Blog

Over the past two decades, great strength and conditioning coaches have sometimes been maligned, often unfairly. As coaches, we have been judged by athletic trainers, sport coaches, athletic administration, sport scientists, and the media. Some of these criticisms are warranted because of the lack of expertise and knowledge of the coaches in our field. Some criticisms are not warranted because of the lack of knowledge of our field from sport coaches, medical staff, and administration.

Strength and Conditioning Problems We Are Not Talking About

Our field has been thrust into mainstream media, mostly in a negative light. With the occurrence of rhabdomyolysis in several football programs and conditioning-related deaths, as a profession we need to rethink our protocols and best practices. At some point in their career, a strength and conditioning coach will have to decide whether they work for the safety of the athlete or for the sport coach and/or administration.

At some point in their career, an S&C coach will have to decide who and/or what they work for, says @TheKurtHester. Share on X

Young strength and conditioning coaches are typically naïve and petrified of the head sport coach who charges them with training their team. They will acquiesce to all the sport coach’s demands, no matter how archaic, because of a misguided sense of loyalty or fear of losing their paycheck.

There are very few older statesman left in this field, and the ones that are left typically will fight for the safety of the athlete without fear and/or repercussion. These older statesmen have built up enough clout with sport coaches and administration to at least voice an opinion without being fired. I am not saying their opinion is listened to, but at least it can be voiced.

My Perspective in the Field of College Strength and Conditioning

As an older statesman in S&C, I have had my share of problems with other departments. I have taken a beating from administration more than I have from sport coaches, mostly because most sport coaches don’t enjoy confronting me. But they have gone and voiced their concerns to administration and then it is time for a so-called trip to the principal’s office for a reprimand. The directive I usually get from administration is that my job is to make the sport coaches happy. Silly me, I thought my job was to safely enhance the performance of our athletes, as well as help them safely traverse college life while attaining a degree.

Silly me, I thought my job was to safely enhance the performance of our athletes, says @TheKurtHester. Share on X

These are a few of the problems I have faced with sport coaches that could have ended in a lawsuit because an athlete’s safety was not a concern:

• A sport coach wanted the strength and conditioning staff to administer a military-style boot camp workout to recruits who were at their sport camp. These recruits were between 12 and 15 years of age. They had no prior medical evaluation from the training staff and the workout was to be held at 1:00 p.m. on a turf field in July in the southeastern part of the U.S. Besides the pure stupidity of this idea, I have never trained an athlete for a sport in that manner. If an athlete had suffered an injury of any kind, it would have been malpractice on my part. I refused the request and that coach immediately cried Title IX, stating that I would have performed the request for football, which I would not have.

• On another occasion, a sport coach wanted me to implement hill sprints for his athletes prior to a match. He thought it would make his athletes tougher during competition. This is a sport where an athlete can jump upwards of 300 times in a match. I refused, saying that I would not administer a training session that would have a high probability of injuring an athlete during competition. I told him that I would rather be fired than be part of his lunacy.

• Yet another incident occurred after the university was shut down because of snow and ice and the president of the university deemed it unsafe for any student, faculty, or staff member to be driving that day. I canceled all workouts for two days until the roads were safe and campus was reopened. Well, a sport coach did not see the logic in that. He wanted his team to train that day and I refused. He stated that he could have his team train if it was consensual, which we all know means voluntary/involuntary. I told him that if an athlete or strength coach was injured on the drive to the facility, it would be a liability issue, not to mention an ethical issue. I refused and he went to administration, and then my directive from administration was to send a coach and uphold the workout. Luckily, no one was injured that day during travel.

In any one of these instances, if an injury—or, heaven forbid, a fatality—had occurred, I would have undoubtedly been the scapegoat. Athletic administration and/or the sport coach would have thrown me under the proverbial bus and backed over me multiple times. Then I would have been vilified on social media, on television media, and in print media. I could definitely see a negative and sensationalized piece done on HBO’s “Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel” about the incompetence of S&C coaches in collegiate athletics.

What We Need to Make a Positive Change

Until athletic departments hire a Sports Performance Assistant Athletic Director to oversee the strength and conditioning department, nothing in our field will change. We will continue to be forced to bow down to the misguided demands of sport coaches so they won’t whine to administration that we are shirking our responsibilities. (The same responsibilities that not one person in administration has a clue about what they are.) But we can somewhat insulate ourselves with an inordinate amount of paperwork, leaving a trail that a blind bloodhound with a stopped-up nose could follow.

Construct a paper trail of forms to prove to the legal system that you were competent, just in case, says @TheKurtHester. Share on X

I feel that, as a profession, we have to take the stance that no one in administration has our backs. We must construct a paper trail of concerns and practices to exhibit to the legal system that we were competent in our protocol, as well as our judgment. In this way, if something catastrophic were to happen to an athlete, the responsibility would be on the athletic administration and/or the sport coach.

The paper trail starts with an Altercation Form (Figure 1) for any occurrence that you or anyone on your staff has with a sport coach that is of concern.

Even if you don’t send the report up the chain of command, it is prudent to fill it out and keep it on file in the event something occurs after anyone expresses their concerns. Fill out the report as soon as possible after the altercation so that it is fresh in your mind and fresh in the minds of any witnesses. You should also screenshot any text messages that are communicated between administration and sport coaches on any directives that you feel put an athlete in harm’s way or are unethical in nature. Download and make hard copies of the messages and date them.

You should also have an Injury Incident Report Form (Figure 2) ready in case a sport coach makes you perform a duty in a training session that you feel is inappropriate, and leads to injury. The injury report should be filed ASAP also so that it is fresh in your memory.

A report should be on file if you are directed to perform any conditioning workout that is not in accordance with the protocol that you or your staff have on the docket or that is, in your judgment, an unsafe practice. Finally, you should have a Return to Play Form (Figure 3) as well, as that covers the need to document a release back to competition or full practice.

Be Smart and Be Responsible for You and Your Athletes

Some coaches will feel that this is an overreaction, and disloyal to the sport coach or university. But I believe in loyalty: I am loyal to the sport coaches who are competent and I am loyal to the athletes in my care. I believe that there is no coach at any level in this country who wants to intentionally injure an athlete. But there are some sport coaches who think they know sport science and have misconceptions of our field. They also believe in pseudo-science and old wives’ tales, and are under pressure to win.

No coach wants to purposely hurt an athlete, but some sport coaches don’t truly know sport science, says @TheKurtHester. Share on X

There will come a day when a strength coach will have to go to court and he will have enough of a paper trail to save his ass. He will win a lawsuit and if that lawsuit is big enough, then and only then will the athletic administration start to have the back of the strength and conditioning department.

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

Medicine balls have been an important part of my training and coaching since the day I set foot at Cal State Northridge as a track athlete. Back then, we trained with medicine balls roughly two times a week, and normally there was a different theme or concept we applied each time we used them. One day, for example, would have a pressing emphasis and another day emphasized heaving, which I will provide examples of later in this article.

As the season went on, we would change the stimulus just a bit by adding 360 jumps with a pass, box jumps with a heave or press, and hurdle hops with a heave or press. As I graduated and moved on to coaching, I had an idea of why using medicine balls was effective. But, for the most part, I used them in my coaching because Coach Glenn McAtee used them, and we always had great results with very few, if any, injuries. Therefore, I programmed medicine ball training in my own plans just like Coach McAtee.

Sequential Acceleration and Maximum Force

As a young coach at 22-23 years old, I began to attend every USATF Coaches Education Course on the throws that I could. That’s where I finally came to understand the true importance of medicine ball training for athletes of all disciplines: it’s the training of summation of forces. During the education classes, Coach Larry Judge often referred to the summation of forces, which really drove home the importance of medicine ball training, or what we call multi-throws.

We all know that in every sport movement there is a proper order in which the limbs and muscles have to move to create maximum force. If these limbs and muscles do not move in the correct order, the result of whatever movement you’re trying to perform will be poor. Examples of poor summation of forces would be a baseball player swinging a bat before he plants his lead foot or a shot putter putting the shot without turning his feet and hips.

Medicine ball multi-throws train the summation of forces to develop coordination, says @nick_g_garcia. Share on X

The basic definition of the summation of forces is: when all body parts act simultaneously in practice, the strongest and lowest body parts around the center of gravity move first, followed by the weaker, lighter, and faster extremities. This is also known as sequential acceleration and results in successive force summation.

When using medicine balls, especially those with a heavier load, they continuously stress the proper order of the muscles and limbs involved in the movement. Bottom line—multi-throws with medicine balls develop coordination.

Movement Foundations

As I became more educated throughout the years, I realized that it’s not only the summation of forces that made the multi-throws a constant in my system. It also helps bridge the gap between the weight room and the field or court of play. In sports, speed kills. Although you can train with a speed emphasis in the weight room, you’re always fighting gravity with resistance training. Heavy squats, bench presses, deadlifts, and other exercises can move very slowly when the intensity is very high.

Counter the slow speed of heavy lifting by using multi-throws alongside the lifts, says @nick_g_garcia. Share on X

We can counter this by using multi-throws alongside lifting as contrast training. An example is doing a heavy clean set followed by a set of heaves for height. The medicine ball is light enough to stress constant acceleration and speed. These days you can even measure the speed of your throws by using a ball made by Bar Sensei, which has a measurement device built-in.

Multi-throw movements can be used in a ballistic manner in all three planes of movement, which also bridges the gap between the weight room and field of play. Barbells have limitations on what you can do with them. With dumbbells, you can be a bit more creative using movements like rotational high pulls and cross body 1-arm snatches. But they still limit which plane you are working in and how ballistic the movement can be.

Medicine balls are light enough to stress constant acceleration in all three planes of movement, says @nick_g_garcia. Share on X

With a medicine ball, the sky’s the limit as far as incorporating 360-degree jumps with a throw at the end and lunging in all planes followed by a throw. You can be as creative as you want with these movements, and they can be as ballistic as what occurs in your actual sport discipline.

Using medicine balls also emphasizes a concept that is huge in my system: training toenails to fingernails. When starting on the feet, heaving and pressing movements emphasize this concept. Basically it all comes back to the summation of forces and proper firing of the muscles and limbs associated with the movement you are performing. It starts at the feet and finishes when the ball leaves the fingers.

Practical Applications

So exactly how do I use medicine balls each week in our training? We emphasize heaving 90% of the time and pressing throughout the season.

Football

With football players, I often explain that heaving can be considered a defensive day because the movements are similar to tackling. A pressing day can be considered an offensive day because it emphasizes movements like stiff arms and blocking. I really like my athletes to understand why we are doing things rather than just having them do them with no idea about what they’re trying to emphasize.

Heaving

• Front Heave for Distance
• Lunge and Heave
• Heave for Height
• Back Heave for Distance
• Hammer Heave (left and right)

Pressing

• Chest Pass from Knees
• Soccer Throw
• Incline Chest Pass w/ Jump
• Shot Put (left and right)
• Jumping Chest Pass

Track and Field

When working with track and field athletes, we’ll do heaving once a week and pressing once a week—usually on a Monday and Thursday or a Tuesday and Friday. Regardless of the day, the order of the session is the following:

• Warm up followed by sprinting. Yes, we do sprint as throwers, and we even emphasize an acceleration day and max velocity day.
• Following the sprinting session, we do our individual.
• When we complete our individual event, we move on to our multi-throws and then hit the weight room.

Team Sport

When we train team sport athletes, we warm up, perform our sprinting, follow the sprinting session with our multi-throws, and then hit the weight room. I normally change the types of throws every four to six weeks, and we base the volume of throws on what we’re doing in the weight room.

Some of you may have seen me present on the traditional system I use. In that system, we have base, volume, unload, and performance weeks. A base week has six of each throwing movement, volume week has eight of each throwing movement, unload week has two of each movement, and performance week has four of each movement.

Gambetta Total Body Throws

When I feel it’s time to switch up the multi-throws, I normally move to a combination of heaving and pressing throughout the same session. We also have distinct unilateral movements. Here’s an example that I call Gambetta Total Body Throws or GTB.

• Single Leg Heave for Height (RDL to a Heave)
• Single Leg Squat and Throw (like an RDL to a Jerk)
• Heave for Height
• Squat and Throw (like a Jerk)

GTB takes place on both days of multi-throws during the week, and depending on the season, are rotated in and out every four to six weeks with heaving and pressing. As we start to get to the end of the season, I begin to incorporate throws with hurdle hops, box jumps, and 360-degree jumps. I use the single leg heave for height and the single leg squat and throw for specific ballistic hamstring work during a weight room session.

End of Season Multi-Throws

During the end of the season, we again base the volume on what we’re doing in the weight room, and a typical multi-throws session looks like this:

• Front Heave for Distance
• Back Heave for Distance
• 360 Chest Pass (right and left)
• Over 2 Boxes Front Heave
• Over 2 Hurdles Back Heave

Core Work

Toward the end of the season, we begin to incorporate medicine balls in our core work during a weight room session. We want to be fast and explosive at the end of the season, so everything we do emphasizes speed and explosion. The best way to do this for the core is to use medicine balls. Once again, they are light enough to stress constant acceleration and can be used in all three planes of movement.

The best way to emphasize speed and explosion for the core is to use medicine balls, says @nick_g_garcia. Share on X

I mentioned above that our single leg work that emphasizes the hamstring moves to medicine ball heaves and presses to be ballistic as possible. I say “emphasizing the hamstring” because as athletes we should not be training a single muscle by itself—we need to be training movements. Here is what a core workout may look like using medicine balls.

Gambetta Wall Series for the Core 

• Soccer Throw
• Chest Pass
• Down the Side (right and left sides done by themselves)
• Cross in Front (right and left sides alternate like forehands and backhands)

The size and weight of the medicine balls depend on how strong the athletes are, although we tend to stick with 2k-4k for women and 3k-5k for men. Remember the goal when using multi-throws is speed, and a medicine ball that’s too heavy will defeat the purpose. Occasionally we will substitute a medicine ball heave or press for an Olympic Lift during a cycle. At this point, it may be okay to go a little heavier than normal with the ball, but never sacrifice technique for weight.

Closing Thoughts

It’s clear medicine ball multi-throws can be used in a variety of ways and are very effective. They’re not the end all-be all of training, but they can be a very effective tool in your training toolbox to create an end all-be all system that you make your own. You can see more of the types of medicine ball movements we use at hmmrmedia.com. My email is [email protected] if you have any questions.

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

I felt compelled to write this article because I am scared for the future of sport. However, instead of pointing out the obvious, I decided to meet the problem head-on. A few months ago, I got a phone call from a parent asking if I could help with their son’s training, and I was horrified to discover that the kid was not even in kindergarten yet. This story is not uncommon.

My own daughter will be entering kindergarten this fall and she has yet to play an organized sport. She’s been very fortunate to have been raised in my gym around professional, collegiate, and high school athletes. My wife and I both played college sports, both work in the fitness space, and both continue to train ourselves.

We know the value of training and hard work, but we want to make sure our daughter has fun first and foremost. We try to focus our coaching on positive feedback along with encouraging effort. We hope our daughter and future children enjoy sports and competition as much as we do/did, but we aren’t going to force it. We want it to be organic.

The future of sport doesn’t look good right now, with an alarming trend of falling participation rates, rising injury rates, and more and more videos of parents acting like children. It’s out of control and many of the people in leadership positions are not doing anything about it. Not being involved in youth sport isn’t an excuse to look the other way or put your head in the sand; a small act of defiance against the “win at all costs” attitude is enough if it’s collective.

A small act of defiance against the ‘win at all costs’ attitude is enough if it’s collective, says @SPSmith11. Share on X

While professional and college athletes have their own problems, in time, the future elites will come from youth sports. Here are ways we can make sports safer and more enjoyable for today’s youth athletes.

Teach Parents About the Recruiting Process and Being a Better Fan

Parents play an expensive lottery with scholarship hunting, and most of the time athletes who are pushed to use their athletic abilities to get into college never make it. In addition to the wild goose chase for a full ride, parents become nasty fans who lose their compass along the way. In fact, the term “fan” comes from the word “fanatic,” and the way people act at games borders on insanity nowadays.

The parents looking for kids to play sports to get a better education have good intentions, as a college degree has enormous value. But the stark reality is that a parent’s DNA has more of an impact on the child getting into school for sports than summer camp selection or choosing the right private coach.

As role models, parents in the stands should act in a way that teaches their kid that everyone in sport should be respected and valued. As guardians, they should be educated on how rare scholarships are and why they’re not for everyone, including their own child. They need to know that being both a fan of their kids and driver of their future is more than simply scholarships for college—it’s the health and well-being of their own children and, potentially, their grandchildren.

We need higher-level coaches to warn about overspecialization, and overdosing on sports in general, says @SPSmith11. Share on X

We need more outreach on general parenting in sports, and the best way to do this is to have higher-level coaches warn the public about overspecialization and overdosing on sports in general. Playing multiple sports is not the answer; it’s about having the right structure and balance, which is something not easily sold to parents who think they know more than they actually do. Parents need to just be parents, and be there to help and educate their children.

In the great article, “What Makes A Nightmare Sports Parent — And What Makes A Great One,” Steve Henson quotes a speech by Bruce E. Brown, a high school and youth coach:

“Overall, grandparents are more content than parents to simply enjoy watching the child participate,” he says. “Kids recognize that.”
A grandparent is more likely to offer a smile and a hug, say “I love watching you play,” and leave it at that.
Meanwhile a parent might blurt out …
“Why did you swing at that high pitch when we talked about laying off it?”
“Stay focused even when you are on the bench.”
“You didn’t hustle back to your position on defense.”
“You would have won if the ref would have called that obvious foul.”
“Your coach didn’t have the best team on the field when it mattered most.”

Parents are part of the problem and part of the solution, so fostering an environment where a kid can enjoy being a kid is a great start instead of chasing scholarships too early. Our goal is to make training a part of the fun athletes should have, and bring back the enjoyment they may have lost in the process.

Put a Pause on Sports and Make Games Fun and Rewarding

The first step to making better athletes is to stop competing in sports and start playing more games. In fact, the problem with youth athlete development is that the public and some coaches think youth sports is miniature professional sports, just with younger athletes. Sports usually reveal or showcase talent, while games develop everyone, not just the gifted kids. Games don’t focus on who wins—they focus on learning and having fun. When nobody loses, everyone wins, provided it’s done at the appropriate level.

The problem is that the public and some coaches think youth sports is miniature professional sports, says @SPSmith11. Share on X

Most kids are typically scared to try, but when we only reward success, kids are quicker to give up when things don’t go their way. It’s extremely important for parents and coaches to encourage kids to try and practice—continuous effort and focus should be the message. Try not to only encourage the “natural” and “gifted” performances.

Be active in getting your children to participate in and try new sports. My father reminds me all the time that when my brother and I were young, we just wanted to play outside, play in the pool, and play video games. He claims that we always complained about going to practice and games, but once we got on the field, we always had fun and competed hard.

Games encourage participation because nothing is at stake except exploration and creativity. When kids are playing not to lose, experimentation and the evolution of the sport suffer because taking a risk is too risky. Another benefit to games is that they are focused on the participant having instant success and enjoyment, not being overwhelmed with rules and equipment limitations. Even free and unstructured play, like recess activities, is disappearing. It doesn’t matter if it’s at home or at school, raw play is an endangered species because kids are being poached for youth sports that generate big business.

Support Physical Education and Nutrition Programs

Everyone talks about the value of exercise and fitness for children, but when it comes down to budgeting, physical education is being either scrapped or gutted. “Gym teachers” are usually unappreciated, overworked, and poorly supported by the school system. Not many superintendents have enough moral conviction to apply the research and make changes based on what they know is true.

If you want your child to succeed, learn from Finland and get moving. The book Spark should be the backbone of the curriculum in every school district in America, but like PE teachers, it’s mentioned in workshops and then ignored when the school day gets carved up. Kids should have access to free play, guided play, and instructed play as an essential right.

I am a great example of a clumsy child who teachers took from being probably the least athletic person in the grade, to becoming a captain on a state-winning team in high school. While I give all the credit in the world to my high school coaches, the PE programs from elementary to middle school were instrumental in teaching me to move. To this day, I still use all the lessons learned from PE beyond sports coaching, as they helped me become competent in exercise and wellness. Kids now are less active and less motivated to be active, and the obesity crisis is growing. Activity is not valued, and all the Fitbits in the world will not save our population if what we are doing is not fun or rewarding.

My take on gym was it always pretty fun, and games were usually easy (basketball, floor hockey, baseball, softball, football, dodgeball, mat ball, volleyball, etc.). I actually enjoyed playing tag or capture the flag more than participating in sports. I would say capture the flag, dodgeball, and mat ball (kickball) were my favorite gym class games.

I still use lessons learned from PE, as they helped me become competent in exercise and wellness, says @SPSmith11. Share on X

In addition to the PE program, nutrition is another challenge faced by schools. Because children are a target consumer for billion-dollar companies, kids’ diets have been transformed into a junk food paradise. Kids are either hungry or overfed, and we need to overhaul the foods kids consume in order to reduce childhood obesity.

Just having a better cafeteria is not the answer, as the process of learning about nutrition can’t wait until high school biology; it must be taught early so kids understand how what they eat makes a difference. It’s embarrassing what kids in the U.S. eat compared to other countries, yet few schools are stepping up. A good solution is to have schools partner with farms and grow their own food so education and nutrition are both connected.

Reignite Town Teams and Kill Off Travel Squads

I generally hate travel teams, not because kids shouldn’t have fun exploring a new city, but because most kids are better equipped to compete locally. Most programs are designed to financially support the one star on the team by including pay-to-play athletes or drain the area’s talent and make “superteams.” We end up seeing a never-ending season that grinds down a kid into overuse injuries and mental exhaustion. It’s not right, but not only is it allowed—it’s encouraged, with a large price tag.

I tell parents all the time: “Don’t worry about your kid getting seen. If they are that good, colleges will find them.” It’s rare that a kid is so great that the talent around them is holding back their development. For every Messi going to the Academy in Barcelona, there are a million young athletes who will never play professionally. It’s not that trying is an inappropriate goal—everyone has the right to dream—but stacking the odds with more competition and travel doesn’t address the needs of development.

The real solution for youth sports is just the opposite of what is being done now with travel teams. Have the kids play different sports and practice more, so the opportunity to compete is valued by the athlete. Training is the ultimate teacher, and too many travel teams participate in tournaments to give the family a reason to tour like wannabe pro teams. Tournaments are nothing more than gasoline to a wildfire in youth sports; they place inhumane orthopedic and physiological strain on athletes who are not prepared to handle such workloads. It’s not ethical and it needs oversight by the right organization.

Town teams are not immune to over-competing, either. Staying local allows more competition to happen because travel is not a barrier, but a good safeguard is to keep games shorter and only as frequent as deemed appropriate by a collective set of transdisciplinary experts and parents. While moms and dads are sometimes the problem, they are also the most important part of the solution for youth sports. If the right ones are part of the fix, their experience creates a checks and balance to bureaucracy that can go astray.

Participating in multiple sports doesn’t mean an athlete is better prepared for sports, says @SPSmith11. Share on X

My own experience with travel or club teams is that, for the most part, they don’t integrate well with scholastic programs. You can’t serve two masters. When an athlete has to compete in back-to-back games in the NBA, the sport science community freaks out, but when it happens with kids, it’s them having “fun.” A youth body is resilient, but only to a point, and competing and practicing too much is just not a smart plan in the long run. As a community, we need to simply say “enough is enough” and put a cap on the process.

Make Performance Enhancement an Alternative to Competing

Participating in multiple sports doesn’t mean the athlete is better prepared for sports, it just changes the rules of games and provides some changes in scenery. An athlete who runs up and down a soccer field, then runs up and down a basketball court, and finally runs on a track is still competing and practicing hard. While more skills and different opportunities to express slightly different skills in altered sporting environments are great, athletes need to train in order to handle the stress of sports in general, and playing more games isn’t the solution. Athletes need a break in order not to break, and this is more important as the athlete matures.

Athletes need a break in order not to break, and this becomes more important as the athlete matures, says @SPSmith11. Share on X

Playing outside in elementary school is not the same as a 15-year-old athlete playing sports every season, so something needs to change. “Training to train,” as promoted by long-term athlete development (LTAD) experts, is strangely neglected in youth sports. You can’t compete year-round on an empty tank of body development, and kids need training away from the field and court to reduce injuries and get stronger. In-season training does work well at the lower levels, but with busy school days, homework, part-time jobs, and social lives, kids need downtime from sports.

Athletes should take one season off from sports practice and competition in high school. General training should be organized and coached professionally, and that means qualified coaches in sports performance. Younger athletes don’t need a break from sports if the season is not a series of excessive scheduled competitions and long practices. Introduction to training starts from day one, but only when it becomes intense enough to merit a respite from full-time sport should we concern ourselves with workload.

My brothers and I all went from four sports to two sports by freshman or sophomore year of high school. We also were full-year participants at a private strength and conditioning gym throughout high school, and saw the benefits of doing something organized to get prepared for sports. Kids don’t need to play a sport all the time, and a break is nice so they can enjoy activities that don’t have a ball or a score at the end.

Nature, crafts, and simple recreational activities are just as important to the development of a human being. Sports are just a part of someone; they’re not everything. Even the most dedicated and passionate athletes need a planned rest period or break, so kids who are doing it for fun and friendship should be given the freedom to pursue other interests without fear of falling behind. Taking time away is not a sign of weakness—it helps to reload the body and mind.

Improve Coaches’ Education with Mentorships

Last, but perhaps the cornerstone to the problem, is the coaching side of the equation. Athletes sometimes spend more time with their coaches than their parents during the school year, and some coaches are underqualified. While coaches may have good intentions, ignorance is not bliss with athlete injuries, and a standard is necessary if we want to reduce injuries and create a positive experience.

Although a bad coach will lose games and be responsible for injuries, successful coaches can also be a problem when they win at any cost. Winning can cause all involved to overlook the injuries and disenfranchised athletes who quit sports from the process, so success needs to be measured outside of the wins and losses column. Conversely, not winning and being beaten chronically is a warning sign that the program is in trouble or the team should not be in the league they are competing in.

Even successful coaches can be a problem when they must win at any cost, says @SPSmith11. Share on X

Different regions and levels will have various coaching certifications and accreditation programs, but the key figure is the person hiring the coach. The politics that affect the hiring process are a problem. Good, qualified coaches are getting overlooked for coaches who have “ins” or clout that enables them to get a job they are not suited for. Winning can distract an athletic director at all levels, and in youth sports the problem is worse because those hiring the coach may not exist (the coach owns the club) or the business cares about profits and not athlete well-being. Privatization or more education will not always fix the problem of getting better coaches; transparency usually keeps things honest.

Coaching education can take several forms. Mentorships in coaching aren’t about being an assistant to a head coach, but a continual process of having someone to bounce ideas off. Mentorship is not about how to coach better, it’s to make sure the path is sustainable and healthy for the younger coach as well. Good coaches are out of sports due to burnout just as much as good athletes are, so preserving the health of great coaches is just as important as shaping new ones.

Coaching education is about levels or phases. It’s about making sure the right information connects to those who need it, and that’s assessment of the coach’s ability. While no perfect answer exists here, a good benchmark for good coaching is end-of-season reviews by both peers and athletes. Over time, the coaching profession will evolve from education, but only if those who hire and evaluate what makes a great coach are educated as well. Time will tell, but I have hope because more and more people are at least talking about the issue due to problems that surfaced at the higher levels.

The First Step in Change Is Spreading the Word

It doesn’t matter what you believe in, not talking about it will never solve anything. The most powerful way to get people talking about the problem is to bring it up in a way that is constructive and time-sensitive. If you think a problem exists with athletes burning out and getting hurt, don’t badmouth those involved. Instead, get proactive, and that starts with confronting the challenge with rolled-up sleeves and time in the trenches.

Leadership starts with action, and waiting is never a good idea when the problem is currently going on. So, play your part and do something, no matter how big or small, as everyone together can make a difference.

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

You’re in the middle of your conference schedule. You’re tired, worn down, and frustrated. Your team just lost another tough game, and the last thing you want to do is train the next day. Now, imagine being one of your players and multiply how you feel by about a thousand.

“At such moments, the Warrior of the Light is not concerned with results. He examines his heart and asks: ‘Did I fight the good fight?’ If the answer is ‘yes,’ he can rest. If the answer is ‘no,’ he picks up his sword and begins training all over again.” —Paulo Coelho, Warrior of the Light

If you work in or around athletics, you’re going to deal with tough seasons at some point in time. It’s the law of averages. And no matter how experienced you are as a coach, nothing can prepare you for the challenges of dealing with a team that is suffering through a losing season. It is impossible to truly be ready for these challenges until you are hit with them head-on.

When this happens, as a strength and conditioning coach, you are almost powerless. You can’t put the ball in the basket for the team, and you have very little control, if any, over what goes on during the game. The best you can do is make sure the team is physically ready to play the game when the whistle blows. And 99% of that effort happens when nobody is watching.

We Just Lost and the World is Ending

Well, it’s not really ending, even though it feels like it. The sun is going to come up the next day and, unless it’s the last game of a player’s career, they’ll have another chance to shine. No matter what happened, leave it in the past. Strength and conditioning coaches cannot get wrapped up in the wins and losses or highs and lows a team experiences.

The weight room needs to be a safe haven for athletes during a losing season. Share on X

The weight room needs to be a safe haven for the athletes. It needs to be a place where they know they can get better but also step away from the pressures of their game for a little while, especially in-season. They say that doing a round of cardio is the best anti-depressant medicine, so why not make the weight room a place where your athletes can get better while enjoying themselves? The world will not end because you lost a game.

It’s So Easy—in Theory

Everything is easy until you put it into practice. The question is, how do you create this nurturing and positive atmosphere? Strength coaches are competitive. We wouldn’t do what we do if we weren’t. We feel the losses just as much as the sport coaches and the players. But just because we’re hurting doesn’t give us the right to add to the players’ misery the next day. We need to do the opposite. We need to once again create a welcoming, upbeat atmosphere in the weight room, a place where they can focus on their training and not on the game.

How Do We Create a Positive Atmosphere?

Of course, it’s easier said than done and there is no right or wrong way to create an encouraging, positive atmosphere for your team. The key is to know your team’s personality. At this point, it doesn’t come down to X’s and O’s, it comes down to psychology and having the pulse of your team. If your team typically likes to dance (most teams love to dance), make sure you put music on to kick-start it. Freeing their minds of stress, if only for a few minutes, will go a long way to improve their mood and hopefully their performance for the next game.

The Day After a Loss

The day after a tough loss is always going to be the hardest, especially when you have to turn around and play again in twenty-four hours. The team is typically tired, upset, and lacking the motivation to do anything that requires effort. Coaches are working hard to learn from the mistakes from the night before and planning to get the team ready to play the next day, so it’s important that the strength coaches do the same.

When the team walks into the weight room or steps on the court for warm-up, do not throw a pity party and feed into the negativity. Often, the strength coach is the “energy-giver.” Embrace this role and give the team the boost they need. It’s time to move on and get ready for the next step. The past is the past. Learn from it, improve on it, and ultimately put it in the rearview mirror.

Dealing with an Extended Losing Streak

Losing one game is hard enough. Losing multiple games in a row is downright torturous. Former NFL Coach George Allen once said, “Every time you lose, you die a little bit. You die inside… a portion of you. Not all of your organs. Maybe just your liver.”

Obviously this is a bit of stretch, but a point well taken. It hurts to lose. Athletes and coaches make huge sacrifices to succeed in their sport. They expend a lot of effort in their preparation, from the start of the off-season right up until game time, so it’s easy for losing to feel like failing. And when losses start piling up, it’s easy to feel like the world is crashing down.

As hard as it may be and as much as people will resist this, it’s vital to stay positive and stay the course to get out of the losing streak and ultimately get better from the experience. Getting the athletes to understand and “trust the process” is crucial to their overall success and development.

3 Keys to the Process

1. Programming is the Easy Part—Buy-In is the Most Important and Toughest Part

As strength coaches, we understand the importance of a sound, year-long training program. We spend hours doing our research and putting together our periodization plans. But those plans, no matter how great they are, no matter how fancy our excel spreadsheets look, are meaningless if we’re not getting great effort and buy-in from the players.

In-season is the hardest time to train athletes—the weight room is a nuisance to them. Share on X

In-season is the hardest time to train because the athletes have so much on their plate. The weight room is a nuisance to them; it’s just one more thing they have to do. To get what we need out of them, we must make the lifts short and create variety week in and week out. This doesn’t mean we have them do something completely new to them, but it does mean getting creative with what you have and what is familiar to them.

Get creative during the season to maintain the atmosphere of success you built in the off-season. Share on X

Instead of your typical in-season lift, create a circuit to break up the monotony that incorporates the exercises they already know. Or, create a weight room competition where they can get excited and compete in something other than their sport. At some point, jump into the competition yourself and help them get a little crazy. All of this helps keep the atmosphere of success that you worked so hard to build in the off-season.

2. Pre- and Post-Practice Warm-Ups and Cooldowns

Warm-ups and cool downs are also times to get creative. You don’t need to make drastic changes. Even playing a game of tag or creating some competition while getting loose is good for morale and gets the team in the right mindset for practice. I admit I struggle with this because there are a lot of things I want to accomplish in my warm-up. But generating excitement with games and forgetting about a structured warm-up is great for the team’s psyche.

As for the cool down, vary what you do each day. Instead of band stretching, one day do a dynamic cooldown or put together a static stretch series. Any variability from the norm will be good for them.

3. Game Day Warm-Up

The game day warm-up is the culmination of all the work done in preparation for the game. By this point, there’s no need for anything but to help the players get themselves mentally ready for the game. Unlike the practice warm-up, this needs to be consistent and have no element of surprise. It needs to be fast (7-10 minutes on the court) and move them in the right mindset to play.

I want the team to know exactly what to expect and to put them in an atmosphere where they can find their focus without any external pressures. How you build the atmosphere varies on the type of personalities that exist on the team, so it’s vital you have a clear understanding of what makes the team tick. This is where you see the biggest differences in sport culture. A football team typically wants to get very fired up whereas a golfer or tennis player needs more quiet time to silence the noise. I’ve found basketball is a mixture of both.

When we play at home, I set up the weight room for the first part of their warm-up. I put one of their games—or their opponent’s games—on the TV, pick music I know will relax them, and let them do what they need to do to get ready. I have different exercises set up for them and am available to stretch anyone who feels they need it before they take the court to start shooting. We do all of this before the dynamic warm-up on the court.

I design everything to get the athletes feeling good and in the right mindset to play at the highest level. The more physically ready they feel, the more comfortable they are during the game.

Conclusion

Creating a positive atmosphere for your athletes is the easy part. Putting it into practice when the season isn’t going your way is the biggest challenge. It’s most important to know the pulse of your team and have the willingness to adapt. What works one week might not work the next, so it’s vital to your in-season success to adapt to each situation you face. As strength coaches, if we can keep the focus on continual growth and improvement, our program will reap long-term benefits by carrying over into the off-season, the next season, and beyond.

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

Omega-3s are riding an alpha wave of hype. In the sports world, the use of omega-3s as a nutraceutical for repetitive head trauma and concussions is gaining momentum. This escalated demand, combined with a minimal consumption of fish and multiple studies reporting alarming omega-3 deficiencies among athletes and the general population, creates a perfect storm for supplement companies to swoop in and take advantage by marketing high-priced omega-3s.

Unfortunately, there’s confusion over which omega-3 product to purchase, which results in many puzzled looks when facing an overwhelming selection of omega-3 supplements in the vitamin aisle. Additionally, most supplement dosages don’t even match the research, and this makes efficacy highly questionable. After all, who wants to gulp down 10 fish oil pills each day?

While everyone is so concerned with omega-3 supplementation due to omega-3 deficiencies and the consequences of those deficiencies, very little attention is being given to the molecular carrier of the omega-3. This carrier heavily influences bioavailability, retention in the body, and subsequent efficacy in improving omega-3 deficiency to obtain desirable health outcomes. If the goal is a quick and efficient recovery from DHA deficiency, then the different forms of DHA supplementation must be considered.

This perfect storm of formula problems suggests omega-3 supplements are overpriced and overhyped. If you’re looking for more value than the nonchalant “just take an omega-3 supplement,” this article will tell you how to find a valuable source of omega-3s to better exploit their nutritional properties.

What Are Omega-3s?

Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids are essential fatty acids (we must get them from the diet) that are critical for normal cell growth and development.

The main omega-3s are:

• Docosahexaenoic Acid (DHA): A long-chain fatty acid that is needed to create neuronal synapses (i.e., where signaling occurs for cell-to-cell communication) and membrane fluidity. Every cell in the body contains DHA, but it is mostly concentrated in the eyes (93%) and brain (97%), especially in areas involved in memory and attention.
• Eicosapentaenoic Acid (EPA): A long-chain omega-3 needed for overall health.
• Alpha-Linolenic Acid (ALA): A short-chain omega-3 that serves as an energy source and building block for DHA and EPA. We must directly increase DHA intake because the conversion of ALA to EPA is 8% and then from EPA to DHA is 0-4%. So, ALA is not sufficient for increasing DHA in the brain.

DHA and EPA are structural components of cells, while ALA is used more as an energy source. DHA and EPA deliver critical biological effects, such as fighting inflammation and providing cardiovascular benefits. Low levels of DHA in the brain or eyes can slow down signaling (communication) between cells, which leads to poor vision and weaker cognition (e.g., development of learning, reaction time, etc.).

Read more about DHA here.

The Hierarchy of Factors to Consider in Omega-3 Efficacy

To obtain the benefits of omega-3s that have been extensively reported, sufficient intake and duration of intake, as well as transport and assimilation into brain and blood cells are all key. DHA comes in the form of food or supplement from cold-water fish (such as salmon, mackerel, herring, and tuna), algae, and Antarctic krill.

Just because you take in a certain nutrient doesn’t mean that you will digest all of it. Share on X

Before someone can argue about the efficacy of any supplement, there is a hierarchy of factors to consider:

• Dosage: The amount of DHA/EPA in the food or supplement.
• Bioavailability: Think of this as the amount of a nutrient consumed and how digestible the nutrient is. Just because you take in a certain nutrient doesn’t mean that you will digest all of it. For dietary fat digestion, enzymes are used in the hydrolysis of fat in the small intestine. Then, the hydrolyzed by-products are absorbed across the gut lining. Essentially, bioavailability describes how much of a nutrient is taken in and actually retained in the body fat through digestion and absorption.
• Absorption: After digestion, micelles transport the fatty acids to the surface of the gut lining, where they can be absorbed.
• Metabolic Fate/Retention in Tissue: Metabolic fate is where the omega-3s go after digestion and absorption. Omega-3s need to get into circulation and then assimilate into compartments in the body, such as red blood cells (RBC), adipose tissue, muscle, and brain.

Essentially, not all omega-3s from food and supplements are the same with respect to bioavailability, absorption, and metabolic fate. Why is this so? Because omega-3s contain differences in chemical form (or carriers) when they come from food versus when they come from supplements. This is the reason omega-3 research regarding health outcomes is unclear and mixed results have been reported: It’s not an equal playing field when comparing foods and supplements.

The efficiency of the omega-3 carrier studied in the research is rarely focused on. Subsequently, a majority of supplement companies do not ensure that the omega-3 carrier in their omega-3 source is sufficient for bioavailability. In the research using omega-3 supplements, minimal attention has been given to the bioavailability of omega-3s in different dietary supplements. This major oversight impacts absorption and metabolic fate as well.

Many companies don’t ensure the carrier in their omega-3 source is sufficient for bioavailability. Share on X

It’s interesting that of the large number of publications researching the biological and health effects of omega-3s, very few studies directly focus on omega-3 bioavailability. This is the reason it’s considered almost impossible to compare the outcomes of the studies¹—there are so many differences, including the study design, number and sex of participants, duration of studies, different carriers of omega-3s, different measures used to estimate bioavailability, and more.

Ultimately, it is evident that the carrier of the omega-3 affects its bioavailability and subsequent efficacy.

Different Molecular Carriers of Omega-3s

In nature, omega-3 fatty acids (FA) are found in triacylglycerol (TAG)/triglyceride (TG), phospholipid (PL), or free fatty acid (FFA) form. Most omega-3s from fish are found in the TG form, which is considered the “natural” form. Fish oil comes from fish that are processed and encapsulated into supplements. Omega-3s can also be converted into other forms, such as ethyl ester (EE), which is an oil concentrate.

Preformed DHA is considered structurally identical, but in food and supplements, DHA typically undergoes an enzymatic and chemical reaction (or is esterified) to become one of four different lipids that serve as molecular carriers:

• Triacylglycerol/Triglycerides: Consists of three fatty acids connected to a glycerol backbone. This form of lipid is found in foods like fish, seafood, and fish oils. There are small amounts of monoacylglycerol (MAG), diacylglycerol (DAG), or phospholipid (PL) in foods.
• Phospholipid: Consists of two fatty acids connected to a glycerol backbone and a phosphorous group that is linked to a “head group,” which consists of choline, ethanolamine, and other types of phospholipids. So instead of a third fatty acid, there’s a phosphate or choline added. Of the forms of PL, one of the most important forms is DHA-enriched phosphatidylcholine (DHA-PC), which is the most predominant PL in salmon, tuna, rainbow trout, and mackerel. An important PL is lysophosphatidylcholine (lyso-PC), which is discussed further below.
• Free Fatty Acid: These aren’t connected to a glycerol backbone; hence, “free” fatty acid.
• Ethyl Ester: The synthetic form, where DHA/EPA is connected to ethanol, which produces an omega-3 oil concentrate.

Cold-water oily fish, such as salmon, sardine, anchovy, herring, and mackerel, contain between 1-1.5% PL and 10-15% TG.²Up to 33% of the EPA and DHA may be in the form of PL, depending on the type of fish.³The FA content is different in farmed fish compared to wild fish because of the aquaculture feed.

Does esterifying the omega-3 source in TG or PL form influence absorption efficiency of FAs into the blood? Does this impact the subsequent effects on integration into tissue and long-term health outcomes?

Metabolism of Omega-3s

The metabolism of omega-3s is highly important in evaluating bioavailability and retention in the body and will be briefly described.

In our gastrointestinal tract, the TGs are broken down into FFAs and MAGs. They are then absorbed by our gut cells, put back together to form TAG, and transported in chylomicrons (small globules that transport fat) to the liver. There, the FAs are either stored in the liver or exported in very low-density lipoprotein to target tissues like muscle, adipose, red blood cell (RBC), brain, etc., where they are usually incorporated in membranes.

DHA is rapidly sent to:

1. Plasma Lipoproteins– Mostly as TG or PL.
2. Blood– As non-esterified DHA or lysophosphatidylcholine-esterified DHA (lysoPC-DHA).

Studies suggest that DHA bioavailability to the brain is greater when DHA is in the lysoPC-DHA form in the blood even though non-esterified DHA is still a good source of DHA.^4-7But how DHA enters the brain is still a mystery. The preferential crossing of the blood-brain barrier in the lysoPC-DHA form is supported by a few studies, which is further supported by the finding of a specific transporter of lysoPC-DHA called MFSD2A (major facilitating superfamily domain-containing protein 2A).

The other important factor is that DHA in the lysophospholipid form has a longer plasma half-life, which increases DHA brain exposure. This has important implications for brain diseases.

Phospholipids are digested and absorbed differently than TAGs. It’s a bit more complicated. Phospholipids enter the hepatic system as micelles (a stable group that is essential for fat absorption), so they’re more bioavailable.

Evaluation Process of Omega-3 Status

Aside from digestion, absorption, and transport, omega-3 retention and incorporation into tissue are endpoints to be considered. Long-term studies (multiple weeks or months) determine omega-3 status by examining the levels in RBCs, which are suggested to closely parallel DHA levels in the brain.⁸Omega-3 status determined via RBCs is thought to reflect long-term availability.

The Omega-3 Index is valuable, but it’s only part of my evaluation process for omega-3 status. Share on X

Many studies have shown that the concentration of EPA and DHA in RBC membranes correlates well with omega-3 levels in cell membranes of other tissues like the heart, liver, and brain.^9-11Specifically, the omega-3 index—the total of EPA and DHA presented as a percentage of total FA in RBC membranes—is a sufficient measure of long-term incorporation of FA in tissue.

For example, the Omega-3 Index, along with other tests, was critical in holistically evaluating that one of my NFL players was not getting enough omega-3s in his food-first approach, despite consuming multiple servings of salmon per week. Therefore, we re-strategized in our goal to increase brain resilience by following a nutrition-first approach instead of only a food-first approach.

The Omega-3 Index is valuable, but it’s only part of my evaluation process for omega-3 status.

Factors Impacting Bioavailability of Omega-3 Carriers

For omega-3s, think of bioavailability as the dosage of EPA/DHA that you consume and the number of these FAs that raise the amount of omega-3s in your blood. When it comes to DHA and EPA, we need to make sure that the type of fat carrying these critical nutrients provides high bioavailability. Otherwise, impaired absorption is worthless, especially at the price of $1+ per serving of fish oil.

Omega-3 dosage and bioavailability are critical factors before we can completely disregard omega-3s for specific health and performance benefits (e.g., reaction time, brain resilience, etc.).

Long-term and short-term studies are complementary in understanding omega-3 bioavailability and their biological effects.

• Long-Term Studies: Provide the bioavailability and subsequent metabolic fate, which is more informative about the biological effects of omega-3s.
• Short-Term Studies: Better for evaluating the bioavailability of omega-3s, but not information about metabolic fate and accumulation in tissue.

In actuality, studies investigating bioavailability should consider supplementation over an extended period of time instead of a single dose in order to be certain.

Much of the discrepancy between studies can be correlated to variables such as different levels of EPA and DHA, different treatment times (a few days versus eight weeks), and different doses used (e.g., 3 grams versus 2 grams).

It is difficult to analyze bioavailability when studies make gram-for-gram comparisons of different omega-3 carriers: for example, 2 grams of an omega-3 supplement in the PL form versus 2 grams of an omega-3 supplement in the TG form. It is suggested this is inappropriate and could lead to inaccurate results. Bioavailability determines efficacy even in the comparison of identical dosages of omega-3s of two different forms.

Another two factors to consider are the food matrix that influences the bioavailability of the nutrients in it and the total dietary fat consumed with omega-3 supplements (e.g., consuming an omega-3 supplement that contains eggs and avocado at breakfast). Significant effects on omega-3 bioavailability are related to the amount of dietary fat. A high-fat meal significantly improved absorption of the EE and TG forms in humans when compared to a low-fat meal (44 grams of fat versus 8 grams of fat). There’s a higher omega-3 bioavailability if you consume omega-3s with a high-fat meal.

There’s a higher omega-3 bioavailability if you consume omega-3s with a high-fat meal. Share on X

Then there’s the influence of formulations that focus on improving tolerance and/or increasing bioavailability. An emulsified form may provide higher availability, which may lead to better digestion and absorption of omega-3s.¹²Microencapsulated fish oil compared to fish oil capsules may also enhance bioavailability, possibly due to easier breakdown. However, enteric coating, which is resistant to stomach acidity, is suggested to have no influence on bioavailability.^13,14

Bioavailability Comparison of Different Omega-3 Carriers

First and foremost, TG is considered more effective than EE. DHA in natural fish oil is typically esterified to TG and PL. But, if the form impacts the bioavailability, does the form also influence where the omega-3, specifically DHA, is incorporated in the body (e.g., the brain or RBC)? It is suggested that DHA-PC could increase DHA in RBCs better than DHA-TG.¹⁵

Studies using PL versus TG showed significantly greater incorporation of omega-3s into tissues from PL compared to TG. Of the PL forms, PC is a highly efficacious source for DHA. A study has shown that the metabolic fate of DHA differs quite a bit when taken in as TG compared to PC for bioavailability of DHA in plasma and storage in various tissues in the body.

Multiple studies have shown that DHA-PC results in a higher bioavailability and greater efficacy of accumulation in the brain compared to DHA-TG.^15,16 With respect to outcomes, DHA-PC has produced more significant improvements in cognitive performance and emotional well-being compared to DHA-TG.

A study investigated the efficacy of dietary DHA carried by PC compared to DHA carried by TG in pigs.¹⁵Researchers found that dietary DHA carried as PC is more efficient at being incorporated as brain gray matter DHA than DHA carried as TG. It was also more effective in the retina, liver, and red blood cells.

It’s important to note that DHA is in the phospholipid form in the cell membranes of the brain and retina. This includes phosphatidylcholine and phosphatidylserine.

A 2018 study assessed the bioavailability of different DHA carriers by comparing the incorporation of DHA in plasma, RBCs, retina, and brain tissues in adult rats provided with PL-DHA or MAG-DHA over 60 days. To evaluate the PL and MAG carriers, they were compared to DHA oil containing the usual TG-DHA.

The study found that MAG-DHA and PL-DHA are more efficient than TG-DHA in increasing DHA levels in RBCs. The study reported that PL-DHA enriched oil may require minimal digestion before absorption, which is a key factor in omega-3 efficacy.

Ultimately, the differences were assumed to be due to absorption, and if most fish oil supplements are TG-bound, then this is an important issue due to dietary PL consistently showing better bioavailability. Essentially, in PL versus TG, human studies do not have conclusive results, but animal studies suggest the PL form may improve the bioavailability of omega-3s, which helps enhance absorption of EPA/DHA.

This carrier may be important if the goal is brain resilience because the key is DHA accumulation kinetics in the brain. Lowering the DHA concentration in the liver could be helpful for increasing DHA availability for other tissues.¹⁵ This could be done by providing DHA as PL rather than as TG for building up brain DHA.

Gut Microbiota Implicated in Omega-3 Absorption

Gut microbiota are suspects in the bioavailability issue. The latest research suggests that some gut microbiota could be snatching the omega-3s. When TAGs are digested, a portion of the free fatty acids released may be used as a carbon source (i.e., energy source) for our gut microbiota, and the leftovers may be eliminated in our feces. This means the >$1 price per serving on your probiotic supplement may be feeding your gut microbiota more than depositing DHA in the brain to increase brain resilience.

Your probiotic supplement may be feeding your gut microbiota, not depositing DHA in the brain. Share on X

The interesting part of the 2018 study described above is that the researchers discuss a novel, hypothetical mechanism as to why there is a difference among the carriers leading to differences in the amount of DHA circulating in the body. It was suggested that part of the FFAs released from TAG are neither absorbed nor excreted. So where do they go?

They were taken up by the gut microbiota. Some bacteria, such as Lactobacillaceae, can metabolize FAs. Therefore, it is suggested that some of the FFAs released from TAG can be used by gut microbiota. It’s estimated that gut microbiota use 5-15% of the FFAs released from TAG.

After TAG is broken down into MAGs and FFAs, they can enter one of three different pathways:

• Chylomicron Synthesis: absorption into fat globules used for transportation
• Excretion: in our feces
• Gut Microbiota: uptake and use for energy

It is estimated that the resulting differences in absorption leads to:

• 80-90% of total FAs absorbed from TAG
• 0-5% of FFAs are excreted in our waste
• 5-15% of FFAs are used by the gut microbiota

Essentially, it appears that MAG-DHA and PL-DHA are more efficient at increasing DHA levels in RBCs compared to TAG-DHA. And the reason for the difference in absorption may be due to our gut microbiota snatching some of the FFA during the digestion of TAG.

Do Omega-3s Really Have an Impact on Brain Resilience?

DHA is recognized as a critical nutrient for brain cell communication with anti-inflammatory effects in the brain, which recommends its use as a strategy for several brain diseases that are inflammatory. Increasing brain DHA may protect from neuroinflammation associated with aging, pro-inflammation, or an acute injury such as a concussion.

Since brain DHA levels depend on diet, bioavailability must be a priority. The function of DHA and its critical role in brain development, cognition, and vision is well-supported. The big issue is understanding how DHA actually accumulates in the eyes and the brain, especially when there is tight regulation in the separation of blood circulation by the blood-brain barrier.

Since brain DHA levels depend on diet, bioavailability must be a priority. Share on X

Does the RBC DHA level serve as a biomarker of DHA accumulation in the brain? The efficacy and incorporation of DHA into tissues in our body is questionable.

The form of PL called lysoPC is suggested (based on young rats) to be the desired vehicle of DHA to the brain compared to TG.^8,17LysoPC carrying DHA may increase brain penetration, which would serve as an important factor in the therapeutic treatment of neuroinflammation.

The bottom line: We tout the value of increasing DHA in the brain, but we don’t yet fully understand the different forms that transport the DHA into the brain. The DHA carrier is highly important.

Dosage: Intake vs. Uptake

Different national and international health authorities recommend omega-3 intakes that range from 250 milligrams per day to up to 2 grams per day of EPA and DHA. Remember, what is on the label doesn’t really translate to what is in the body.

Research suggests that dosage not be provided as a fixed amount, but rather, based on body weight.¹For example, consider 1 gram of EPA in TG given to two different people, one who weighs 60 kilograms and another weighing 90 kilograms. Although the 60-kilogram person receives a dose that is 50% less than the 90-kg person, as their weight is 50% less as well, the doses aren’t equivalent as compared to bodyweight. In this scenario, one dose is equivalent to 0.0017% of body weight for the 60-kg person, and 0.0011% of body weight for the 90-kg person. This results in variability in the omega-3 status measurement assessing bioavailability.

A systematic review also showed that women have a significantly higher amount of DHA in their plasma/serum, RBC, and adipose tissue compared to men. Therefore, sex plays a role in omega-3 bioavailability as well.

Note that dosage is your intake—your uptake is a different ball game. Share on X

Additionally, initial nutritional status may influence the efficiency of recovering DHA depletion, which requires a different dosage. What is the key dosage? Well, that depends.

Note that dosage is your intake, but your uptake is a different ball game.

When Dosage Is Really a Problem

Omega-3 supplements are a promising nutritional approach for optimizing brain health, especially related to cognition and warding off neurological diseases. But with the information above, the evidence suggests that omega-3 supplements are definitely not all equal. Given the need for therapeutic use, two populations for whom dosage is a major concern are:

• Athletes of Collision Sports: For football, hockey, rugby, etc., a high dosage and efficacy is key to potentially alleviate long-term consequences related to the brain and neuroendocrine system. Supplement companies are jumping on the bandwagon and claiming that their product can be a preventative nutraceutical. Unfortunately, many do not have dosages that match the literature. Where are the bioavailability studies that are especially well-controlled? Is there a formulation issue?
• Carriers of the Apolipoprotein E e4 Allele: Chronic high doses of DHA to those who carry the APOE4 allele may reduce the risk for Alzheimer’s Disease (AD). APOE4 is one of three forms of APOE that lead to an increased risk for AD, such as less-effective clearance of B-amyloid plaque that causes cognitive decline, higher inflammatory response, and lower ability to cope with the consequences of brain injury. Those with one e4 allele have three to four times the risk of developing Alzheimer’s compared to those without the allele. However, this nutrient timing needs to happen before the onset of dementia. It is suggested that APOE4 is a modifiable AD risk factor and DHA supplementation may help alleviate the neurological disease. It’s a perfect storm for an athlete who has this gene and is playing a collision sport.

Practical Advice

After reading this article, you’re probably thinking: So what? The purpose of this article was not to confuse people, but rather to pose questions that determining omega-3 supplementation for different biological effects is not easy. It’s not just about “take a supplement.”

The issue boils down to the fact that omega-3 supplements vary in dosage and the type of dietary carrier used, which influences the incorporation of DHA into tissue. Just because you’re taking an omega-3 supplement for brain health, doesn’t mean that it’s going straight to the brain. The variables, such as the omega-3 carrier, that influence the ability of DHA to get into the brain need to be optimized.

If different forms of omega-3s have different bioavailability profiles, do we need to aggressively vet omega-3 supplement companies? What are the bioavailability claims of omega-3 supplement companies, or are they brushing that variable to the side?

Dosage is obviously a critical factor when determining which omega-3 supplement to provide. Unfortunately, the majority of omega-3 supplements are not formulated with dosages that match the literature for efficacy. Therefore, we’re battling dosage issues combined with poor bioavailability.

When unknowingly facing misleading or false claims from omega-3 supplement companies, how can you optimize your omega-3 intake? The difficulty with supplement companies is that many do not disclose an important component on the label: the specific form of EPA or DHA used. This makes it challenging for the consumer to compare omega-3s.

Additionally, some companies add “label dressing.” Maybe a stack of vitamin D and omega-3 makes sense, but the addition of other components like MCT oil is unnecessary.

The transparency for omega-3 supplements appears non-existent.

Should you just stick to food? The amount of EPA/DHA in salmon ranges from 999 to 1,825 milligrams per 3-ounce serving. But how many people are consistently eating salmon at least two times per week? And does a food-first approach allow for therapeutic dosages to be reached?

A study that compared 600 milligrams of DHA from algae oil to cooked salmon over a two-week period found that the two were bioequivalent in nutritional availability. This is where I stick to a nutrition-first approach: Consume omega-3s from food, but also supplement. Use blood testing to figure out the dosage need for that individual person.

Re-Think Omega-3 Supplements

Omega-3s are a more complex process than what may be admitted, which makes them subject to a lot of variability when evaluating their preventative and therapeutic benefits, especially for concussion. Efficacy boils down to dosage, bioavailability, absorption, and incorporation into different tissues and organs of the body.

Omega-3 supplements can be a big expense in your arsenal of supplementation. “Sexy” omega-3 bottle labels mask bioavailability issues, and many of these supplements may not be adding any nutritional value because their bioavailability isn’t completely there.

Omega-3 supplementation is warranted—pay attention to intake and the variables impacting uptake. Share on X

Without a doubt, omega-3 supplementation is warranted. Focus on the intake and variables impacting uptake. Hopefully, omega-3 supplement companies will catch on that providing value that translates into future health benefits starts with the right formulation.

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. Ghasemifard S, Turchini GM & Sinclair AJ. “Omega-3 long chain fatty acid ‘bioavailability’: a review of evidence and methodological considerations.” Prog Lipid Res. 2014; 56:92-108.
2. Hjaltason B & Haraldsson GG. “Fish Oils and Lipids from Marine Sources.” In Modifying Lipids for Use in Food; Gunstone, F.D., Ed.; Woodhead Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2006; pp.57-79.
3. Xu R, Hung JB & German JB “Effects of dietary lipids on the fatty acid composition of triglycerides and phospholipids in tissues of white sturgeon.” Aquacult. Nutr. 1996; 2:101-109.
4. Bernoud N, Fenart L, Moliere P, Dehouck MP, Lagarde M, Cecchelli R & Lecerf J. “Preferential transfer of 2-docosahexaenoyl-1-lysophosphatidylcholine through an in vitro blood-brain barrier over unesterified docosahexaenoic acid.” J Neurochem. 1999; 73:338-45.
5. Lagarde M, Bernoud N, Brossard N, Lemaitre-Delaunay D, Thies F, Croset M & Lecerf J. “Lysophosphatidylcholine as a preferred carrier form of docosahexaenoic acid to the brain.” J Mol Neurosci. 2001; 16:201-4. Discussion 215-21.
6. Picq M, Chen P, Perez M, Michaud M, Vericel E, Guichardant M & Lagarde M. “DHA metabolism: targeting the brain and lipoxygenation.” Mol Neurobiol. 2010; 42:48-51.
7. Thies F, Pillon C, Moliere P, Lagarde M & Lecerf J. “Preferential incorporation of sn-2 lysoPC DHA over unexterified DHA in the young rat brain.” Am J Phys. 1994; 267:R1273-9.
8. Innis SM. “Plasma and red blood cell fatty acid values as indexes of essential fatty acids in developing organs of infants fed with milk or formulas.” Journal of Pediatrics. 1992; 120(4):78-86.
9. Metcalf RG, James MJ, Gibson RA, Edwards JR, Stubberfield J, Stuklis R, Roberts-Thomson K, Young GD & Cleland LG. “Effects of fish-oil supplementation on myocardial fatty acids in humans.” Am J Clin Nutr. 2007; 85:1222-1228.
10. Harris WS, Sands SA, Windsor SL, Ali HA, Stevens TL, Magalski A, Porter CB & Borkon AM. “Omega-3 fatty acids in cardiac biopsies from heart transplantation patients: correlation with erythrocytes and response to supplementation.” Circulation. 2004; 110:1645-1649.
11. Tu WC, Mühlhäusler BS, Yelland, LN & Gibson RA. “Correlations between blood and tissue omega-3 LCPUFA status following dietary ALA intervention in rats.” Prostaglandins Leukot. Essent. Fatty Acids. 2013; 88:53-60.
12. Ikeda I. “Digestion and absorption of structured lipids,” in A.G. Chrisyophe & S. DeVriese (Eds.), Fat Digestion and Absorption, AOCS Press, Champaign, IL, 2000, pp. 235-243.
13. Schneider I, Schuchardt JP, Meyer H & Hahn, A. “Effect of gastric acid resistant coating of fish oil capsules on intestinal uptake of eicosapentaenoic acid and docosahexaenoic acid.”J Funct Foods. 2011; 3:129-133.
14. Kurowska EM, Dresser GK, Deutsch L, Vachon D & Khalil W. “Bioavailability of omega-3 essential fatty acids from perilla seed oil.” Prostaglandins Leukot. Essent. Fatty Acids. 2003; 68: 207-212.
15. Liu L, Bartke N., van Daele H, Lawrence P, Qin X, Park HG & Brenna JT. “Higher efficacy of dietary DHA provided as a phospholipid than as a triglyceride for brain DHA accretion in neonatal piglets.” J Lipid Res. 2014; 55:531-539.
16. Ramprasath VR, Eyal I, Zchut S & Jones PJ. “Enhanced increase of omega-3 index in healthy individuals with response to 4-week n-3 fatty acid supplementation from krill oil versus fish oil.” Lipids Health Dis. 2013; 12:178.
17. Thies F, Pillon C, Moliere P, Lagarde M & Lecerf J. “Preferential incorporation of sn-2 lysoPC DHA over unesterified DHA in the young rat brain.” American Journal of Physiology. 1994; 267(5):R1273-R1279.

Before dawn, water polo players, triathletes, and swimmers splash into chilly pools for their morning workout. Amateur runners often extend their noon lunch hour to sweat out a full weekday training session. School-age athletes typically practice between the final bell and their dinner time. Meanwhile, competitions for spectator sports—such as basketball games, baseball games, and football games—are frequently scheduled in prime-time slots beginning as late as 8 pm. Within this broad range, is there a particular time of day that’s optimal for training and performance?

Given the current interest in the individualization of training—including the collection of genetic information and screening for other measures such as blood and the microbiome—one aspect that is under-discussed is that of chronotype, and it’s closely-related cousin, the biological circadian rhythm. Well established by research, chronotype can be defined as an individual’s overall predisposition towards a preference for morning-ness or evening-ness.

Chronotypes are often discussed in the real world by categorizing people as “larks” (those that prefer mornings) and “owls” (those that prefer evenings). There is an additional category, the intermediate chronotype—sometimes called “neither types”—who don’t appear to have a firm preference for mornings or evenings. Most of us may have a pretty good idea of our chronotype. For example, I naturally prefer to stay awake until around midnight and wake up at 8 am, and I tend to do my best work later on in the day. If you’re not sure about your chronotype, several online questionnaires can help you figure it out. Perhaps the most well validated is the Munich Chronotype Questionnaire (MCTQ).

Chronotypes and the Modern Work Day

Fortunately for me and my preference for evening, I’m a remote worker and can choose the work hours that best suit me—and I do. Many people aren’t so lucky. Research suggests that only 15% of people have a morning preference, with 50% having an intermediate chronotype, and 35% have an evening preference. In most of the Western world, however, the workday begins at around 9 am, meaning most people have to awake before 7 am once travel is factored in.

It’s even worse for teenagers, who undergo a circadian shift toward evening preference during this age but often have to be at school before 9 am. Such a mismatch between chronotype-circadian rhythm and required work-school hours is a recipe for disaster, which we are only now starting to understand fully.

The mismatch between chronotype and start times for work and school often causes people to get much less sleep than they require during the week, leading to chronically under-slept people who try to compensate by oversleeping on the weekends. Accumulating many of these cycles can lead to social jet lag, which is characterized by the 80% of people who use an alarm clock regularly. If sleep-wake cycles were aligned with chronotype, there would be no need for an alarm clock.

A recent study reported that almost 70% of people experience at least an hour of social jet lag, with a third reporting two hours. Social jet lag has been linked to a number of health issues, including obesity and depression, and represents an important issue for further research.

Sleep Patterns and Performance

But what effect can all of this have on performance? A 2015 study published in Current Biology attempted to find out by recruiting 121 competitive athletes to undertake a chronotype test. There was a fairly equal mix between morning and evening preference chronotypes (approximately 25% each) while about 50% were intermediate chronotypes. The authors took a subgroup of twenty of these athletes to undertake an aerobic fitness test (the Beep test) on six different occasions: 7 am, 10 am, 1 pm, 4 pm, 7 pm, and 10 pm.

As you might expect, early chronotypes performed their best in the early trials, intermediate chronotypes in the middle trials, and late chronotypes in the later trials. The evidence supports the idea that chronotype may affect training performance at different times of day and that there’s an optimum time for different chronotypes to undertake training.

The researchers took this one step further, exploring the impact of time since waking on performance by chronotype, and again there were differences among the groups. The early and intermediate chronotypes performed best six hours after waking while the evening chronotypes performed best just over eleven hours after waking.

The results are food for thought. Most professional sport athletes train in the morning or afternoon and very rarely in the evening, suggesting that we might expect a greater number of morning chronotypes in a group of elite athletes. And, in general, this is what the research has found.

Of Brazilian Paralympic athletes, 71% were morning chronotypes as were over 60% of well-trained South African endurance athletes. A 2016 study of high-level Australian athletes found similar results where the vast majority were morning or intermediate chronotypes, with very few evening types. Indeed, they discovered that none of the triathletes were evening chronotypes and only 3% of cyclists were.

The conclusions from these studies seem obvious at first glance: athletes tend not to be evening chronotypes. We could take this a step further and suggest that, when it comes to talent identification, we could assess chronotype as an additional marker to add to the testing battery. This idea receives support from the fact that chronotype has a genetic component and is, at least partly, hardwired.

There are, however, a couple of wrinkles in this theory. As mentioned earlier, most elite athletes tend to train earlier in the day—very few train in the evening. Practical experience also tells me that this occurs more often in some sports. When I was at the University of Bath during my athletics career, the swimmers had finished their session just as I arrived for mine at 9 am. Similarly, many elite runners and cyclists started their training very early. This likely benefits them because their competitions tend to occur earlier in the day. Marathon races, for example, often have an early start and a morning chronotype would be ideal in this scenario, as it matches with training and competition.

Do early chronotypes select morning sports or does early morning training cause a chronotype shift? asks @craig100m. Share on X

But we find ourselves in a chicken and egg scenario. Which comes first? Do early chronotypes select morning sports or does early morning training cause a chronotype shift in these athletes, so when they undergo chronotype testing they exhibit a morning chronotype? A 2017 study in Chronobiology International gives us some insight. Here, the authors recruited 120 elite South African male rugby players and 117 non-exercising controls and gave all of them a chronotype questionnaire. On the whole, there were far more morning chronotype athletes in the rugby group—47% compared to 23% in the controls.

The authors, however, also undertook a genetic test for PER3, a gene linked to chronotype. There were no differences between the athletes and controls, suggesting that the prevalence of morning chronotype in the rugby players was due to learned behavior and not genetically determined. If this finding is true (of course, there is an alternative explanation that this particular gene might not impact chronotype, although the research suggests it does), it indicates:

• There’s a high prevalence of morning chronotypes in elite sport because the athletes tend to train in the morning, shifting their chronotype to match the time of regular training activity.
• Using a chronotype screen as a talent identification tool would be meaningless since the outcome is plastic and trainable.

Building New Habits

In addition to the study on rugby players, a 2015 study published in the European Journal of Applied Physiology put 26 swimmers through a pair of 200m swim time trials, one at 6:30 am and the other at 6:30 pm in a randomized order. On average, the morning chronotypes performed better in the morning trial, and the evening chronotypes performed better in the evening trial.

But there was also an association for habitual training time and performance. Those athletes who regularly trained in the morning tended to perform better in the morning, and those who trained in the evening clocked their best performance at that time. This finding adds further support to the idea that regular training time either has the potential to overcome chronotype preference or indeed trains it to match the new daily cycle, although this isn’t always reported.

Considerations

So where does all of this leave us? When it comes to picking the best time of day for training, the morning might be best for morning chronotypes while later in the day may be ideal for other chronotypes. We also might expect that the enhanced training performance from matching training times would lead to enhanced training adaptations. To my knowledge, this hasn’t been tested.

Another consideration is whether the habitual training time matches the competition time. I’ve presented some evidence suggesting the time of day an athlete regularly trains has the potential to either shift their chronotype or reduce its impact. In athletics, most high-level competitions, such as Grand Prix events, World Championships, and the Olympic Games, are often held in the evening or have their finals in the evening. Accordingly, we could suggest athletes train at the time of day at which they compete.

There’s a caveat to this concept, though. Training in the morning means the athlete can’t have anything happen before the session that would negatively impact training quality, and morning training frees up the latter part of the day so they can contend with other tasks. Training in the late afternoon or evening, however, has the potential to disrupt events earlier in the day as well as the athlete’s social life (which, believe it or not, they do have).

Conclusions

Given these complications, perhaps the best solution is a compromise. An athlete should train at the time of day that best suits them regarding chronotype, availability of coach and facilities, and lifestyle. As they approach a competition, they could carry out some training at the time of day the competition will occur. This allows some circadian retraining, which could positively enhance performance. An example of this might be an athlete who often trains in the morning, but, at an upcoming major championships, knows his races are in the evening.

This is something I often did in my final preparations for the World Championships and Olympic Games—switching my training to the competition time so I could get used to the temperature and conditions at that time, and start to develop an eating routine that would match my performance. Such an approach allows the athlete to adapt favorably to training and may enhance their competition performance. Regardless, understanding an athlete’s chronotype may be important when developing the optimal training program.

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

Knowing your athlete’s direction bias (DB) can help improve motor control, the direction of force application, and proprioception all through a few exercises you can incorporate into a warm up. Gym programming design can then incorporate DB to make an athlete more robust across all planes of movement while keeping them away from aggravating positions. If we look at movement quality as a central nervous system (CNS) instruction that avoids aggravating a sub-threshold pathology, then DB gives us our answer.

I previously wrote the article, “Direction Bias Gym Programming and Athletic Performance” outlining preliminary research and theories behind its use in the sports performance domain. This led to great interest in a common question: “How do I determine an athlete’s direction bias?” Apparently, I put the cart before the horse. This article provides a step by step approach on how to perform a basic DB assessment.

What is an Athlete’s Direction Bias and Why Do We Need to Know It?

First, let’s summarize what DB is, so we understand the implications of working it into an athlete’s programming.

1. The body has a preferred way of moving that it finds most efficient, which results in improved quality of movement and power development called direction bias (or direction preference).
2. DB is brought about by either:

• an underlying pathology (symptomatic or asymptomatic); or
• developmental reasons, which can be assessed quite easily with repeated movement testing in a DB assessment.

3. If the athlete works either in a position or movement direction against their bias, they will inevitably:

• lose form
• find the exercise harder than it should be
• develop symptoms

All in all, these effects will yield a less than satisfactory training effect.

We determine DB by observing a person’s movement quality in three standardized dynamic stability tests before and after the same “repeated movement in one direction.” DB assessment is highly reliable and allows for assessing an asymptomatic individual as well as an athletic population. The hypothetical mechanism of action that improves function is based on Mackay-Lyon’s review.¹ It’s believed to address the afferent input of pathology that affects locomotion’s regulating central pattern generator output.^1,2Through direction-specific movement, therefore, the motor deficits induced by the pathology can improve.³

How to Perform a Direction Bias Assessment

This is what separates a therapy from an exercise: the ability to assess for change before and immediately after the intervention. DB assessment allows the therapist or coach to confidently prescribe an exercise as a therapy due to its validated, predictable response.

Direction bias assessment lets us confidently prescribe an exercise as a therapy. Share on X

We base DB assessment on the visual assessment of an athlete’s movement quality in:

• 5 single leg heel raises (5HR) on each leg
• 5 single leg squats (5SLS) on each leg
• 5 single leg hops (5SLH) on each leg

Give instructions as follows:

• 5HR—Fold arms across chest. Raise up and down on toes smoothly without stopping at top or bottom. Try to keep balanced on the one leg.
• 5SLS—Fold arms across chest. Bend the knee and lower slowly to a point as low as you feel comfortable, then raise back to upright without stopping at the top or bottom. Try to keep balanced on the one leg.
• 5SLH—Fold arms across chest. Hop five times in a row. Imagine you’re hopping on hot coals. Try to hop as high as possible but contact the ground for the shortest time possible for each hop. Try to keep balanced.

Ask the athlete to rate their baseline performance out of 5 on a 10-point scale for each test.

Frontal Plane

In our case example, the frontal plane displays poorer movement on the right side, which classifies the athlete as having a right sagittal plane bias. Subjective questions about an athlete’s past injury history will often show that, while perhaps asymptomatic at the time of testing, they report a more predominant injury history on that side. The correlation between injury history and movement dysfunction makes DB testing an invaluable tool for exercise prescription and potentially injury prediction modeling.⁴

In this case example, the athlete demonstrates a 30% difference in the Asymmetry Index across these tests. In itself this is worthy of attention; studies demonstrate that an asymmetry of greater than 20% in kinetic impulse with jumping can indicate a high risk of injury.⁵This protocol is currently under validation against a gold standard in a clinical trial, but anecdotal data is extremely favorable. And the ease of measure for the coach and clinician make it useful as a clinical tool by itself.

Sagittal Plane

Whether to choose a repeated extension or a repeated flexion intervention is a clinical judgment. We can determine this by doing the following, in order of importance:

1. Ask the athlete if any positions make them sore or stiff consistently. Excessive bending is a flexion movement at the pelvis and lumbar spine. If this were sore, such as following a block session from sprinters, it would be an aggravator. It would make sense to choose the opposite movement of extension to provide the athlete a therapeutic effect.
2. Ask the athlete about the mechanism of how their most significant past injury occurred. If the athlete injured their hamstring as they lunged toward the finish line, this indicates that flexion was the mechanism of injury so you would choose an extension movement to try and provide a therapeutic effect.
3. Ask the athlete if there are any positions they prefer to be in when sore? If sleeping on their stomach is comfortable, this indicates that extension is an “easing” position, so you would choose an extension movement to try and provide a therapeutic effect.

The experienced clinician can draw upon familial and genealogical history as well as training response to select movements and injury history. However, if you’re unable to make a clinical determination from these questions about which direction to do the repeated movement exercise, simply choose one and let your re-assessment findings guide your DB determination.

To correlate the DB assessment findings, we also tend to add a physiological test to the data sample such as lumbar flexion and extension or straight leg raise (SLR) testing. Note that physiological testing tends to indicate a negative response if the repeated exercise is against the athlete’s DB or is an aggravator. However, it does not necessarily indicate a positive correlation if the physiological test improves. The triage of movement quality tests I’ve described is more sensitive to these changes.

Subjectively, this athlete reported his “first most significant injury” as a right hamstring injury at take off in the long jump. It’s a rapid hip and back extension movement, so we chose a repeated flexion bias exercise as the one most likely to be therapeutic.

How Do I Select the Intervention Exercise?

The DMA Clinical Pilates course suggests that the best exercises for testing an athlete’s DB are the following:

For Flexion Bias

Image 2. Roll-ups. The athlete maintains their sagittal plane bias leg in 45 degrees hip flexion. They can use momentum to roll up into a traditional sit-up position keeping the other leg down and reaching forward as far as their trunk can flex. They then return to the lying position by tucking their chin in and posterior pelvic tilting to slowly roll down as they breathe out. They repeat this 2 x 10-15.

Image 3. Heel touch. The athlete starts on their back with both hips flexed to 45 degrees. Instruct them to lift their bias leg up to 80 degrees hip flexion with both the arms and head as they breathe in. Then lower arms and head to the bed as they breathe out. Repeat this 2 x 15.

For Extension Bias

Image 4. Single leg kick. The athlete lies prone and shifts legs toward the bias side. Instruct them to rapidly “bend the knee, lift the hip, straighten the knee, and lower it controlled.” They repeat this 2 x 10.

Image 5. Four-point extension. The athlete starts on their hands and knees with hands under shoulders and knees under hips. Instruct them to lift and straighten their bias side leg, trying to make it “as long as possible.” Encourage them to try to keep their pelvis level and not laterally shift as they extend their leg and return. They repeat this 2 x 10.

In our case example, our long jump athlete performed 2 x 15 roll-ups and 2 x 15 heel touches moving his right leg. We then retested his repeated movement tests.

In this case, the asymmetry reduced from 30% to 6.7% and visually, overall movement quality and functional tests improved. If we were to do a crossover study with this athlete, we would see a deterioration of performance if they were to perform repeated right extension bias exercises such as the single leg kick or four-point extension described above.

We use this frequently to “prove” that we chose the correct bias by showing deteriorating performance with the anti-bias and then improving it again with the correct bias type exercises. It creates buy-in by the athlete and coach and helps prove in your mind that you’ve selected the right exercise intervention.

How Important are Asymmetry Changes?

The arguments regarding how important it is to correct asymmetry are not within this article’s scope. However, it’s hard to argue against a desire to improve the direction of force application, as demonstrated in these tests by repeated hopping over a set position or joint proprioception. The degree of how much a therapist or coach chases this utopia is certainly more than a worthwhile discussion.

Should I Use Direction Bias Assessments with My Athletes?

I love the phrase “athlete specific before sports specific” because it encapsulates the reasoning behind the sometimes unusual exercise selections that make up the programming. If an athlete moves badly in an exercise, sometimes it’s too difficult or time-consuming to coach them out of it. This is likely due to a CNS “protection mode” or “alarm theory” that prevents one from moving into a position that could be potentially deleterious with a load. The statement “the body is only as strong as the brain feels safe” describes this perfectly.

Although there is a huge amount of research still to be done in this area, I encourage you to try and find your athlete’s DB and learn how to use the intervention exercises in warm-ups and exercise selection to improve movement quality and performance and reduce injury risk.

DB assessment is taught as part of the DMA Clinical Pilates Courses for health professionals in Australia, and I highly recommend anyone with the opportunity to attend one of these courses. For more information beyond the scope of this report, I recommend reading the 2012 article by Tulloch and Phillips as well as these DMA Clinical Pilates courses.

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. Mackay-Lyons, M. (2002) Central pattern generation of locomotion: A review of the evidence. Physical Therapy, 82(1): 69-83.
2. Phillips, C. (2015) Avoiding paralysis by analysis makes complex patients simple. Presented at 2015 Australian Physiotherapy Association Conference, Gold Coast. October 2015.
3. Wajswelner, H., B. Metcalf, et al. (2012) Clinical Pilates versus general exercise for chronic low back pain: randomized trial. Medicine and Science in Sport and Exercise, 44(7): 1197-1205.
4. Kiesel,K; Butler, R; Plisky, P (2014). Prediction of Injury by limited and asymmetrical fundamental movement patterns in American football players. Journal of SportRehabilitation,23(2): 88-94.
5. Jordan MJ, Barnert J, Aagaard P, Herzog W. (July 13, 2015).  The kinetic impulse asymmetry index in the vertical jump predicts lower bodyinjury in elite athletes. In: XXV Congress of the International Society of Biomechanics Abstract Book. Glasgow, United Kingdom. (pp. 664-665) (AS-0311).

The purpose and goal of this article is to convey my ideas (and mine alone) of improving speed in American football players through increased exposure to the skill of linear sprinting during the off-season. These are some of the principles that I have applied with my players ranging from middle school up through the NFL, and I’ve seen nice improvements. Some of the results that I have achieved using this approach with particular clients are listed in the table below:

Why Train Sprinting for Football?

The need to train sprinting for football might seem pretty obvious. Many reading this article will quickly say, “Uh…football players obviously need speed. Speed kills. We recruit speed. We crave speed in our program. Our program is nothing without SPEED.”

I work with a fair number of high school football players going through the recruiting process who can’t stop talking about how seemingly obsessed college recruiters are about getting them to run a 40-yard dash or quickly asking if they run track and, if so, what their 100-meter time is.

Football recruiting based only on speed needs to change. The game is more than just physical output. Share on X

I have seen kids get completely ignored by colleges after running a 40-yard time at their camp that wasn’t up to the coaches’ expectations. Sprint times are becoming the ultimatum for some kids for scholarship consideration. It almost doesn’t matter if you are a better football player than the other guy at your position—if he runs faster than you, he’s likely getting the recruiting look while you continue contemplating how you can play at the college level.

The Four-Coactive Model

Recruiting based solely on speed needs to change. Anyone that truly understands the game of football and everything that goes into it will support this notion. The game is about far more than just physical outputs. My favorite illustration of this point comes from the Four Coactive Model presented by Dr. Fergus Connolly in his brilliant book Game Changer. I have rudimentarily summarized this model in Table 2³:

Based on this model, putting a major focus on a player’s physical traits only tells us about 25% of the whole story in terms of what a player’s true potential as a football player might look like. Compensations certainly exist where a player might make up for a lack of technical skill by having tremendous speed, but any time we see major deficits in any of the four coactives, it should raise a red flag of performance potential left on the table.

That being said, those of us who work with high school or college football players trying to make it to the next level still have to accept the reality of what coaches are currently looking for. And that, unfortunately, means that we need to create the greatest 40-yard-dash-running players possible. However, we should be mindful of how an improvement in speed can have a global effect on each of the four coactives.

The Butterfly Effect of Speed Improvement

I have a common response when I get a call from a client who ran a good 40-yard time in front of scouts or recruiters, and it goes something like: “Great… Now you can focus on playing football.”

While I like to joke about the obsession with 40-yard-dash times, there is no question that speed plays a role in a player’s ability to play at a high level. If technical and tactical ability are equal, a slower player will have to work harder to get to the same area of the field than a player who is faster. When it comes down to what you need to do to make the play, rather than what you can do, then the faster player will always have a physical advantage over the slower player. Plus, when it comes down to the bare-bones, off-to-the-races type of big plays on the football field, speed really helps.

I believe that an improvement in speed is an example of how making gains in one coactive can have a butterfly effect on the others. For one, when athletes feel themselves getting faster and have sprint-testing data to prove it, they get a burst of psychological positivity. I have yet to meet an athlete that isn’t completely hyped about getting faster or feeling fast. I believe there’s no doubt that this affects overall confidence, which can then carry over into practice or game situations when the season rolls around.

An improvement in speed shows how making gains in one coactive has a butterfly effect on the others. Share on X

In a previous article I wrote, I discussed some of the theories and bullet points behind non-linear skill acquisition, one of which is the idea of affordances. Affordances are fairly simple to understand and are basically the opportunities for action that an athlete perceives in his environment. If a running back sees an open hole at the line of scrimmage, he now has an affordance available to him.

Well, affordances are not just based on what the environment provides, but also on what the athlete perceives himself capable of doing. So, by getting faster, a football player can spread his newfound confidence over into his technical abilities and tactical awareness. Here are some examples:

• A defensive back who has the responsibility of covering a deep zone of the field might feel more confident in creeping up near the line of scrimmage to hide his true intentions, knowing that he has the speed to bail out and still get to his zone in time.
• A mobile quarterback might not be flustered at all by a pass rush because he feels confident he can escape outside the pocket and still make a play with his speed.
• An offensive lineman might pull around the edge with more tenacity knowing that he can easily keep up with the scraping linebackers and prevent them from getting to his ball carrier.
• A running back might see an open hole and think “end zone” rather than just “first down.”

This butterfly effect of training speed trickles over into maintaining health as well. When looking at the physics, there is virtually no exercise outside of sprinting that exposes an athlete to the same combination of power, speed, elastic recoil, rhythm, coordination, and more. There’s a reason that sprinting is often referred to as the most intense activity the human body can produce. If athletes understand the basics of sprinting safely and efficiently, they can prime their bodies to build resiliency.

The basics of sprinting safely and efficiently help athletes prime their bodies to build resiliency. Share on X

Concepts in Acceleration – Lessons from ALTIS

My mindset as it relates to linear sprinting has been heavily influenced by the folks down in Phoenix at a wonderful place called ALTIS. At the forefront of ALTIS are coaches like Dan Pfaff, Stu McMillan, and Kevin Tyler, who bring extensive experience and practical application in coaching elite track and field athletes from all over the world.

When visiting ALTIS or going through the education courses on their website, you quickly discover that they aren’t fully bound to traditional training theories and bring a lot of original thinking to the world of getting faster. In particular, I really appreciate their approach to using “motoric words”; that is, using certain words and cues to invoke a feeling in the athlete rather than just spitting out a body position. As an example, rather than telling an athlete to “arch the back” or “lift the knees up,” we can start using words like “drive”, “punch,” and “bounce” to give the athletes better context for understanding execution strategies.

Stu McMillan uses some fairly uncommon phrases to explain to his athletes what he wants to see. He talks about pressure and power, rather than saying “force into the ground,” to help the athletes understand they should press the ground away rather than stomp in an attempt to apply more force. He might discuss rhythm and timing to help athletes comprehend when foot strikes should occur at different speeds or body angles. Rather than telling somebody to “have good form,” he might explain what shape to display while achieving gradually more elevation on each step of acceleration. My favorite is how he doesn’t use the word “relax,” but instead uses the words patience and peace to help his sprinters remain at ease and let their performances unfold¹.

Speed as a Fluid, Harmonious Whole

This quote from the ALTIS foundation course really sums it all up nicely: “Athletes should be thinking about the expression of speed as a fluid, blended activity – with an execution from start to finish which manifests itself as a harmonious whole, irrespective of the distance being covered.”¹

This philosophy can be diluted down to three basic pillars of acceleration that are all interdependent:

1. Projection: Projecting with appropriate force from the first step to the last. Too much or too little force will negatively affect the overall rhythm of the acceleration, as well as disrupt the smooth rise in the center of mass.
2. Rhythm: Increasing the frequency of each step over the course of the acceleration distance. Shorter sprints (i.e., 40-yard dash) will require a faster change in rhythm than longer sprints (i.e., 100-meter sprint).
3. Rise: Raising the center of mass slightly with each step of acceleration until fully upright. Appropriate projection and rhythm will lead to a smooth rise in the center of mass, like a plane taking off into the air.

So, my interpretation of this information is that any time we are training for linear acceleration performance, we are focusing on projection, rhythm, and rise. They are present at all times in unloaded sprinting. However, particular drills can emphasize some over others:

• Resisted sprinting emphasizes horizontal projection and the application of pressure and power.
• Variations of dribble runs can develop rhythm and timing when in the upright sprinting shape.
• Buildup runs can help athletes understand the smooth connection between rhythm and rise.

The ability to accelerate is a cornerstone reality of any field-based team sport, and American football is certainly no different. If we are training to enhance the absolute output of acceleration, it is important that we use sound principles. Similarly, just because our players aren’t powerlifters or Olympic lifters doesn’t mean they shouldn’t execute sound principles and mechanics when lifting.

What About Top Speed?

Top speed (also referred to as maximum velocity) will determine the absolute limit of how much speed a player can generate. I won’t touch too much on top speed here because I have gone in depth on this topic previously on SimpliFaster and lent support for its development by referencing the work of Dr. Ken Clark. To sum up significantly, there is a positive correlation between the level of maximum speed that a player can hit and his ability to accelerate at any given distance. I have reposted the diagram used in my previous article to illustrate this point.

As you can see, even just a 0.5 meter-per-second (m/s) increase in top speed can result in a difference of a tenth of a second in a 20-meter sprint and even greater differential at longer distances. That tenth of a second could mean the difference between being drafted or not, receiving a scholarship or not, or saving a touchdown or not.

Charlie Francis and CNS Intensity

It seems almost every team sport preparation specialist that has looked into speed training has come across the work of Charlie Francis. I know that Francis influenced me, and shaped a lot of my early views on how to prepare for speed. What I really took to heart is that we are simply not sprinting enough if we expect to be fast. His work also taught me to find out more about the central nervous system (CNS) and ensure not to overwork it.

What I really took to heart from Francis is that we aren’t sprinting enough if we expect to be fast. Share on X

Francis developed an approach known as high/low sequencing, whereby days of high-CNS intensive work (i.e., sprints, Olympic lifts, jumps, etc.) are alternated with days of low-CNS intensive work (i.e., aerobic work, upper body lifting). He explains the rationale behind this approach, stating that it takes about 48-72 hours for the CNS to recover from intensive work, and only 12-24 hours to recover from low-intensive, or extensive, work⁴.

As a note, high intensity in this case refers to big time activation of the body’s nervous system, which can only be achieved by pushing the body’s limits of explosive power. This is different than high-intensity cardiorespiratory work, which focuses on the power of the aerobic system. Both might be described as “high-intensity,” but for the purposes of this article, when I say “high intensity” I refer to CNS intensity rather than aerobic intensity.

Are Any Football Players Actually Fast?

Charlie Francis stated that novice sprinters have a much harder time exhausting their CNS. Their outputs are just not high enough to really trash them. Instead, excessive volume will likely lead more to structural risks like excessive muscle fatigue, soreness, or the potential of pulled muscles and strains. So, volume should still be kept in check, but it’s possible that the CNS is not being drained quite as much as we might expect.

If we consider what Francis describes as a “novice” sprinter, we start seeing comments like the following⁴:

• Lacks basic technical skills that relate to sprinting.
• Does not generate nearly as much CNS fatigue as a top sprinter.
• Should see consistent initial drops in sprint times as speed potential unfolds with training.
• Needs more focus on general fitness qualities (strength, power, mobility, etc.).
• Tends to decelerate quickly on longer sprint efforts, thus able to see greater speed gains by improving top speed before focusing primarily on starts.

These comments sound an awful lot like they’re describing most football players learning how to improve their linear sprinting speed. In addition, Table 3 shows some of the maximum velocities, in meters per second (m/s), associated with what Francis refers to as beginner, intermediate, and top sprinters⁴.

Using the work from Ken Clark, we can objectively look at what this entails. Clark published a paper for the NSCA in 2017 titled “The National Football League Combine 40-Yard Dash: How Important is Maximum Velocity?” This article presents the mathematics to calculate modeled maximum velocity (top speed) from measured 40-yard dash times.

According to this math, a football player would have to run around a 4.37-second 40-yard dash to achieve a correlated velocity of 10 m/s. Any football scout will tell you that this is a blazing fast time for a football player. But is it blazing fast in the context of human ability?

Let’s consider the current NFL Combine record holder John Ross, who ran a recorded 4.22-second 40-yard dash. His associated velocity based on the math reported by Clark would be around 10.35 m/s. Fast for a football player? Undoubtedly. Fast compared to a top sprinter? Not even close.

Maintaining Perspective for Football Players

So, even the fastest 40-yard dash time ever recorded at the NFL Combine in Indianapolis would be considered “intermediate” in the world of sprinting. Now, I must state that 40 yards might seem far to some, but it is not a relatively far distance compared to events like the 100-meter sprint (which converts to about 110 yards).

Some players have more speed than their 40 times represent, as the 40-yard distance is just not enough room for them to continue accelerating to their true top speed. Tyreek Hill is a great example. According to Wikipedia, he ran a 10.19-second 100-meter sprint in 2012, which should put him close to a max velocity of 11.5 m/s. Hill is widely considered the fastest player in the NFL—but even with his 100-meter time, he STILL would not be considered a “top sprinter” in the world of track and field.

It seems that, at best, football players will only achieve a relatively intermediate output of speed no matter how much they develop. Let’s also consider the weight room in this regard: Are we going to have top-level powerlifters or Olympic lifters on our football team? Likely not. Again, at best we will probably see beginner-to-intermediate levels of output when compared against the best in the world.

Let’s be real about this though—this is FINE. Football is a team sport that is based on using specific tactics and techniques to get a higher score than your opponent. It’s quite literally NOT based on the absolute outputs of any particular movement. The only thing that matters is doing your job and doing it with enough skill to help your team win the game. That’s it.

Football is quite literally NOT based on the absolute outputs of any particular movement. Share on X

However, while speed work might not be draining a football player’s CNS as much as it might for a high-level sprinter, we should also keep in mind that CNS fatigue will accumulate from other factors of football practice such as technical and tactical training. While we might be able to get away with more consecutive exposure to high-CNS training elements in the off-season, we still must be careful not to do too much on any given day.

Rethinking High/Low Sequencing

So, as I understand it, we won’t have the fastest, strongest, or most powerful people in the world playing on our football team. Therefore, it’s my belief that the focus needs to shift away from constantly chasing higher outputs and be put instead on developing the skills of movements like sprinting, jumping, or lifting, and letting the outputs happen organically. Two quotes from two great track coaches support this notion:

Charlie Francis: “I would be careful of the concept of ‘trying’ to run at 100%. If you run smooth, things will often sort themselves out, if the technique is good.”

Stu McMillan: “Coordination…rhythm…timing…balance…posture…elevation…These are the things that are truly the prime determinants of speed.”

I like to believe that skill is improved through high-quality exposure to the necessary stimuli to invoke change. As Dr. Kelly Starrett says in reference to how people move throughout their lives, “Practice makes permanent.”⁸

Most strength coaches I know who work in the private sector or in the college setting get four days to work hands-on with their players. I also know that a lot of strength coaches try to adapt Charlie Francis’ high/low model. Thinking they absolutely must follow a high day with a low day, they might end up with something like Table 4.

This was my exact template a few years ago. After thinking about it more, I realized a major issue: it only devotes two out of seven days to enhancing the skill of sprinting. With football players, it’s likely that they need more exposure to sprinting in order to foster the growth of speed as a skill.

On his website back in 2014, Derek Hansen provided a theoretical template for utilizing a high/low approach with American football players over a five-day training period. If strength coaches have a system where they can access players for five days’ worth of training sessions, then this seems to be a really nice balance that allows for at least three days of high-intensity CNS work and naturally builds recovery into the program. Table 5 shows a rendition of Derek’s theoretical training week⁵.

My Solution

The fact is that most strength coaches work with a four-day training week and are faced with the challenge of having to build very explosive athletes while ensuring that they don’t fry them from a CNS standpoint. My solution has been to simply expose my athletes to some sort of speed and high CNS stimulus every training day while managing volumes with a “micro-dosing” mentality (stay tuned).

In the context of American football, I believe that constant speed exposure may be warranted. Share on X

One of the criticisms that Charlie Francis makes about having more frequent speed days is that it does not feature a “wave” progression and results in constant exposure. But when I consider the context of American football, the players will need to sprint at any given moment, on any given day of practice or during games. Therefore, in the context of football, I believe that constant speed exposure may be warranted for three primary reasons:

1. The speed outputs of football players are drastically lower than top-level sprinters, enabling them to train in more intensive environments more frequently, as long as volumes are accounted for.
2. Greater exposure to high-quality sprint training can enhance the skill acquisition of getting faster.
3. Football players must have the capacity for explosive efforts at any given moment, all week long during the season.

This is my interpretation and my thinking, which may be different than yours and that’s okay. But I will provide my most-recent general template for high school and college football, showing the field work in combination with weight room work in the off-season.

Table 6: My high school football off-season general training template, which shows field work in combination with weight room work in the off-season. *MRSL = Maximal Resisted Sled Load and can be understood by reading George Petrakos’ articles here and here. **Explained later in the article.

In these templates, four out of seven days are devoted to enhancing the skill of sprinting. The “off” days naturally build in three “low” days by default—the players are typically not engaging in required physical activity on these days and might engage in rest or recovery-based protocols. If we give them too many “low” days, as in Table 4, then they spend the majority of the week in a more down-regulated state, which will make the transition to in-season or spring ball much harder.

Micro-Dosing: Saving the Nervous System

A template is really nothing if we don’t consider the volume being performed within it. In Key Concepts Elite Edition, Charlie Francis gives an example of Ben Johnson averaging around 500 meters of total sprint volume in a speed session. Considering that Ben Johnson was clearly a top-level sprinter, the effects on his CNS after 500 meters of speed work would be very high in comparison to a football player. If Johnson performed three speed sessions a week using a high/low sequence, this volume would result in around 1500 meters a week.

Let’s also keep in mind that sprinting is sport practice for a sprinter. Much as a sprinter needs higher volumes of sprinting, powerlifters and Olympic lifters need more “practice” volume as well. Football players are not sprinters, powerlifters, or Olympic lifters. They are football players. Therefore, our goal should be to find the LEAST amount of sprinting, Olympic lifting, and strength training that will still yield positive results. This allows us to free up more CNS capacity for training aspects of the game like practicing positional skills, gaining a deeper understanding of the game tactics, and maintaining a healthy psychological state of mind. In the off-season, this means achieving deeper adaptations from representative learning drills and small-sided games or 7-on-7s.

Determine the LEAST amount of sprinting, lifting and strength training that yields positive results. Share on X

To bring up Derek Hansen again, he wrote an article back in 2015 discussing the use of “micro-dosing” for speed work during the football season to maintain a speed stimulus within the week of sports practice⁶. The article touched on the idea of performing a small handful of sprints to conclude the warm-up before practice, and how this can help maintain exposure to speed throughout the season. The concept ties into finding the minimal effective dose to see results but not excessively add to fatigue.

This became my journey for all forms of preparation for my football players. Where could I minimize volumes of general physical training while capitalizing on the most important aspects of performance?

The Needs Analysis: Filling in the Holes

High school players are exposed to plenty of game-like stimuli almost all year round with the upswing of 7-on-7 tournaments and collegiate recruiting camps that feature 7-on-7 situations as well as 1-on-1 situations. As stated previously, my goal for these kids is to get them as fast as possible in the 40-yard dash to help them get recruited. So, when we have our speed-dominant days (Tuesdays and Fridays in Table 6), I want to do my best to ensure that they feel focused and ready to commit to developing acceleration skills. I also don’t want them to perform too many repetitions of sprinting in the session, where quality starts to deteriorate.

For the college guys, they have already been recruited and must now acknowledge that playing the game and becoming a solid contributing player to their team should be paramount. However, we all know that college players are still largely scouted based on their ability to run a fast 40-yard dash. So, they need some exposure to representative learning in the form of agility training and small-sided games to enhance their technical-tactical skillset. However, they must also continue to devote some time to ensuring they reach a minimum performance threshold in speed, power, and strength if they expect to make it to the next level.

Team sports are incredibly complex, and training for them becomes a bit of a jigsaw puzzle. As Fergus Connolly talks about extensively in Game Changer, team sport athletes are very much creatures of habit. To this end, if I can find a volume range that works to enhance performance but not overload the system, then I can theoretically maintain this volume range while the players’ skill improves and training becomes more potent through a rise in intensity rather than always tweaking reps or sets. The players’ minds and bodies can become accustomed to knowing when certain stimuli will occur and approximately how much effort will be put into each workout. As long as we continue to enforce quality over quantity, we should start seeing improvements in the targeted skills.

My Volume Guidelines

As far as direct speed training is concerned, I have seen some nice improvements from using the volume ranges shown in Table 8, listed by position group.

Cyclical drills like skips for distance or bounding are also added into the volume (total yards) for the field work, but broad jumps and throws are not. I believe more volume of cyclical activities in relation to explosive jumps will positively influence speed gains, so I make cyclical activities and sprint variations the priority.

When all is said and done, my athletes will typically only perform about four to six total sprints for the workout (with about one to three more done in the warm-up period). Since speed is present every day in some form, we really don’t need to do that much, especially if we want to keep quality high. Days that feature sprint testing will always fall on the lower end of total volume ranges.

Position will determine how far each sprint effort is in terms of distance. This affects total volume, so that linemen can perform the same number of repetitions as skill players but not travel as far. For example, on a testing day, a skill player might perform three 40-yard sprints to achieve a volume of 120 yards where a lineman might perform three 20-yard sprints to achieve a volume of 60 yards.

Examples of Drills and Protocols

In my program, I focus on sprinting as a skill by using complexes to develop my football players. My goal is to expose players to different concepts of acceleration and horizontal power so they harness skills with which they become very familiar but continue to refine over time. I alternate between using complexes and testing so that the psychological stress associated with testing days starts to diminish and I can track changes as they occur throughout the year.

Speed-Power Complexes

I love speed-power complexes for a couple of reasons. For one, I find that they help keep football players engaged because players tend to enjoy variety. In my experience, moving from one exercise to another helps them dial in for that particular moment and then they are stimulated by a new task afterwards. The other reason I enjoy speed-power complexes is because they challenge the football players to address different concepts of acceleration.

For example, taking an athlete’s arms out of the equation with a stick acceleration or while holding a medicine ball requires that they find a way to brace their trunk appropriately and find more power in the leg projection. There is also a potentiation effect as the first two exercises attempt to set up the final exercise in the complex where it’s all “put together.”

In my programming, I break up the complexes into two primary templates: Acceleration Complexes and Top Speed Complexes.

To keep this article from being incredibly long, I want you to know that all the exercises listed below are “searchable” on internet video platforms. I have ensured that the title of each exercise is, indeed, “searchable” so if any reader is unfamiliar with an exercise, a simple internet search will reveal the answer. I have uploaded some clips of my athletes performing some of these drills on my YouTube channel as well. Keep in mind that there are certainly more exercises that can fit into each category.

How I Test Speed

I typically test sprint performances in two-week cycles. So, I perform two weeks of speed-power complexes where no timing is done at all. Here, the focus lies in the development of skill and recharging the athletes’ focus. Then, for two weeks after that, I swap out the speed-power complexes in favor of some sort of sprint test.

I typically test either two- or three-point sprints for 20-30 yards if I want to get a measure of progress on acceleration, and I love using the flying 10-yard sprint test to measure changes to top speed. The 40-yard dash is used sparingly and I tend to stay away from it until I feel comfortable that the athletes are psychologically ready to perform a skillful sprint and not throw everything by the wayside just to get a decent time. This takes a lot of patience and practice. When timing 40s, I set up a fully automatic timer (FAT) and then I also hand-time it and record both times just to have some different vantage points.

Speed Is Great, but the Game Determines Everything

The major drawback of using 40-yard dash times and 100-meter sprint times as prime determinants of a prospect’s grade for recruitment is that the context does not match what really happens in the game. Wouldn’t common sense seem to say that coaches should look for players who play fast in the game, not just perform well on a linear sprint assessment?

It really all comes down to an athlete’s limiting factors. Simply stated, these are factors that limit a player’s ability to perform at a higher level. Limiting factors can exist in any of the four coactives: physical, psychological, technical, or tactical. In addition, when assessing limiting factors, the most sensible approach for a coaching staff is to identify them within the context of the game, not just in a closed testing environment. In other words, the game determines everything about how we should prepare football players.

The game determines everything about how we should prepare football players. Share on X

Performing a 40-yard dash is a skill, as is performing a 1-repetition maximum barbell squat. If a player is not familiar with the particular skill, there’s a good chance he won’t perform too well on it, despite his potential. There are plenty of players who are “ballers” on the field but don’t seem to test very well in combine-based activities. The context is different. Also, consider the players that absolutely crush the combine drills from practicing them over and over, but neglect the technical and tactical skill preparation of football and struggle to replicate these outputs in the context of the game. Of course, the most promising prospects (from a physical perspective) are the ones that both play at a high level and stand out at combines.

To me, it seems a big risk for a coaching staff to recruit solely based on sprint times and how a player performs in closed drills at a camp or combine. The complexity of the football game far exceeds any activity in these camps or combine environments. To understand how a player operates within all four coactives, we have to watch the player play the game. This idea is probably best summed up in a quote from Bill Belichick in reference to how he believes players should prepare:

“We’re training our players to play football, not to go through a bunch of those February [combine] drills. Yeah, our training is football intensive. We train them to get ready to play and ultimately that’s what they’re going to do…in the end, they’re going to make their career playing football. We already know that with our guys, and we don’t have to deal with any of that other stuff. We just train them for football. I think it’s huge.”⁷

As much as I love speed, I love winning football games more. Share on X

Later this year, Fergus Connolly and I will provide a detailed, systematic approach to how players and coaches can start preparing players for the context of football in our upcoming book, The Process: The Methodology, Philosophy & Principles of Coaching Winning Football.

For me, increasing 40-yard times is a necessary step to help players get noticed in recruiting. Training for linear speed certainly helps improve physical capacity, but the reality of football is that assessment and testing must consider all four coactives if we really want to effect change in the wins and losses columns. As much as I love speed, I love winning football games more.

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. ALTIS Education Web site [Internet]. Phoenix (AZ): ALTIS Education; [cited 2018 July 6]. Available from: https://education.altis.world/
2. Clark KP, Rieger RH, Bruno RF, & Stearne DJ. The NFL Combine 40-Yard Dash: How Important is Maximum Velocity? The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 2017.
3. Connolly F. Game Changer: The Art of Sports Science. Las Vegas (NV): Victory Belt Publishing Inc.; 2017.
4. Francis C. Key Concepts: Elite Edition. CharlieFrancis.com; 2008.
5. Hansen D. Applying the “High-Low” Training Concept to American Football. Strength Power Speed[Internet]. 2014 [cited 2018 July 6]. Available from: http://www.strengthpowerspeed.com/high-low-training-football/
6. Hansen D. Micro-Dosing with Speed and Tempo Sessions for Performance Gains and Injury Prevention. Strength Power Speed [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2018 July 6]. Available from: http://www.strengthpowerspeed.com/micro-dosing-speed-tempo/
7. New England Sports Network Web site [Internet]. Watertown (MA): New England Sports Network; [cited 2018 July 6]. Available from: https://nesn.com/2016/02/bill-belichicks-advice-to-prospects-training-for-nfl-scouting-combine/
8. Starrett K. Becoming a Supple Leopard 2^ndEdition: The Ultimate Guide to Resolving Pain, Preventing Injury, and Optimizing Athletic Performance. Las Vegas (NV): Victory Belt Publishing Inc.; 2015.