explain the underlying purpose of the test. When they understand what the test is truly looking to display, many athletes will give a valid effort rather than try to cheat for a higher score. It’s also easy to replicate a test once it has a standardized format and meaning for the athlete. Based on the research on familiarization with medicine balls, some movements may take more than a few reps to be considered valid. So practicing and repeating the efforts stringently will improve the validity and efficacy of the test.

 

Honest Error Correction

After considering the ways athletes “cheat” the system, let’s look at the common honest mistakes and errors. We find that, as in standard strength training, most errors start at the setup. We all know it would be very difficult to squat your max weight if you started with your feet all out of whack. This is the same for testing protocols, including medicine ball tests. How an athlete is set up at the start will dictate what happens when the movement begins. Instead of waiting for a catastrophe, spend some time and energy creating a repeatable and optimal starting position for the athlete and give them a fighting chance.

Most athletes, if given the right circumstances, will do the best they can and not cheat, as the movements don’t have much room for error. If you spot a strange motion, explain the fault and repeat the test. Sometimes a video camera alone will keep athletes from attempting a conscious mistake, but showing a clip afterward is priceless when errors cannot be rectified by verbal explanation.

Spending the time it takes to refine your testing protocol is worth it, says @ShaneDavs. Share on X

Finding your own concrete protocol will take some time but it removes so much of the havoc on test day. Your protocol and verbal cues could simply be camouflage for your cheating prevention or they could ensure a great starting position for replication purposes. Either way, spending the time it takes to refine your protocol is worth it. For a few ideas on procedures, here is a return to play article written about five years ago that shared and outlined some solid points on medicine ball tests.

A Few Points to Consider

After giving some thought to your protocol and to what you are trying to accomplish by testing—and for that matter, training with medicine balls—you should consider a few points. First, medicine ball throws are not specific to sport. They are as specific to pitching, hitting, and throwing as squatting is to jumping. They are tools and can help the general abilities that improve the sport skill.

Take the baseball swing, for example. Part of the setup and movement strategies associated with hitting a baseball involve timing, reading, and decision-making. It is not just output, as the medicine ball throw is; it also involves a significant amount of input and processing. So throwing a medicine ball does not, and arguably should not, mimic your sport skill exactly. It is a general strength or power tool that only helps the output part of the equation.

Similar to the swing is the throw or pitch. Handball and baseball throwing involve accuracy. Now, it’s nice to have a little bit of direction when throwing a med ball, however, the outcome or result doesn’t fully rely on the thrower’s ability to hit a target. A handball study on throwing velocity showed precision was unaffected while power improved. So a non-specific throw can still benefit a sport skill. To me, this means don’t overcoach the MB movement like it’s the sport skill. The repetition and effort that comes with throwing for numbers (testing with the MB) alone will benefit the velocity and power of the sport skill.

Lastly, I encourage you to rely less on normative or comparative data and look more closely at an individual’s progress. Why wouldn’t the normative data be important? Technical differences will play a role in the velocity. A stronger and more powerful athlete might throw a medicine ball farther than a weaker counterpart, but the velocities may not line up. Although my last points were about not worrying about making the med ball throw a sport skill, the mechanics and refinement of the throw can play a role in some of the data you’ll see.

What Is Rotation? What Do You Look for? How Do You Test It Properly?

At times, body rotation is confusing; while most coaches understand that torso rotation would require the hips to remain locked, the end goal is something entirely different. What we want is a rotation of the hips and shoulders, somewhat in unison, to generate as much force, power, and velocity as possible. A factor to take note of is that hip power from the extremities usually transfers through the spine, rather than the spine doing all the work alone. Generating power from the legs and transferring it to the arms (and torso) is typical of almost all sporting movements (regarding rotational power). Although the spine dissipates and recycles energy very well, most of that ability comes from Mother Nature, not being good at core exercises.

Something else to consider is the fine line between seeking out useless spine mobility and moving safely. Obviously, adequate movement is important for joint health, but efforts placed on increasing range of motion of the trunk may not help performance, according to some research. The argument was that a limited range of motion at certain joints can aid in velocity when transferring force from the lower to the upper extremities. Coaches value core training because they want to protect the spine, but they also know that mid-section strength is vital when transferring forces.

Rotational throws tend to be the sloppiest med ball movements, which is risky and hard to test well, says @ShaneDavs. Share on X

Why is this all important? Simple. The value of rotational power needs to be put into a healthy perspective because rotational throws tend to be the sloppiest of the medicine ball movements. They can get ugly and lead to poor control and coordination. Without knowing the true prerequisites of good-looking rotation, or at least what you’re actually testing, there tends to be a slippery slope of bad mechanics, which is both risky and hard to test well.

Categories and Subtleties When Throwing

I would argue that there are a few categories to consider when discussing throwing and what tests you’ll use. First, you have to decide whether you want to test static, dynamic, or both. Then, whether you want to allow stepping, test in-place, or both. We use all variations because we can gain valuable information from each. In the descriptions of the movements below, I explain how and why you should use the variations in your protocols.

How to Test Rotational Power with Side Throws

Rotational throws tend to be either a punching action or a sweeping/scoop action. The punching action keeps the ball closer to the body and relies slightly more on the upper body, whereas the sweeping action extends the arms out away from the body, similar to a hammer throw, and usually involves a little more lower body, as in track and field events. Both movements incorporate rotation, but are far different in regard to interference with repeatability and technique.

We tend to see better quality of data with repeatability with shotput-like action, but for athletes with poor upper body strength, a sweeping action with arms straight works well. The shot version also keeps the ball from spinning too much. Often, when using the long arm sweeping version, the athlete spins the ball intentionally, which overinflates the data a bit.

Coaching Tip: I find that the shotput/punch-style throw works better with a lead step, as it allows the tester to “be an athlete.”

Video 1. The “punch” version of rotation may be more repeatable as the motion is less susceptible to body English. Comparing both the traditional rotational throw and the punch/push style may be an interesting assessment for some coaches.

Although I prefer stepping with the “punch” version of the rotational throw, I like both stepping and locked in-place throws with the long arm, scoop style. By keeping the stance “stiff,” you get more standard and reliable data. It’s fine to allow leg drive, but make sure the movement has parameters that are sensible, meaning the body shift is minimal and the leg motion is repeatable.

A seasoned athlete should be able to find a comfortable and effective stance by themselves, but a less-experienced one might need help determining this position. As a coach, you can use a symmetrical base stance or staggered depending on what you’re looking for. Experiment and come to some conclusion as to what you want to train and test and go from there. You can choose to make the stance specific or use something general so comparisons are wider; either way, have a plan for what to do later if you wish to compare different athletes.

Coaching Tip: Cueing the athlete to “throw up, slightly” will keep their ball path straighter and help to eliminate too much lateral movement.

Video 2. The traditional rotational throw uses arms that are parallel and has a longer motion. Some coaches use a countermovement, while some prefer a strict rotation starting from a still position.

How to Test Upper Body Power with a Chest Throw

Chest throws with two hands are simply underrated. I am a big fan of lower body testing, but feel that one rep maximum testing in the upper body is great for some sports and athletes, and unnecessary for others. Youth, novice, and poorly trained athletes who need to be assessed were once limited to push-up and pull-up tests. If you’ve trained any of those populations, you’ll understand that those can be just as hard as a max bench press.

Chest passes with medicine balls were great to keep athletes elastic, but as an upper body test they weren’t exciting. The Ballistic Ball has made that a moot point. They work great to complement your upper body testing or to replace it, as in the aforementioned populations.

In certain situations, a med ball chest pass could replace the bench press for testing purposes, says @ShaneDavs. Share on X

Before you lose your mind thinking I am in favor of dumping the bench press, I am not. In terms of logistics, push-ups and bench pressing can be very time-consuming and coaching-intensive. If you work with large groups and have limited time, a chest pass could be a convenient and effective replacement. I am not, however, arguing that medicine ball throwing should replace your upper body training! But as a test, it could give you some reliable and easy measurements to allow you to spend more time training than testing.

Coaching Tip: By having an athlete sit (on a box/bench) or half-kneel (pictured in video), you can eliminate most of the lower body involvement and address the upper body test as such.

Video 3. Anyone can do a good half-kneel or seated throw and it requires very few repetitions to get familiar with it. In addition to their simplicity, chest throws are fairly safe.

As pictured above, chest throws test and train well from kneeling or sitting positions and can also be done in a variety of stances to address specificity in certain populations. Another popular position, and one that eliminates all of the lower body, is the supine chest throw. By lying on your back, you can ensure there will be almost none of the data inconsistencies that come with standing variations.

Whatever variation you prefer, the chest throws are the most reliable because the ball is pushed with a very simple motion. The load and size of the ball are also great for athletes, and using a heavier ball removes many of the “micro accelerations” that come with light implements being thrown at very high velocities. Balls above 12 pounds reduce the “noise” and produce cleaner data in general.

Coaching Tip: Having a partner is important for safety purposes, but can also be utilized to add a greater eccentric “drop” when testing or training dynamic supine throws. Just don’t catch your own throw!

Video 4. Supine chest throws eliminate all lower body involvement and do a good job mimicking the bench press if that’s what you are replacing.

How to Test Total Body Power with Overhead Back Throws

My personal favorite throw is one everyone will likely love: maximum effort throws overhead. Throwing medicine balls forward (chest pass or overhead like a soccer throw-in) is common, especially with rehabilitation programs, but a true overhead back throw is a total body movement that starts with the legs. The main reason I love the throw is for the added coordinative demand it requires. If you want to see athleticism—look no further.

While testing or competing for distance is fun and exciting, the data collection is near impossible without a lot of trained eyes and space. With the ability to test velocity, you just need some high ceilings or open space and you’re good to go. As I’ve already discussed, velocity really adds a luxury and new look to the other two test categories, but with the overhead throws, recording speed is indispensable.

I especially like this test because of the simplicity in its directions and rules. Hold the ball, squat down, and throw as hard as you can. Of course, coordination and practice will help advance the test numbers slightly, but most of the improvements will come in the form of pure capacity and power.

Although simple in concept, I must warn coaches about an inconvenient part of complex movements. You must factor in movement variability and speed readings when interpreting the tests. In the past, nearly all of the data collected was with distance, a measure that requires a lot of skill by the athlete to be valid and useful for coaches. Different sports will perform uniquely with medicine ball overhead back throws compared to other exercises, so look at all of the tests before drawing conclusions. Poor launch angles would sabotage an otherwise great throw with regard to distance.

Throwing for distance is fine, but remember that you may see athletes not match up perfectly when ranked for velocity and distance separately. By replacing distance with velocity, we get a more efficient and convenient method of data collection and a rawer value as a whole. At Exceed, we like having skills to ensure that athleticism is not lost, but reliability and validity are important when testing. Like back squat tests or even jump tests, standardizing the tests requires an athlete to follow directions and not cheat.

The countermovement version is a great way to see an athlete move unrestricted. Some sports or positions would benefit from training or testing from a static position, but as an overall testing method, we prefer the countermovement approach. Fewer regulations and allowing the athlete to find their best practice will ensure that the improvements you see come from training adaptations, not testing familiarization.

Coaching Tip: Every coach loves “triple extension,” but how about quintuple extension? The vertical throw involves extension of the ankles, knees, hips, spine, and arms. Cue the athlete to throw slightly backwards for best effort. This will typically result in tremendous full body extension without the awkward back bending some athletes do when searching for distance.

Video 5. Throwing a medicine ball up explosively is another great way to see how an athlete moves. I love to follow an athlete’s ability to throw a medicine ball fast over their career.

Transfer and Capacity with Medicine Balls

With any weight room or field training drill, the transfer to sports performance is a difficult quality to prove for several reasons. The first problem with transfer is that most training programs include multiple variables, so teasing out one factor isn’t truly possible. Most training that is highly specific transfers well because the modality is within the same “species” as the sporting action. Transfer is important because coaches want exercises that have a high probability of making athletes better on the field, but sometimes capacity is just as valuable.

Transfer is important, but sometimes capacity is just as valuable, says @ShaneDavs. Share on X

Capacity encourages transfer because fatigue, general strength qualities, and power are needed to keep athletes durable and resilient. Capacity is also more plastic, and can be shaped by additional specific training to assist with transfer, so the two training qualities are far from mutually exclusive. The best example is squatting heavy: While it may not guarantee that an athlete runs fast, having that capacity does show to benefit with injury rates and the ability to tolerate other training elements that may transfer nicely to sports performance.

Although I believe medicine balls help to express power better than they develop it, I don’t want coaches to dismiss medicine balls as less-effective tools. Specific sprinting and jumping are direct paths to sport and weightlifting or powerlifting can be more effective for power development, but the medicine balls are specific enough to maintain a quality during the offseason. They won’t replace your sport training or your barbell work, but they are great additions and you can include them in testing protocols to make everyone’s training better and more candid. Overall, medicine ball training is timeless and I’ve yet to see someone’s performance drop because of the equipment.

‘Throwing’ a Few Ideas Around

After reading this article, you should be more than confident that testing with medicine balls is worth the investment, but here are a couple of reasons why I love testing throws. Athletes need to get out of their comfort zone with their sport and appreciate general skills and general training. Medicine balls are wonderful equalizers because they are the perfect middle ground that all athletes can find reasonable success in.

Testing with med balls is safe and effective—you can jump right in after training with them, says @ShaneDavs. Share on X

In addition to positive feedback from honest training, ballistic throwing is popular with team coaches, making medicine balls excellent discussion points to other training needs that are not as well valued in coaches’ minds. Testing with medicine balls is safe and effective, and coaches should jump right in after a few weeks of training with them.

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

If you are reading this, chances are you are already familiar with the concept of microdosing from many of Tony Holler’s articles at the Track Football Consortium or here on SimpliFaster. We have seen this concept applied to short sprints with three to four fly 10s. We’ve also seen this applied to speed endurance work, with minimal reps and longer rest periods in between the longer distances that are covered. We’ve even seen it applied to practice theory and having a minimal amount of practices during a week period, taking into account some extreme cases with as few as one practice a week (which I have gotten away with on several occasions).

I think the success that coaches have had using this technique in a high school setting has been pretty well documented (we are anxiously waiting for someone in the college or pro levels to apply it to see what kind of results they get). But how can you take this concept off the track and apply it to other settings, like the weight room? Come with me down this rabbit hole, as I have discovered a couple of unique and powerful tools to support this method.

We are waiting to see the results of someone who applies #microdosing at the college or pro levels, says @korfist. Share on X

In the weight room, one concern I have is that a lot of what we do may or may not have an impact on sprinting, because we move the bar so slow and, in some fashion, not at all like we would move when we run. There is also a lack of timing, as well as a question of the role of slack or lack thereof in dealing with a bar on our shoulders. In trying address these thoughts, I back-doored my way into finding the first tool I want to discuss, the Exogen suit. I had an idea for overspeed training where—if I could weigh down a limb with a small amount of weight and pull the athlete at maximal speeds—I could force the muscle to contract faster with that little bit of weight and strengthen the muscle at speed. It would certainly be a change in environment.

I had heard that Henk Kraaijenhof was experimenting with something like this with an athlete he trains, so I emailed him and asked for details on what he had going on. All he responded with was a picture of an athlete wearing what looked like a Venom costume. It was some form of neoprene tights, with discs stuck to the suit. He is usually good at leaving me hanging and letting me do a little work for myself. And I knew if Henk was using it, it had to be good—otherwise, he wouldn’t waste his time.

Movement at Speed

With a little digging and research, I found out that the equipment in the picture was the Exogen suit, made by the movement technology company LILA. The concept behind it is that, in order to truly strengthen a movement, you have to execute that movement at the appropriate speed. As previously mentioned, the speed and movements performed in the weight room may not always have the most beneficial effect. On the other hand, if you weight the limb either with weight or speed, you can injure your athlete. (Think 5-pound ankle weights, which do not always have the greatest benefit.)

The Exogen suit utilizes weight by the gram. It is a compression-type suit made of Exoprene™, and you stick the 200-300g weights to the suit with Velcro. The weights are teardrop-shaped, so the heavier part can go closer to the joint and make it weigh even less.

The experience of running while wearing the Exogen suit is actually quite amazing, because nothing moves when you have it on: You don’t feel the weights moving with momentum. It is a pure movement feel, unlike ankle weights or even the Kolka Thigh trainers (who remembers those from the early 2000s?).

So, as I usually do, I bought a bunch of the stuff to try it out on myself and on some test-case athletes. I always try new products and methods out on myself before I let my athletes take a shot. Strangely enough (for me), instead of doing the most difficult/extreme exercises first, I actually followed the instructions, and man am I glad I did.

The progression is to start with the calf sleeves first to train better hamstring function. I put on my calf sleeves with 200 grams and went through the normal warm-up my sprinters would do—some booms, lateral chain, and mini hurdles. I could feel something, but not enough to change my timing. When I took the sleeves off, I felt like I was flying. A day later, I really didn’t feel any soreness from the exercise. But that night, while I was walking my dogs, it kicked in: DOMS hit my hamstrings hard.

It took about a week for the soreness to dissipate. Next, I had to try the sleeves with my athletes. A quick caveat: I did not time any improvements. When we started the project, it was 80 degrees out. When we finished the cycle, it was in the 40s and 50s. No one runs fast in cold temperatures.

Did the athletes have a noticeable change? Yes, for some reason, their turnover improved, noticeably. They all felt like they were flying. Stride length looked the same, if not better.

So I tried it out with my Girls Lacrosse team, which included five Division 1 athletes who have been with me for three years. Due to weather and space limitations, we timed Freelap 40s in different locations for pre and post. Pre was an outdoor track in 90-degree weather, and post was indoor in a crowded fieldhouse. But we saw some substantial time drops from the girls who wore the suit versus those who did not. I have seen enough to warrant buying more calf sleeves.

Microdosing with the #Exogen suit strengthens movements at the proper speed and recruitment, says @korfist. Share on X

In my mind, the Exogen suit supports the concept of microdosing by applying very small amounts of weight to strengthen our bodies instead of big, heavy weights. For example, instead of doing glute-ham raises with a plate or rubber band, we used the 200g of weight behind our calf to strengthen our hamstrings. While heavy weight room work is not quite the movements we use in sport and may change recruitment patterns and recovery times, microdosing with the suit strengthens movements at the proper speed and recruitment.

Occlusion Training

In pursuit of more microdosing-based methods, the next pieces of equipment I tried were the B Strong blood flow restriction training cuffs. Cal Dietz raved about these in his workouts. Remember, his idea—which I agree with—is that no change happens in a session unless you trigger a hormonal response or change the tissue.

The B Strong cuffs limit the flow of blood, which causes fatigue when exercising with light weights. The fatigue sends a message to the brain to help more by sending growth hormone to the receptors, which will result in stronger muscles without using heavy weights. And because the weights are light, there is no poor form or the compensatory recruitment patterns that often come with poor form. Better yet, there is little muscle damage from using the lighter weights, so recovery times will be lessened.

One aspect that excites me about the potential of the B Strong cuffs is an idea that Cal and I share: the concept that restricting blood flow will also force the fast twitch muscle fibers to fire more. There is no oxygen to supply the slow twitch muscles, and that will force the body to use fast twitch muscle fibers or maybe even help the conversion of slow twitch to fast twitch.

Additionally, a fight that I lose every year is the idea that an off day is an off day during track season. My athletes find a way to get back into the weight room to do their upper body work (mostly above and beyond what I suggest; therefore, throwing off future workouts due to the lack of recovery from actual beneficial work). The cuffs could serve as a meeting in the middle: The athletes can now do all of their bodybuilding work using the cuffs, without the same muscle/system damage caused by the “curls for the girls/suns out, guns out” workouts.

As with the Exogen suit, I had to try it myself. I had tested another cuff in Venice Beach, when teaching RPR at OsteoStrong. I liked it, but I went with the B Strong cuffs. For fear of another weeklong soreness, I followed the advice of Sean Whalen and did not go all-out on my first try with everything on and crank it to 11. I started with just the arms and did 5-pound curls and triceps extensions for 30 seconds on and 30 seconds off for 10 minutes. I was tired at the end and my arms felt full, like I had a really good pump.

The next day I did body weight squats with the same intervals. The following day, I could feel I had worked out: My muscle tissue was sore, but not the typical sore. It was a better sore, if that makes sense. But most importantly, my elbow did not feel wrecked. My elbow takes a beating from all of the RPRI do and it prevents me from doing any arm exercises. I even had to get rid of my favorite—chins.

The next day, my elbow actually felt better. So, for a 50-year-old who likes to beat up his body, this may be a great alternative. For my athletes, we will see when track starts. From a running standpoint, and no indoor track, we could do high knees for time and possibly elicit the same response as a longer run. Outdoors, I am thinking of doing 23-second runs with the leg cuffs.

It seems sensible to investigate the possibility of #microdosing with the support of new technology, says @korfist. Share on X

With less weight and more specific recruitment with regards to speed, microdosing with the support of new technologies seems to be a sensible path to further investigate, especially if we can stimulate a change in muscle type (fast twitch) or muscle chemistry (growth hormone).

I’ll share more at TFC-Chicago in December. My topic will be microdosing in the weight room, and we will investigate these ideas as well as some others during the session.

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

Do you ever have those days when you don’t want to work out? I do, and the older I get, the more often I feel that way. Usually, though, I end up working out anyway. Sure, the session with the foam roller is about 10 minutes longer than normal, and my warm-up seems like it takes longer than the actual workout. But there is still a lift to do, and just because I don’t feel like doing it that day doesn’t change the fact that I need to get it done. The more I think about it, if I only worked out on the days that I really felt like it… well, I’d look and feel a whole lot worse than I do now.

Does that mean that those workouts are perfect? Of course not—but I get them done anyway. Working with mostly college-aged athletes, I always laugh when they tell me they can’t work out because they don’t feel like it today. Really? I have been lifting at least five days a week for almost 30 years, played five years of college football, and have been competing at powerlifting, strongman, and weightlifting for over a decade (which has taken a toll on my knees and back).

For me, there is the added stress of working 50 or more hours a week at my full-time job and another 20 hours on my business, writing books and articles, plus living on and managing a 40-acre farm… all of which can suck the motivation from anyone. Oh yeah, and I am also the proud papa of a wonderful 2 ½ year old who runs nonstop. All this, and my athletes are the ones telling me that they don’t feel like lifting? Right. I so badly want to tell these 18- to 22-year-olds to trade lives with me for a day and see how much they feel like training.

But, of course, I don’t. As a professional strength coach, my calling is to help people become better versions of themselves. This means that when I am given an opportunity, there’s going to be a lesson taught so these younger athletes can learn from my experiences. Remembering back to what I was like at that age, I can’t blame these athletes for not understanding how narrow their view really is, or having strategies to grind through things they don’t particularly want to do.

Think about it for a second: When you were at that magic college age, didn’t you feel relatively good all the time? I know I sure did. That is the time when your body produces your own personal cocktail of gonadal steroids and adrenal androgen agents. It’s as simple as this: When people are in this primed training environment, they can recover, grow muscle, and lean out faster than at any other point in their adult life.

At that age, what were the major stresses in your life? Mine sure weren’t my job, mortgage, children, or the health concerns of family members. They were getting a date, figuring out how to afford the newest video game, and getting my homework done on time. As I said, this is the age when you should be mentally and physically feeling good most of the time.

When you constantly feel good, it makes everything easier, especially training. You can walk into the gym at 6:00 a.m. or 7:00 p.m., after a night out or not, and still salvage a decent workout. Unfortunately, the day comes where you walk into the gym and you just don’t “feel” quite right. Your knees might ache from yesterday’s squat session. Maybe you slept on the couch last night and your lower back hurts. Or maybe you got dumped by your longtime girlfriend or boyfriend.

The scenarios are endless, but ultimately there is one decision to make. Are you going to work out today? Over the years, I’ve heard two very different ways people ask that question. Some ask, “Do I feel like lifting today?” while others wonder, “So, should I lift today?”

How Changing the Wording Changes the Question

At the heart of both questions is a simple choice to make about whether or not to lift. But changing the way you phrase the question also changes the process of how you reach your answer. Asking if you feel like doing something involves the most primitive area of the brain’s limbic system.

This region oversees the most basic of bodily functions, like controlling your heart rate and breathing, governing primal instincts such as being hungry or finding people attractive, and making decisions that either give you pleasure or avoid pain.

Asking if you feel like doing vs. should do something involves different parts of the brain, says @CarmenPata. Share on X

Asking if you should do something, on the other hand, involves a different and more evolved part of the brain: the cerebral cortex. This part of the brain surrounds the limbic region and is responsible for what you’re doing right now—communication, conscious thought, and information processing would not be possible without a fully functioning cerebral cortex.

The cerebral cortex’s relationship to the limbic region is both figuratively and factually significant, since the cerebral cortex is the higher power in regard to your brain. It can override the primal urges for immediate gratification or for running away from possible pain. In our case, if the cortex has a specific process or plan, then it can overrule how you feel that day and decide to move some weight or not, as long as there is a framework set up to engage the cerebral cortex and its reasoning process.

Goal-Based Decision-Making

Your training goals for the day, either hypertrophy or performance, will determine what sort of questions you need to ask. When you train for hypertrophy, the goal is to have specific muscles grow in size by varying the combination of reps, rest, or weight, which overloads and fatigues the muscle. The classic hypertrophy training idea is four or more sets with 8-12 reps per set, all done with 90 seconds or less between sets. Weight or resistance is adjusted, so if you cannot get eight reps you take some weight off the bar, and if you get more than 12 reps you add more weight to the bar.

Workouts like this cause a fatigued state in the localized musculature for two main reasons:

• First, the primary muscles involved have a significant decrease in the carbohydrates stored (muscle glycogen).
• Second, the chemical that provides energy for muscle contractions (phosphocreatine) is used up.

The bad news is that because you are fatigued, you won’t be as strong when you finish with the workout until your body has a chance to recover. The good news is that skeletal muscle is really good at recovering and replenishing both muscle glycogen and phosphocreatine, meaning you can recover from hypertrophy workouts relatively fast. You might be really, really sore for a few days, but from the view of an exercise scientist, your muscle glycogen and phosphocreatine will be back to their pre-exercise levels in hours—which technically means that you are recovered.

Your training goals for the day—#hypertrophy or performance—determine the questions you need to ask, says @CarmenPata. Share on X

In other words, you don’t feel like lifting. You’re sore and beat up, with another high-volume leg day in front of you. It would sure be nice to have some objective way to see if you are really not ready to lift, or are simply feeling sorry for yourself.

You’re in luck—I have one and it’s the secret I’ve shared with the athletes I work out with. Believe it or not, most of it is just a simple checklist. For the people who train solely for hypertrophy, deciding whether or not to lift is sort of easy because of these factors. Here is the checklist I use with people to see if they are ready to have a high-volume hypertrophy workout.

For me, the five yes/no questions in the checklist determine whether someone is ready for a hypertrophy-type workout. Let me explain my rationale. Resting morning heart rate is a good indicator of recovery and overall body stress levels as long as it’s done the same way every day. Here is my personal morning routine and what I suggest to others:

1. Wake up.
2. Go to the bathroom.
3. Drink a glass of water.
4. Sit down for at least 10 minutes in a quiet spot and think about the things you’re grateful for and what makes you happy.
5. Use the app Instant Heart Rate on your smartphone to take your heart rate. Write it down, or use a program like Google Sheets to keep your records and get your average.

Working with mostly college-age athletes, I know that it is not the duration but the start or onset time of sleep that is a good indicator of sleep quality. That’s why I ask if they went to bed before midnight. Checking if people had something to eat for breakfast should give an indication of whether their muscles have been primed with some carbohydrates before working out. In my mind, getting something to eat—even if it’s a Pop-Tart—is still better than nothing.

Hydration status is represented with the urination question, and though it makes some people giggle, it is a down-and-dirty (pun intended) way to figure out if people are getting enough water. Finally, you have to account for the social, emotional, and intellectual stress that people are experiencing, which is the reason for the question revolving around people’s feelings.

To proceed with your normal lift, you must score at least three of five checks in the “Yes” column. If there are more checks in the “No” column, I give people an alternate workout. I let them pick what exercise or exercises to do, but they have to follow these guidelines.

• Med balls or kettlebells only.
• No more than 4 total sets.
• No more than 10 reps.

It’s a really low volume (<40 reps) workout compared to what they would typically get (32-48 reps per exercise), but that’s the point. Their alternate workout is a de-load. They are in the gym, getting some work in, and setting themselves up for a great workout tomorrow.

Performance Training and the Autonomic Nervous System

I mentioned that most of the people I work with are college athletes, and for this population, becoming faster and better at their sport is the goal of training—any hypertrophy that happens is a by-product of training. With that in mind, the question of “should I lift?” changes from determining if they are physically ready to grow to instead determining whether they are ready to be as fast or powerful as they can be. Again, you have to make sure the body is ready, but if you look to the muscles for this answer, you’re starting at the wrong place: You have to go much deeper than the muscles.

You must look deeper than the muscles to determine whether the body is ready to lift, says @CarmenPata. Share on X

When your body is not under stress, it functions in a state referred to as the “rest and digest” or parasympathetic state. From an evolutionary viewpoint, when you are in this parasympathetic state, your body is getting ready for the next time you have to run or fight to escape from a dangerous situation. Like the name suggests, this is when the body can repair itself: digesting food, canceling out stress hormones like cortisol or adrenaline, and conserving energy with a lower heart rate. When you are in this state, it is easier to think and do work that requires a steady hand.

The counterpart to the parasympathetic state, “fight or flight,” is how the body functions under stress. When you are in the fight or flight—or sympathetic—state, you are experiencing all the benefits and drawbacks of having your body primed for physical activity. Your heart rate and breathing increase, sending more blood and oxygen to your extremities and getting ready for activity. Stimulants like epinephrine are released into your body, causing your pupils to dilate so you can see more of the world. Adrenal glands begin to secrete the hormone adrenaline so you have a boost of energy if you need it.

Being in this primed physical state for activity comes at a cost. Non-essential systems, like digestion, are nearly shut down to provide blood and energy to the rest of the body. Your ability to process complex ideas or your fine motor skills are greatly impaired as well. Think of it like this: If a lion is chasing you for lunch, do you need your digestive system to process your breakfast, or do you want as much extra energy as possible to help keep you running fast until there is someone else between you and the lion? Once you’ve survived the lion attack, then you can rest and your body will have time to finish digesting your breakfast. Make sense?

Thankfully, we don’t have to run from predators in our daily life anymore, but our bodies haven’t figured that out and still respond the same when we feel any sort of stress. Physical, emotional, and psychological stress, as well as stress from trauma, all trigger the same response from our bodies. This wouldn’t be an issue if there was enough time to rest and recover from each stress event, but that isn’t the way modern life works.

We have rush hour delays and congested traffic. We stay up later, sleep less, and are exposed to more varieties of stress than our ancestors could even dream of. When you are constantly exposed to all of these stressors and are not given enough time to let your body get back to its rest and digest state, how do you know when you are ready to train to be fast or powerful?

Simple. You check your nerves. As you’ve read, when you are exposed to a stressor, you shift to a primed physical state, which is what you want for training. But if you remain in this stressed state for too long, your nerves become overloaded and it takes more time to signal your muscles to contract. What all of this means is that, although your muscles are full of muscle glycogen and phosphocreatine, you will still train like you are weak and slow. To keep this in check, I have athletes use this version of the readiness questionnaire, which has two very important additions.

The big changes are in questions 7 and 8. When athletes are scheduled to execute workouts that demand they be near their absolute best and fastest, we have them get a baseline reading of their nervous system.

Most people like using an app on their phone called SpeedTapping, which has a rectangle that you have to tap as many times as possible in 30 seconds. The other option is to use a Just Jump pad and get a countermovement jump score. Either way, their test gives my staff and the athlete a glimpse of how their nervous system is functioning. After their warm-up, but before the athletes begin their lift, they re-test. If their score is higher than their baseline, which it should be, then they continue their lift as normal.

Every once in a while, their post-test is actually lower than their baseline. Think about it for a second: They perform worse after warming up than they did before warming up. Besides violating every training theory about an active warm-up improving total body function, this drop in performance tells me their nerves are not functioning at their normal levels and the athlete is in no way capable of training at a high level that day.

However, instead of letting them walk out the door, I have the athletes do a recovery-style workout, with 20-30 minutes performing a very low heart rate (<110 beats per minute) activity like walking, biking, rowing, or swimming. This is followed by 10 minutes with a foam roller and a good stretching or yoga session, and then they can call it good for the day. I’ve found that performing these easy, recovery-type workouts usually does the trick, and the following day their taps or jumps are back to normal.

From Readiness to Results

So, what does all of this mean? Whatever the goals of your workout session—becoming as big as a mountain or setting a new personal record—it’s about getting results. When you go to the gym, you should figure out what will be the greatest return on your time, effort, and sweat. Deep down, the root of the problem is that our brains just don’t want us to do more than what we need for our body to survive, let alone put itself in a fatigued state from working out.

Therefore, you have to make a choice. In that moment of choice, we truly become the paragon of all life on the planet, because human beings are the only ones that have that ability. Choosing what to do with our potential is the privilege and the price we pay as human beings. After all, a tree can only be a tree, but it will always grow as tall as it can. A cheetah can only be a cheetah, but it will always run as fast as it can. You and I are different, though. We can not only decide how much of our potential we will use, but we can also decide what we will remake ourselves into.

While we have this power and choice over what we will do, at some point everyone’s motivation wanes, and the temptation to skip a workout begins to creep up on us. Having a plan (or in this case, a checklist) to see if you are really ready for a training session, rather than listening to your feelings tell you “not today,” is a powerful tool. Think of it this way: Your feelings are just information, they are not instructions. Just because you don’t feel like it on a given day, doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t lift, but that you need to take a closer look to see if you are ready to lift.

A plan that determines your #readiness to train is a powerful tool that can override your feelings, says @CarmenPata. Share on X

If all the signs are yes, except for your feelings, then at any point you can override what you are feeling, which is something you already do many times each day. I get it—going into a heavy deadlift workout is not the same as holding back your inner Hulk and not smashing the printer when it has a paper jam. But, then again, it sort of is. You are making a choice to ignore your primal feelings and instead listen to your rational thoughts.

If you are anything like me, sometimes you just need someone or something to come along and push you out of the funk of feeling sorry for yourself because you don’t feel like lifting. In that case, think of these readiness surveys like your own personal Hans and Franz: They’re “here to pump you up!,” making sure that at the end of the workout you are one step closer to the person you want to be.

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. “Medical gallery of Blausen Medical 2014”. WikiJournal of Medicine 1 (2). DOI:10.15347/wjm/2014.010. ISSN 2002-4436. [CC BY 3.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0)], from Wikimedia Commons.

Intermittent fasting is an increasingly common way of eating popularized over the last couple of years by a variety of people from medical doctors to internet gurus. In essence, intermittent fasting means restricting when you consume food—your eating window—to a set number of hours. The eating window most commonly is eight hours, with individuals eating their first meal at midday and their last meal at 8 pm, therefore fasting for 16 hours.

Fasting has garnered a lot of interest over the years since research in animals has shown that those consuming fewer calories (caloric restriction) tended to live longer. Recent research suggests that even in the absence of caloric restriction, regular or semi-regular periods of lower food intake (i.e., a fast) can have some important health benefits.

#Fasting has garnered interest since research in animals has shown that those consuming fewer calories tended to live longer, says @craig100m Share on X

The research on intermittent fasting is somewhat scarce, with intervention studies both low in number and participants. Nevertheless, there are some promising early findings, including behaviors associated with enhanced weight loss in some studies and improved metabolic markers in others. Interestingly, these improvements occur even when calorie intake matches non-intermittent fasting behaviors, suggesting that the improvements are not due solely to consuming fewer calories.

Insights from Athletes Observing Ramadan

Of course, athletes are always looking for the next edge they can gain over their competitors, and intermittent fasting potentially represents such an edge. As you might expect given the paucity of research on intermittent fasting in non-athletes, research in elite athletes is essentially non-existent, which makes it difficult to draw firm conclusions.

Fortunately, there is a group of people that acts as natural participants in an experiment, allowing us to understand the impact of intermittent fasting on sporting performance. Every year, millions of Muslims observe Ramadan, a religious period in which people are unable to consume food or liquid during daylight hours—from dawn to sunset.

Clearly, this doesn’t act as a perfect proxy for intermittent fasting. Usually, intermittent fasters eat later (or, in some cases, earlier) in the day, and are free to consume fluids at any point. During Ramadan, observers can’t consume liquid, which skews the results slightly, and they often eat overnight, which can negatively impact sleep. Nevertheless, there are some lessons we can learn.

So, what does the science say about performance during Ramadan? Some studies found that performance declines. In a group of professional soccer players, speed, agility, dribbling speed, and endurance were reduced during Ramadan. Similarly, just three days of intermittent fasting during Ramadan significantly reduced speed and power ability. A 2009 review found that a number of studies across different groups of athletes reported various decreases in performance. It seems clear that the altered eating patterns of Ramadan pose a significant problem for athletes.

But drawing conclusions from these studies and attempting to apply their findings to intermittent fasting is difficult. For a start, those who fast during Ramadan tend to consume far fewer calories than normal, which by itself will reduce performance, and often they suffer disturbances to their circadian rhythm caused by overnight eating. They also can’t consume any fluid in the day, which again limits performance.

A more recent review concluded that, as long as athletes maintain their total intake of calories and micronutrients and their typical sleep quality, they likely would not see any negative effects on performance. This is similar to the International Society of Sports Nutrition’s position stand on nutrient timing: total energy and nutrient intake are what’s important. For most people most of the time, the timing of these factors is less important provided they consume enough food and fluid.

Intermittent Fasting and Adaptation

In fact, more recent research suggests that, for some athletes, periods of time with less—or even no—energy intake may help enhance performance. An important training adaptation for endurance athletes is the production of new mitochondria, called mitochondrial biogenesis. When endurance athletes train, their bodies detect when energy stores are getting low, which releases several signaling factors including AMPK. These signaling factors, in turn, stimulate many of the positive adaptations to endurance exercise, including mitochondrial biogenesis.

As such, training in a low energy state is associated with enhanced training adaptations in some specific measures. It’s worth noting, however, that these studies often use a low carbohydrate diet as opposed to completely fasted training, as would be the case in intermittent fasting.

If you’re involved in resistance training, a recent review suggests that carbohydrate restriction—often induced by intermittent fasting—may reduce subsequent muscle hypertrophy as well as the ability to undertake lengthy training sessions, which are common for elite athletes.

So periods of lower carbohydrate intake, which we might consider as a proxy (although not a perfect one) for intermittent fasting, may enhance or reduce training adaptations, depending on your overall training goal.

As such, it’s difficult to state objectively whether intermittent fasting is a good or bad idea for athletes since it depends on many factors.

If you train in the morning, intermittent #fasting may compromise training adaptations, performance, says @craig100m. Share on X

For example, if you train first thing in the morning, but don’t eat anything until the late afternoon, you compromise your training adaptations. Similarly, not eating before a high-intensity exercise, such as sprints and resistance training, also will likely reduce training performance and, in turn, hamper competition performance. If you train later in the day, however, there doesn’t seem to be any harm in intermittent fasting as long as you consume sufficient energy and nutrients in your pre- and post-training meals.

The only downside is when it comes to protein intake. While by far and away the most important factor with protein is total daily intake, some evidence suggests that eating 20-40g every 3-4 hours provides a small advantage regarding muscle protein synthesis, which could affect muscle recovery and growth. And though the impact of this may be small, it could make all the difference for elite athletes.

Key Takeaways

In summary, we can conclude that:

1. 1. It’s most important to consume sufficient energy and nutrients to support performance. If you can consume the energy, nutrients, and protein you need from your meals—regardless of whether they come from one meal or ten—you’re most of the way there.
   2. Of course, elite athletes tend to have greater nutrition requirements than “normal” people. When I was competing in bobsleigh, I weighed 95kg and trained for 4-5 hours daily. As such, I had to consume around 4000 calories per day, which included 200g of protein. Consuming all this in one or two meals, or a short time window, would have been hugely impractical and likely impossible due to feelings of fullness.
   3. An important consideration is that even when high-level athletes follow free eating (meaning eating that’s not time restricted) patterns, research suggests that they don’t consume enough energy. As a result, we can speculate that consuming more energy with fewer meals during intermittent fasting is unlikely to occur due to the huge volumes of food required.
   4. It also seems like a very good idea to consume energy, protein, and nutrients before, and in most cases for elite athletes, during training sessions. This may not be possible during intermittent fasting, depending on the eating window and the time of day the athlete trains.
   5. You definitely have to consume energy, protein, and nutrients after training (although likely not immediately after). This might be possible with intermittent fasting depending on both the training time and eating window.
   6. If you have more than one training session per day—as many elite athletes do—intermittent fasting could make it harder to consume food both before your first session and after your second session.

Some evidence suggests that regular intakes of protein spaced throughout the day are better than larger intakes consumed less often. While the impact might be small, it could make the difference for elite athletes, and intermittent fasting would preclude this.

Concluding Thoughts

Given that high-level athletes require much more nutrition than non-elite athletes and must spread out these nutrients across the day when they have multiple daily sessions, this time-restricted approach seems to be a sub-optimal option. However for recreational athletes who train for shorter durations and with less intensity—and therefore have lower energy demands—intermittent fasting may be appropriate, especially for weight management.

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

Speed is a top priority in football and many other field and court sports. Football coaches love speed in all its forms—gap-to-gap, sideline-to-sideline, endzone-to-endzone, and everywhere in between. Even so, many coaches still treat game-changing speed as a genetic trait rather than a developed skill. Why do some football coaches recruit speed only to then neglect it? Identifying speed and training speed are two very different things. And developing speed is not the same as developing strength and conditioning.

Bear Bryant said it best, Luck follows speed. Anyone who coaches modern football with old-school methods should consider attending the Track Football Consortium(TFC) this year in Chicago December 7-8 and in Tampa Dec 14-15. Modern football is a game played at breakneck speed. Where football players of the past were big and bulky and wore big, bulky pads, today sprinters dominate football games wearing tights and almost undetectable shoulder pads.

Speed is the key to modern football, but too many football practices look more like boot camp than track practice. If “playing fast” is your mantra, speed considerations should be the lynchpin of weekly practice. Why are some high school football players faster on Monday than Friday? Practice is a grind. Football coaches demand full speed on every rep, every day. If you’re a football coach whose team is faster on Friday, I want to meet you.

“Too often, I see coaches overemphasizing conditioning during the offseason and never developing absolute capacities of strength, power, and speed. In particular, a common mistake is to attack repeat sprint ability when you have never truly developed speed and thus sprint ability itself.”—Josh Bonhotal (Purdue Basketball, TFC-4)

From Track to Field

Now, does this mean all track coaches understand speed development? I don’t think so. Like their counterparts on the gridiron, too many track coaches are addicted to lengthy practices with heavy emphasis on strength, conditioning, and general fitness. The same coaches are fearful of max-speed sprinting in practice. Some track programs never spike-up and sprint—they just run and run and run.

This may be due in part to many track programs having a distance coach at the helm. Sprinters are often seen as soft and lazy because they require so much rest and recovery to grow faster. Daily practice and consistent hard work are keys to distance running, and many coaches make the mistake of holding sprinters to the same standard as distance runners.

Don’t even get me started on the typical weight room program. Arbitrary lifts. Arbitrary sets and reps. Always chasing infinite strength gains. Many in the weight room don’t seem to understand the difference between bodybuilding and speed development.

Why don’t coaches respect speed development properly? Too many coaches are addicted to the process. When process trumps content, performance suffers. What’s more important: ten hours of terrific football practice or an amazing game on Friday night? It’s the content (the performance) that matters most, not the process. There’s no magic in ten hours of practice. Content must drive the process.

Speed is a coordinated skill to train from day one. Rule #1: never do speed training in a state of fatigue. I believe, however, that the majority of football players practice in a constant state of fatigue; too many sprinters have the same experience in track. This extends even further, as speed is not only the domain of football and track athletes. All athletes benefit from speed, and speed gains correlate with the improvement of other athletic skills.

“Music has been a part of formal education for hundreds of years. Playing the piano or violin makes people smarter. Sprinting is to the athlete what music is to the brain.”—“Basketball Advice from a Sprint Coach” by Tony Holler

Roots of the Track Football Consortium

I love the definition of consortium: An alliance, partnership, or coalition of people pooling resources for a common goal.

That’s it! That’s what our consortium is all about. Our common goal? Speed. The entire idea behind the Track Football Consortium is to share a range of insights about sprinting as a skill instead of a chromosome designated at birth.

No one goes out and recruits strong kids anymore. Strong and fast, yes. Strong and slow, no.

Identifying speed and training speed are two very different things, says @pntrack. Share on X

Identifying speed and training speed are two very different things. Recruiting fast kids should be the number one goal for football and track coaches. However, once you get fast kids, what are you going to do with them? Chris Korfist and I are speed coaches seven days a week. Our lives have become a quest to improve this skill that has been a part of the human experience since ancient times. Both Chris and I have deep roots in football.

Without question, the Track Football Consortium is unlike any clinic you’ve ever attended. Our core speakers include football coach Dan Fichter of Irondequoit, NY, Chris Korfist and Tony Holler of the Chicago area, and Cal Dietz of the University of Minnesota.

TFC Expanding to Tampa

This year we’re offering our first-ever TFC on the road. On Dec 14 and 15, Carrollwood Day School in Tampa will host the Track Football Consortium. Our lineup is impressive. Core speakers Chris Korfist, Dan Fichter, and Tony Holler will all be there. December will be the first time Feed the Cats from Tony Holler is presented in Florida.

Steve Jones of Kimberly High School in Wisconsin will speak. Coach Jones had his 70-game win streak snapped in the opener this year. Since then, a new streak has begun. Steve has now won 79 of his last 80 games.

Jacksonville University’s Ron Grigg, one of the most respected track coaches in the country, will also present, as will Al Leslie, the head track coach at Saline High School, Michigan. Al was named the 2018 National High School Track and Field Coach of the Year by USA Today.

Dr. Ken Clark, who was phenomenal at TFC-7 last June, will also join us in Tampa. For a full list of speakers and topics, visit the TFC-Tampa web page. Those considering attending TFC-Chicago on Dec 7-8 can find information on the TFC-Chicago web page. The Chicago clinic will feature Gabe Sanders of Stanford University.

We’ve had seven previous consortiums featuring some uniquely great speakers. Carl Lewis was our keynote speaker at TFC-6. Stuart McMillan of ALTIS spoke at TFC-4. Strength and conditioning legend Jimmy Radcliffe of Oregon spoke at TFC-5. Dr. Ken Clark, one of the world’s top sprint scientists, spoke at TFC-7. Latif Thomas, CEO of Complete Track and Field spoke at TFC-2. At TFC-7, we attracted an audience of 250 including coaches from 22 states and two foreign countries.

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

Why another speed training article, you ask? With so many articles on the internet on ways to get faster, why would you read another one?

How do you know an athlete is improving on the field or on the court? Parents and coaches tell us all the time they can “see the difference,” but can they? Can the athlete tell they’re moving faster? Through many years of experience, you do gain an “eye” for determining when someone is moving better and covering more ground, but when numbers matter, and they do, we use electronic timing to measure it properly.

There are no shortcuts to getting faster—improving speed takes time, says @ShaneDavs. Share on X

Game speed, sport speed, and track speed are all attempts at labeling the ability to be fast when it counts. Look at speed from a strength and conditioning perspective. There are no shortcuts to getting faster—improving speed takes time, and isn’t just about a great exercise or block of training. It may not be popular or fancy, but the best programs produce results and can show them.

Building a Culture for Speed Development

Before I get into the Dashr system, I want to talk about the value of creating a vibe of speed that athletes appreciate. Although most of our athletes have different lifting programs, all of them warm up together and we do our movement work first, similar to a track team. Everything we do feeds into our speed development, but you don’t need to train fast with everything you do. We lift heavy, do hypertrophy work, add in isometrics, condition, and challenge the core, but it all supports our speed.

Even our photo gallery screams that we care about action, as a good action shot is a better representation of an athlete then their uniform is. There are plenty of D1 college athletes and pros who have gone through Exceed in the past, and displaying them in action in a game is more important than a wall full of random numbers or schools. Building a culture of speed means you develop it and celebrate it.

We are well aware that training like a sprinter isn’t going to replace the needs of decelerating and moving in different directions, but working on straight-ahead speed works. If you are fast and prepared the right way, the myth of all speed and no brakes does not apply. We do a lot of plyometrics and eccentric work, teach deceleration more than a little, and even test the ability to brake throughout the year. But you have to run fast eventually, and you can’t be scared to sprint linearly because it’s not sport-specific.

I don’t mean to rant, but it seems that running in a straight line fast is a crime. If you are on social media, we are thrilled that our friend Jeremy Frisch is helping the world see the value of physical education with his games and obstacle courses. He is the king of youth training, but also has some strong, fast, older dudes coming out of Achieve.

Age-appropriate training works both ways. You don’t train kids like miniature adults, and you don’t train high school and college athletes like children. Training for the sport means knowing the demands and going beyond what’s needed to thrive. Our culture is about all types of speed using true reaction drills that require large eccentric forces, not just a few drills that resemble reaction.

If you are choreographing training and placating your novelty-seeking followers, you are not doing reaction training. It is hard to find the perfect recipe of how much linear speed work and how much deceleration and change of direction training to do, and it is highly dependent on your situation. We attack both qualities, but also realize that good training usually covers the bases with speed.

Why We Time Electronically

At Exceed, we use multiple timing systems to evaluate athletes, but that’s not all we do. I think a misconception exists that if a coach tests linear speed or change of direction ability, they don’t understand complex movement in games. For the record, we spend a considerable amount of time breaking down the skills involved with acceleration, deceleration, and change of direction, but we allow position and sport coaches to teach their athletes the sport skills they want them doing. During Combine prep, we outsource and hire coaches to bring the skills together into better sport movement.

We often tune up some lags that may be borderline sport skill coaching, but mainly because of a faulty pattern that is easily corrected. What we see too often, and is concerning to a degree, is the lack of general ability and overload of specific skill work labeled as “speed.” If you don’t have raw speed as an athlete, specific technique won’t get you where you want to go.

If you don’t have raw speed as an athlete, specific technique won’t get you where you want to go, says @ShaneDavs. Share on X

No offensive coach in the world will be able to take a 200-pound athlete and upskill them to stop JJ Watt, so don’t expect a slow athlete to separate from an NFL corner either, regardless of their “footwork.” Maximize an athlete’s general abilities, and let the team coaches do their job. If a gap still exists, maybe tutoring them can help.

Electronic timing is an honest way to see how fast an athlete can run from point A to point B. It’s simple and effective, and a great starting point for most coaches. One of the best ways to build trust with an athlete is through transparency, and that can only happen by giving them the power to see the same information you are collecting. Electronic timing of speed is brutal and unforgiving, but necessary, especially with the absurd numbers people believe they have run. We don’t electronically time every repetition, but not testing your own training program is an act of denial.

Too much testing, however, is also a problem. It’s easy to hide behind a piece of technology and mask inexperience and inability, and testing every sprint, jump, and exercise shows just that. We strive for an ideal balance of training with measurement and good old-fashioned training. None of our equipment collects dust, but if the power goes out, we’ll be fine. (Side note: We’ve had three power-outage sessions in our old facility.)

Speed is the universal language that nearly every sport and country understands, but we are miles away from being on the same page. Without electronic timing and simple speed testing, it’s hard to make progress with long-term development or keep a team coach happy. Education matters, but a team report of different speed and power tests beats a PowerPoint stack every time. Numbers don’t explain everything, but they do start the conversation!

Assessing Speed: What and How to Test

We test short sprints more often than anything else, but are comfortable just letting athletes run and not overthink things with too much feedback. My business partner and I test as much as necessary to get the information we want. A track athlete can use times more often because they are desensitized, but for some team sport athletes, numbers become a distraction. Our advanced athletes who are finished with college are better at handling the information without overreacting, but under most circumstances, getting the work done is a priority.

The philosophy we have is that a watched pot never boils, so sometimes we only check on speed at training intervals where an actual improvement is likely to show up. We always prefer teaching and training over testing, but without a consistent audit of the training program, it’s hard to know what is and isn’t working.

Without a consistent audit of a training program, it’s hard to know what is and isn’t working, says @ShaneDavs. Share on X

Most of our testing is for acceleration, top speed, and change of direction (5-10-5). We know that more extensive testing can be done, and that true “agility” is more complicated than going back and forth for 20 yards, but practicing with a great team coach and doing a great job in the weight room are best for the athletes. Complicated footwork drills and tag games are increasingly popular, and reaction timing drills that aren’t universally accepted or done at game speed make up the majority of the videos we see nowadays. But when did a slow and weak athlete get a scholarship for his ladder work or colored light reaction drill time?

If you spend too much time in training on extra movement work and gimmicky fun with an athlete who is not adequately strong or fast, who will be entrusted to do the strength and speed training? We don’t claim to be the world’s leading authority in speed development, but we have the confidence to say local athletes are excelling at high-level college and professional sports in our backyard, and their movement skills are not holding them back.

Coaches, parents, and even athletes will want to test what they believe is important, so we listen. We have our list and they have theirs. If the 40-yard dash is what you test, it’s far from a perfect test, but when appropriate, there’s no harm in collecting the metric splits or velocities while giving them what they want. Having a short sprint test such as a 20 may not be ideal, but focusing on a simple measurement communicates to everyone that speed matters.

Your facility is the first thing that let’s an athlete know “this is what we believe.” If you have 10 squat racks and a 10- by 5-yard strip of turf, you clearly prioritize strength over speed. The same goes for your testing and training protocols. When speed matters, you better have a facility (or access to one) and testing protocol that shows your clients what exactly you deem most important to their development. For us, philosophically, the purpose of the weight room is to gain mass, reduce injuries, and improve an athlete’s ground force, and then we sprint, jump, and stop to improve their speed on the field.

What the Dashr System Includes

The Dashr is an infrared timing system. If you want to understand beam-based timing, this Buyer’s Guide explains how the technology works. A coach who is familiar with the old Brower timing system will understand its similarities to Dashr, but instead of the dread of replacing batteries and trying to record times, the process is far more efficient.

The Dashr system includes a case, tripods and reflectors, and individual lasers. Since the system connects wirelessly, all you need is a smart device to get started. The manufacturer recommends you use an Android phone because its antenna is excellent, but the system works on Apple products as well. We use both iPads and Android products with the technology in our facility, so we follow the recommendations of the founder.

Coaches who work with very large groups and anyone who uses the system for combines will need to consider the more advanced system. When you invest in the higher-end system, you will be able to get multiple timing splits and the option to use the RFID feature to keep the process organized efficiently. The wrist bands are similar to the radio collars that environmental scientists use to track animals, but instead the technology tracks athletes.

When working with groups, RFID improves workflow and ensures the sprint performance matches up with the correct athlete. You still need to oversee the process, but having RFID is great if you are unfamiliar with new kids’ names or have too many athletes for easy organization. We have only experimented with the roster software, but it’s a benefit for anyone who needs to be organized.

We haven’t used Drillstack, a program that connects to Dashr, but we are going to look at an athlete management system down the road. We get a lot of data with all of our equipment, and now we need something to keep things running smoothly. The Dashr web app and export options to Excel are enough for now, but if you are a college team that needs to be organized and connected, we suggest connecting with the providers of an AMS software.

Combine Testing, Training, or Team Timing

If you test an athlete, you are most likely either in the talent identification world or developmental category. We do a little bit of both. Combine testing is everywhere, and not just for elite levels. Head coaches are increasingly looking for someone to test their athletes, but many have been tricked into forgetting what’s most important. The improvement!

We test continuously so a parent, agent, or athlete knows you can start getting better at any time, says @ShaneDavs. Share on X

I think a lot of combine hype and fancy marketing has distracted these coaches from the result-based approach. We love the idea of testing their team, but we also want the time and energy allocated to get athletes faster and produce results. The best time to get faster is in the off-season, so if you are going to run a testing program or combine, schedule it appropriately. We continuously test so a parent, agent, or athlete knows that you can start getting better at any time, but we do recognize that the off-season is when the planning for next year begins.

Video 1. Dashr streamlines workflow, as everything is connected, including options for RFID and third-party software integration. Coaches can use either Android or iOS devices to display data.

For event-based timing or large group timing, Dashr has some cool features that make it an effective tool for the job. For “ready up,” get-on-the-line-and-go testing, Dashr has a “quick run” feature that doesn’t need buttons or resets to use. Just put the hand down, wait for the beep, and rip. A coach pressed for time can get an entire team tested in under 20 minutes, with multiple attempts during that period.

Dashr’s ‘quick run’ feature can get an entire team tested in under 20 minutes, says @ShaneDavs. Share on X

Who Should Use Dashr

We don’t want to label the Dashr an entry-level product because it has proven to be a great product, but its price point and simple-to-use design are great for coaches who just want the basics covered. For advanced athletes, we are exploring more expensive and super precise options, such as the Swift or MUSCLELAB Laser, but to get a job done with the majority of athletes, Dashr will more than suffice.

A lot of private facilities don’t like the idea of high school and youth teams testing speed, as that may disrupt their leverage in acquiring clients. I don’t fear independent timing or even training with teams. Athletes want to train with the best option available, and we are more than just a timing service—we are a complete training facility with years of high-level experience. You don’t hire a carpenter because they can measure their cuts; you hire them because they can build something the right way.

Our facility uses multiple devices for timing and jump testing in the same way we use different training tools for strength work. The use of different systems doesn’t add complexity and confusion; we just know that it’s perfectly acceptable to use the right tool at the right time. Dashr will continue to be our workhorse, as we get a lot of value from it, but at times we will use Ergotest and even video systems when appropriate.

Just Time and See the Difference

Wrapping this review up, my goal was to make sure every coach knew of an affordable option with group timing. At Exceed, we use multiple timing systems to get the job done, but we love the fact that, within a couple minutes, we could set up the Dashr system and start timing athletes immediately without worrying about batteries and a way to record the times.

If you’ve had a bad experience with electronic timing in the past, know that @DashrMPS is worth trying, says @ShaneDavs. Share on X

Dashr is most easily summed up as an upgrade from the old Brower timing system, as it connects to a tablet or smart device instead of an obsolete handheld and wirelessly gets the job done. If you had a bad experience with electronic timing in the past (as we all have), we know that Dashr is a piece of equipment worth trying. We are happy with our experience and it makes a great addition to our facility.

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

If you are 85% proficient in a skill, then it should translate to your performance. You can’t write a paragraph without learning sentence mechanics first. You can’t play chess without understanding how each piece moves on the board. The same theory applies to sport—at any training age, at any skill level. As athletes develop skills, they gradually progress from coordinating gross motor skills (large muscle groups) to refining those skills, or improving their fine motor skills¹. Novice athletes improve their performances more frequently than advanced athletes, because advanced athletes must invest more time into skill development.

Skills translate to performance when you achieve 85% proficiency. Share on X

Think about any post-game interview with a professional athlete. The interviewer asks, “What went well today and what could you have done better?” The athlete typically notes a previous weakness that they’ve been working on extensively in practice, and how it finally came together that day. Or, the athlete acknowledges a weakness that cost them the win, and now they know what to focus on for next time. (Alternatively, the athlete has no sense of what went wrong, and you, the fan, start shouting out what they did wrong from your living room. You might be able to identify someone else’s skill deficiency but cannot execute the skill yourself.)

Identifying Skill Deficiencies

On HMMR Media podcast Episode #154, Nick Garcia and Martin Bingisser interviewed sports science Professor J.B. Morin from the University of Nice Sophia Antipolis. During the interview, Morin used an extraordinarily effective analogy to describe training. Comparing athletes to tubes of toothpaste, Morin suggests that novice athletes have a full tube, so no matter where you press, toothpaste comes out². Regardless of which skills you select to develop, the novice athlete benefits and their performance improves. Advanced athletes, on the other hand, have mostly empty tubes: It’s harder to squeeze toothpaste out, because you must know exactly where to press on the tube².

In other words, advanced athletes have already developed many of the necessary skills for their sport. If advanced athletes wish to improve, then it’s critical for their coaches to identify the skills they must focus on and improve upon. In pole vault, even advanced athletes display a wide variety of proficiencies and deficiencies. The best vaulters are usually extremely fast and strong, but how they utilize their strength and speed varies based on their technical proficiency.

Every vaulter has their quirks—their little deviations from consistent, reliable mechanics. You can call this “personal style” all you want, but you’d be fooling yourself by labeling these quirks as beneficial. Some common pole vault skill deficiencies are:

• Skipping steps
• Poor posture
• No jump up at take-off
• Late pole drop
• Poor arm extension at plant

These are just a few of many possible skill deficiencies that can be gradually corrected by practice drills. As a coach, you must balance generalized skill development with individualized attention, because your practice sessions should give all athletes an opportunity to improve on their skills or the skill focus of that session. On a high school track team or at a pole vault club, your coaching practice must consider the economy of scale. Too much individualized attention will not allow your other athletes to receive enough feedback to efficiently pursue 85% proficiency. Finding the appropriate balance will elevate your coaching practice.

Too much individual attention means other athletes won’t get enough advice to reach 85% proficiency. Share on X

Warm-Up Drills Build Skills

I believe in beginning every training session with a comprehensive, skill-based warm-up that lasts 30-40 minutes. The warm-up should include drills that address the five components of the vault. Recall from my previous article that the components are:

1. Pole carry
2. Run
3. Plant
4. Take-off
5. Air mechanics

The warm-up does not have to be identical every day, nor does it have to follow the sequence listed above—but I firmly believe that you should stick to a core set of warm-up drills that you have confidence in and value above all others. For example, at Apex Vaulting Club, we always begin our warm-up with sprints, dynamic stretching, and running drills before grabbing poles. Our running drills are comprehensive, including B-skips, straight-leg bounds, two-leg bounds, and high knee drills. Sometimes we include mini-hurdle walkovers or sprints.

Each of these drills addresses a different part of the run (#2). When we move on to pole drills, we begin with one-arm pole drops, two-arm pole drops, rollovers, and pole runs. Pole drops address the pole carry (#1) and the plant (#3). Rollovers develop an athlete’s hip movement and pole speed at take-off (#4). Rollovers partially address air mechanics (#5) too. Pole run drills develop a vaulter’s natural sequence of the pole carry, run, and plant. Some days we add stride-stride-long-short jump drills to further develop take-off, but this drill substitutes for another drill removed from the warm-up.

It’s better to know more drills than you can use in a single warm-up session because you can vary the drills in each training session and avoid staleness. The cumulative training effect of these drills will reinforce skills necessary to move your athletes toward 85% proficiency, which will translate to improved performances. Let this principle drive your respect for tedium and routine. I have included instructional videos of the following component-specific drills to support your coaching.

Running Mechanics

Video 1. Front-Side Running Mechanics with Mini Hurdles

Observe your athletes’ running mechanics during the warm-up and give them feedback. One by one, watch how they execute each sprint drill over 30 meters. Have them walk back and repeat the drill. We rely on B-skips, straight leg bounds, double leg bounds, and high knees.

Then, put it all together with mini hurdles. Spread the mini hurdles 2 feet apart and have your athletes walk over the hurdles with good form. High knee lift, toes pointed upward, walk a straight line, keep your body over the foot when it lands on the ground, chin up, chest up, etc.

When your athletes complete these walkovers several times and show improvement with your feedback, you may move the mini hurdles to 4 feet apart and instruct your athletes to sprint at 60-80% max speed. This opens up the stride to a more natural sprint and reinforces the skills developed in the previous drill, as well as the warm-up.

One-Arm and Two-Arm Pole Drops

Video 2. One-Arm Pole Drops

Have your athletes line up shoulder to shoulder with approximately 2 feet between them. Place the left foot forward and the right foot back. Lift the pole for a high pole carry. Keep the right hand in front of the right hip and the left wrist bent backward near the middle of the chest. Keep the shoulders tightened back, as though pinching the upper back. Release the right hand and allow the pole to fall under its own weight. As the pole tip drops in front of you, extend the left arm so that the left hand is slightly above the forehead. Squeeze the left triceps to finish. Repeat 9x.

Video 3. Two-Arm Pole Drop

For two-arm pole drops, allow the pole to fall under its weight and keep the right-hand grip loose until the left arm extends and finishes. The two-arm pole drop is like the one-arm drop, but the placement of the right hand at the finish will differ depending on the technical model you use. Repeat 9x.

Rollovers

Video 4. Rollovers

Hold the pole as high as you can so that your arms create a 45° angle. Keep the wrists and elbows inward, closer to the pole. Place your take-off foot one foot length away from the pole. Lean forward, and actively pull yourself upward. The goal for this drill is to move, or “rollover,” the pole quickly and raise the hips. Rollovers isolate the moment after take-off to improve pole speed and hip motion.

Pole Runs

Video 5. Pole Runs

Using tape, draw the outline of the plant box 50 feet out on your runway. You want to allow space for your athletes to slow down after they plant the pole. Move your athlete back from this taped box the same distance as their five-step approach and start them there. They should set up a good run, and plant the pole in the taped box. Your focus should be on their pole carry, posture, and timing. You may have your athlete run through or jump up. At Apex Vaulting Club, we run through the taped box.

Air Mechanics Drills

For most events in track and field, the preparation phase determines success. In shot put, an off-balance glide leads to a poor delivery of the shot. In long jump, inadequate sprint mechanics brings the foot under or over the toe board for a poor attempt or a foul. With the pole vault, each component in sequence must support the next for the athlete to effectively execute their air mechanics.

First and foremost, teach your athletes to jump. This is a vertical event. Share on X

If your athletes never learned proper air mechanics, however, then it won’t matter how effective they are on the ground because they won’t know what to do after they jump up. First and foremost, teach your athletes to jump. This is a vertical event. If you believe that jumping up is useless for vaulters, then you’re missing out on one of the easiest ways to increase your grip height or pole’s weight rating. (With no jump up, I hope you’re using heavier poles anyway; otherwise you have a greater likelihood of snapping a pole, too.)

At Apex Vaulting Club, we use take-off drills, swing to sit, swing to belly, and full jump from a one-step to reinforce jumping up. These drills have other skill applications, but provide smaller scale opportunities for the athlete to feel the jump and coaches to observe this skill in action. When you watch the videos, note how much each athlete jumps up before they begin working the pole.

Video 6. Take-Off Drill, Swing to Sit, and Swing to Belly

Once you’re in the air, you have to work the pole. Whichever technical model you use, you must scale down your jumps to focus on the necessary skill—pushing or pulling on the pole³. At Apex Vaulting Club, we relax the arms for a natural block and then begin pulling on the pole to bring the hips upward to initiate the turn.

Swing to sit and swing to belly drills support athletes feeling these mechanics in the correct sequence. Feeling the motions in a drill reinforces the athlete’s repeated coordination in successive attempts. The pole vault community often understates and overlooks the importance of feeling. Your athletes’ conscious perception has value in developing translational skills that support them through all phases of the jump. Let’s stop worrying about hitting positions and let’s start drilling the motions.

The pole vault community often understates and overlooks the importance of feeling the motion. Share on X

Video 7. Full Jump from One-Step

Commonalities

In From Beginner to Bubka and Isinbyeva too!, author and coach Alan Launder posits that “what is tactically desirable must be technically possible.”⁴In other words, an athlete’s performance in a competition depends upon their compounded skill development through numerous hours of practice. Launder’s words are profound enough to not be limited to pole vault alone.

All sports require the development of general and specific skills, because sustainable athletic improvement depends on consistent execution and resilience to fatigue⁵. Launder also argues that “what is technically desirable must be physically possible.”⁴Without enough strength or speed, many pole vault drills can become inaccessible to athletes, especially with a short approach, where drills are most beneficial.

Fortunately, most of the drills shown in the videos above are useful for all ages and skill levels, with the correct pole. All athletes, regardless of sport, need to be strong enough to access the skill for a performance benefit⁵. When athletes are not strong enough to effectively execute the skill, they increase the probability of injury to the muscles supporting that skill. Strikers on the soccer pitch must develop an accurate and powerful kick to consistently score goals. Distance swimmers must have the forearm strength endurance to maintain a correctly cupped hand for the entire duration of their race.

Surprisingly, pole vault and high jump, the two vertical events in track and field, require vastly different skill sets. A vaulter develops greater “push” off the pole by increasing the distance between their hip height and their grip on the pole. Full jumps from a one-, two-, or three-step approach are great drills to work on this skill. Vaulters also need to increase how quickly they move their pole to vertical. Rollovers and take-off drills support increasing pole speed, like the way high jumpers use short approaches to improve the translation of horizontal speed into vertical ascent.

Great athletes rely on their strengths in competition and focus on their weaknesses in practice. Share on X

The multi-events, which include both high jump and pole vault, provide a remarkable opportunity to observe general and specific skills because each athlete offers a different balance of the two in each of the 10 events. For example, Kevin Mayer’s recent 9126-point world record in the Décastar demonstrates an impressive dependence on strength and coordination, compared to the equally impressive emphasis on speed and power in Ashton Eaton’s decathlon world record set in 2015. Great athletes rely on their strengths in competition and focus on their weaknesses in practice.

Feeling Their Way to Long-Term Improvement

Every athlete is different and brings their own unique set of challenges to training. Their strengths and weaknesses shape their journey in sport. If we, as a coaching community, wish to build resilient, lifelong athletes, then we cannot become hindered by short-term performance goals at the expense of long-term skill development. Even when your brightest athletes want to dive into a technical analysis of a single jump, they still need to “feel” the movements of their own body. Athletes develop competence in skills from an awareness of execution and its repetition.

You can talk it through all you want to with them, but if athletes aren’t feeling the movements, they will struggle to repeat them correctly. Remember, skills translate to performance when you achieve 85% proficiency. Drills can be tedious and sometimes even frustrating when they don’t go right, but they are necessary and beneficial tools for long-term improvement. Sometimes, the trade-off is worth it.

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. Higgs, C., Balyi, I., Way, R., Cardinal, C., Bluechardt, M. (2009). Developing Physical Literacy: A Guide For Parents Of Children Ages 0-12. Canadian Sport Centre.

2. HMMR Podcast Episode 154: Force and velocity (with JB Morin).

3. Kaminsky, Noah. “Critical Indicators for Pole Vault II: Cueing Hip Movement by Model.”

4. Launder, Alan and Gormley, John. From Beginner to Bubka and Isinbayeva too!CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, second edition, 2014. First edition, 2005.

5. Verkhoshansky, Yuri. “Main Features of a Modern Scientific Sports Training Theory.” New Studies in Athletics, IAAF Quarterly. 1998: 13(3); pp 9-20.

Branko Miric is the owner and head coach of Apex Vaulting Club in Fairfield, New Jersey. He is also an assistant coach of track and field at Ramapo College, where he specializes in pole vault. Branko founded Apex in 2007 and proudly promotes an athlete-centered training environment. In addition to pole vault, Apex offers comprehensive strength and conditioning for athletes of all ages. Find him on Instagram @therealapexvaulting and Facebook at Apex Vaulting.