Blog

Athletes at the collegiate, professional, and Olympic levels are training harder than ever before to gain a competitive advantage over their opponents. Even at the youth level, if you visit any large or small town, you’ll witness athletes dedicated to improving their physical abilities in pursuit of reaching the next level. This is great for the world of sports, as it cultivates a higher level of competition.

The increased attention to physical preparation, however, brings with it a greater need to recognize that there should remain a balance for optimizing athlete recovery. It is imperative to remain conscious of this concept; otherwise, the expression of the physiological and biological systems will not meet the demands of an athlete’s environment.

Generally speaking, a physical preparation coach’s ultimate goal is to reduce the potential for injury by prioritizing fundamentals and enhancing the development of biomotor qualities (strength, power, and speed), which will simultaneously aid performance. One of the main goals for a sports physical therapist, on the other hand, is to facilitate the mitigation of pain while improving comprehensive capacity.

Ultimately, the objective of both professions is similar: to increase the longevity of each athlete’s capacity to express their highest potential while remaining durable. To accomplish these goals, we need to have a basic understanding of stress, so we can develop resilience and prepare players for the physical demands of competition.

This article highlights three practical methods to facilitate a shift to recovery and promote the positive adaptation to training loads. With this information, all parties involved in the athletic development process, especially physical preparation coaches and practitioners, can further assist athletes in displaying high physical capacities while mitigating their susceptibility to injury.

I don’t intend to create a narrative that training load, which is indeed a stressor, is the injury instigator and performance detractor in and of itself. Instead, quite the opposite is true. We should view physical training as a prophylactic and antidote to injury, which occurs only if we establish an accumulation of training load, or steady-chronic exposure, as opposed to sudden and abrupt, acute exposures.

For this to occur, an athlete must be prepared to accept their next bout of training. Athletes acquire this readiness from inter-session recovery, which discourages maladaptive disturbances in the system and encourages adaptive responses.

Recovery Strategies

The purpose of stress recovery adaptation is to place the nervous system in a state that’s ready to act and react efficiently within an ever-changing environment, both physiologically and psychologically.

1. Positional Breathing

First it’s important to understand that when we endure stress, especially from training (dependent on exercise selection, of course), our system typically results in rigidity or extension bias. This position is beneficial for force production and performance, but if it’s sustained during low-level daily activities, it can result in decreased variability, adaptability, and consequently recoverability.

When a stressor is introduced, your body undergoes primitive reactive patterns that limit degrees of freedom, or available options. If you think about it, your position is a subconscious physical manifestation of your emotions and the state of your autonomic nervous system, or simply put—dynamic outputs reflecting dynamic inputs. This can self-perpetuate and increase sympathetic drive that creates a vicious CNS dysregulation cycle and alters sensory feedback to the brain.

In simpler terms, the perception of fatigue and threat is more readily activated with higher threshold exercise so you never get a real opportunity to recover.

Many athletes experience a heightened perception of soreness and tightness from this position and will hammer away at a joint by doing aggressive mobility and stretching techniques. Sometimes those mobility restrictions and areas of tension are present simply because their brain does not deem it safe to allow the body to access certain positions. Controlled breathing, especially while reaching and pushing, can mitigate these sensations and set athletes up to recover.

To drive your system into recovery mode, perform two rounds of five exhalations in a circuit. Share on X

We can access these tough and restricted positions by performing diaphragmatic breathing with long slow exhales. The breathing encourages better input and creates awareness to reference the position consistently while also establishing time under tension. Conscious breathing stimulates vagal tone so that the parasympathetic nervous system is more pronounced and also provides an opportunity to be at ease with the earlier unpleasant sensations. Performing two rounds of five exhalations, completed as a circuit, can be a great way to drive your system into recovery mode.

Video 1. The athlete demonstrates the All Fours Bear Hold with proper breathing technique.

Video 2. The athlete performs a lat hang with a strong exhale followed by a five-second held breath and then a soft inhale.

Video 3. The athlete shows how to do downward dog toe reaches and when to inhale and exhale.

Video 4. The athlete performs a 90-90 hip lift with a shift while breathing deeply.

2. Aerobic

The aerobic system is another area where we can optimize recovery. Why? It is the most largely adaptable energy system and can mitigate the perception of fatigue and threat. Remember, when we encounter a stressor, we become more sympathetic and rely less on the aerobic system and more on the alactic and lactic systems. When running from a bear, we need immediate energy that promotes high biological and mechanical output, and the aerobic system doesn’t cut it.

The aerobic system instead prioritizes a long-term supply of energy during low-level intensity outputs and ensures that movement variability remains high. With low variability comes a decreased capacity to adapt as we lack the options necessary to meet the environmental conditions.

Targeting the aerobic system will promote not only post-session recovery but also intra-session recovery during intense training days by resynthesizing energy currencies and delaying the onset of fatigue-encouraging energy systems.

The Aerobic System is the Most Largely Adaptable Energy System:

• Increases mitochondrial density (more ATP)
• Improves capillary density and circulation
• Increases aerobic enzymes
• Decreases resting HR
• Decreases sympathetic dominance
• Increases left ventricle/stroke volume

Two methods for aerobic recovery that I’ve found helpful (with credit to Joel Jamieson of Ultimate MMA Conditioning) are cardiac output and high-intensity continuous training.

• For cardiac output, the mode and load should be HR 120-150, 30-90 minutes of continuous activity (biking, swimming, jump rope).

• For high-intensity continuous training: max resistance, HR 130-150, 10-20 minutes, low speed (spin bike, lunges uphill, step-ups), potentially performing two rounds.

I prefer these strategies because they are low impact and reduce the stress and strain on contractile and non-contractile tissues, especially tendons. Performing this 1-2x per week—dependent on exercise load, exercise selection, and athlete level—can be very impactful.

3. Soft Tissue

Contrary to popular belief, no amount of pressure you apply to soft tissue will break up any scar tissue nor will it break through adhesions and lengthen tissues. It’s important to understand that you cannot rub yourself flexible. That does not mean that foam rolling is not a valuable part of the recovery process. Foam rolling is a great way to modulate unpleasant symptoms (soreness) and decrease the sensitivity of heightened tissues.

It's counterproductive for athletes to beat themselves up by foam rolling aggressively. Share on X

It’s counterproductive to have your athletes beat themselves up by foam rolling aggressively to the point of tears, grimacing, and breath-holding. This strategy will simply increase sympathetic tone throughout the body. As a result, they’ll feel like they need to roll even harder next time, continuing the cycle.

Instead, breathe to decrease tension and tone and give a relaxation effect via the parasympathetic nervous system. Although this is a more subjective than objective strategy, it is just as critical. Remember that our perception highly influences a stress reaction, and we must take into consideration the internal load of training.

Internal loading provides insight into the athlete’s perception of effort-fatigue and psychological reflection. Integrating soft tissue can alter this internal loading, specifically the psychological response to the external loading or work completed.

Video 5. The athlete demonstrates foam rolling for the hip flexor.

Video 6. The athlete performs the two-step process for glute foam rolling.

Video 7. The athlete shows us how to foam roll the mid- to upper back.

To further grasp the reasoning and rationale of these strategies, it is imperative to establish a basic understanding of stress, from its ramifications to its manifestations.

General Adaptation Syndrome

One of the first to give a scientific explanation for biological stress was Hungarian endocrinologist Dr. Hans Selye. He called his stress model, based on physiology and psychobiology, the General Adaptation Syndrome (GAS). The model states that any event, real or perceived, that threatens an organism’s well-being (a stressor) leads to a three-stage bodily response.

Stage 1: Alarm

• Fight-or-flight response and sympathetic nervous system are activated
• Resources are mobilized

Stage 2: Resistance

• The parasympathetic nervous system returns functions to normal
• Resources are focused against the stressor
• HR, BP, RR increase, and body remains on red alert

Stage 3: Exhaustion

• Continued stress exhausts resources and causes fatigue and system failure

We must understand that physical training is a stressor, though controlled, that initiates this cascade of events. The goal is to remain outside of exhaustion, commonly referred to as overtraining in the performance world. Exhaustion may lead to performance decrements and can have serious physical ramifications systemically. One may ask, how is training a stressor if I don’t feel stressed afterward?

Physical training is a stressor, causing a cascade of neuroendocrine and physiological events. Share on X

Essentially, stress is stress is stress and is created equal. However, it may not appear to be at first. Whether we’re running from a lion, watching a horror movie, or facing upcoming deadlines, our system typically results in the same general neuroendocrine and physiological cascade of events initiated at the hypothalamic-pituitary axis. But we may have varying levels of subjective perceptions of stress (physical, biological, psychological, emotional, etc.) because our cognitive appraisal varies, which alters our perception of the stressor.

The stress response triggers the sympathetic nervous system, which is not innately bad. Issues arise if we remain in this sympathetic state during everyday low-threshold activities and don’t shift to our parasympathetic branch to promote recovery, regulation, and regeneration.

 

Stress Is a Necessity

Realize that stress is not a synonym for bad. Stress is vital and necessary for life, and without it, our evolutionary advantages would not exist. The diagram below depicts why stress is necessary. With controlled stress, we can manipulate variables to suit our current capacity and future requirements. The ultimate outcome is maintaining resiliency and health as long as possible.

The only way to create durability is to refine the system, and the only way to refine the system is to disrupt homeostasis temporarily, instigating change. This yields adaptation and a system that is neither underdeveloped nor overdeveloped but robustly efficient.

With constant, repetitive, high-input stressors—specifically rigorous training for this article—an athlete may be posed with a threat. The threat itself is not an issue since we subject ourselves to threat (a stressor) each time we train. Regarding physical and physiological qualities that a person wishes to obtain, there has to be a stressor applied. If you want to be bigger, faster, or to lift heavier, the system has to experience a stimulus strong enough to warrant a shift.

Issues occur when you continue to have withdrawals (stressors) without making deposits (recovery). That’s called an overdraft. No one wants an overdraft. To up your deposit game, you must shift your system to a state where recovery can occur and not focus on speeding up recovery. When we emphasize speeding up recovery, we impede the body’s three natural processes.

Think of it this way: we have to acquire money before we purchase material things. We have to do the same with the body and focus on recovery, restoration, and energy resources before attempting to purchase physical and physiological assets.

Contrary to common belief, physical training—whether running and conditioning or strength-oriented—does not promote homeostasis. It disrupts homeostasis. Essentially, this means that at the moment you are training, you are not getting stronger, bigger, or faster. Instead you are (or should be) challenging the tissues of all your systems.

For this adaptation to be positive, we need to promote adequate recovery. Without recovery—which includes nutrition, hydration, sleep, and often forgotten sympathetic mitigation—we may have poor outcomes leading to maladaptation. This leads many athletes to train even harder or run even farther, the complete opposite of what their system needs.

If you train to recover like you train to adapt, you improve your ability to restore homeostasis. Share on X

If you train to recover like you train to adapt, you can improve your ability to restore homeostasis. Your body does not care about making you stronger or faster if you are constantly in a recovery deficit. Instead, all resources and energy are used to handle daily hassle stressors and the demands of excessive intense physical activity on the body. We want to ensure there are enough resources and energy available for tissue repair and stress recovery adaptation.

Stress Overload

As we know, neurological, physiological, and biological processes, which yield performance, are all outputs from the brain—it is the governor. Every time an athlete steps into the weight room, let alone the field of play, there are endless inputs (afferent information) and outputs (efferent information) that attempt to elicit the most efficient reflexes and reactions. As a result, the brain, which is the central nervous system, has to recover to function at its highest capabilities otherwise acquisition is impacted negatively.

The body’s limited resources and energy for coping with stressful situations mean that GAS has evolved to be only useful for short-term animal survival. The harder we train without recovery, the less variable this system becomes as the sympathetic state dominates, leading to difficulty with down-regulation and adaptation to environmental demands. This accumulates to cause poor adaptation, disrupted sleep patterns, fatigue, and ultimately poor performance.

The stress bucket is a great depiction of how we all have a certain degree of propensity to endure stressors, including:

• Significant life change: marriage, children
• Catastrophic: unpredictable large-scale events
• Daily hassles: seemingly minor negative events—long store lines, losing car keys
• Ambient: globally integrated into the background of the environment—noise, crowding
• Physical: exercise, physical activity, and training

If we fail to allocate time to recover from training, which is a very controllable input, then we run the risk of overflow and performance decrements. While there is a myriad of strategies to encourage recovery, the three suggestions provided earlier in the article are all effective and efficient methods to use in an athlete’s programming.

Assessment Strategies

Determining when we need to prioritize recovery strategies throughout the athletic preparation and competition continuum requires consistent monitoring of key indicators. Although measurements from biochemical, hormonal, and immunological perspectives do exist, they are not easy to implement since they’re typically more invasive and require more time allocation.

Ideally, load monitoring involves measuring both external and internal loads, where measurement tools range from general to sports-specific and are either objective or subjective. Measuring the external load typically involves quantifying an athlete’s training or competition load, such as hours of training, distance ran, weight lifted, or the number of games played. Other external factors, however, such as life events, daily hassles, or travel may be equally important.

We can measure internal load by assessing the internal biological, physiological, and psychological responses to the external load such as heart rate (physiological/objective) and rating of perceived exertion (psychological/subjective).

It’s critical to implement mixed methods when monitoring an athlete’s response to training load. There is no unanimous method to determine the overall effect of stress from training load on performance, fatigue, and injury because there are numerous factors that influence an athlete’s actual response to load. Take, for example, an overweight middle-aged male who will have very different physiological and perceptual responses (internal load) to an 800m run than a trained runner. Although the external training load is identical, the internal training load will be much higher in the older unfit individual.

We can gain an understanding of an athlete’s perception of load by consistently providing subjective questionnaires. Several researchers have investigated the use of subjective monitoring and found it to be a sensitive and consistent way to determine acute and chronic changes in an athlete’s well-being in relation to load.

Subjective Assessments

Subjective assessment measures include the Recovery Stress Questionnaire for Athletes (REST-Q-Sport), Daily Analysis of Life Demands for Athletes (DALDA), and Profile of Mood States (POMS). Rather than administering the entire questionnaire, it may be more time efficient to review questions that elicit tangible responses. Simple inquiries before training can be extremely valuable for detecting unplanned fatigue.

Heart Rate Variability and Rating of Perceived Exertion

There’s been hype recently over assessing heart rate variability (HRV), which is the measure of variation in time intervals between heartbeats. Essentially, by assessing HRV, we can gain a physiological indication of the autonomic nervous system’s (ANS) state. The ANS, which regulates heart rate, blood pressure, breathing, digestion, etc., will reveal less variation during higher sympathetic activity. The problem is that measuring HRV is not always feasible. Instead, session rating of perceived exertion (RPE) can be a quick and easy way to measure an athlete’s internal response to the training session’s intensity.

Range of Motion and Flexibility

Joint range of motion and flexibility also provide insight into stress and load accumulation. In team sports, a strength coach may not be able to assess athletes individually. An efficient approach I’ve found effective is gauging the toe touch and split squat. By assessing these two movements, we have a glimpse of the outward reflection of the autonomic nervous system’s variability.

Both movements will reveal the ability to offset the extension bias. Each movement may indicate potential structural fatigue to contractile tissue (toe touch) and sensorimotor fatigue due to the coordination required between upper and lower extremities in an asymmetrical pattern. We should not use these as a stand-alone, and and we should establish a baseline quality (split squat) and quantity (toe touch) before future assessments.

No matter which assessments you choose, the ultimate goal is to answer two basic questions: How is the athlete tolerating and adapting to the physical stressors, and is the athlete prepared for the next exposure?

Conclusion

Remember the primary goal of training is to create controlled stress that will stimulate a change in the efficiency and effectiveness of each system throughout the body. Before this stress adaptation can occur, however, an athlete must be in a recovery state. It should not be the intention of a performance coach, skill coach, or therapist to speed up recovery and limit the body’s natural processes. Instead, our goal is to ensure athletes are in a state ready to recover.

“If you train too hard on your easy days, soon you will be training too easy on your hard days.”—Keijo Hakkinen

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

Relevant Reading and Resources

Sapolsky, Robert M. Why Zebras Don’t Get Ulcers: An Updated Guide to Stress, Stress-Related Diseases, and Coping. W.H. Freeman, 2001.

Wingo, Mary K. The Impact of the Human Stress Response: The Biologic Origins of Human Stress. Roxwell Waterhouse, 2016.

Schulkin, Jay. Allostasis, Homeostasis and the Costs of Physiological Adaptation. Cambridge Univ. Press, 2012.

Halson, Shona L. “Monitoring Training Load to Understand Fatigue in Athletes.” Sports Medicine, 2014; 44(2): 139-147.

Budgett, R. “Fatigue and Underperformance in Athletes: The Overtraining Syndrome.” British Journal of Sports Medicine, 1998; 32(2): 107-110.

Thorpe, R. T. (Robin), et al. “Monitoring Fatigue Status in Elite Team SportAthletes: Implications for Practice.” International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 2017; 12(2): S2-27-S2-S35.

Everly, George S., and Jeffrey M. Lating. “The Anatomy and Physiology of the Human Stress Response.” In: A Clinical Guide to the Treatment of the Human Stress Response. Springer, New York, 1970.

Taylor, et al. “Fatigue Monitoring in High PerformanceSport: A Survey of Current Trends.”Journal of Australian Strength and Conditioning, 2012; 20(1): 12-23.

Schwellnus M., Soligard, T., Alonso J., et al. “How much is too much? (Part 2) International Olympic Committee consensus statement on load in sport and risk of illness.” British Journal of Sports Medicine, 2016; 50(17): 1043-1052.

Gabbett, T.J. “The training-injury prevention paradox: should athletes be training smarter and harder?”British Journal of Sports Medicine,2016; 50(5): 273-280.

In most sports, we not only want to move ourselves but also want to have the ability to move exterior objects—opponents, baseball bats, hockey sticks, rackets, etc. Pulling the bar in Olympic lifts not only trains the triple extension at the hip, knee, and ankle but also force production, proximally to distally into the ground with our feet, to transmit that force into the barbell to drive it up and then it reverses back onto us in the catch position. Based on this information alone, we can see the superiority of the pulling component of the Olympic lifts compared to only jumps.

And what about the catch? Is it necessary for athletes? Consider the speed it takes to drop under a heavily loaded barbell to catch a clean. Going from the pull’s tall, triple extended position to the bottom of a full squat in milliseconds must be worth looking into.

A common argument against training the Olympic lifts is that we don’t need to teach athletes to catch the bar. The detractors argue that the catch doesn’t add any extra physiological benefits to athletes who are not Olympic weightlifters. There are even studies that suggest athletes would benefit more from performing only clean and snatch pulls due to the concentric-only movement, which eliminates the need to decelerate and transition under the bar and, therefore, produces more force at the top of the pull.

The accuracy of these claims is questionable, however, because we never know how technically proficient the athletes are in the studies who perform such complex movements as the snatch and the clean and jerk. If an athlete cannot perform a technically sound clean, of course they will not benefit fully from the exercise.

Critics also argue that the primary goal of the Olympic lifts is to achieve triple extension at the hip, knee, and ankle. Why choose such complex movements to achieve that goal when we can use jumping variations and medicine ball throws, which get the same result?

The peak force of a 250 lb. clean surpasses both jumps and medicine ball throws, says @will_ratelle. Share on X

The Olympic lifts are much more than those two components. When an athlete performs Olympic lifts, consider the forces placed on them compared to trap bar jumps or 20 lb. medicine ball scoop throws. The peak force of a 250 lb. clean surpasses both the jump and the throws. One study compared the differences between a clean pull and a counter movement jump, showing peak force nearly doubled in the clean pull and time-to-peak force was 36% faster in the clean pull. Think of Newton’s 3^rd law: for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Olympic Lifts and Agility

Agility, a major component of athletic competition in just about every sport, is commonly defined as the ability to accelerate, decelerate, and accelerate again. I argue that accelerating a barbell as fast as possible and then decelerating and getting under the bar and then accelerating the bar back from a full squat checks the box of training agility as well.

The acceleration and deceleration demands of #OlympicLifts check the box of agility training, says @will_ratelle. Share on X

Compare Olympic lifts to medicine ball throws. With a medicine ball throw, we completely unload the body after we project the ball into the air or wherever we throw the ball. Olympic lifts require us to exert near maximal force onto the bar and then train the motor ability to reabsorb that force on the catch, which we can do by power cleaning/snatching or full cleaning/snatching.

Don't neglect the #eccentric strength required to catch the bar during an Olympic lift, says @will_ratelle. Share on X

To take full advantage of the bar’s peak force, we must drop into a squat position to catch it. I understand that the initial “explosive” action of a pull or a jump or a throw attracts most coaches, but it’s important not to neglect the eccentric strength required to catch that bar as well.

Olympic lifts also train athletes to brace quickly. They need to brace when they begin their first pull, to keep a rigid, tight back. And they need to brace as they rack the bar as they catch. It’s a very quick transition between the second pull and the rack position.

Developing Resilience

Specificity is always a muggy topic in the strength and conditioning field because coaches have different definitions for specificity and point to different methods for specific training. But in football, hockey, and basketball, there is contact and that contact can continue to occur over and over again in a matter of seconds.

For example, a defensive end may rush the edge and make contact with an offensive tackle to find himself getting chipped by a running back a split second later and then hit again by the same offensive tackle. The defensive end must be able to brace, or they will get the wind knocked out of them. And being able to rack a clean might be one of the best ways to prepare the athlete for that level of contact. Not only because of the bracing, but also because of the amount of force needed to withstand a heavy clean or snatch.

Racking a clean may be one of the best ways to prepare athletes for high levels of contact, says @will_ratelle. Share on X

If our athletes only perform pulls, throws, and jumps (which I believe are extremely beneficial), they only expose themselves once to that high level of force. But if they include the catch, they expose themselves to that high level of force twice. Now take that 2:1 ratio and apply it over the course of a typical four-year college career. What would you rather do? All things being equal with exercise selection, which athletes will be more prepared to get hit in football or hockey? Which athletes will be more prepared to finish at the rim through contact in basketball? Which athletes will have the potential to hit the ball harder in tennis or baseball?

The evidence points to the Olympic lifts as one of the more effective modalities we can use to best prepare our athletes for competition.

Timing and Technique

Of course, it’s going to take time to teach athletes the proper technique, and there might be situations where there’s no time to go through the progressions. Maybe you have a transfer student who only has one season and has never cleaned or snatched before and the season starts four weeks after they arrive on campus.

In that situation, I get it. I spent some time as a player in the NFL and CFL, and the most we ever did was hang cleans. This was probably appropriate given that there’s such a rapid turnover of players, and it would be a logistical nightmare getting guys to clean with great technique when you may only have some guys for a week. That, combined with the fact that the athletes’ job is to play football—not train— puts a coach in a position where what’s best for the long-term may not work in the short run, and a coach does not want to hear concern from the front office.

At the University of North Dakota, however, we redshirt almost every freshman football player, and they train three days a week during the season without any other team in the weight room. It would be a disservice to them if they didn’t start learning the Olympic lifts in those initial autumn months to prepare for the winter season training. We have the time, so we do not need to rush anyone through the progressions. Because there have been so many articles written about the neurological benefits of the Olympic lifts and the development of motor skills and grip strength, etc., I wanted to touch on these other areas that are often left out of the discussion.

Getting buy-in from the athletes and the coaching staff can be challenging. Athletes get embarrassed and discouraged when they perform the lifts without good technique. I had one football player, for example, who was lagging behind when we were cleaning from the floor as a group, and he probably wasn’t ready for that. He would shoot his hips up first, causing the bar to drift away, which caused an imbalance in the barbell-skeletal system. This then caused a jerking second pull and a very inconsistent catch position.

He got frustrated with the program, so we modified his program for the day by having him complete one rep of a segmented clean deadlift, followed by a clean pull, followed by a power clean. The sequence slowed it all down and allowed him to concentrate on each piece of the lift without the complex progressions. He performed that for another couple training days until he felt competent to complete a set of all power/full cleans. This worked since we didn’t have to set him back at all, and he was able to get his work in without feeling like he was being singled out.

Final Thoughts

It makes the most sense to me that we should train our athletes to perform these movements. Sure, it may take some time for them to develop the technique and the timing of it all, but when they’re able to put it together, they can really improve their performance in their sport. Athletes who can clean heavy and snatch heavy give themselves great potential to hit harder, run faster, and jump higher. And what seems to be the least appreciated, their ability to brace through contact (eccentric strength) may give them an edge over their competition.

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

While effective training develops physical qualities such as strength, speed, power, endurance, and other technical, tactical, and psychological elements that are essential for performance, competitive sports offer a separate and unique set of motivational and inspirational factors.

Playing the game offers freedom of movement, thought-free expressions of physical talent and skill execution to achieve a desired result. Players get competition, the challenge of besting a worthy opponent, and the chance to test their ability. The game gives instant feedback—each play, each set of downs, each inning, each half, there is always a precise marker of what the athlete’s efforts have produced to that point. Sports are also unpredictable: Players keep playing because no two games, no two matches, no two races are ever exactly the same.

Players keep playing because no two games, no two matches, no two races are ever exactly the same, says @xrperformance. Share on X

With that in mind, let’s consider for a moment the number of hours your players actually play versus the number of hours they train in order to play. It takes an incredible amount of repetition to induce automation in the execution of a skill or develop the physiological adaptations that lead to increased physical performance. However, how many of those training hours replicate and distort what really happens during the game?

Is there an ongoing element of competition during training or is it a check-marked system of completing sets and reps? Is there freedom of movement, expression, and decision-making from the players, or are drills closed and movements directed? Is there immediate feedback or are gains entirely long-term in nature? Are the sessions planned and predictable?

Transitioning from a Coach-Centered to an Athlete-Centered Approach

During game play, the coach wants the athletes to be active problem-solvers, to correctly assess what is occurring during the game, and to respond with the appropriate decisions and skills. However, it is often the coach who is responsible for all the elements of training, with the athletes having limited input in the training process. This approach is termed a coach-centered approach (CCA).

On the other hand, a player-centered approach (PCA) uses various strategies to enhance autonomy and empowerment, and provides athletes with tools and strategies to manipulate and manage the training process.^1,2This article will look at five reasons to consider transitioning from a coach-centered approach to a player-centered approach, as well as how to implement autonomy-supportive behaviors in your practice.

Improve Performance During Competition

Performance in sports relies on the interaction of physical, technical, tactical, and psychological/social factors under complex and dynamic circumstances. During games, players need to not only demonstrate their movement skills, but also make appropriate decisions under pressure. When working with team sport athletes, for example, the first objective of the coach is to establish their style of play or Mental Model. This ideal or “alpha version”—as defined by Richards, Collins, and Mascarenhas³—represents the perfect execution of a skill or play as if it were picked from the pages of a textbook.

But coaches are not the ones playing the game. Therefore, the players’ contributions in reshaping the coach’s vision and making it a Shared Mental Model are crucial. Through team meetings, team debriefs, conditioned or small-sided games, reflection, and questioning, players can take control of their learning. The performance vision offered by the coach and further developed by the players is then shaped by information on the court, on the field, or on the ice. This is only possible if you allow players to provide their input.

Coaches aren’t the ones playing the game. Therefore, you need to allow players to give their input, says @xrperformance. Share on X

For example, players can now anticipate future playing situations based on the Shared Mental Model and/or respond to new challenges as they arise during training. Individual players are now able to coordinate their actions with those of their teammates under various different scenarios. Finally, players can make appropriate decisions during the game and further discuss the new performance vision with their teammates and coaches for the upcoming match. Overall, this approach enables athletes to develop the tactical awareness and understanding to make informed decisions during games.

Improve Feedback from Athletes

In a coach-centered approach, the coach has knowledge of the game and they transmit this knowledge to players. The coach therefore instructs players on the skills and tactics to use during training and games under x and y circumstances. In a player-centered approach, however, the relationship that you create and foster with the athletes that you work with will have a profound impact on their motivation and, therefore, their performance.

Communication between players and coaches is crucial if you are to adopt a player-centered model in your coaching. First, the coach needs to provide a safe environment for players to provide input. During team meetings, for example, this means providing equal opportunities for every player to participate in the team discussion and guarding against one or several players dominating the dialogue. For some issues, this may involve implementing procedures to ensure confidentiality, such as telling players not to include their name on feedback sheets or placing a box or envelope near your office where players can turn in any assignments, feedback sheets, or notes.

A player-centered coaching model relies on the involvement of all players, not just the vocal ones, says @xrperformance. Share on X

During meetings and training sessions, you should use questioning to get players’ input. By asking a question and providing the athletes with time to answer it, the coach presents an opportunity for the athletes to be active learners and improve their understanding of the task at hand as it relates to the game model.

You can ask two types of questions: low-order questions and high-order questions. Low-order questions support technical development and focus mainly on the what, when, and where. High-order questions are designed to stimulate critical thinking and are mostly about the why and the how.

The implementation of questioning takes time and may be uncomfortable at first. The athletes that you work with may not be used to answering such questions and may be reluctant and intimidated, especially if they need to answer those questions in front of their teammates. The best option for coaches is to plan which questions to ask, and when during a training session they can use questioning.

I would suggest that you start with basic questions and provide athletes with opportunities to answer these questions in a small group. Then, gradually introduce more high-order questions first during meetings and later during team training sessions.

Enhance Motor Learning

I am a firm believer that getting athletes involved in understanding the why is very important for the sports and S&C coaches. In terms of motor learning, I mostly refer to the relatively permanent changes in behavior or knowledge that support long-term retention and transfer.⁴ When athletes understand why they are performing a specific exercise or why the training program is structured a certain way, they are more likely to understand the concepts leading to performance enhancement.

Involving athletes in understanding the WHY is very important for sports and S&C coaches, says @xrperformance. Share on X

The use of questioning fits nicely in this situation. You can use simple low-order questions (what and where), such as asking the athletes what the acronym PAL means when working on acceleration mechanics (Posture, Arm action, and Leg action) or having them tell you the coaching cues needed to perform a hang power clean (hips back, shoulders over the bar, jump up, and punch the elbows). External coaching cues, such as push the ground behind you (acceleration), punch the ground from above (top speed mechanics) or reach for the cookie jar (shooting a free throw in basketball), are a good way to reinforce transfer of training and learning.

On the other hand, asking high-order questions about techniques and tactics related to their sport or requesting that athletes self-evaluate their performance can also be helpful. Look specifically at the why and the how, and evaluate whether the sessions you planned as a coach ensure the long-term retention of the different concepts the athletes were exposed to in training.

Individualize Training

Once the athletes under your supervision understand the why, you can start to implement different autonomy-supportive strategies. Being autonomy-supportive means that the coach must understand the athlete’s perspective, acknowledge their feelings, and provide pertinent information and opportunities for choice, while minimizing the use of pressure and demands.⁵ Put simply, that means providing choices, explaining the reason to perform a specific exercise or drill, letting athletes show initiative, and providing positive feedback based on competence and performance.

Traditionally, athletic development coaches or S&C coaches like to use strict training protocols, loads based on %1RM, or repetitions ranges to target many of the different physical qualities required in sports. You can consider this prescriptive style of coaching—where the coach dictates the exercises being done and determines the loading parameters—a coach-centered approach.

In a player-centered model, coaches provide choices based on the athlete’s level of experience. Share on X

In opposition, in a player-centered approach, the coach could look at any of the four recommendations provided by Halperin, et al.⁶ You could:

1. Select the number of choices based on the athlete’s level of experience.
2. Provide a range of options to choose from.
3. Determine if the choices provided are relevant to the task or not.
4. Consider your relationship with the athlete when deciding on the variables described above.

If you use Olympic weightlifting movements in your programming, a good idea could be to outline the different movement progressions that the athletes can perform based on their training experience and technique. If an incoming freshman has little or no experience with Olympic movements, using DB high pulls, DB RDLs, and DB jump shrugs can serve as a proper foundation for that particular athlete. A senior can go ahead and perform more advanced variations, like a power clean from the hang or different pulls.

Another example could be to select a few different exercises that athletes can perform during the in-season, when you don’t know how their body will feel after a game. For instance, a football lineman could choose a bilateral back squat, a single-leg squat, or a leg press as his main lower body exercise for his first weight training session of the week, roughly 48-72 hours’ post-game.

Finally, there are some athletes that you get to know on an individual basis as your relationship with them grows. For example, one student-athlete I worked with in the past two years had a history of knee injuries. His condition was so bad at first that he could only participate in the special teams’ segment of football practices if he wanted to play the game on the weekend. After these 15-20 minutes of special teams, he would pretty much sit out the rest of practice.

Two years later—and after many modifications to his training program—we would have daily discussions before training sessions to assess how he was doing and whether he could perform the training sessions. We often alternated lower and upper body sessions when he felt his knees needed more rest, or limited squats in favor of unilateral posterior chain work.

Increase Adherence to Training Programs

Let’s face it: For some athletes, training to develop physical qualities such as strength, speed, power, and endurance can become quite repetitive, if not boring. You might think that you can only use this approach with fairly advanced or elite athletes. However, you can implement an autonomy-supportive environment with younger athletes as well.

You can implement an autonomy-supportive environment with younger athletes, not just the elite, says @xrperformance. Share on X

While working with a high school soccer concentration program, I tried such strategies with grade 7 soccer players—both boys and girls. During one of their soccer classes in the weight room, they had to design their own training program for that session. They had to choose between different athletic movement skill (AMS) competencies, then select the movements (squatting, lunging, hinging, pushing, pulling, bracing, and rotating) and the movement progressions.

I was very pleased with the different training sessions these young players came up with. Keep in mind that there were no right or wrong answers, and that I was more interested in their thinking process and their ability to make a link between athletic development in the weight room and their sport of soccer.

Providing young athletes with choices can be as simple as letting them decide whether they want to sprint on a flat surface or on a short ramp, or whether they want to use stairs instead of boxes of various heights to perform plyometric exercises. Telling them to set up an obstacle course using various pieces of equipment and different stations that emphasize footwork, change of directions, jumping/landing mechanics, and running is also fun, and allows them to be creative and involved in the design of the session. Basically, you give them guidance in setting up the exercise based on the theme, skills, or physical qualities you would like them to improve.

Give Them Choice and a Voice

When working with athletes, the role of the coach is to plan, organize, monitor, and respond to the different circumstances that evolve around the training process. At the beginning, this certainly entails providing more guidance and more direction on the different aspects of the training. However, as your relationships with your athletes grow—and they mature and gain a better understanding of themselves, their needs, and their sport—your role as coach is not to tell athletes what to do, but to set up learning opportunities that enable them to figure it out themselves.⁷

Giving athletes choice and a voice is an important starting point for their enjoyment of the game, says @xrperformance. Share on X

Providing athletes with choices and a voice in the training process can therefore serve as an important starting point for the athletes that you work with to realize the beautiful joy of the game.

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. Kidman, L. (2005). Athlete-centred Coaching: Developing Inspired and Inspiring People. (T. Tremewan, Ed.). Christchurch, New Zealand: Innovative Print Communications Ltd.
2. Sheridan, M. P. (2009). “Coaches Empowering Athletes … Using an ‘Athlete-Centered’ Approach.” Podium Sports Journal.
3. Richards, P., Collins, D. & Mascarenhas, D. R. D. (2012). “Developing rapid high-pressure team decision-making skills. The integration of slow deliberate reflective learning within the competitive performance environment: A case study of elite netball.” Reflective Practice: International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 1-18.
4. Soderstrom, N. C. & Bjork, R. A. (2015). “Learning Versus Performance: An Integrative Review.” Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(2), 176-199.
5. Mageau, G. A & Vallerand, R. J. (2003). “The coach-athlete relationship: a motivational model.” Journal of Sports Sciences, 21(11), 883-904.
6. Halperin, I., Wulf, G., Vigotsky, A. D., Schoenfeld, B. J. & Behm, D. G. (2018). “Autonomy: A missing ingredient of a successful program?” Strength and Conditioning Journal, (February).
7. Kidman, L. & Lombardo, B. J. (Ed.). (2010). Athlete-centred Coaching : Developing Decision Makers. Worcester, UK: Innovative Print Communications Ltd.

Although the popularity of, and excitement over, force plates and contact grids is palpable, the Just Jump contact mat still has plenty of value. Coaches who have the Just Jump system or don’t have a budget for higher-priced equipment can still get a lot of value from the contact mat.

This overview covers what the Just Jump system can and can’t do. In addition to the pros and cons of the equipment, I give some pointers for using the contact mat and suggest what population to best use it for. No matter what jump assessment tool you rely on, you will benefit from the information provided in this article.

About the Just Jump System

The Just Jump testing system is a contact mat that collects air and contact times. Most coaches that use the testing device measure air time when testing vertical jumps. You can also use the equipment for sprint and shuttle tests, but for most coaches, it’s a handy tool for estimating vertical jumps.

The #JustJump tests quickly, and helps us make straightforward decisions for our younger athletes, @ShaneDavs. Share on X

The Just Jump is not a force plate; it’s a mat that knows when an athlete is on it and when an athlete is in the air, but it’s still useful for coaches who want to see changes in their training program. At our facility, we have used the Just Jump System for years to help drive straightforward decisions with younger athletes, and the convenience of quick testing is a perfect fit for us.

For the last 20 years, the Just Jump system has been researched for validity and reliability in testing jumps compared to a gold standard. The results are clear—the product is useful for estimating jumping ability, but it’s not the same as a force plate.

Recently, sport scientists conjured up a correction formula to improve the data, and that is especially useful to determine a true jump score. I care about improvement and watch technique carefully to ensure that improvement is coming from the legs getting more explosive, not the athlete cheating by landing with a deep squat. At our facility, we allow a soft landing, but it’s “soft and shallow,” not low and hard.

What the Just Jump Can and Can’t Do

When you buy a system, it’s for ease of use and estimating change in a training program. We use both a contact grid and a force plate with our athletes now, but when we have a mob of athletes and little time for testing, we will use the Just Jump. We also have a Vertec because we want athletes to be familiar with jumping up and reaching, not just performing the strict tests recommended by the scientists.

When we have a mob of athletes and little time for testing, we use the Just Jump, says @ShaneDavs. Share on X

You can calculate the power and forces from a contact mat, but the device doesn’t measure those scores directly. Additionally, you can’t acquire the differences between right and left legs, so if you are doing rehab like us, that will be a major drawback. The Just Jump is also not a tool for horizontal jumping and bounding, and the system has a set amount of jumps it can collect with canned tests such as the 4-jump test. Lastly, the system can’t detect if an athlete is rolling, rocking, or dipping when doing a non-countermovement jump.

A great coach will see it if an athlete is not strict, but automated sensors do help and that’s why force plates are great for detecting a quiet phase. When training in a group, athletes watching strict techniques is helpful not only for jump testing, but any training that requires a pause or isometric contraction.

NFL Combine Vertical Testing

Conventional vertical jump testing is not as valid as jumping with hands on hips or hands holding a rod, but we still like to look at those numbers because they’re more real to athletes trying to rob a home run in baseball or block a shot in basketball. We still do jump tests with more “lab-like” mechanics, but to connect an athlete to testing when they are young, it is important to include a vertical jump with arms. With our Combine athletes, we test using a Vertec and Just Jump at the same time, as it adds a layer of confidence in the training data and prepares athletes for the actual testing they will do on Pro Day.

Video 1. Vertical jumping with arms is a standard test in the NFL, and other organizations using this form of test often include a Vertec. Because the movement has higher variability from the torso and arms, the test is not as reliable as those without arm contribution, but is good to add to a jump testing battery.

We have had plenty of athletes go on to play Division I football, hockey, and volleyball, and some of them have gone to programs that test with force plates. We know that the tests will show data that is very hard to satisfy an uneducated ego, but after testing with different jumping styles, they know that without the arms and a countermovement, their heights will be lower. As with electronic timing and hand times, you should educate the athlete on the differences because they always want the better score to represent what they can do. We are upfront in explaining the differences in technology so nothing is fudged or inflated.

Elastic Rebound Testing

The 4-jump test is popular because it is fast and indicates if an athlete has a good bounce; meaning they are able to use stored energy from their legs. We can tell a lot from this test, but it requires some practice for athletes. We used the 4-jump test to spitball an athlete’s ability to perform plyometric motions, but the test can’t do much more than estimate rebound jump height.

Scores on the 4-jump test will be lower than a contact grid because the mat size is smaller, forcing an athlete to focus on steering just as much as maximal jumping. We like having a restricted space, as it demonstrates a standard form of body control.

Young athletes tend to be a great fit with the 4-jump test, mainly because they are less skilled and less elastic. The power-to-weight ratio factor does make interpretation of the information difficult, as some athletes tend to get bigger and stronger before their ability to store and use elastic energy develops. We like testing more frequently to ensure we are vigilant with the long-term development process, because speed and eccentric abilities are so important. When we see a big discrepancy between the concentric and eccentric scores on the kMeter and with the jump tests, we know that some athletes need special attention paid to elastic development.

The eccentric utilization ratio (EUR) is a solid metric for identifying changes in a season, or whether an athlete needs more plyometrics in their training program. Like the rest of the jump numbers, this calculation is more of a flag than anything else. If we see poor absolute numbers we don’t worry too much about what the athlete needs, as poor power is obvious, but for athletes who have trained for a while, we want to know that both starting speed and deceleration abilities are developed. Athletes with poor eccentric abilities that are fast tend to be talented but underdeveloped. We close the gap by making sure the EUR is solid after putting in the work over a few months.

Universal Jump Tests

You can perform Bosco tests, specifically jumping without arms with and without countermovement, with the Just Jump system. In order to get the most out of the test, the athlete needs to land with a nearly straight leg because the air time starts when the feet no longer apply weight on the mat, and that is near toe-off. When landing, an athlete has to look very similar to the way they looked when they started the jump, otherwise the scores are going to be artificially inflated.

Field-ready reliability is the key to the Just Jump mat, and we like to see real progress in inches, says @ShaneDavs. Share on X

Field-ready reliability is the key to the Just Jump mat, and we like to see real progress in inches, not fractions of an inch. If you want laser precision, actual force is needed, not jump height. Still, a firm protocol and tough coaching will ensure that contact mat numbers are solid enough to make programming decisions. As long as a coach doesn’t cave in, a contact mat like the Just Jump is enough to see obvious development; when it becomes too close to call, other tests are needed.

What is useful with contact mat jumping is speed of testing. Wearables are fine with small groups and unlimited time, but with larger groups like entire teams, it breaks down. With three or four stations, an entire team can test in a few minutes, and this is necessary for in-season training. Some teams have less than an hour to fully train—sometimes less than 30 minutes—so data collection that takes long can defeat the purpose of capturing it in the first place. If you don’t have time to train because you are testing, then the numbers are meaningless because you can’t do anything to intervene.

Test numbers are worthless if you have no time to train, because you can’t do anything to intervene, says @ShaneDavs. Share on X

Reactive Jumping with the Chip

You can assess for Reactive Strength Index (RSI) with force plates and contact grids, but you can also enhance the Just Jump with an external chip that is roughly $70 and needs to be specially ordered. If you are trying to get the RSI, you can use a box about 12-18 inches high and place a hurdle on the other side of the mat. The hurdle encourages an athlete to be both reactive and propulsive, as the small barrier cues the athlete to think about projection and speed off the mat.

We like to see 0.2 seconds or faster, and understand the precision doesn’t need to be perfect to be useful. As long as the athlete performs the task effectively, the contact time is useful. Landing on the mat instead of on the ground beyond the hurdle can get air time, but we like using the hurdles because the movement is better and the athletes look athletic and elastic.

Due to the sensitivity of jump testing, fatigue is difficult to discern with jump tests alone, especially when athletes are not motivated to perform their best when the numbers are not part of a reward process. Like screening, fatigue monitoring requires more than just one number alone to determine risk, so we think asking how athletes feel when the numbers are clearly compromised is better than just assuming jump tests are representative of their readiness to lift or sprint.

Further Recommendations

SimpliFaster has published several articles on jump testing and jump training, and a few buyer’s guides on contact grids and force plates are also available. The most important factors for investing in testing are the time involved and the information you receive, not the cost of the equipment.

The most important reason to invest in testing is the info you receive, not the equipment’s cost, says @ShaneDavs. Share on X

Jump testing or any type of testing requires a plan for what to do when you receive the information, and simple testing and a decision tree is a great start. The Just Jump system is a great entry tool for coaches wanting to get data that is both practical and reliable, but you need to know what to do with the data and what the limits of the system are.

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

Increasing muscle mass is an important aspect of training for many sports, especially early in an athlete’s development. Some recent studies, however, have cast some doubt on the legitimacy of earlier research about the importance of hypertrophy, suggesting we might need to examine some of our long-held beliefs in this area.

There’s a very real possibility that increases in muscle size are not particularly well correlated with increases in muscle strength. If true, this could mean that the standard hypertrophy phase of training is less important and may not even need to be programmed in sports where hypertrophy itself is not crucial.

Developing Hypertrophy

In the early stages of athlete development, a coach typically looks for general training-based improvements, the majority of which are often a function of muscle hypertrophy. As such, there is a natural focus on the best type of training required to drive hypertrophy optimally in athletes.

Over the years, it’s become clear that there are a plethora of ways by which we can stimulate skeletal muscle hypertrophy. We can lift heavy loads (>75% 1RM). We can lift light loads (~30% 1RM), provided we get close to muscle failure. We can lift loads in the middle of this range. We can restrict the blood flow to the muscle, allowing us to promote hypertrophy with lower loads, which is crucial during rehabilitation from an injury where higher loads come with an increased risk of re-injury. We can use different contraction types: isometric, eccentric, and concentric. We can lift quickly or slowly. We can alter the frequency, volume, and intensity of training sessions. Provided that the load is sufficient, we can promote muscle hypertrophy.

To Infinity and Beyond: Hypertrophy Timelines and Plateaus

Typically, we think of muscle hypertrophy as a slow process, which is why we believe that the majority of early improvements in strength and hypertrophy programs are due to neural adaptations. But is this actually the case? This is where a recent review—with the Toy Story-inspired title “Muscle Growth: To Infinity and Beyond?”—comes in. It’s yet another paper born from collaborations with various researchers, including Jeremy Loenneke from the University of Mississippi.

These recent papers have been really interesting because they question the underlying assumptions on which training theory is formed—such as Selye’s General Adaptation Syndrome—and bear similarities to the work of my Prof Doc supervisor, John Kiely. “To Infinity” is a review of studies of adult humans using at least three muscle size measurements over time.

Upper Arm and Chest Muscles. The researchers found eight papers that measured changes in the biceps muscle size at multiple time points. Taken together, it appears that muscle size increases after about four weeks of training. In older females or untrained subjects, though, this may take longer. For the triceps, the amount of time appears to be longer, about six weeks. For the chest, muscle size increases after three to six weeks of training.

Leg Muscles. For the quadriceps, muscle growth is often seen after one to three weeks of training. For the older adults, though, some studies show no increases in muscle size after three months; fortunately this is not a common finding in the research and may be related to the methodology used in those particular studies. The same is true for the hamstrings, with significant increases in size reported by the first week of training.

Plateaus. Plateaus—the point where further improvements in muscle size are not seen—varied between the upper and the lower body. For the upper body, a set point in time could not be determined, in part due to studies’ shorter time periods. For the lower body, further increases in muscle size do not occur after 12 weeks of training. Again, there is a dearth of studies that explore longer-term adaptations in muscle size because it’s hard to get participants to adhere to the exercise guidelines for long periods of time.

Increases in muscle size are likely to slow down after twelve weeks, says @craig100m. Share on X

The main findings, then, are that muscle growth plateaus tend to occur after about 12 weeks (although this could be due to methodology) and that skeletal muscle hypertrophy can occur sooner than commonly thought. Both challenge current beliefs and, as such, make this review potentially very important.

Key Variables to Consider

Obviously, we need to examine variations in methodology among the studies here, as the authors point out. As mentioned, many studies simply don’t last for long periods of time, making it difficult to fully understand how muscle hypertrophy may vary over time. There is the possibility—although I’m purely speculating here—that a second, slower, more sustained period of muscle hypertrophy may occur following the initial, rapid, and acute skeletal muscle hypertrophy in reported in shorter studies.

Gender and Age. Additionally, the people participating in the study impact the results. From the research cited in this review, apparently muscle size increases more rapidly in males, potentially due to the greater amount of anabolic hormones. But they also plateau more rapidly when compared to females. It seems age also is a significant modifying factor, with older adults tending to exhibit slower and, in some cases, no improvements in muscle size compared to younger people.

Diet and Emotional State. We also need to consider inter-individual variation, which is a drum I continually like to bang. The diet of the people participating in these studies may limit how much muscle they can grow and how long the process will occur. Are they consuming sufficient protein and calories? Their psycho-emotional state will also impact their adaptations. It’s now well established that non-training stress, such as university exams, can negatively impact adaptations following resistance training. Might these factors come into play here?

Genetics. Genetics is another variable to bear in mind. There are many genes (more precisely, single nucleotide polymorphisms, or SNPs) that can impact both the time course and magnitude of increases in muscle size. It’s a fairly safe assumption that SNPs associated with greater levels of muscle mass may be more prevalent in athletes who are successful in sports and events where increased muscle mass is important. As such, can elite athletes undergo faster levels of muscle growth or extend their muscle growth for longer periods of time without plateauing?

It seems logical that they can. Professional bodybuilders are huge, and it seems unlikely that all this hypertrophy occurred within the first three months of their training. Ok, they’re possibly doped up to their eyeballs, but “natural” bodybuilders (note the quotation marks) are still highly muscular. On a purely anecdotal level, I gained about 7kgs of mass when I transitioned from track to bobsleigh, despite being a well-trained, genetically gifted athlete with a 9-year resistance training background. While I have no doubt this was not all muscle, I know at least some of it was.

Conclusions

So where does this leave us? “To Infinity” is certainly an interesting and very important review. The main take-home is that, despite popular beliefs, skeletal muscle hypertrophy can occur pretty quickly during the first three weeks following the start of a resistance training program. A second consideration is that these increases in muscle size tend to plateau after about twelve weeks. Given the points I made above, we can take this with a pinch of salt.

Nevertheless, it’s certainly true that increases in muscle size are likely to slow down after twelve weeks while increases in strength do not. Anecdotally again, I added 90kgs to my power clean personal best after my first three months of training—although it did take seven years to achieve this. Also, given that the power clean is a highly technical lift, many of these increases in “strength” may have been technical.

As athletes develop, we may want to deemphasize or omit muscular #hypertrophy-based training, says @craig100m. Share on X

Given this new information, as an athlete develops, we might wish to place less—or indeed no—emphasis on specific muscular hypertrophy-based training. Instead we could focus on aspects that are more likely to lead to performance enhancements, including exercises with increased transfer to the competitive movement and special strength exercises. By selecting these exercises, coaches may be able to drive further improvements in well-trained athletes that would not occur when following traditional hypertrophy-centered training.

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

Neck training certainly isn’t a new idea: It’s been in practice for hundreds of years among medical professionals and athletes alike. Applications and methods have varied though, as we’ve gained access to better tools and more information about the human body. Training the neck is instrumental to reducing the rate and severity of sports concussions, but it’s about improving performance as well. In this article, we will share a brief history of neck training and how it relates to athlete health and well-being.

Training the neck is instrumental to reducing the rate and severity of sports concussions. Share on X

The very first neck-strengthening device, “The Head Lifting Machine,” was invented in 1890 by the director of physical training at Harvard University’s Hemenway Gymnasium, Dr. Dudley Allen Sargent. He developed a variety of complex machines to fill gaps left by conventional exercise equipment of the late 1800s.

The next major evolution in neck strengthening came in the 1970s, spurred by Arthur Allen Jones, founder of Nautilus and MedX. Over the course of two decades, Jones released a long line of fitness equipment, including the Nautilus Rotary Neck Machine. Regarded as the godfather of high-intensity training, Jones made resistance training more appealing to the general public and helped fuel the fitness boom of the ’70s and ’80s. Soon afterward, Hammer Strength (founded by Gary Jones, Arthur’s son) and Rogers Athletic Company released their own line of neck training equipment, the most popular of which were their four-way neck machines. Head harnesses also started to become more popular during this time.

The latest innovation in neck training—Iron Neck—was released in 2012, as research studies began to link increased neck strength to decreased risk for concussions. Iron Neck was invented by Mike Jolly, a former football player and wrestler at UCLA. It combines linear and rotational resistance for a more functional way to train the neck and core.

Rehabilitation

More than half a billion people in the world suffer from chronic neck or back pain, accounting for $90B in annual spending in the U.S. alone. These major health issues aren’t going away any time soon. Some common types of injuries that lead to neck pain include: whiplash (motor vehicle accidents, contact sports), repetitive strain (poor posture, tech neck, text neck), nerve pinch injury (neck stinger), disk injury (bulge, herniation), vertebral fracture, and spinal cord damage.

The Academy of Orthopaedic Physical Therapy recently released neck pain guidelines with four classification categories:

• Neck Pain with Mobility Deficits
• Neck Pain with Radiating Pain (Radicular)
• Neck Pain with Movement Coordination Impairments (WAD)
• Neck Pain with Headache (Cervicogenic)

The purpose of this classification system is to direct intervention toward optimal treatment, based on the individual’s presentation of symptoms. Types of treatment could include stretching, mobilization, manipulation, range of motion (ROM) exercises, stabilization exercises, isometric strengthening, vestibular rehabilitation, eye-head-neck coordination, traction, and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS). More information about the differences in diagnosis and proposed treatments for each classification can be found here.

Injury Prevention

Football players, wrestlers, and boxers have been the most active neck-strengthening participants (among athletes) over the past several decades, though each is motivated by a different reason. The primary concern in football (and hockey and rugby, as well) has been to reduce neck stingers and other cervical spine injuries. For wrestlers, it can often be the difference between winning and losing. A player can leverage a strong neck as an extra joint to gain position against an opponent, facilitate take-downs, and reduce risk of choke. The focus for boxers has been to reduce whiplash, concussion risk, and traumatic brain injury (TBI), such as chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE).

Originally termed “punch drunk syndrome” due to its association with boxers, then later dementia pugilistica, CTE is a form of neurodegeneration believed to result from repeated head injuries. The movie Concussion highlighted the resurgence of CTE after Dr. Bennet Omalu identified the disease in Mike Webster, a former offensive lineman for the Pittsburgh Steelers, during his autopsy. Since 2005, more than 300 cases of CTE have been discovered; most are reported to have come from tackle football.

The number of reported concussions has doubled since 2002, with nearly four million sports-related concussions occurring in the U.S. every year. This, coupled with the long-term risk of CTE, has garnered increased attention in the media and scientific community. Research around concussion diagnosis, treatment, and prevention is increasingly popular. Several studies over the past decade have shown an inverse relationship between neck strength and concussion incidents.

Nearly 4 million sports-related concussions occur in the U.S. every year. Share on X

In 2014, the Journal of Primary Prevention published a study that tracked 6,700 high school athletes in boys’ and girls’ soccer, basketball, and lacrosse over a 2.5-year period. Researchers captured anthropometric measurements, athletic exposure data, and concussion incidents. After adjusting for gender and sport, neck strength remained a significant predictor of concussion (p = 0.004). For every 1-pound increase in neck strength, odds of concussion decreased by 5%. (Collins et al., 2014)

Note: This study did not incorporate neck strengthening to see how increased neck strength impacts concussion risk. Rather, it looked at the neck size and strength of a large group of high school athletes and retrospectively analyzed that data based on the occurrence of concussions.

Rotational Acceleration

Digging deeper, rotational forces have been revealed as an important, yet often overlooked, aspect of concussions. One of the lead researchers in the 2014 study, Dawn Comstock, clearly explains the neck’s involvement in reducing concussive forces that reach the brain:

“As the head rocks back and forth, it’s also twisting a little on the brain stem, and it’s those accelerative and rotational forces as the brain is impacting inside the skull that are really what’s causing these concussions. A stronger neck means you’re reducing those accelerative and rotational forces.”

Consequently, the National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment (NOCSAE) is implementing a new helmet standard that goes into effect in November 2018. The new test will incorporate a “neck” that allows the head in the test to twist and move in all directions, whereas the old helmet test only measured the linear force experienced by the head. Dr. Robert Cantu, renowned neuroscientist and NOCSAE Vice President notes, “If you take a blow to the side of the head, you are going to spin the head on the neck. It’s the type of injuries that lead to concussions.”

Iron Neck

Mike Jolly invented Iron Neck as a response to the impact CTE had on former teammates and the rise of concussions in young athletes. Jolly began investigating ways to prevent concussions and focused on two growing areas of research:

1. Neck training as a proactive measure to reduce concussion risk.
2. The increased threat of rotational forces on the brain.

He reasoned that if an athlete could train the neck to slow head acceleration upon impact (i.e., reduce whiplash), that would reduce the risk of a concussion. As a certified trainer, strength coach, and former fitness gym owner, Jolly also knew the importance of making the training functional and dynamic.

Many neck training modalities are effective at creating strength through concentric training, but only in four linear directions. Iron Neck’s unique design allows coaches and athletes to increase neck strength dynamically in every position so they’re better prepared for the unpredictability of contact sports.

Iron Neck’s design allows athletes to increase their neck strength dynamically in every position. Share on X

The Iron Neck machine is worn on the head and has a proprietary fitting system that includes an inflation system and adjustable head strap to hold it in place. It works through two forms of resistance, linear and rotational. Linear resistance can be applied via a resistance band (increasing in difficulty as the band is stretched out), cable pulley machine, performance trainer, or flywheel training device. Rotational resistance is applied through a disc-braking system (fully adjustable on the Iron Neck Pro model), which creates a very dynamic and functional way to strengthen the neck.

There are three models to choose from: Pro (adjustable rotational resistance), Varsity (low, fixed rotational resistance), and Home (no rotational resistance). Each is available in Standard (fits up to 80th percentile) or Large size options. It’s completely portable and attaches to existing equipment or infrastructure, so there’s no additional footprint in the gym.

An added benefit of Iron Neck is the ability to engage the core throughout the training. Since the lever point is at the top of the head, the entire kinetic chain is constantly engaged, increasing balance, stability, and coordination. For advanced training, you can add a medicine ball, kettlebells, or band pull-aparts to target additional muscle groups.

An added benefit of Iron Neck is the ability to engage the core throughout the training. Share on X

While Iron Neck originally started at $1,000 and 13 pounds, it is now half that price, weighs just 3 pounds, and is comfortable enough for 60-somethings to use at home or in physical therapy clinics. “The technology is the same but the product has been completely redesigned. What we have been really good at these past six years is listening to our customers and improving the product based on their needs and their ideas. Improving the fitting system to be more comfortable on the head has also made female athletes more interested and open to introducing it into their training programs,” says Jolly.

Being Responsible Means Taking Action

There are still many unknowns about CTE, including its exact relationship with concussions and its prevalence across different sports. However, one thing is certain: Reducing whiplash and head acceleration (both linear and rotational) reduces damage to the brain. The best way to diminish whiplash and head acceleration is to develop a stronger neck, the body’s built-in shock absorber for the brain.

The first time someone is introduced to neck strengthening is often for rehabilitation after an injury, whether that’s from repetitive strain or whiplash/concussion. The majority of athletes aren’t doing anything to strengthen their necks. An intervention is desperately needed, particularly for female and youth athletes. Studies have identified thinner, weaker necks as a reason these athletes sustain higher concussion rates. On average, females have half the neck strength as males and suffer almost double the number of concussions in comparable sports.

Most athletes aren’t doing anything to strengthen their necks—an intervention is desperately needed. Share on X

SimpliFaster: Iron Neck is currently being used by hundreds of professional teams, schools, MMA gyms, first responders, military pilots, race car drivers, and physical therapy facilities, across 25 countries. Take advantage of Iron Neck’s “Back to School” sale for up to 25% off your order. The promotion ends September 15, 2018.

(Athlete photos credited to Robert Sherman)

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

Concussions are THE safety issue in sports today. Set up a Google Alert for “concussion” and your inbox will soon fill with articles like my inbox does every day. These articles discuss everything from research, laws, foundations, and new technology to professional sports concussion protocols, injuries to athletes, CTE, and the ongoing and contentious debate about youth tackle football. There are vocal advocacy groups on each side of the fence and they frequently support their points of view with incomplete information at best, and misinformation and frank denial at worst.

We have all watched professional athletes get injured. How many times have you seen a player get hit hard and not move (for at least a few moments), then grab his/her head, and though wobbly and clearly “out of it,” that player is allowed back into the game?

Most recently, in 2018 World Cup play, Nordin Amrabat collided hard with another player. His left shoulder was hit and this wobbled his head. His face clearly impacted the turf and he immediately exhibited the fencing response (concussive convulsion). He was dazed and stayed down for over 10 seconds. He was then helped up and was so wobbly that he braced himself on the trainer. He was “out of it.” Unfortunately, he was then slapped in the face by the trainer and an athlete sprayed water on him (from his water bottle).

To make matters worse, he returned to full play only five days later, wearing a headband that he only wore briefly and then removed.

Watching how these “concussions” or “possible concussions” are managed at the professional level leaves us with more questions than answers. The management of these injuries at even the highest levels of sports is fraught with indecision and poor decision-making. Concussion protocols differ from sport to sport and non-compliance with a sport’s own protocols is a frequent occurrence.

The way possible #concussions get managed at the pro level results in more questions than answers, says @DrHorwitz. Share on X

On top of this mismanagement, the reports of these injuries feature sensational headlines and a spiderweb of confusing and inaccurate terminology. So, let’s make sense out of this. Let’s say you are a youth coach with no medical personnel on the sidelines. What do you do?

Policies, Protocols, Pamphlets, and Laws Are Not Enough

Medical papers on concussions discuss protocols for remove from play and return to play. These are important because all kids must be removed from play if a concussion is suspected—“if in doubt, take them out”—and not returned to play until properly examined and given medical clearance. However, a review of the multitude of youth concussion lawsuits and discussions with the attorneys, expert witnesses, and legal professors involved all make one word very clear: Communication.

The Case of Robert Back

I will use the case of Robert Back, a 16-year-old football player from Montana, to illustrate both the medical and legal aspects of proper concussion management.

Robert lived with his father and stepmother, and attended Belt High School, where he was on the football team. The team had an athletic trainer (AT) provided by a local hospital system.

The Montana Concussion Law was signed in 2013, before Robert got hurt. It is named for Dylan Steigers, a 21-year old East Oregon University football player who died in a scrimmage. After an impact, he walked off the field and vomited. An ambulance was called and he died a day later. Like most concussion laws, the Montana law stipulates:

1. Educational material must be provided to parents and athletes, and must be signed.
2. Coaches must take a concussion course annually (this differs from state to state).
3. If a concussion is suspected, the athlete must be removed from play.
4. The athlete cannot return without a doctor’s clearance to play note.

The Montana High School Athletic Association and Belt High School concussion policies both followed the Montana State Concussion Law.

Sometime before September 2014, the Back family received the concussion education sheet and the elder Mr. Back signed it. He later stated that he did not read the sheet.

Sept. 5, 2014 (Friday): Robert Back played in an away high school football game and sustained a concussion. He did not report any symptoms to anyone.

Sept. 6-7, 2014 (Saturday-Sunday): Robert experienced nausea and headaches and was brought to the ER that evening by his stepmother. He was diagnosed with a “minor closed head injury.” He was sent home with discharge papers saying he should refrain from playing football until cleared by a physician. His father did not read the discharge papers. Robert continued to be symptomatic on Sunday.

Sept. 8, 2014 (Monday): Robert called his father at work to tell him he did not feel well. He vomited while in the shower. His father called the school and told them Robert would not be in attendance.

Sept. 9, 2014 (Tuesday): Robert went to school but did not go to practice.

Sept. 10, 2014 (Wednesday): Robert’s father took him to see a clinic doctor. The doctor verbally told his father that Robert was not to play football until Sept. 15. The doctor gave him a note saying the same, but the father denied reading it. The doctor stated that each school has its own return to play policy. The Back family said Robert went to school and gave the note to the coach, but the coaches denied receiving the note. It was the family’s understanding that Robert would not play in the upcoming Sept. 12th game.

The AT told the head coach to give Robert an ImPACT test. The coach administered a “pre” test.

Sept. 11, 2014: Robert participated in a non-contact practice, during which he reportedly exhibited confusion and disorientation.

Later that day, the AT reviewed the ImPACT test results and emailed the head coach, stating that Robert “looked OK concussion wise.” The coach interpreted that statement to mean that Robert was cleared to play.

Sept. 12, 2014: Robert was cleared by the coach/trainer to play in that night’s game. He played in the game, and his father was in attendance. Robert “did not sustain any big hits,” yet he collapsed on the sidelines after halftime. An ambulance took him to the hospital, where he had an emergency craniotomy. He is now a quadriplegic who needs 24/7 care.

TeamSafe™ Sports: A Youth Sports Safety System

When examining the timeline of the Robert Back case, you can see the breakdowns in documentation, communication, and oversight. The goal of a system is to address each of these breakdown points with an actionable tool. Enter TeamSafe™ Sports.

The TeamSafe™ Sports platform addresses each point as follows:

1. The parent registers his/her athlete(s) and must report any prior concussions and baseline testing.
2. The parent is provided with the most up-to-date concussion education sheet and must attest to reading it and sharing it with their child. The organization now has this documented and no administrative work is required.
3. The head coach must create an emergency action plan for his/her team following an easy template that assigns each duty to a coach and/or parent.
4. The organization administrator may add any required education courses to a web portal. The course information with a “complete by” date is emailed to the coach and there is an in-app notification as well. The TeamSafe™ coach certification course covers brain injury, as well as topics like sudden cardiac arrest, heat injuries, anaphylaxis, asthma, seizures, skin infections, bleeding, broken bones, and more.
5. The coach can see a roster of his/her team(s) and if any athlete has a medical issue or prior concussion, or is taking any medications, a medical alert is highlighted.
6. If there is a suspected concussion (impact plus one sign/symptom), all signs and symptoms can be quickly toggled and the coach can tap “remove from play.” An immediate text and email is sent to all stakeholders. This notification states that the athlete was removed from play and must be carefully observed for the next 72 hours. “What to do next” information is provided as well, and is reviewed below. A concussion report is generated and placed in the athlete’s profile, with the date, time, person who removed the athlete, and documented signs/symptoms.
7. The athlete’s roster entry is highlighted in bright yellow with the words REMOVED FROM PLAY.
8. It is then the parent’s responsibility to bring their child to the doctor to get examined. When the doctor provides a note, an image of the note can be taken and uploaded into the system. Another immediate text/email is generated, which states that the athlete has seen the doctor and lists the date on the note. If there is no “return” note, the notification states that the athlete must return to the doctor for follow-up. The athlete’s roster entry is changed with this information. The concussion report is updated with the doctor’s note and return date. The platform even has a suggested doctor’s note template based on all 50 states’ (and the District of Columbia’s) high school concussion return notes. This note simplifies the process for the parent, administrators, and doctor.
9. The administrator can follow each step of this protocol from the web portal and view the note to confirm the date and authenticity of the note. (Yes, authenticity is a big issue in youth sports.)
10. Once the administrator verifies that all the information is valid, he/she provides the final “clearance.” The athlete roster is once again updated to note the clearance date, and this is not removed until the date of the clearance. Another notification stating that the administrator has cleared the athlete is sent.

Risk Management

Many attorneys were consulted during the development of TeamSafe™ Sports. One recently explained, you “can’t change the liability by not adopting standards – it’s there whether they want it or not. If I’m looking at the case and they don’t have any procedures or protocols it’s going to make them look worse. They’re going to be bound by what’s out there anyway for why didn’t they take the time to show they cared and they wanted safety procedures and policies.”

The purpose of any risk management policy is to provide a consistent and effective approach to addressing risk, and make all attempts to avoid harm, protect the organization, and protect the athletes.

Risk assessment questions to consider carefully are:

• What could go wrong?
• What is the likelihood that each identified risk will occur?
• What can reasonably be done to reduce the severity, likelihood, or impact of these risks?
• If something goes wrong, how do you respond?
• What is the effect on the organization if a loss occurs (financial, reputation, future viability, etc.)?

Emergency Signs and Symptoms

Know how to identify a problem. These signs and symptoms require immediate medical attention.

• One pupil larger than the other.
• Drowsiness or inability to wake up.
• A headache that gets worse and does not go away.
• Slurred speech.
• Weakness, numbness, or decreased coordination in arms and legs.
• Neck pain or tenderness.
• Dizziness.
• Repeated vomiting or nausea.
• Convulsions or seizures (shaking or twitching).
• Change in behavior.
• Increased confusion, restlessness, agitation, irritability, or combativeness.
• Unable to recognize people or places.
• Less responsiveness than usual.
• Will not stop crying and cannot be consoled.
• Loss of consciousness (passed out/knocked out). Even a brief (~1 second) loss is an emergency.

Return to Play Guidelines

After a possible concussion, the return to play decision should be made very carefully and with the help of a “return team” that includes the athlete, parents, coaches, administrators, and medical professionals. The consensus statement on concussion in sport—from the 5th international conference on concussion in sport—has the most recent guidelines for sports concussion management and explains the return process.

For youth athletes, the return process includes Return to Learn (School) and Return to Play (Sport). Each of these is a multi-step process that is best overseen and reviewed by the entire return team. Both sets of protocols have similar instructions:

• Move forward to the next stage only when symptom-free for 24 hours. If symptoms re-appear, go back to the previous stage and make sure symptoms vanish. Contact your physician or seek medical help immediately if symptoms worsen.

Return to Learn Stages

Stage 1: No School

• No television, video games, computer use, phone, texting or loud music.

Stage 2: School Part-Time – Maximum Adjustments

• Half-day attendance with appropriate academic adjustments.
• No homework or testing.

Stage 3: School Part-Time – Moderate Adjustments

• Full-day attendance with appropriate academic adjustments.
• Limited homework (does not cause symptoms to return) and no testing.

Stage 4: School Part-Time – Minor Adjustments

• Full-day attendance with no academic adjustments.

Stage 5: Full-Time School with no special accommodations

Return to Play Stages

Stage 1

• Aim: Symptom-limited activity.
• Activity: Daily activities that do not provoke symptoms.
• Goal: Gradual reintroduction of work/school activities.

Stage 2

• Aim: Light aerobic exercise.
• Activity: Walking or stationary cycling at slow-to-medium pace. No resistance training.
• Goal: Increased heart rate.

Stage 3

• Aim: Sport-specific exercise.
• Activity: Running or skating drills. No head impact activities.
• Goal: Add movement.

Stage 4

• Aim: Non-contact training drills.
• Activity: Harder training drills; e.g., passing drills. May start progressive resistance training.
• Goal: Exercise, coordination/thinking.

Stage 5

• Aim: Full contact practice.
• Activity: Following medical clearance, participate in normal training activities.
• Goal: Restore confidence and assessment of functional skills by coaching staff.

Stage 6

• Aim: Return to sport.
• Activity: Normal game play.

Supervision and Oversight

If you do not have medical staff to supervise the stages, the parent can do it by using the appropriate Concussion Symptom Evaluation form each day of each protocol. As long as the score does not go up after the initial 24- to 48-hour period, the athlete can advance to the next stage.

In the school environment, the athletic director/principal will have oversight, but the medical staff guides the return process and decision. In the league/club world (no medical staff), we provide the administrator with full oversight (validity and meaning of date on the doctor’s notes) and final clearance approval.

Addendum 1: A Note on Baseline Testing

A 2018 paper looking at the validity of baseline testing found a “growing concern about the validity of baseline test results — meaning there’s concern over the degree to which the scores on these baseline tests actually reflect an athlete’s true cognitive ability…These findings suggest that the rates of invalid performance on baseline testing may be alarmingly high.”

Dr. Douglas Comeau, an assistant professor at Boston University School of Medicine, summed it up by saying, “PCPs [primary care providers] need to know that the younger a patient is, the less valid the results may be.”

“There were multiple points of failure through this whole case, but there were so many opportunities to do this right.” ~ Dr. Michael Collins (Director of the sports medicine concussion program at University of Pittsburgh Schools of the Health Sciences.)

This case makes it clear that sports organizations must have well-defined policies and provide education to coaches and parents. Yet, without a system of real-time communication and administrative oversight, even the best policies can fail.

Back up well-defined policies with a system of real-time communication and administrative oversight, says @DrHorwitz. Share on X

System-wide failures occurred at many points, but the key areas revolve around both doctor’s notes. If these notes were immediately documented and stored (via a simple picture) and immediately communicated to all stakeholders in real time (via text/email), then it is much more likely this outcome could have been changed.

As this reporter stated, “I sincerely hope this case is talked about every year at the beginning of any sports season, because if no one learns from this case we will surely be back in court again writing the same stories about more paralyzed young men and women who suffered the consequences.”

Addendum 2: Symptoms of Concussion

• Headache and/or head pressure
• Neck pain
• Feeling like going to vomit
• Nausea
• Dizzy
• Blurry vision
• Double vision
• Slurred speech
• Radiating pain in arms or legs
• Numbness/tingling in arms or legs
• Sensitivity to light
• Sensitivity to noise
• “I don’t feel right”
• “I can’t think clearly”
• “I feel sluggish, groggy”
• “I feel very tired”
• “I feel nervous”
• “I feel sad”
• Memory loss

Signs of Concussion

• Hard collision
• Loss of consciousness
• Slow to get up
• Balance/unsteady walk
• Falling to the ground
• Holding head
• Dazed or confused
• Blank or vacant look
• Facial cut and/or bruise
• Seizure (fencing response)
• Change in behavior
• Vomits
• Irritable
• Inability to stop crying
• Answers questions slowly

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

Good coaches provide technical feedback that helps their athletes improve upon previous performances. Great coaches simplify technique, rely on a few critical indicators to assess, and provide individualized feedback, where they can be most confident and effective. Pole vault has a few exceptionally powerful indicators that will help you coach it successfully.

Mid-marks are a simple, yet effective way to predict the success of a jump and provide immediate feedback to the athlete. Certified coaching instructors teach the requisite knowledge of theory and practice for your event, but then they also tell you to find your personal style.

Mid-marks do not qualify as personal style. Mid-marks are effective, they are individualized, and they are critical to coaching the vault. Find other technical components of the vault to apply your personal style. Other critical indicators for pole vault include drill proficiency and hip movement. In this article, I focus on mid-marks and will address the other two indicators in forthcoming articles. For now, let’s understand mid-marks and discuss their benefits.

Sequence of Mid-Marks

In the following sequence, pole vault coaches should become proficient in addressing:

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

Your athlete must become proficient in this sequence, too. Therefore, Run becomes the first critical indicator for the event. Similar to any other jumping event, when the steps are off, the jump is off. Get the steps right, get the jump right. “Catching their mid” will address runway challenges so that the athlete can adequately set up their plant and take-off.

What Are Mid-Marks?

Mid-marks are a diagnostic measurement for the coach to assess the quality of an athlete’s plant and take-off. Mid-marks can be used generally and individually. In general, they help determine a new athlete’s approximate approach and grip, and they become more useful when applied individually.

From a 6-step approach, a mid-mark is the position of an athlete’s 6th stride on the runway, or their 3^rd left step. For example, Craig’s 6-step approach starts at 82’ back from the box. His left foot will touch down six times on the runway before he takes off and attempts to clear a bar. Craig’s mid-mark is the position on the runway where his left foot touches down for the 3^rd time during his approach. A reasonable mid-mark for Craig would be 52’ in this case. For someone who is a lefty, you would use their 3^rd right step. Once you know how to “catch their mid,” you can use this measurement to address the athlete’s plant and take-off.

When an athlete has been in a coaching system for a long time, they should know their mid-mark and its progression in a given practice session, performance, or season. Mid-marks progress further back down the runway as an athlete matures and improves.

How to Use Mid-Marks

Regardless of pole vault style or model, mid-marks are useful data for all vaulters. When a vaulter hits their mid, it’s reasonable to expect that they will be set up for a good jump. Let’s consider some less than ideal mid-marks on the runway.

In the past few weeks, Amanda has typically hit a 42’ mid. Today in practice, Amanda consistently hit her mid-mark until her 7th jump. Amanda was under by about a foot and hit a 41’ mid-mark. Either:

1. She needs a higher drive knee in the first step to correct her over-extended first stride, which caused her to be too far under the pole on take-off—this adjustment emphasizes gradual acceleration during the approach; or
2. She needs to move back a half-foot because her first step was fine; she has loosened up from her warm-up and her previous jumps, and she’s taking longer strides that must be accommodated.

For option 2, I would encourage only a half-foot back adjustment to see whether Amanda remains under the pole again on her next jump. It’s not going to be obvious from one jump that she needs to move back the full foot. It’s important to use the next few jumps to assess how well Amanda will be set up for plant and take-off.

Now, consider Max, whose mid-mark is 48’. Max takes 15 jumps and has moved back a foot over the course of practice, but he’s still hitting a 48’ mid and his jump looks good. On Max’s 16th jump, he hits a 50’ mid and gets stood up by his pole on take-off. Max will either need to:

1. Grip up and jump up because his run looks good and he’s moving the pole exceptionally well; or
2. Extend his left arm more and jump up; or
3. Move up a half-foot because he’s fatigued from his prior jumps and his stride has shortened slightly.

It’s the coach’s responsibility to assess the athlete based on the objective data available as well as a more subjective context. A good coach will know what’s necessary to create the best possible runway for their athletes. If Amanda often goes out too small, then a bigger first step will best support her. If Max has stronger arms than legs, it may be best to move him inward for the end of his practice session. Even the best vaulters put together relatively poor attempts when they’re outside their mid—over or under.

Why Should Athletes and Coaches Rely on Mid-Marks?

It’s hard to observe speed. Human eyes can observe relative speed easily, but absolute speed is much more difficult to see. Mid-marks help you measure speed.

When Amanda hit that 41’ mid in option 2, she sprinted faster because her nervous system was firing and her muscles had warmed up. Her speed was the determining factor in moving that mid-mark forward. Although she missed 42’, her increased speed predicted that she would have a better jump. Amanda’s higher speed and 41’ mid placed her too far in on take-off, so this one jump didn’t end up being that great. However, if we didn’t know her 41’ mid and its 42’ references, it would appear that Amanda needed to correct her plant and take-off. This was not the case since Amanda is consistently great on take-off.

Mid-marks monitor an athlete's speed on the runway & offer an evaluation of the setup for take-off. Share on X

Follow the correct coaching sequence and accommodate Amanda’s increased speed by moving her start position backward on the runway. There’s nothing wrong with Amanda’s plant and take-off. On her next jump, she will have an excellent take-off with good hip height. Speed creates the best jumps. Mid-marks monitor an athlete’s speed on the runway and offer an evaluation of the setup for take-off. Every time an athlete sprints down the runway, their mid-mark data is available, whether you use it or not. Collecting this data is easy, so it’s inexcusable not to have it.

Mid-marks will fit into different coaching systems and vault philosophies. Share on X

Mid-marks are objectively measured and subjectively determined. Your coaching system will have mid-marks that correspond with your vault philosophy. Some coaches encourage blocking big, which will bring mid-marks inward. (Blocking is a term that describes the position, or positioning, of the vaulter’s arms when they plant the pole.) Other coaches may emphasize letting the plant block the arms into position. This style will bring mid-marks outward. The vault philosophy doesn’t matter because the mid-marks remain consistent for athletes within a given coaching system. For example, Coach David “DJ” Johnston (from Lees-McRae College in North Carolina) developed a mid-marks chart that correlates grip, start on the runway, and approximate bar clearance height.

At Apex Vaulting Club, we rely on DJ’s chart for newcomers because it’s a great initial reference. As our athletes progress and move their approach farther back down the runway, we move away from DJ’s mid-marks because Apex athletes take off farther out than DJ’s recommendations. Again, DJ’s chart is a great place to start, but his system is his and your system is yours. If you know what you want from the take-off, over time you’ll know where to expect your mid-marks to land on the runway.

How Mid-Marks Apply to Other Events: The Long Jump and Triple Jump

Long Jump

The long jump approach resembles the pole vault approach in many ways, including initiation, posture, sprint mechanics, the penultimate step, and take-off. Mid-marks provide a reasonable check on the athlete’s approach before they reach the board for take-off. A coach will know if their athlete will foul the jump if the take-off foot touches down past the expected mid-mark.

Once again, fatigue will shorten the stride and poorly support the athlete’s acceleration down the runway. When it’s obvious in a competition or practice that the athlete is losing steam, move the start position inward or call it quits. I recommend the latter option. There’s no need to push through fatigue in fast-twitch events, and it would take a greater concerted effort to accommodate the approach in doing so.

Unlike vaulters, long jumpers don’t carry poles so their stride is less encumbered and longer than a vaulter’s stride. DJ’s chart does not apply. Instead, a different mid-marks chart based on a longer stride length is more appropriate. Here are David Johnston’s long jump mid-marks chart and Coach Jeff Martin’s (from Indiana State University) long jump mid-marks chart.

Triple Jump

Mid-marks support the triple jump, too. Under the same jumps coach, gradual acceleration may work better for some athletes, whereas constant and controlled velocity may work better for others. Coaches must know their system and their athletes extraordinarily well to develop a reliable chart, but I recommend keeping mid-marks more individualized in the triple jump.

Closing Thoughts

As stated, your coaching philosophy for an event may differ from the next coach, but mid-marks always apply, and the mid-mark charts already available offer a great place to start. Modify DJ’s or Martin’s chart to fit your system because no one knows your athletes better than you. Mid-marks are just one of three indicators that allow you to assess your athlete’s running mechanics—an imperative skill—which you can use practice drills to reinforce. Drills build skills. Stay tuned for my next two articles, which will address drill proficiency as an indicator of translational skills and hip movement as an indicator of pole speed.

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

The Developmental Academy (DA) is the highest tier of youth soccer in the United States. It was started by U.S. Soccer in 2007 and is based on the philosophy of “increased training, less total games, and more meaningful games using international rules of competition.”¹³Almost every MLS team has a developmental academy playing in this league, and the remainder of the 74 teams in the league are comprised of the biggest youth soccer clubs from around the country. The season is nearly year-round, with short breaks during December and June-July.

Even among other developmental academies, we have a unique situation with the Real Salt Lake Developmental Academy. It is a full-time residential academy, with the players living together in dorms and attending Real Salt Lake Academy High School. The dorms are a 5-minute walk from the high school, and the school is attached to the training facility. It is about as professional of an environment as you can get in amateur athletics.

Real Salt Lake Developmental Academy is about as pro an environment there is in amateur athletics, says @CoachCotter2. Share on X

With DA teams becoming better funded and getting larger support staffs that include strength and conditioning coaches, I thought it might be useful to write an article outlining what a six-week off-season program can look like when you are in this type of truly high performance environment (i.e., no school, no time restrictions, no space or equipment limitations).

This year, our off-season began Monday, July 2nd, which was a week after our final match of the season. During this period, we train six days a week, utilizing Charlie Francis’s “High-Low Approach” to distribute central nervous system (CNS) stress appropriately throughout the week (Figure 1).

This article outlines what a typical week looks like for our RSL Academy players and how each element fits into the high-low model.

Day 1 – Monday – Testing: Vertical Plyometrics, Max Velocity Sprints, Repeat Sprints, Quad-Dominant Lift

Monday is the day of the week on which we implement our testing/monitoring protocols. This has less to do with daily monitoring from a readiness perspective, and more to do with assessing the progress of power and speed qualities week to week. Physical qualities like vertical jumping ability and maximum sprinting velocity are very sensitive to fatigue, so testing them on a more regular basis allows for a more consistent picture of how the athlete is responding to the training program; as opposed to just two snapshots in time six weeks apart, where current fatigue levels have a larger chance of being a confounding factor.^7,10

We choose to do this on Monday because we are coming off a light day Saturday and an off-day Sunday, so this is the time of the week where the athletes are theoretically the freshest. This may not be the best day for these assessments for certain populations (i.e., collegiate athletes who might use the weekend for social activities rather than rest), but that is less of a worry with this population.

The session begins in the weight room with a standardized warm-up/movement prep, which is outlined below in Figure 2. Each speed/lift day, the warm-up programming is categorically the same (glute med work, T-spine mobility, etc.), but the exercises change simply for the purposes of staving off monotony.

After the athletes complete the warm-up sequence (approximately 20 minutes), we move on to jump testing. We utilize a three-jump countermovement jump test (hands on hips), as well as a three-jump Abalakov jump test. We are lucky enough to have access to force plates, so the jumps are performed and recorded on there. The metrics we look closest at are jump height (which the athlete is most interested in), impulse, and peak vertical force. If we can get one or all three of those metrics moving up on a fairly consistent basis, the athletes are heading in the right direction.

I believe it is very important for both the athletes and coaches to see these metrics move (or stagnate) over time. First, it gives the athletes a sense of progress— a confirmation that the time and energy that they are putting in is paying off. This is especially important in the soccer world, where even teenagers can be apprehensive about weight gain (even in the form of muscle).

The vertical jump data gives the coach something to reference when the athlete expresses concern over gaining a few pounds in the off-season. For the vast majority of the time, while the athlete may be gaining weight, the improvements in their force-producing capabilities far outweigh the negative effect of this increase in mass. Second, the data does not lie, and therefore it holds the coach accountable for the training they are delivering. It can often be a source of reflection and re-analyzation of the training program, which is important for driving continual improvement.

After the jump testing, we head to the field and begin our on-field warm-up (5 minutes of light jogging and dynamic movements, mostly athlete directed) and vertical plyos (10 minutes). Regarding plyometrics, we follow the basic principles Mike Boyle laid out.²Our six-week vertical plyo progression is shown in Figure 3.

As you can see, the intensity of the plyometrics increases every two weeks with weekly increases in volume. It isn’t the most aggressive plyo program out there, but I share the same sentiment as Dan Pfaff when he says “I’d rather be a mile undertrained than an inch overtrained,” and too quick of a plyo progression is a fast track to knee tendinitis. Pogo jumps are the only plyometric exercise performed more than one time a week. The intensity of these jumps is fairly low, and we put a big emphasis on ankle stiffness in the program, which is crucial for improving sprinting and jumping abilities.

Along with the plyometrics, we also mix in some wicket running to prime the athlete’s technique for the subsequent max effort sprints. These generally include a 10- to 15-yard lead-in, so the athlete can get up to speed before running through 8-10 6-inch hurdles. In my experience, no drill has improved athlete’s running technique faster and more reliably than wicket running.

No drill improves athlete’s running technique faster and more reliably than #wicketrunning, says @CoachCotter2. Share on X

The height of the wickets cues a high knee drive and the distance between wickets challenges athlete’s stride length—two aspects of sprinting that non-track athletes tend to struggle with. To determine the distance between the wickets, I rely on Chris Korfist’s suggestions of starting at 1.5 meters and increasing the distances in .2-meter increments from there. For the taller and faster athletes, 1.5 meters might be too short of a distance right away, so 1.7 meters would be a more appropriate starting point for them.

Next, the athletes run anywhere from 3-5 max effort sprints, ranging from 55 to 78 meters. We use 55- and 78-meter distances for a few reasons. First, while soccer players rarely perform a sprint longer than 30 meters in a match, we want to prepare our players for the “worst case scenario,” where they make either a long recovery run back or a long sprint forward on the counter. Second, these are not elite track athletes, and they generally reach max velocity by 40 meters; therefore, we can get away with starting our sprints at 55 meters and be fairly confident we are still getting to max velocity. Third, most soccer fields are 110 meters long, with the penalty boxes about 75 meters apart, so running end line to midfield (55 meters) or “box to box” (78 meters) is an easy designation to make. Our max effort sprinting progression is shown in Figure 4.

The max velocity sprints serve as our second performance test of the day, as the players are wearing GPS units so we can track improvements in max velocity capabilities over the course of the off-season. We also try and do “kinograms” (Figure 5) of each athlete sprinting every few weeks to give them some feedback on their stride mechanics.

After the max effort sprints, we finish our on-field segment with some metabolic sprint work. On Mondays, these come in the form of repeat sprints over 38 meters. We use 38 meters because that is the length between the penalty box and the halfway line on most soccer fields. The athletes sprint this distance every 30 seconds, resulting in about 5 seconds of work interspersed with 25 seconds of rest (which is comparable to many RST protocols). This isn’t meant to be too exhausting, as we still have to finish the session with a lift, so we only do 1-2 sets of 6-10 reps. The incomplete rest intervals during this exercise cause the players to get a slight metabolic (i.e., lactic) conditioning effect, which can be beneficial for an anabolic endocrine response.⁵

Figure 6 shows a velocity trace from one of these sessions.

Once the on-field work is finished (approximately 45 minutes), we head into the weight room for a quad-dominant lift. With the hamstrings already being taxed from the sprinting, we choose to not load them too heavily again in the weight room on the same day without an off-day following. The six-week progression of our Day 1 lift can be seen in Figure 7 below.

Day 2 – Tuesday – Low CNS: Extensive Tempo, Passing Patterns

Similar to James Smith,¹²Keir Wenham-Flatt, and many other coaches influenced by the work of the late Charlie Francis, my preferred method of aerobic conditioning is “strides” or “extensive tempo running.” The higher velocity of the runs allows the athletes to work on fluid running technique, while the longer rest periods (we use approximately 1:3 work:rest) permit high volumes of running without substantial accumulation of lactate. Additionally, in a soccer world often dominated by small sided games, accumulating a lot of distance at higher speeds (20-24 km/hour) can have a protective effect on what might be underutilized hamstring musculature. Twenty to 24 kilometers an hour is about 60-73% of our athletes’ max sprint speeds (29-35 km/hour), so it still falls into the low-intensity category in Francis’ high-low model (Figure 8).

To make it simple, we utilize the soccer field for our extensive tempo runs. Players run the length of the field in 17-20 seconds (depending on the fitness level of the athlete), then use the remainder of the minute to walk the width of the penalty area (38 meters). Each rep is 1 minute, and it takes 2 minutes for one lap around the field, so 4×6 minutes is 4×3 laps. We take 2-3 minutes of passive rests between sets. With regard to volume, we follow the guidelines laid out by Derek Hansen, in which soccer players are recommended to work up to 4,500-5,000 meters of tempo running per session.

The volume increases by two laps, or 440 meters each week, which ends up being a 16% increase in volume from week 1 to week 2, with that relative change in volume decreasing each week until the jump from week 5 to week 6 is only 10%. Figure 9 shows our six-week extensive tempo run progression.

After the conditioning, we perform some sort of passing pattern for 15-20 minutes. These passing patterns serve multiple purposes. First, the players love it, so it gives them something to look forward to at the end of a conditioning session. Second, practicing these sport-specific skills under fatigue is a different stimulus for them compared to what we typically do in-season. During the year, we usually perform these types of passing patterns at the beginning of a session as a technical warm-up, when the athletes are still fresh. Finally, soccer-specific movements, such as opening up to pass and receive, changing directions, and dribbling, are unique movement patterns that stress the hip musculature in an explicit manner.

I believe that it is important to keep those movements and muscles conditioned, even in the off-season, so the first week of pre-season is not such a shock to the system. An example passing pattern can be seen below in Figure 10.

Day 3 – Wednesday – High CNS: Movement Prep, Lateral Plyos, Accelerations, Upper Body Lift

Wednesday is the second high CNS day of the week. In the same fashion as our other high CNS days, it begins in the weight room with our movement prep, then moves to the field for lateral plyos and variable start accelerations (falling, rolling, COD, etc.—see Figure 11), and ends with an upper body lift (Figure 12).

Upper body lifting is sometimes overlooked in non-collision sports like soccer. Obviously, a large amount of upper body hypertrophy is not the goal of the program, but I believe that upper body lifting with soccer players can serve two distinct purposes. First, heavy upper body movements like bench press can provide a large CNS and endocrine stimulus without further taxing the legs. Second, developing the musculature of the back through heavy pulling exercises can help athletes improve speed through more intense arm swing action.³

Some non-collision sports don’t do upper body lifting, but our soccer players do for two reasons. Share on X

Day 4 – Thursday – Low CNS: Aerobic Grid Runs, Passing Patterns

On our second low CNS day of the week, we opt for slightly more high-volume conditioning. For this session, we use an adapted version of Dan Baker’s “Maximal Aerobic Grids” (Figure 13).¹

Dr. Baker’s original protocol calls for athletes to run the grids at 100% and 70% of their maximal aerobic speed (MAS), but I have found it more practical with my athletes to run them at 100% and 60% MAS. When we slightly decrease the speed of the slower side of the grid, the athletes can complete more volume in a single session.

Day 5 – Friday – High CNS: Movement Prep, Horizontal Plyos, Max Velocity Sprinting, Speed Changes, Hamstring-Dominant Lift

The final high CNS day of the week is Friday. Friday is structured very much like Monday, but with the plyos horizontally directed as opposed to vertically, and the lower body work in the weight room being more hamstring dominant compared to more quad dominant on the first day of the week. You can see our horizontal plyometric exercise selection and progression in Figure 14.

We then repeat the same sprint technique work through the wickets, the same max velocity sprint work (55- to 78-meter sprint every 3 minutes), and our metabolic sprint work. The metabolic sprint work on Fridays comes in the form of 60- or 80-meter “speed changes,” where the athlete accelerates for 20 meters, slightly decelerates and cruises for 20 meters, and then reaccelerates for another 20 meters. In an effort to get a little lactate accumulation, we utilize incomplete rest periods (1:1 work:rest) for anywhere from 4-8 reps.

Finally, we finish with a hamstring-dominant lift (Figure 15). We choose to do our hamstring-dominant lift at the end of the week for two reasons. First, we trap bar deadlift on these days, which requires the heaviest load of any exercise we perform, and therefore induces a significant amount of CNS and mechanical stress. Second, the hamstrings are much more prone to DOMS than the quads (especially when eccentric hamstring work is the focus), so it makes sense to perform it going into the weekend.

Day 6 – Saturday: Extensive Intervals

On the final training day of the week, we finish with extensive interval runs (Figure 16). The players do these runs on their own, or at least that’s the idea. Ideally, these runs would be at 60-70% of the player’s MAS. So, for our example, an athlete with a MAS of 5.03 m/s would run their intervals at 6.7-7.8 mph if on a treadmill, or anywhere between a 7:45- and 9-minute mile if they are using a GPS watch.

The final extensive interval run occurs 2 days before the official first day of pre-season (August 13). For this reason, there is a de-load in the volume of this run, as well as a de-load in volume for many of the other elements of the program on week 6.

One Way to Approach Off-Season Programming

Hopefully, this article provides some ideas for other coaches for their off-season programming and how they can fit all the different elements into a traditional High-Low Model. Obviously, there are many ways to skin a cat—this is just what we decided to do this off-season, based on the reasoning stated in the piece. Please feel free to leave any comments or critiques in the comments section below, or I can be reached on Twitter @CoachCotter.

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. Baker, D. (2011). “Recent trends in high intensity aerobic training for field sports.” UK Strength and Conditioning Association, 3-8.
2. Boyle, M. (2016). New Functional Training for Sports(2nd ed., pp. 173-190). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
3. Francis, C. (2008). The Structure of Training for Speed (Key Concepts 2008 Edition)(p. 18).
4. Gathercole, R. J., Sporer, B. C., Stellingwerff, T. & Sleivert, G. G. (2015). “Comparison of the Capacity of Different Jump and Sprint Field Tests to Detect Neuromuscular Fatigue.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 29(9): 2522-2531.
5. Godfrey, R. J., Madgwick, Z. & Whyte, G. P. (2003). “The exercise-induced growth hormone response in athletes.” Sports Medicine. 33(8): 599-613.
6. Hansen, D. M. (2014, August 27). “Optimal Tempo Training Concepts for Performance and Recovery.” In Strength Power Speed. Retrieved July 10, 2018, from http://www.strengthpowerspeed.com/optimal-tempo-training/
7. Johnston, R. D., Gibson, N. C., Twist, C., Gabbett, T. J., MacNay, S. A. & MacFarlane, N. G. (2013, March). “Physiological responses to an intensified period of rugby league competition.” Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 27(3): 643-654.
8. Jouaux, T. (2015). “Technical Warmup: 50 Exercises Handout.” In TonyJouaux.com. Retrieved July 10, 2018, from http://www.tonyjouaux.com/forcoaches/technicalwarmup
9. Korfist, C. (2016). “The Art of the Mini Hurdle: Building Sprint Form.” In Simplifaster. Retrieved July 8, 2018, from https://simplifaster.com/articles/the-art-of-the-mini-hurdle-building-sprint-form/
10. Marrier, B., LeMuer, Y., Robineau, J., Lacome, M., Coudrec, A., Hauswirth, C. & Piscione, J. (2016, April). “Quantifying Neuromuscular Fatigue Induced by an Intense Training Session in Rugby Sevens.” International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance. 12(2): 218-223.
11. McMillan, S. & Pfaff, D. (2018). “The ALTIS Kinogram Method.” In Simplifaster. Retrieved July 8, 2018, from https://simplifaster.com/articles/altis-kinogram-method/
12. Smith, J. (2014). Applied Sprint Training(pp. 38-42). n.p.: Vervante.
13. “What is the Developmental Academy?” (n.d.). In U.S. Soccer Developmental Academy. Retrieved from http://www.ussoccerda.com/overview-what-is-da