Blog

 

I am a thief. Everything in my coach’s toolbox is stolen. I scour the Internet for the best coaching articles, troll social media for the best drills, befriend/stalk mentor coaches all over the country, and stock up on coaching videos and programs. I’ve always believed that if I am going to ask student athletes to work hard on the track, I need to do the same off of it.

After the end of last season, I attended two coaching clinics. The first was in Chicago. Coach Tony Holler spoke about timing fly 10s and publishing results. I stole his idea. Now we time our fly 10 times with Freelap and publish the results on social media. Chris Korfist and Dr. Tom Nelson talked about breathing and being activated. I also stole this information. Every athlete in our off-season knows about level 1 activation. We also encourage them to take 20 deep belly breaths when waking up, throughout the day, and before going to bed.

Two weeks later my insane friend and I took a 6-day road trip from El Paso to Boston to attend the Complete Track and Field summer clinic. Coaches from Harvard, Columbia, Brown, UMass, Boston, and Jacksonville University worked with high school athletes on warming up, accelerating, sprinting, jumping, and hurdling. I stole cues, drills, progressions, and ideas. I quickly realized these coaches were not just smart—really smart—but also that they conveyed their information in a simple manner through effective instruction.

Meeting coaches like Holler, Korfist, Nelson, Latif Thomas, Cal Dietz, Rueben Jones, Marc Mangiocotti, Joel Smith, Tony Veney, Dan Fitcher, Kebba Tolbert and so many others makes you quickly realize how little you know. But then you get excited because they are so willing to share their experience and knowledge. Ultimately what matters most to me is transferring what I learn and applying it for the benefit of my athletes and program in a simple and effective way.

I am a thief. Everything in my coach’s toolbox is stolen. Share on X

This aim was especially evident when Ron Grigg, Director of Cross Country/Track and Field at Jacksonville University, presented a fascinating lecture about three simple yet valuable drills: skipping for height, skipping for distance, and hurdle gallops. I left his clinic convinced that these drills could transform our jumping program.

Let me begin with the observation that the majority of jumping practice sessions I have witnessed make my heart ache for the kids. I am stupefied by some of the practice norms many coaches allow their athletes to create. For example, I’ve seen some middle school coaches let 15–20 kids practice multiple full-length approaches with an entire jumping sequence—including landings. High school coaches set up high hurdles within a few feet of the board so long jumpers can “jump” over the hurdles and create more height. They also set up mini-hurdles on the runway so triple jumpers can bound for more distance even though their form becomes completely compromised.

In the past, I’ve been guilty of silly or unnecessary drills. As a younger coach I believed that “more was better.” Simplifying is difficult, but that is Coach Grigg’s point with these three drills. If they are the only ones you do, you will keep it simple for your athletes, and they will still achieve their goals.

“These drills are like the ingredients on a spice rack,” Coach Grigg told me. “You can create something really good if you use the ingredients properly or you can create something rotten if they are not understood or misused. When done correctly the skips can turn into high-level drills, or when done poorly they can look very much like second grade recess time.”

He added, “You have to be able to watch, and know what you are looking to see. Being able to teach the very basics of posture, takeoff foot patterns, swinging segments usage, and displacement depends on observation.”

Video 1. The three key fundamentals include posture, takeoff foot pattern, and swinging segments.

Posture

When doing these drills, athletes should have proper posture. These posture cues also transfer to sprinters. Through the usage of the drills, Coach Grigg is “trying to use as much commonality between sprinting and jumping. The skills they are learning will make them better sprinters and athletes.”

The posture when performing the drills should be:

1. Neutral head — head down during acceleration is WRONG
2. Neutral pelvis — Stomach tight, back flat, hips up, butt tucked, belly button to spine: stable yet mobile
3. Absence of forward or backward lean

Sprint coaches will recognize many of the same cues used during acceleration and max velocity. Chins tucked or heads down forcefully during acceleration compromise foot contact placement (below or behind hips), mechanics, and the angles athletes are trying to achieve during acceleration. The postural cues help guide athletes during these specific low-force application drills, and they can transfer over during higher velocity drills and sprinting.

Takeoff Foot Patterns

The continuous nature of the drills allows athletes to feel the takeoff foot patterns they need to achieve when long jumping and triple jumping. These are the direct concepts Coach Grigg emphasizes:

1. Isometric preparation of ankles (and quadriceps)—dorsiflexed toe or 90-degree angle between the foot and shin. Strong stable ankles (and knees) at ground contact. Allows for bridging position during penultimate step.
2. Located under or slightly in front of COM to conserve horizontal velocity
3. Heel/toe rolling or flat rolling contacts (“Like a rocking chair,” Coach Grigg says)
4. Shin perpendicular at full foot support
5. PUSH on the ground, NOT pull

These explanations regarding takeoff foot patterns apply to the penultimate and jump steps in the long jump and the takeoff step in the triple jump. The biggest takeaway for athletes is being able to continually repeat these drills throughout the season and feel the takeoff foot patterns at low velocities. They learn what their feet should be doing and apply this knowledge when jumping at higher velocities.

Swinging Segments

Swinging segments refer to how athletes use their shoulders, arms, hips, and legs during the drills. The drills are introduced with lower forces and smaller movements to emphasize the feel and movement of the body. A common error is to move body parts and not the body. For example, an athlete may drive the arm without blocking and drive the knee high, yet the body doesn’t displace vertically. Through progressions, the athlete learns to move the body through smaller force applications, smaller ranges of motion, then gradually increase the forces—which will in turn increase the displacement and ranges of motion.

Eventually, skips for height ask athletes to generate as much as height as possible, and skips for distance ask athletes to cover as much distance as possible. However, many aspects needed to create successful horizontal jumps are often wasted motions when athletes participate in the traditional forms of these exercises. Done properly, the swinging segments will create:

1. Large and powerful amplitudes of movement
2. Synchronized movements that help timing and rhythms
3. Blocking—body parts STOP while the body continues to move

As the athlete’s shoulders, arms, hips, and legs generate movement, blocking/stopping them allows the body to continue moving and synchronize the timing of the jumps.

Fundamental Outcome

When done correctly and efficiently, an athlete’s posture, takeoff foot contact pattern, and swinging segments create elastic energy and displacement. Coach Grigg cues athletes to “move your body, not just your body parts,” essentially eliminating wasted motions and to “push, swing, and block” all occurring simultaneously) to help them time and synchronize the drills—and eventually the horizontal jumps.

Skips for Height

When skipping for height the athlete will be cued to do the following:

1. Move body up and forward
2. High hips, low knees
3. Like a soccer header, or a basketball rebound

Video 2. Skips for height.

A notable difference between a power skip for height and this one is that athletes are expected to keep their knees low and hips high. To create this movement, athletes feel the swing in their arms and then block the swinging motion. As the arm opposite the jump leg passes the hip on the downward stroke it will be blocked, but the hips will continue to rise, and the athlete’s body will continue upward and forward. The arm driving forward opposite the swing leg will also be blocked. This causes the swing leg knee and thigh to stop moving up and then work back down into a straightened position, thereby allowing the swing leg foot to work down below the hip. This position resembles sprinting action where the free leg will back down toward the track beneath the hip (center of mass).

Skips for Distance

When skipping for distance the athlete will be cued to do the following:

1. Move body forward and up
2. Feel your takeoff foot behind you
3. Push the thigh forward
4. Block the thigh low

Video 3. Skips for distance.

In this form of skipping for distance, the arms will be blocked in a similar but even lower manner as they are in skips for height. The jump leg, however, serves a different purpose. The coach cues athletes to feel their takeoff foot behind them, allowing the body to move forward and up. The athlete pushes the swing leg hip and thigh forward and then blocks them low. As a result, the free leg works back down into a straightened position, allowing the shin to open up and create an acute—or close to a 90-degree—angle with the swing leg dorsiflexed foot.
The importance of this cue transfers to the first phase of the triple jump. I believe we spend more than enough time cueing the jump leg in the triple jump but often neglect the swing leg. If we cue the athlete to push the swing leg thigh forward then block it low, it works back down as previously stated. Additionally, it sets up an elastic swing during the hop phase.

Hurdle Gallops

When athletes jump over a low barrier or a mini-hurdle/wicket, they are cued to do the following:

1. High hips, low knees
2. Feel the swing
3. Feel the block

Video 4. Hurdle gallops.

Hurdle gallops take the requirements of both skipping exercises and ask the athlete to apply them. As a result, the drill requires its own set of skills. During skips for height, the primary movement of the body is vertical (up) and then out. During skips for distance, the primary movement is horizontal (out) and then up. Hurdle gallops ask the athletes for equal levels of both horizontal and vertical displacements due to the placement and height of the hurdles. Each coach will have to play around with the distances based on their athletes’ skill and mastery. Coach Grigg places 6” banana hurdles about 3 meters apart because of the skill and ability of his Jacksonville female athletes.

Whatever the distance, athletes must generate enough force application to jump over the hurdle, and enough distance to be in position to clear the ones that follow. Too much height and the athlete will not be able to jump over the next hurdle. Conversely, too much distance and the athlete will knock over the hurdles by not generating enough height.

While posture, takeoff foot placement, and swinging segments remain the same in hurdle gallops, a combination of height and distance are required to be successful. You can make this drill more challenging by having athletes gallop over higher hurdles or increasing the distance between the hurdles—or both.

Conclusion

Coach Grigg notes that if you watch an athlete walk, then jog, and finally sprint, you will notice many of the same patterns. Walking and jogging at low speeds transfer to how an athlete warms up, skips, jogs, and ultimately sprints. This is especially evident in competition. Athletes—especially those with a low training age—tend to revert to what is most comfortable or natural. These three drills allow the coach to cue proper posture, proper foot strike, and synchronization of upper body and lower body movements that will transfer to sprinting. Proper takeoff foot patterns, swing and blocking movements, and displacement will transfer to horizontal jumpers.

We coach in an era where complicated, and dazzling drills are easily accessible online and coaches buy into training programs/videos loaded with overly complex, yet compelling and “sexy” drills. As coaches we need to focus on the fundamentals even if it they are not “sexy” because that will ultimately get our athletes the results they strive to achieve. Echoing motivational speaker Jim Rohn, Coach Grigg ended his presentation by saying, “Success is neither magical nor mysterious. Success is the natural consequence of consistently applying basic fundamentals.”

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

 

If you are an avid reader of SimpliFaster, you will notice the frequent reference to electromyography (EMG) studies throughout the blog’s articles. The goal of this review is to inform readers about the science and application of EMG experimentation. Not all readers will have the need to perform EMG readings on themselves or their athletes, but everyone involved with sports in some capacity should be aware of the requirements for measuring muscle activity.

The ability to understand EMG research and apply the science is a valuable benefit when making decisions on exercise selection and other choices in training and rehabilitation. This guide includes instructions on performing your own EMG experiments, as well as determining when you need additional instrumentation or expertise to analyze the collected data.

What Is Electromyography?

Electromyography is a measurement of electrical activity in the muscles during movement. EMG is used in both medical and research settings, and the data collected is valuable to learn what is happening with muscle and motion. Depending on the location of the muscle group, users of EMG will either perform surface data collection or, if deep muscles need to be measured, fine wires are used for intramuscular insertion.

An electromyogram records the signal strength to the muscle or set of muscles. EMG is an indirect measure of muscle force, since it’s only picking up the neurological activity during the movement, and not the direct muscle tension. Most instruments that measure EMG send the signals to a computer or other hardware tool to filter the data, so it can be displayed and analyzed later by a trained professional. A valid interpretation depends upon a strong knowledge of both movement science and muscle physiology, and other simultaneous measurements are taken to cross-validate and ensure confidence in the findings.

The Value of Internal EMG Data for Coaches and Sports Medicine

Performance coaches and sports medicine professionals have relied on research to provide clues and insights into the actions of muscles during sports tasks and exercises, whether for performance or rehabilitation. The arguments against EMG are not because of the science or technology, but the contextual design of the studies—the specific exercises and subject populations. If you have direct access to EMG instrumentation and can test your own athletes, it’s far more useful than depending only on external studies.

The application of EMG is not just for research. EMG is also an important tool for biofeedback during training and rehabilitation. In addition to quantitative feedback for the athlete while performing physical tasks or rudimentary rehab exercises, EMG is a great teaching tool. Clinical settings, as well as group training, rarely use EMG to assist the professionals involved, but new technology is streamlining the process and athletes are more engaged in their data now.

EMG technology has come a long way since the 1950s and 1960s, but it’s still the same tool when you strip away the newer innovations and get right to its core. The major difference is that the transmission of the data from athletes is wireless now, and the data can also synchronize with other sensors and instruments.

Whether you perform your own experiments or only read the experiments done in formal research, being informed on the nuances of data collection and interpretation is vital to understand what the information means. Coaches and sports medicine professionals can be tempted to scan through the materials and methods parts of studies and skip to the conclusions or summary charts, but they then risk missing the true results evident in the paper. Read the full study and even the citations at the end of a research paper. It is important to judge the data and the conclusion of the author(s) separately.

What Information Can EMG Provide to Professionals?

Nearly all of the studies that use EMG tend to be investigations into popular exercises in strength and conditioning or rehabilitation. Many landmark studies on sports tasks are very popular and have a large impact on other studies—an important ranking measurement in research—due to their value in revealing what is happening in athletic motion. Simply stated, training and rehabbing athletes can get a hint from EMG as to what is happening with the muscles involved in sport and what exercises could help prepare them for their particular sport.

EMG is not just about which muscles work the most during exercise; it provides a vast amount of information that can help everyone in sport solve problems better. For example, EMG can help measure the rate of force development (RFD), track coordination changes from beginner to advanced athletes, observe symmetry and asymmetry in gait, and even determine the effects of pain and fatigue on older populations. EMG provides a wealth of information that transcends sports and the field of physical therapy. Electromyography connects to other fields of study as well.

EMG is not just about which muscles work the most during exercise; it provides a vast amount of information that can help everyone in sport solve problems better.

Most of the arguments in support of investments in EMG education and equipment cite the ability to get more information than the naked eye can reveal. Another benefit is that the information is objective, so that everyone can agree on it and decide on an intervention. Dysfunctional muscles are not just a weakness or size issue (cross-sectional)—there’s often a less obvious factor that can’t be left to guesswork. The use of EMG on athletes in team or college environments adds another layer of confidence that what is being done in training and rehab is managed properly.

The Requirements for Collecting EMG Data from Athletes

Collecting EMG readings does require some experience and expertise, but the demand of collecting data isn’t overwhelming. The biggest challenge isn’t the use of the software or other technology; it’s having the athlete follow directions, and also keeping the exercises consistent when performing a group analysis. EMG can be a perfect n=1 experiment, especially with biofeedback during return to play after an injury, but team or sports analysis is extremely difficult to do with complex motions because of styles and body types involved. The variability of EMG data can be misinterpreted as inconsistency or inaccuracy, but the true cause is likely the subjects rather than the measurement integrity.

Defining an event, or when a sporting action starts and stops, is difficult, and is a primary reason why video cameras or other tools synchronize with EMG. A continuous recording is hard to interpret, and a raw signal doesn’t fully explain what is happening in time and space. EMG is especially valuable for a time series or time course of events, rather than just being distilled to peak and average values of gross movements. Activity, the term used in EMG to summarize the nervous system providing a signal, is basically just a rise and fall of microvolts from the muscle. More electrodes placed at key muscles will create a wider, more-detailed picture of what is happening in the task being measured. This will, of course, require more analysis later. The comparison of relationships between limbs or muscle groups is extremely valuable to professionals in performance and therapy, and most of the superficial muscles are propulsive in nature.

Intramuscular EMG is usually performed for deep muscles or small muscles that simply can’t be read by electrodes. While intramuscular, or fine wire, EMG may sound painful, the wire is very thin and thread-like, making it surprisingly comfortable for most subjects being measured. Some athletes need to shave the testing area, such as muscle groups in the legs, and practitioners usually isometrically test the muscle group with a voluntary maximal effort or maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) to normalize the data.

Subject motivation will make a comparison limited, but there’s an expectation that using a contraction of near maximal effort will gain a perspective of the magnitude of activity. Each athlete will have to perform an isolated muscle contraction isometrically for each muscle recruited, thus making data collection take a little longer, but this is also common with other data sets from other sensors. Electrode placement is important as well, since some areas of the body are especially congested and can cause either crosstalk (false readings from other muscles) or misinterpretation from not knowing what muscle is being analyzed.

Common Errors in the Use of EMG in Research and Clinical Settings

Even researchers can make mistakes with EMG, since the instruments and environment can interfere with the collection of a pure signal. EMG is prone to motion artifacts when movements are fast and violent; thus, high-speed and high-force activities sometimes give false readings. Some resources have compiled a comprehensive list of the causes of errors, but most issues with collecting quality data are due to the limits of the technology and the way that subjects respond to instruction.

• Normalization, or creating a MVIC, is not a perfect process and subject errors are common.
• Electrodes can fail in different ways and require very precise placement. Additionally, not all muscle groups are ideal for EMG recording.
• Athletic motions or exercises are not always repeatable or easily captured, due to the subject’s reaction to having electrodes applied to their skin and body.

EMG recording, like any measurement, is only as good as the user and the equipment applied. Some bodies and some sports movements or exercises are easier to analyze because of very trivial but important factors, such as keeping the electrodes on the body in real-world settings. For example, sweat or ballistic actions will make electrodes fall off, even if elastic adhesive is used. Even an electrode staying on the skin when recording high-velocity movements is not necessarily a sign of a good reading, as skin will slide and not stay precisely on the muscle group like it does during slower activities. As stated earlier, manual isometric muscle contractions commonly create errors because new exercises are still foreign to athletes. Since experienced practitioners don’t always motivate the test subject enough or trust that the effort was maximal without objective measurement, a perfect MVIC baseline is hard to establish.

An athlete will naturally, and unknowingly, change their motion when they are aware that they’re being measured or tested. This is common with all measurements, as the simple placement of a camera during training may result in changes to technique or increases in effort. Some athletes are especially sensitive to having tactile sensors on their body, and respond negatively to the measurement because it’s distracting. No matter how accurate or precise an instrument is, the quality of the measurement relies on the quality of the action performed by the athlete. Having the athlete replicate in the lab what they do on the field is important to researchers, but in clinical settings and coaching environments, where the therapy room or field is actually the lab, repeated uses can’t disturb technique as practice time is sacred.

The quality of the EMG measurement relies on the quality of the action performed by the athlete. Share on X

Even exercise events are difficult to measure, due to motion or technique variability that is large enough to taint the data. The nature of fatigue requires the need to average repeated bouts for a valid assessment. Measuring groups becomes especially difficult when the athletes have different levels of strength and size. In general, the more explosive and complicated the movement, the less accurate the EMG information will be, but the data is still useful enough to collect. Overall, the challenges of acquiring a set of clean EMG readings are not so insurmountable that it’s not worthwhile; it just means professionals using the measurements must be consistent and thorough.

How to Interpret EMG Signals and Draw Conclusions

After data is collected, interpretation and in-depth analysis are required to solve problems or summarize athletic events. EMG signals require filtering so the readings can be converted to actual values for comparison. Several filtering options exist, and most of them “clean up” the readings so a simpler representation can be viewed and charted. In addition to each individual recording, the group of recordings is often averaged or statistically analyzed as a whole with additional software. Due to the differences between each subject, the flaw with summarizing a group of recordings by a large population is that the variability can be misleading. On the other hand, not having the variability of a large population can bias or skew data because of small sample sizing.

Interpretation of the EMG recording is a combination of statistical and mechanical evaluation of what happened over time. Most practitioners break down the activity into sequences or partial actions in a timeline. Published research using EMG analysis has divided exercises into eccentric and concentric actions, like most strength exercises, but more complex athletic motions are done differently. In general, specific milestones in each sporting action, from start to finish, are dissected so comprehension is easier for both the reader and the scientist.

EMG is often paired with other instruments, such as force plates and video capture equipment, to create deeper analysis. Extreme analysis is possible, such as in-shoe pressure, motion capture, and physiological recordings. Longer capture periods can identify fatigue, due to the power output diminishing over the time course of the data collection. On average, more data sets help define both the context and meaning behind EMG.

There’s no perfect science to drawing conclusions with EMG, as it can be abused and misused because of the accessibility of the instrumentation. For example, just because an EMG reading is higher for an exercise doesn’t mean the muscle recruitment is truly better. Again, passive and active contractions are complicated events in muscle physiology, and higher average or peak values for a motion don’t indicate superiority. Conversely, EMG readings done properly are valid assessments of neuromuscular activity.

Muscle activation is higher or lower based on mechanical and conscious awareness of the recorded subject. A subject isometrically contracting a muscle group because they are guarding against injury or just conscious of the electrode can fool even an experienced practitioner of EMG, so expertise must go beyond just using the equipment and being in the field area tested. EMG data is not difficult to collect or analyze, it just requires a good advance plan to properly design an experiment and know what you want to eventually discover.

Popular Clinical and Training Facility Uses for EMG

The final piece of EMG science is its application in settings that are not research-based. Clinical and performance settings have more demanding needs in terms of time and efficiency, and EMG does add some preparation time before and additional analysis later. The overarching value of electromyography is its objective feedback, either instantly or gradually, for athletes. Generally, EMG is used in applied settings for these four reasons:

• To quantify a meaningful coordinative neuromuscular asymmetry beyond force production or speed.
• To benchmark changes in return-to-play training and follow-up in the years after completion of rehabilitation.
• To provide immediate biofeedback for athletes learning and mastering a skill or performing an exercise.
• To acquire new information on a specific sporting task to model better performance or more resilience to injury.

The common argument against EMG is not about its validity, but the practical need of getting a job done with little time. Most coaches and sports medicine therapists simply don’t have much time on their hands and athletes are somewhat apprehensive about getting data with electrodes, even if when placed on the surface of the skin. The amount of time needed before, during, and after EMG isn’t as large as it was in the past, due to advancements in wearable technology and better automation with software. In summary, a few extra minutes may save days and weeks if used judiciously, and best practice is not readily available in the clinical and applied performance arena today. With the rise of smart fabrics, the option of using EMG as a monitoring tool is promising.

Two main areas where EMG can influence sport are the development and the sometimes-necessary rehab of athletes. Training typically has higher demands in workflow because larger groups are involved, and rehabilitation usually has a better staff-to-athlete ratio. Both performance and medical practitioners need objective indications of change, and EMG is a more direct measure of muscle function than eyeballing alone. Combined with a talented and experienced professional, EMG adds more confidence to the true progress of the session, or can reveal regression if the athlete has a setback.

Without oversimplifying, medical professionals seek better balance to reduce injury occurrence or improve success after injury. Generally, performance staff wants to maintain ability or improve the development of athletic qualities. Both departments or fields have commonalities, but their responsibilities for injury diagnosis and training plans differentiate them. In modern sport, medical and performance roles are very hard to separate because training principles are applicable to both roles. The point where one role ends and the other begins is more ambiguous than ever.

Most EMG applications can be distilled if a muscle is underactive or overactive, or lacks specific timing with coordination. It can be easily argued that athletes will return with visual symmetry or coordination that seems efficient, but the muscle activity could reveal that more time is needed to be ready. As EMG proliferates in the clinical setting, better treatments and more effective training programs will evolve.

Deciding Whether EMG Is Appropriate for Your Environment

Electromyography is not for everyone, but nearly any level of sport can access the information without a major undertaking. EMG in research is far different than in a clinical setting, so if you are working with groups, most will find it difficult to apply. Several opportunities exist with EMG data, such as experimentation on athletic tasks and exercises, as well as return-to-play conditions. Nearly any team can make progress by adding EMG into their setting, but knowing the fundamental science behind it is a necessary starting point.

References and Suggested Research

1. Dimitrova N.A. & Dimitrov G.V. Interpretation of EMG changes with fatigue: Facts, pitfalls, and fallacies. J Electromyography Kinesiology. 2003 Feb:13(1) 13-36.
2. Farina, D., Negro, F., Gazzoni, M. & Enoka, R.M. Detecting the unique representation of motor unit action potentials in the surface electromyogram. Journal of Neurophysiology. 2008; 100(3), 1223-1233.
3. Guissard N. & Hainaut, K. EMG and mechanical changes during sprint start at different front block obliquities. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 1992; 24:1257-1263
4. Maffiuletti N.A., Aagaard P., Blazevich A.J., Folland J., Tillin N. & Duchateau J. Rate of force development: Physiological and methodological considerations. European Journal of Applied Physiology. 2016; 116:1091-1116.
5. Massó N., Rey F., Romero D., Gual G. & Costa L. Surface electromyography applications in the sport. Apunts Med Esport. 2010; 45(165):121-130.
6. Mero, A., & Komi, P.V. Electromyographic activity in sprinting at speeds ranging from sub‐maximal to supra‐maximal. Medicine and Science in Sports Exercise. 1987; 19(3): 266‐274.
7. Reaz M.B.I., Hussain M.S. & Mohd-Yasin F. Techniques of EMG signal analysis: Detection, processing, classification and applications. Biological Procedures Online. Springer-Verlag; 2006; 8(1):163-3.
8. Vigotsky A.D., Ogborn D. & Phillips S.M. Motor unit recruitment cannot be inferred from surface EMG amplitude and basic reporting standards must be adhered to. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2015 Dec 24.

Antioxidants and branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs) help maximize training gains and minimize recovery, especially when taken after exercise. In the appropriate dose, antioxidants accelerate recovery by reducing inflammatory damage. BCAAs also accelerate recovery and help synthesize muscle proteins.

Antioxidants, Adaptation, and Inflammation

Intense physical exercise creates an inflammatory stress reaction within the body that produces both adaptive and maladaptive physiologic responses. Antioxidants can eliminate additional stress by converting reactive oxygen species (ROS) to less reactive molecules.

So far, researchers have not determined whether taking antioxidant supplements during training encourages adaptation. ³

Researchers do know that, if ROS accumulate excessively, athletes may experience such overtraining symptoms as chronic fatigue. ³ Uncontrolled oxidation can also cause lipid, protein, and DNA damage, which diminish cellular function. ³ DNA damage, in particular, can interfere with the DNA’s positive adaptation to exercise-induced stress. ³ And disturbances in our homeostatic balance may affect the function of our metabolic, neuroendocrinologic, oxidative, physiological, psychological, and immunologic systems.

A low dietary intake of antioxidants may decrease our body’s ability to combat the build-up of ROS during exercise. ³ An excessive intake of antioxidants, however, can cause the opposite reaction and suppress oxidation reduction at the cellular level. This hinders the beneficial effects of exercise on our cells.

Consequentially, ingesting antioxidants can prevent adaptation during and after exercise. One study, for example, showed that taking 1,000 IU of Vitamin C and 400 IU of Vitamin E inhibited training-induced increases in skeletal muscle protein.³ Prolonged antioxidant supplementation may also reduce oxidation. However, there are no long-term studies about this specifically. ³

Antioxidants such as Co-enzyme Q10, tart cherry juice, and pomegranate juice can accelerate recovery by reducing inflammatory damage. ³ There seems to be an optimal dose of antioxidants to create an adaptive, anabolic, regenerative, and enhanced state of performance and recovery (see figure below). We need more research to solidify the reference ranges for athletes. ³

For testing purposes, most studies consist of an acute bout of exercise to induce drastic muscular damage. Researchers then compare supplementation against a control for immediate study.

BCAAs for Muscle Protein Synthesis and Recovery

It’s widely accepted that BCAAs are essential for supporting recovery and optimal performance health. Since BCAAs regulate skeletal muscle protein synthesis and accelerate recovery, researches examined whether BCAAs would help calorie-restricted athletes undergoing a heavy resistance training regimen retain lean body mass.²

During the study’s eight-week body building program, athletes took 14g BCAAs pre- and post-workout while a comparative group took carbohydrate-based placebos. The BCAA group lost fat mass and maintained lean body mass, while the carbohydrate group lost lean mass and body mass.

BCAA study group lost fat & maintained lean body mass; placebo group lost lean & body mass. Share on X

Both groups increased the 1RM in the squat, but the BCAA group improved more significantly. In the 1RM max for the bench press, the BCAA group improved, while the carbohydrate group decreased in strength. The proposed theory on the mechanism behind the success of BCAAs for maintaining body composition and improving strength has to do with their effect on the hormones responsible for protein synthesis.

Exercise induces a change in the balance of hormone levels after exercise. Testosterone, insulin, and cortisol, particularly, become elevated. ¹ Testosterone, insulin, and insulin-like growth factor are anabolic hormones, meaning they favor muscle growth, whereas cortisol is a catabolic stress hormone favoring muscle breakdown.

It’s ideal to keep anabolic hormones running strong after exercise to promote muscle growth and repair and to relax cortisol levels to prevent the reversal of this repair process. ¹ One study aimed to find the effect BCAAs’ had on these hormone levels when taken in a 200mg/kg dose thirty minutes before exercise. ¹ Twenty young soccer players in this randomized, double-blind study were split into supplement or placebo groups.

In the BCAA group, serum insulin and testosterone were significantly higher than the placebo group after exercise. There was no difference in cortisol concentrations between the two groups. This indicates that BCAA supplementation may contribute to muscle protein synthesis as a direct result of elevated anabolic hormones after exercise.

Foods Rich in BCAAs and Antioxidants

BCAAs can be ingested naturally from animal products such as chicken, fish, and eggs. Vegans and vegetarians can find BCAAs in beans, lentils, nuts, and soy protein.

Fruits high in antioxidants are cranberries, blueberries, and blackberries. Beans, artichokes, and Russet potatoes are at the top of the list for vegetables while pecans, walnuts, and hazelnuts are the highest-ranked nuts.

Of course, if adequate dietary intake is not feasible, high-quality supplementation can accomplish the same goals.

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. Atashak, S., Baturak, K., Azarbayjani, M. A., Ghaderi, M., & Azizbeigi, K. (2014). “Hormonal Responses to Acute Resistance Exercise After Branched-Chain Amino Acids Supplementation.” International Medicine Journal, 22(1), 1-5. Uploaded February 14, 2015.
2. Dudgeon, W. D., Kelley, E. P., & Scheett, T. P. (2016). “In a single-blind, matched group design: branched-chain amino acid supplementation and resistance training maintains lean body mass during a caloric restricted diet.” Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 13(1). doi:10.1186/s12970-015-0112-9.
3. Slattery, K., Bentley, D., & Coutts, A. J. (2015). “The Role of Oxidative, Inflammatory and Neuroendocrinological Systems During Exercise Stress in Athletes: Implications of Antioxidant Supplementation on Physiological Adaptation During Intensified Physical Training.” Sports Medicine, 45(4), 453-471. doi:10.1007/s40279-014-0282-7.

 

Recovery is no longer a word looked down upon by coaches, trainers, and hard-core fitness enthusiasts. Instead, they are beginning to realize the multiple improvements that happen when they take the time to allow the body to recover from activity. After all, physiological adaptations occur during recovery. Our systems remodel and rebuild during rest periods, and sleep, nutrition, and hydration are so important during this time. So how can we accompany these aspects of recovery to promote improved and optimal outcomes that support a more demanding training stimulus later?

After years of rest being looked at as “wimpy and weak,” most coaches and trainers are now accepting it as an important part of the training spectrum. While there are plenty of modalities, theories, and practices, the focus of this article will be on the benefit of compression therapy. Many forms of compression therapy exist, from manual therapies to socks, sleeves, and pneumatic devices. I will discuss one of the more popular pneumatic compression devices, the NormaTec Pulse Recovery System.

It’s Not Just Static Compression

NormaTec has been a leader in the industry for years at the professional and collegiate levels. Recently, their presence in the private sector has begun to grow as therapists, trainers, coaches, and private facilities all start to invest in compression technology. This has come about because of feedback and, more importantly, athletes making requests as they return to these settings.

The difference between NormaTec and other compression modalities is that NormaTec uses a patented dynamic pulse massage pattern, as compared to the static compression (squeezing) of other systems on the market. This means that NormaTec’s compression starts distally on the targeted limb segment and works its way proximally to promote lymph and venous return toward the heart for dispersion and distribution of metabolites. By ridding the metabolites from soft tissue, it promotes a quicker healing response, which leads to improvement in muscle recovery time. When coaches combine this with proper rest and nutrition in an individualized way, we can directly impact the success of our programs.

When combined with proper rest, NormaTec can directly impact the success of our program. Share on X

The recovery process begins as soon as the workout, training session, or game ends. It is important to know how we can influence recovery with a system like NormaTec. The pulse system provides gradients of air pressure that will mold to the shape of the athlete’s limb, providing a standardized force across all segments in a circumferential manner. When you combine this with a timed pulse, the NormaTec system promotes optimal metabolite dispersion to promote recovery. Its seven levels of resistance and options to concentrate on certain zones give you plenty of choices and you can focus the intervention to adapt to your athlete’s needs.

 

Another little-discussed aspect of compression therapy is the sense of peace that it brings by providing the recipient with a proprioceptive pressure that assists system stability and overall relaxation. We all know the sense of calm that we feel when tucked under a thick blanket or during a firm hug; the NormaTec uses deep pressure touch stimulation to give that same deep feeling. It stimulates calmness in the central nervous system, helping to shift the person towards a more parasympathetic state through the release of serotonin and melatonin—chemicals that promote happiness, elevated moods, and sleep.

The addition of the NormaTec to our programs has been an effective influence post training, as it also helps athletes to focus on other aspects of recovery. Once athletes feel and experience the benefits of the NormaTec, it serves as a great introduction to many other recovery methods. A simple 20-30 minutes in the boots allows us to work on breathing drills and switching off from the sympathetic nervous system into a more parasympathetic dominant state (which is still a battle for most athletes today). It is in this way that the NormaTec can induce both physiologic and psychological changes to promote improved recovery and performance.

Special thanks to co-author Jon Herting. Jon Herting, PT, DPT, CSCS, ACSM CE-P has been involved in rehabilitation and strength and conditioning for 10 years and has built a reputation among athletes as a clinician who promotes quick results and optimal outcomes. Jon has worked with athletes of all levels, from adolescent to Olympic level, and believes in a holistic approach to rehab, believing there is not a distinct line between rehab and the training process. Jon is a partner in The Training Room of Garnet Valley in Philadelphia, PA, currently serves as adjunct faculty at Widener University and has developed several continuing education courses for clinicians and certified strength and conditioning professionals based around assessment and rehabilitation techniques.

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

 

Parents play a paramount role in the development of a child-athlete. The relationship is built around motivation, propulsion, and encouragement, as well as physical, emotional, and financial support. Parental support has been correlated to youth participation level in sports, the child’s physical and mental well-being, and his or her ultimate success and enthusiasm for the sport. A study by Nunomura and Oliveira (2013) investigated this correlation further with regard for the careers of young gymnasts, and its findings are applicable across all fields of athletics.

Aim for the Middle Ground of Parenting

In today’s sporting culture, the emphasis is largely placed on winning, so essentially “if you’re not first, you’re last.” Some parents tend to get wrapped up in this socially driven environment, and fill with pride and arrogance over the accomplishments of their children. This can be detrimental to the athlete’s well-being on a number of levels.

A young athlete’s success should never be utilized as a means of status or personal intent. Parents need to be able to differentiate the needs of their children from their own. While living vicariously through our youth is acceptable, forcing them to live out our unfulfilled dreams is not healthy. If social comparisons and negative criticism drive the parent-athlete relationship, confidence levels can quickly plummet. Excessive parent “coaching” can result in undue stress for the athlete, which quickly leads to performance anxiety, fatigue, burnout, and loss of enthusiasm and drive for the sport.

It is vital that parents realize a sport does not define their child. Share on X

On the opposite end of the spectrum are the under-involved parents. This type of parent lacks any sort of enthusiasm or engagement for the athlete’s goals and endeavors. The lack of support and encouragement can quickly become disheartening for a young athlete, making it more likely that his or her dedication to the pursuit of athletics will wane.

The middle ground of parenting provides flexibility for the athlete’s progress and milestones within the sport. The moderately involved parent provides adequate support without controlling the athlete’s every move; feedback is sought from the coaches in order to establish the best developmental path for the athlete. The parent can be firm in enforcing proper values and morals in the child, such as teamwork, sportsmanship, and work ethic, though without the authoritarian overload.

It is vital that parents realize the sport does not define their child. They must foster intrinsic values, confidence, self-esteem, and positivity in all aspects of life, so that if the athletic career deteriorates, there is still something for which to be optimistic. Dedication is important in the pursuit of any goal, but only if there is true desire for that goal, and never at the expense of physical or mental well-being.

Parents should hold high expectations for their child only as long as their child’s enthusiasm and passion for the sport exists; as soon as the athlete becomes disenchanted, the parent must stop forcing these expectations on the child. It is important to remain sensitive to a young athlete’s developmental needs in order to maximize the long-term success in both athletics and life in general.

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

Nunomura, M. & Oliveira, M. S. (2013). Parents’ support in the sports career of young gymnasts. Science of Gymnastics Journal, 5(1), 5-17.

Central Nervous System (CNS) fatigue is a phenomenon mentioned in training room conversations, at lectures, and in coaches’ forums. The term itself seems to be well-accepted. But as one delves into investigations on its etiology beyond a Google search into the realms of peer-reviewed exercise science, clear applied scientific information becomes vague and scarce.

Introduction

Much of the work done on mechanisms behind CNS fatigue offers reasons why fatigue results from prolonged endurance exercise. There’s also research into output-related illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome. When we switch gears and examine CNS fatigue under a physical preparation lens, information to substantiate the biological theory that it results from high-intensity (speed and power) exercise becomes much more elusive.

As coaches, however, we likely agree that we cannot plan for successive high-intensity sessions without negative consequences. Or can we? Perhaps we do not know. Or perhaps it’s highly individual or subject to the logistical and traditional constraints of western sport models and common periodization schemes.

In the book, The Charlie Francis Training System, Francis discussed how optimal CNS functioning might look in a high-performance athlete. He suggested, “optimal transmission of nervous signals” and “motor pathways, characteristic of optimal technique and efficient routing of motor signals must be in place.” CNS fatigue is reached when the “by-products of high intensity exercise build up to a point where the CNS impulses (necessary to contract the muscle fibers) are handicapped.”

According to Francis, this is caused by:

• High-intensity work occurring too frequently in a training cycle
• Too much high-intensity volume in a single training session
• Introducing high-intensity training too rapidly into a training program when “residual fatigue still exists.”

Francis offered examples of high-intensity, CNS-taxing work:

• Sprints at maximum speed or 100% intensity from 30-120 meters
• Heavy weights allowing only a few repetitions (2-5)
• Explosive jumping and bounding (plyometrics)

Whenever athletes focus on maximum speed or explosiveness, they tax their CNS. “Low-intensity workouts (65-80% 1RM) leave the CNS relatively intact,” Francis explained. Recovery from CNS work requires at least 48 hours before a similar dose. During this period, the athlete should undergo recovery strategies to restore homeostasis.

“At the highest levels of sport there is a quantum increase in CNS output for every increment of improvement. A 95% effort might require 48 hours of recovery, whereas a PR (100% effort) might require 10 days of recovery,” Frances stated.

It appears there is a margin of recovery that should not be taken lightly when we differentiate between 95% and 100% of max speed or power. Perhaps, then, it’s important to highlight the importance of rest and recovery, proper spacing of training sessions, and load monitoring. Perhaps understanding the following two questions will allow us to improve our practice as coaches:

• How is CNS fatigue created?
• What are the possible mechanisms that underpin this phenomenon?

A deeper understanding of the operations of the CNS has grown over the years, linking biological rationale to phenomena we observe as coaches or sensations we might experience as athletes. However, much of the work on CNS fatigue and its role during exercise is done during prolonged exercise and in clinical exercise physiology and medicine. In the physical preparation of the speed-power athlete, perhaps we are following rules of a game we do not yet fully understand.

When training speed-power athletes, perhaps we’re following rules we don’t yet fully understand. Share on X

Most investigations suggesting the CNS plays a role in fatigue are restricted by the lack of “plausible biological mechanisms” and are “relegated to a role of a black box phenomena” which are hard to defend.³

Let’s Define Fatigue

Fatigue experienced during exercise is defined as the “inability to maintain a given exercise intensity.”² It includes an acute impairment of exercise performance that leads to an increase in perceived effort and an eventual inability to produce high quality and high magnitudes of muscular power.³ Fatigue can vary with the nature of the activity (intensity and duration), the athlete’s training status, and the present environmental conditions.²

The causes of acute fatigue are interrelated and complex. Fatigue can be elicited by depleted energy stores in muscle or by accumulating metabolites within the muscle cell. Fatigue can also result from a failure of neural transmission outside the muscle cell within the nervous system,⁶ which is the focus of this article.

Neural or nerve transmission is the process whereby signaling molecules (neurotransmitters) are released by a neuron (the presynaptic neuron), and bind to, and activate the receptors of, another neuron.⁶

It’s important to mention that fatigue also has roots in psychology. For example, the limits of physical stress may be consciously or subconsciously limited by the athlete’s pain and work tolerance.⁶ Motivation and perception ³ and their effects on performance have been documented for years.¹

It’s difficult to find a specific definition of CNS fatigue. Davis and Bailey explained it as the “failure to maintain the required or expected force or power output associated with specific alterations in CNS function that cannot reasonably be explained by dysfunction in the muscle itself.” Somehow the ability to maintain CNS drive to the working muscle(s) is compromised.

In other words, if it takes more stimulation (CNS input) to produce a desirable level of muscle contraction (output), then the CNS is likely fatigued. This indicates that the muscle itself is less responsive to the degree of input it’s receiving from the CNS.

Evidence for a specific role of CNS fatigue is limited due to human physiology’s constant flux. Share on X

Acute CNS fatigue, although accepted as real and valid, warrants a deeper understanding of the mechanisms involved. Evidence for a specific role of CNS fatigue, however, is limited by the lack of objective measures due to human physiology’s constant state of flux. Understanding the neurophysiological mechanisms behind CNS fatigue may lead to a better understanding of human adaptation to physical stress.

There also may be factors outside of the muscle cell that cause fatigue.⁶ Fatigue may be the product of an inability to activate muscle fibers, which is a CNS function.

A Neurophysiological Mechanism to Explain CNS Fatigue

Fatigue can be classified into electrophysiological and biochemical considerations. Electrophysiological involves steps in the CNS and the peripheral nervous system (PNS) or the fiber leading up to the binding stage of actin and myosin. In this article, I focus on the electrophysiological considerations on the CNS.

Davis and Bailey discussed the following CNS electrophysiological mechanisms that result in a reduction in CNS drive to the motor neuron:

• A reduction in the corticospinal (descending impulses) reaching the motor neurons—a reduction decreases the conduction of signals and impulses from the brain to the spinal cord and muscle.
• An inhibition of motor neuron excitability by neurally mediated afferent feedback from the muscle—inhibition hinders a motor neuron’s ability to be turned on (excited) because the brain is mediating the feedback retrieved from the sensory neuron at the muscle back to the CNS.

These considerations may involve a reflex where mechanoreceptors or free nerve endings give the CNS feedback based on the level of muscle metabolites present from the work the athlete is doing.³ Mechanoreceptors are sensory receptors that respond to mechanical pressure or distortion. Free nerve endings are unspecialized, afferent nerve fiber endings of a sensory neuron; afferent meaning bringing information from the body’s periphery toward the brain—they detect pain.

The CNS makes adjustments, regulating the maximal force that can be produced by the fatiguing muscles so a safe and economical pattern of muscle activation can occur. This is known as the sensory feedback hypothesis.³

There is good evidence that the perception of effort is strongly influenced by the magnitude of the corollary discharge (copy of a motor command) from the motor cortex that delivers information to the primary somatosensory cortex.³

For example, when the force that a muscle can exert is decreased via experimentation (by fatigue or with curarization), the perceived effort for the task increases in association with the more substantial motor command that a person must generate to achieve the target force.
“Whether or not these higher centers are modified by neural input from other brain centers, afferent feedback from the working muscle and/or changes in neurotransmitter metabolism subsequent to the passage of blood-borne substances across the blood-brain barrier is not well studied.”³

The Role of Neurotransmitters in CNS Fatigue

The job of a neurotransmitter is to transmit signals across a chemical synapse, such as a neuromuscular junction, from one neuron to another target neuron—the muscle cell. It also carries messages between cells in the brain and spinal cord.

Small sacs called vesicles store neurotransmitters, and each vesicle holds a single type of neurotransmitter. The vesicles travel like tiny little rafts to the end of the neuron, where they dock and wait to be released (presynaptic cleft). When it’s time for the neuron to release neurotransmitters, the vesicles dump their contents into the synapse gap (the space between cells) where they travel to specialized receptor sites.

In exercise and CNS fatigue, the key neurotransmitters are serotonin, dopamine, and acetylcholine.³

Serotonin

Serotonin is linked to perceptions of effort, lethargy, and CNS fatigue during prolonged exercise. It’s hypothesized that, during prolonged exercise, brain serotonin levels increase in response to increased blood-borne tryptophan (TRP) delivered to the brain. TRP is a precursor to serotonin.³ Because of the physiological conditions created during prolonged exercise, TRP circulates loosely bound to albumin, and the free TRP moves across the blood-brain barrier.³

Serotonin synthesis increases during prolonged exercise, which is associated with lethargy and loss of motor drive.³ When brain serotonin activity or TRP availability to the brain increases, fatigue from prolonged exercise occurs more quickly.

Dopamine

Brain dopamine synthesis also appears to be a key factor in CNS fatigue. It seems to be necessary for movement, and increases in brain dopaminergic activity may increase endurance performance. As noted by Davis and Bailey, dopamine may delay fatigue by inhibiting brain serotonin synthesis and by directly activating motor pathways. Dopamine increases neural drive as well as motivation.⁴

With ideal dopamine levels, athletes may want to train more and be hungry to compete. Share on X

With ideal dopamine levels, athletes may want “it” more. They may want to train more and be hungry to compete.⁴ Dopamine also seems to increase vasodilation and the sweat response. The general theory is: more body heat, better nerve impulse transmission.⁴ Consequently, CNS drive is enhanced and fast twitch fibers are reached due to their superficial nature.

Further Study for Speed and Power Athletes

The elusive question, though, is whether these hypotheses can be applied to all training stimuli and all populations.

• Fatigue of voluntary muscular effort is a challenging construct. It appears CNS fatigue is evidenced by a decrease in central drive likely involving accumulation and depletion of neurotransmitters in CNS pathways located upstream of corticospinal neurons.³
• As we move forward in understanding adaptation to physical stress, more efforts are needed to determine precise mechanisms of CNS fatigue that make biological sense of the perceptions athletes sense during training and the observations coaches make.
• Most of the work done so far has been in clinical settings (chronic fatigue syndrome) and using prolonged endurance performance models with athletes. Yet CNS fatigue is a term used in many other settings, such as the weight room and during sport-specific speed and power sessions. It’s also suggested that we can apply these mechanistic hypotheses to healthier, more adapted populations.

Perhaps the CNS simply lessens exercise intensity to more tolerable levels to protect all humans. Share on X

We are, in essence, examining the same biological markers and measuring CNS drive regardless of the population studied and the stimulus and stress delivered. Perhaps we just have different standards or normative data for the elite athlete versus those with effort syndromes, like chronic fatigue syndrome. Perhaps the CNS simply lessens exercise (stress) intensity to more tolerable levels to protect all humans.

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. Asmussen, E., “Muscle Fatigue,” Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 11(4) (1979): 313-321.
2. Brooks, George, Thomas Fahey, and Kenneth Baldwin, Exercise Physiology: Human Bioenergetics and Its Applications, 4th Edtition (McGraw-Hill Education, 2004).
3. Davis, Mark, and Stephen Bailey, “Possible Mechanisms of Central Nervous System Fatigue During Exercise,” Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 29(1) (1997): 45-57.
4. Davidson, Pat, interview by Derek M. Hansen, “Performance Concept Chat Episode 10: Exploring CNS Fatigue,” StrengthPowerSpeed,podcast audio, March 25, 2017, http://www.strengthpowerspeed.com/articles/.
5. Francis, Charlie, The Charlie Francis Training System (Amazon Digital Services, LLC, 1982).
6. Kenney, W. Larry, Jack H. Wilmore, and David L. Costill, Physiology of Sport and Exercise 6th Edition, (Human Kinetics, 2006).

 

In the strength and conditioning field, on top of lifting, jumping, and sprinting, there are myriad ways to influence performance outcomes. Many of these extras are technology-based, such as tracking velocity, forces, sleep, and recovery. One of these “extras” that I really like, but hear very little about, is electrical myostimulation, or EMS.

Most people know what EMS is, but I don’t see a lot of EMS use in the athletic community and, more specifically, in performance enhancement. I have seen it become more popular of late in high performance or CrossFit, but mainly from a recovery standpoint. I still don’t hear a lot of people talking about it from a performance/stimulus perspective. This is an area that I think holds a lot of potential.

I’ve been interested in EMS for a long time, after reading work from the Soviets, Paavo K. Komi, and coaches like Charlie Francis. It’s not like the research isn’t there—people have published it—but for several reasons, EMS is somewhat impractical in the field. If other coaches are like me, they find it difficult to isolate a single athlete in the training environment for the purpose of EMS. Since traditional machines have always been a bit cumbersome, and you can only use them on one athlete at a time, I think many coaches have written EMS off on an operational level, as opposed to a theoretical level. That being said, I think it can be a very smart investment for an elite athlete whose career tends to span over a decade when it’s all said and done. Although this article is focused on performance, most machines are quite robust and offer a multitude of benefits, for performance, recovery, and rehab.

Unanswered Questions

If you’re one of those coaches who has been curious about EMS but never made the jump, I’ll highlight some of my own experiences and the questions I had about it. My personal interest in EMS admittedly came as a spinoff from my early interest in the Central Nervous System (CNS). When I first began training athletes, I very quickly understood the limitations of the CNS to deliver high-quality output. What I mean by this is that you have a finite amount of “optimal work” that you can get accomplished before the athlete fatigues and loses access to their high threshold motor units. This is the period when they’re most recovered and primed/activated. This leads to one of the questions that frequently crosses my mind.

If my nervous system is such a limiting factor, would training the system with an external stimulus be counterproductive or would it be beneficial?

The data suggests there are many uses for EMS that would drive performance through many mechanisms. According to Komi (in his book, “Strength and Power in Sport”), many studies seem to be contradictory as to the results and mechanisms of EMS. However, in 2012, Filipovic et al. did a systematic review of EMS to try and find a clear-cut response on the effectiveness of EMS.

• This scientific analysis revealed that EMS is effective for developing physical performance. After a stimulation period of 3-6 weeks, significant gains (p < 0.05) were shown in maximal strength (isometric Fmax +58.8%; dynamic Fmax +79.5%), speed strength (eccentric isokinetic Mmax +37.1%; concentric isokinetic Mmax + 41.3%; rate of force development + 74%; force impulse + 29%; vmax + 19%), and power (+67].
• As a result, the analysis reveals a significant relationship (p < 0.05) between a stimulation intensity of ≥50% maximum voluntary contraction (MVC; 63.2 ± 19.8%) and significant strength gains.

Those results seem to indicate that there is a significant benefit to the use of EMS for performance enhancement—most notably, increases in maximal strength, power, and rate of force development. The fact that performance was enhanced is clear, the mechanism by which it enhanced is not so clear. This drew me to consider whether the EMS caused adaptations by itself or whether it merely facilitated more efficient work. My main question is:

Would pre-activating motor units with electrical impulses make them more excitable from an internal stimulus? Or does the EMS cause all the adaptations on its own?

The truth is, I don’t necessarily have the data to answer these questions. You might be better asking Carl Valle, as he’s written on EMS previously (see “The Top 6 EMS Protocols for Sports Performance”). However, I can say that I’ve personally experimented with EMS and have seen positive results.

Now, before I give you my personal experiences, let me tell you that this was a very casual experiment and would hardly pass the scientific validity test. My original purpose was mainly for fun as I had just gotten my hands on a high-quality unit and was curious as to the potential outcomes. I also used this on myself, as a coach and not one of my athletes. The reason I’m sharing this is just to give some feedback to people who are curious about it but never tried it.

Operating the EMS Machine

The first thing I learned is that EMS, at least for me, is progressive. I only used EMS on my legs and I used it mainly on “explosive strength,” in conjunction with my training. This utilizes incredibly strong contractions compared to a massage or recovery setting. The first few times I used it, the contraction I could handle was limited. As I improved my tolerance to somewhere between “uncomfortable”’ and “painful,” I could handle much stronger contractions, progressively. Thus, the technology probably has limitations depending upon an athlete’s level of pain tolerance.

Also, due to its progressive nature, my guess is that best results accompany prolonged usage. Besides this, operations are fairly straightforward: Make sure you have functional equipment and a comfortable position, since your EMS session could be anywhere from 20-40 minutes long. Then, pick the program you’re looking for and use the provided guide to place the electrodes in the appropriate positions. Depending on your brand of EMS, this could be a booklet, picture, or app. At the end of the day, the modern EMS machines are pretty simple. You don’t need to know the optimal frequency or time, as this has been simplified with pre-designed programs. Just plug the machine in, and pick your program.

My Personal Protocol and Outcomes

I know that many people use EMS systems to improve recovery and pain management, but I figured a piece of technology of this magnitude would be best suited for performance. I did a dedicated squat protocol and supplemented with explosive strength on the EMS (mostly quads, as they’re easiest alone) on training days. I figured there were plenty of ways I could work on recovery, but I wasn’t sure of other ways to send impulses through my system that were equal to or stronger than a maximum voluntary contraction. From a performance standpoint, this intrigued me.

Since I didn’t intend to publish data, I never set any controls and didn’t track my data that thoroughly; I only decided to write about this later. However, after about eight weeks, I was able to PR my back squat. The reason I think the EMS contributed to this is because I am nowhere near PRing on any of my other compound lifts, and my Olympic lifting is mainly attributed to technique improvements. Between my age and my training environment, I would never have thought that I’d actually hit a lifetime PR.

My training and EMS protocol followed three main squat workouts per week (I’m not including my accessory or upper body work here). Each of the three days would start with some Olympic lifting or Olympic lifting derivatives, and then went into the squatting soon after. It was never a significant amount of Olympic lifting volume—it was more of a primer than anything.

• On my first squat day of the week, I worked up to five sets of five.
• On my second squat day of the week, I worked up to five sets of three.
• On my last squat day, I worked up to a few doubles, then three or four singles.

Essentially, I went from volume at the beginning of the week to high load at the end of the week, but used auto regulation to find my numbers. I was fairly aggressive with the numbers I wanted, but I also never forced any and never failed a rep in training.

At night on these days, I doubled up and hit a quad program of EMS on either strength or explosive strength, with about 80-90% adherence over the six to eight weeks. I personally prefer explosive strength. I felt that by repeating on the same day, I could get a greater volume of work in after my nervous system had failed. Not only did I actively progress and overload with my training, but I tried to push with the EMS as well. Not that I recommend it, but I got to the point where I wore a mouthguard to bite down on when contractions became intense. All in the name of science.

I’m telling you all this to explain that I last managed to hit a 400lb back squat before my daughter was born, derailing my training once again. While it’s been almost 10 years since my football career, the EMS and training combination allowed me to hit numbers I thought were no longer within my grasp, due to my limited time and focus on training. I highly encourage you, if you have the right situation, to try experimenting with it yourself.

Although the EMS didn’t help with soreness, and I battled days of aching and tightness, I rarely had trouble increasing load by the time my body was sufficiently warmed up for the day. Between the combination of my own results and positive research, I definitely plan to continue experimenting with EMS on myself and a few of my athletes.

The Reasoning Behind My Conclusions

I’m sure there are other educators and maybe even coaches who can give better explanations of the mechanisms and outcomes involved, but I have my own guesses as to why EMS may be beneficial. I personally tend to think performance is driven more from the abilities of the nervous system than the abilities of the tissues involved, but I think EMS might possibly reconcile the two. I know I’ve personally seen compensations occurring, both in myself and in my athletes, and the inability to voluntarily activate specific muscle groups in a uniform way, during certain movements.

A clear example would be an athlete who is relatively strong, but if you asked him to do unilateral movements, he may lack the ability to activate or at least feel a strong contraction on one side vs. the other, either due to injuries or when seemingly “healthy,” if there is such a thing. For instance, asking an athlete with quad tendinopathy to do a single leg hip thrust—my guess is they won’t get much action out of the hip joint. I personally had issues with this even while operating at a high level (relative to my own maximal abilities). My belief isn’t clear, but if we’re inefficient at uniformly activating motor units and muscle fibers in training, EMS can stimulate an equal number of motor units on each limb relative to the amount of impulse being subjected to the area. Where I think this applies is probably (and remember, this is my opinion) through potentiation rather than tissue adaptation.

It is possible that the impulses can stress the local system enough to form their own adaptations, but I personally am not convinced that would be the case. My assumption, and take it for what it’s worth, is that intense uniform impulses probably make it more efficient at voluntarily activating those fibers in my own movements later on in my next training session. I personally only tested EMS in conjunction with training, not as a replacement for it, so it’s hard to say whether the EMS itself caused its own training adaptations.

As much as I feel like my training is generally guided by sound research, the contradictions and confusion with EMS make me want to continue to experiment on my own, as well. I feel that the downside has so far been minimal (or none), but the upside could be significant. I’ve already tested EMS with maximal strength and will continue to test it in more explosive ways, either with a jump test or sprint test.

If you’ve had success, or otherwise, with EMS, please share your stories and get some information out there! I’d love to hear about your experiences and keep pushing the boundaries of performance.

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

 

Hi, I’m Ben Prentiss and welcome to PHP. I’ve just moved into this new facility after 17 years, 8,000 square feet of the world’s latest and greatest equipment. The latest and greatest piece that I’ve had for a year now, is the 1080 Quantum.

I’d say it’s an all encompassing, robotic game changer. That’s basically what I say because when people look at it they think it’s a Smith machine or it’s just a pulley, ’cause you really can’t tell when you look at it what it’s doing. But for me it really has been worth the price in terms of the amount we’ve used it and helped us do things that you cannot do. You can’t do. I mean that’s the number one thing is that there’s nothing out there that can do what the Quantum can do and that’s really it. I mean to overload, to use vibration, to use isokinetic, to boost eccentric, to go full speed, to be able to have the ability to throw or jump, there’s nothing there.

So it really gives the strength coach all of the tools in his toolbox, in one shot. Which trainers always say, “It’s great to have tools in your toolbox.” Well here’s one piece of equipment that basically gives you every variable possible.

One of the things that I like it for, that it’s not famous for is using in our structural phase, where we’re just using small muscles and people wouldn’t think of it as a huge selling point. But actually, when you ask any of my athletes, one of the things they hate the most, which means it’s one of the most effective is doing abductor/adductor, dorsiflexion, anterior tibialis, and rotator cuff, and trap three work. Is unbelievable for the effect. That we can use a two to one eccentric to concentric ratio and move at different speeds has really been effective for us.

Not only is the data important to show but the aspect of having each player sort of compete against each other and look at how much force they can produce, how much newtons they can produce, or how fast they can move the bar. All three of those things are hugely important in the game but also it’s important for the athletes to get better in season, which is a very difficult or typically a maintaining thing. Well now we’ve actually seen athletes through isokinetic get stronger in season.

So when I go back to dynamics with bands or dynamic squat with bands, or those kind of lifts. We’ve actually seen them produce more force after a phase in the 1080. So with so much success and I’ve had the 1080 for almost two years, two off seasons.

I’ve decided to get the 1080 Sprint. So it basically gives me the whole kitchen. I’m now able to do vertical and horizontal production and for me the most valuable tool would be to bring the 1080 Sprint on the ice. So I’ll be looking forward to giving a lot of info on that this coming off season

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

Sprinters in the north are no match for sprinters in the southern states. Why does Florida produce twice as many elite sprinters as Illinois? I think this speed differential has to do with sunshine and dopamine.

Dopamine is good stuff. With healthy dopamine levels, people are alert, happy, and feel an excited buzzing sensation of anticipation. I’ve had that excited buzzing sensation since listening to a Strength Power Speed podcast where Derek Hanson interviewed Pat Davidson. When I finished the 69-minute podcast, I tweeted what I had learned.

What Is Dopamine?

Dopamine is a neurotransmitter identified in the human brain in 1957. I remember my 7th grade science teacher explaining how neurons communicate. We were taught “Andy Axon sends a pass to Denny Dendrite.” The figurative football is a neurotransmitter. The space between the neurons is a synapse.

High dopamine levels provide many benefits to a sprinter including confidence, resistance to fatigue, and the ability to move fast.

High dopamine levels provide confidence, resistance to fatigue, and the ability to move fast. Share on X

In the podcast interview, Pat Davidson said, “Excessive dopamine can make you a lunatic; you can be crazy and psychotic if your dopamine levels are too high. I don’t know if that’s the worst thing in the world for athletes. Having an unrealistic belief in the supernatural and feeling as though they have powers that are excessive; that’s not the worst thing if I want a highly competitive person who thinks they can dominate and do things no one has ever done before. So, I might want excessively high dopamine levels. I don’t think I have a problem with that.”

Dopamine declines naturally from the age of 20 until the age of 80. I remember my excessive dopamine days very well. I was a confident risk-taker, feeling the invincibility of youth. As Pat Davidson said, “I don’t know if that’s so bad.” At the age of 58, I am realistic, well aware of my mortality, and I avoid risk. I thought it was maturity, but maybe it’s the dopamine.

Accomplishments make people feel good. Dopamine levels increase when we are rewarded. We like the way we feel so we seek more rewards. Yes, winning increases dopamine and then fuels the urge to win again. Success breeds success.

Winning increases dopamine and then fuels the urge to win again. Share on X

In Pat Davidson’s article for SimpliFaster, Central Fatigue, and the Role of Neurotransmitters on Reduced Work Output, he cited a 2008 study stating, “Enhanced dopamine levels will provide an increase in psychological motivation to work harder in a more stressful environment.”
Dopamine does more than affect your psyche. With increased dopamine, we experience an increased excitatory effect on our motor neurons and an accelerated velocity of limb movement. Not the worst thing in the world for sprinters.

How Do You Increase Dopamine Levels?

Actions

• Sleep, Sleep, Sleep. Nothing you do will improve dopamine levels more than sleep.
• Sunshine. Minimum exposure to sunlight should be 30-60 minutes, but the more, the better. Sunlight also increases the skin’s production of vitamin D, boosts testosterone levels, and improves the ability to sleep. We evolved for 35 thousand years living in the natural light. Too many people now spend their lives in artificial light.
• Meditation
• Massage
• Avoid junk food, especially sugar.
• Avoid excessive caffeine, including energy drinks.
• Limit exposure to blue light (bright screens including cell phones, computers, and televisions).
• Limit fluorescent light (go outside!).
• Avoid anything that provides instant gratification without effort or discipline. Instant gratification causes an initial spike in dopamine followed by a crash. Addictive substances like cocaine, nicotine, and alcohol spike and crash dopamine levels. Even behavioral addictions like gambling and pornography spike dopamine levels for the short term but have a negative long-term effect.

Nutrients

• Vitamin D
• Magnesium
• L-Tyrosine from natural foods including nuts, poultry, and fatty fish containing omega-3 oils (L-Tyrosine is the precursor of dopamine)
• L-Tyrosine supplements, 800-1,500 mg daily
• Vitamin B-6 (helps conversion of L-Tyrosine to dopamine)
• L-Phenylalanine supplements, 1000-1,500 mg daily (L-Phenylalanine is the precursor to L-Tyrosine)
• Fish oil or krill oil (omega-3 fatty acids) supplements

Medications

• Banned performance enhancing drugs like Adderall and Provigil (Modafinil); I once read about an athlete who broke a national record in practice while taking Modafinil.
  If nothing else, remember that sleep and sunshine are critical to maximize dopamine levels.

Do Sprinters Thrive in Sunshine?

Which states are best in high school track and field? The sunshine states. High schools in California, Texas, Florida, and Georgia dominate the national track and field rankings. Northern states like Illinois, New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio are the second class citizens of the track and field world.

When northern coaches are asked why the sunshine states are so successful in track, their answers seldom mention sunshine. Their reasons include the following:

• Better weather allows for more effective training.
• California, Texas, Florida, and Georgia have more African-American athletes.
• California, Texas, Florida, and Georgia have better facilities.

There’s no question that practices are better under sunny blue skies, but many northern schools have indoor facilities. My high school has a 178-meter indoor track (nine laps to a mile). We have six lanes on the straightaway and four lanes around the track. We can host indoor meets, and our official track season is 19 weeks long.

There’s no argument, good weather is advantageous for training, but that’s assuming training is the key to elite performance. Egocentric coaches think dominant athletes achieve greatness from hard work and intelligent training. Enlightened coaches understand training is only a piece of the puzzle, and possibly a small piece. Training is overrated—important but overrated.

Is track more successful in states with higher African-American populations? At first glance, maybe. Based on the 2010 census, 11.4 million African Americans lived in the four biggest sunshine states (California, Texas, Florida, and Georgia). The four biggest northern states (Illinois, New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio) had 7.8 million. However, the percentage of African Americans living in the northern states (14%) was greater than the percentage in the sunshine states (12%).

Equal numbers of African Americans (3.1 million) lived in both New York and Georgia in 2010. Based on 2016 track and field performances, Georgia dominates New York, especially in the speed events. What makes Georgia so much faster than New York?

There are no stats on track facilities from state to state. My impression is that Illinois track facilities are better than track facilities in Florida. I have no empirical proof to back up my opinion, but I’m sticking to it.

Speed, Endurance, and Strength

In my research, I went to Athletic.Net, a site ranks every athlete’s best performance from every state. I researched one sprint event (100 meters), one endurance event (1,600 meters), and one strength event (shot put).

Sprint Event

In the 100 meters, I found what I expected. The sunshine states dominated the northern states, producing nearly five times the number of sub 10.80 sprinters.

In the 100 meters, the sunshine states dominated the northern states. Share on X

The sunshine states had 771 boys running sub 11.00. In contrast, the cloudy states had only 195. The numbers running sub 10.80 were 294 to 60. The four sunshine states have a combined population of 95.6 million compared to only 56.8 million in the four northern states. The population advantage of 68% does not explain the 395% superiority in sub 11.00 sprinters and 490% superiority in sub 10.80 sprinters.

Endurance Event

After finding what I expected to find in the sprint event, I was surprised by what I found in the 1,600-meter endurance event. The sunshine states, per capita, are no different than the cold, cloudy, rainy north, where distance runners do months of training in the ice and snow. The sunshine states had 170 sub-4:20 milers, the northern states a respectable 103. The 65% more sub-4:20 milers reflect the 68% population advantage.

What? Is good weather training only important to the speed events? Is sunshine more important to sprinters than milers?

Strength Event

So what about the shot put? California, Florida, Texas, and Georgia had 87 shot putters who achieved marks over 55’0” while the north had 76. This 14% advantage is negated by the 68% population advantage.

Let’s recap.

• Track athletes in the sunshine states are fast, really fast. Sprinters in the north are no match for sprinters in California, Florida, Texas, and Georgia.
• Endurance runners are essentially equal in good weather and bad weather.
• Shot putters training in cold-weather states are as good, if not better than, shot putters who throw in the sunshine.

How can Florida produce twice as many elite sprinters as Illinois, while Illinois produces twice as many elite distance runners and throwers? Track and field is considered superior in Texas, yet their only advantage is in the speed events. How can California have seven times more people than snow-covered Wisconsin but only produce twice as many elite shot putters?

I believe the answer is sunshine and dopamine.

Marcellus Moore

I have a sprinter on my track team named Marcellus Moore. Marcellus finished the indoor season ranked IL #1 in the 60 meters and the 200 meters, running 6.86 and 22.13 respectively. These numbers are incredible considering Marcellus is only a freshman who won’t turn 15 until June 30th. When I think of age 14, I think of an eighth grader.

Our school has spring break between the indoor and outdoor track seasons. This year, our spring break lasted 12 days. We usually give sprinters the entire week off since track season is 19 weeks long. Because the break was longer than usual, we practiced on days 10, 11, and 12. Our practices were low-volume and totally alactic. Before the break, I warned Marcellus not to spend his spring vacation doing massive workouts. I explained that he needed rest, recovery, and growth—not hard work.

With a big smile, Marcellus replied, “Don’t worry coach, my family is going on a seven-day cruise.” Marcellus returned from his cruise, practiced three times, and then traveled four hours to the first outdoor track meet of his high school career.

He won both sprints and broke both of Plainfield North’s sprint records, shocking the track and field world with times of 10.55 and 21.28 in the 100 and 200, respectively. Good times for a kid who could be an eighth grader.

Was it the rest, recovery, and growth that produced these elite times?

Was it the low-volume, high-intensity training at our three practices?

Or was it the Caribbean sunshine?

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

Disclaimer: I love the squat and I love deep squats. I come from a powerlifting background and feel a deep sense of pride that I would miss squats rather than cut them high. This was my sport, and I took great pride in my sport. Some say that I hate deep squats, but that isn’t it at all.

I just happen to think that things that are great for one sport aren’t great for all. I’ve gone on record many times as saying that we don’t need perfect technique on Olympic lifts. Reasonable is good enough and, in fact, I mostly just did pulls with my athletes. Likewise, do we need to have a powerlifting standard for squats? Food for thought as we go ahead. Many will disagree, and that’s OK, but I feel that we need to get this information out there now rather than later.

Introduction

If we remember back to the classical periodization models, we see that they were listed out in very general terms. There was Volume, Intensity, and Technique, and that was all. When looking at the Volume and Intensity lines, I think that current strength and conditioning practices are fantastic. Most coaches start with a higher volume and lower intensity (percentage of 1RM) in the off-season; during the pre-season, they decrease volume and increase intensity (percentage of 1RM); and then during the competitive season, they keep both volume and intensity (percentage of 1RM) to maintenance of gained levels.

However, I think there are some areas that we can improve or we have possibly misinterpreted. It is not uncommon for something to be lost in translation. For instance, we have colloquialisms in our language, and they don’t translate into other languages very well, as I found out in China. We had our nomenclature and applied the Soviet nomenclature to it. The Soviet literature had two phases: GPP and SPP. Intensity, from talking to others who speak and translate from the Russian language to English, was more about the quality of the movements and how specific they were. While percent of 1RM absolutely plays a part in it, it’s less important than the exercise.

Was technique referring to sport skill only, or did it also relate to transfer of training for the weight room? For example, in some of Vherkoshansky’s work¹, he changed from squat to squat jump or some other exercise, and didn’t maintain the squat from block to block. He went from a general exercise to what he felt was a more specific exercise for his athletes. They progressed their types of jumps from extensive long coupling to intensive short coupling over time. They didn’t just change the type of movement, but changed the movements themselves. For instance, they went from steadier, coordinated bodyweight squat and tuck jumps to drop jumps and bounds over the course of the training cycle.

History Lesson: How to Apply the Work of Matveyev and Bondarchuk

Before continuing, I think it wise to note that at no point are any of the three variables ever at zero in Matveyev’s chart². What this indicates, at least to me, is that there is a small portion of everything in at all times, but the emphasis is switched. This was confirmed to me by Doc Yessis and Anatoliy Bondarchuk about the typical Soviet programming, and the proportion they gave was that there is typically an 80/20 split during the GPP phase of 80% general exercises and 20% specific exercises. This made a gradual shift to the SPP phase, which ended up being 80% specific exercises and 20% general exercises.

One area that we could do better on is the alternation of exercises through the course of the year to elicit greater gains. A recent study by Rhea et al.³ showed that the ¼ and ½ squats had better transference to the sprints and jumps than the full squat. There are two groups that read this article: The first group has cut out full squatting altogether and only does ¼ and ½ squats to have greater transfer; and the other group calls it heresy, wants Matt Rhea, Joe Kenn, and the other authors all burned at the stake, and refuses to think for a second that the almighty ass-to-grass squat may not be the best thing.

How the Standard of Squatting Was Determined

An interesting side note, and a question no one ever seems to ask, is: How did the crease of the hip below the knee/top of thigh become the standard of squatting? I have unique access to information such as this, as I often lift in Bill Clark’s gym. Bill Clark is the last remaining member of the three-person committee that started “powerlifting” as an offshoot of Olympic lifting, and I talk about this in a section with him in my book, “Powerlifting”⁴. I asked him this question and I’m paraphrasing his answer. (If you’ve ever spoken with Bill, a two-second question can garner a two-hour answer.) “Well, we needed to have criteria for what made a good lift. For deadlift, it was easy. You stand up with it. For bench press, it was easier than the squat. You go down, touch your chest, and come back up. For the squat, it was a bit more abstract so we chose what seemed to make the most sense—the crease of the hip and the knee. If you went below that, it was a good squat because you went low enough. If you didn’t, it wasn’t.”

Ole Clark, as he is affectionately known around here in mid-Missouri, is a stickler for squat depth, as well he should be. However, has our love affair with squat depth as the crease of the hip below the knee, which came about as a compromise between three people for a rule, become the reason for the ass-to-grass squat? I’m not completely sure, but I started in S&C from a powerlifting background, and I know many of us in S&C have. This is where my viewpoint on the squat came into play, and I made everyone squat to depth because that was the standard.

My Evolution in Strength and Power Training

Before moving forward, I want to point out my own fallacy. My athletic background is as a powerlifter. I still am addicted to strength and heavy loads even though my body is broken down. So please don’t take this as a “he’s an anti-strength guy and all single joint specificity guy blah blah blah, yada yada yada…” Take this as a “been there, done that, bought the T-shirt,” guy who is trying to help others learn from his mistakes.

When I started out in this field, I looked at everything from the viewpoint of the squat, bench press, and deadlift. Admittedly, I tend to track back to that every now and then (full squat and deadlift 1RM), but I looked for ways to make the squat more effective for longer term periods, and really expanded into velocity-based training from that. We would squat for strength and for strength-speed. When that was done, we saw greater power and speed gains over the longer time period of the course of their career, but there was a limit.

Managing Complex Training Variables

Where Jacobson et al.⁵, and Miller et al.⁶, found the gains of squat transfer-to-power extend for one year, we had them extend for three years⁷, with the second and third not being anywhere near as steep as the first. This may be partially explained by the use of velocity on the squat and the use of accommodating resistance (chain, in our case) during training⁸. The gains did stop, though, before the fourth year, and on average we did not see any improvements at all. What would have happened if we would have periodized the exercises, rather than the velocity/intensity? I’m not sure. Would moving away from the squat for a while have had a beneficial effect on the athlete? Possibly, but I’m not sure. What I do know is that altering the squat from strength had a beneficial effect.

For a moment, let’s go with an open mind and look to apply the findings of Rhea’s study³ to the original Matveyev model. If we remember that the purpose of the GPP phase was to restore and increase general qualities such as general strength, mobility, and work capacity, we see that the full squat absolutely checks those off the list. As we gain in strength, mobility, and work capacity, and hopefully power, as a result of this, we are fulfilling the purpose of GPP, and thus, this is the appropriate time to utilize the squat. If we then think of the SPP phase as using specific exercises, we can utilize the ¼ and ½ squats most appropriately at this time. The study showed that trained athletes had the greatest transfer to the sprints and jumps, which fulfills the requirements for SPP.

Now, some people may question about the transfer of the ¼ and ½ squat to the jumps and sprints, and that’s fine. Let’s look at some pictures of an elite level sprinter and go into more detail.

If we examine Image 2, let’s look specifically at his drive leg right now. Some folks on Twitter looked at an image similar to this one and said, “See how high his leg is? That looks like a full squat to me.” While I will agree on the hip and knee flexion angles being representative to the squat, how did he get there? Did he get there by lowering his center of mass until he got to this position? No. He went through a violently rapid hip flexion and drove the knee forward to get into that position. Try doing that on a squat—let’s see what happens if you drive one or both knees to your chest and in front of you from the beginning of a squat.

My point is that, if the squat is done in this manner, the individual will either a) dump the bar or b) land on his tailbone. It’s not simply the picture of what someone achieves, but how the person got there is extremely important as well. The hip extensors working eccentrically or the hip flexors working concentrically to achieve hip flexion are two very different activities.

Some will say it’s about the drive from the thigh moving downward to the ground. While there is acceleration downward from the thigh from the hip, it’s unimpeded until the foot makes contact with the ground. At the point when the foot meets external resistance (the ground), the squat strength takes over. Before the increased force production due to ground contact, the majority of force production comes from the sarcoplasmic reticulum. The sarcoplasmic reticulum’s release and re-absorption of calcium enables the actin to be released for the myosin to grab a hold and pull the actin towards it. This allows for the rapid contraction utilizing the sliding filament theory of muscle contraction.

If we examine Image 3, we’re in the stance phase on the right leg, with the left leg going into the drive phase during the accelerative portion of the sprint. As a side note, Dr. Michael Yessis would tell you this is an example of great technique⁹. If at this point in the sprint you see two calves and one thigh, they’re doing it right. If we examine the right leg during this phase, we can see that the right leg is slightly bent during this portion of the sprint. This is going to be one of the deepest portions of the sprint outside of coming out of the blocks that the knee will bend. How low is his squat? I’d say it’s probably around a ¼ squat. During the sprint, there is no full squat.

Breaking Barriers in Exercise or Training Bias

I think that we have allowed ourselves—myself included—to become married to certain exercises; to say that this exercise is the foundation of our program and we should never move away from that. This reminds me of the railroad industry. They have since fallen on hard times, but at one point in our great country, they were the king. They felt that their job was to put railroad tracks down and put trains on them, and move people and products across the country. When the automobile came along, it made the railroad obsolete because people could go anywhere they wanted on the highway system and were not constrained to their routes and locations. The railroad then fell to a point that, while it is still a great industry, the giants of yesteryear no longer exist.

If we stop favoring certain individual exercises, we may improve the results we get with athletes. Share on X

If we say our job is the squat, the hang power clean, and the bench press, and that is what we will do come hell or high water, is that the best thing for our athletes? If it has worked for decades for building athletes (one to two years at a time), it should be in. Well, it hasn’t worked. When it has been done in Division 1 athletes^5,6, the research is clear.

If we re-examine ourselves and cut our ties with individual exercises, we may be able to enhance the results we get with our athletes. If we change our viewpoint on this and look in terms of what is most specific for a certain sport/event/position within a sport, and apply this at the appropriate time, then we can look to cause the greatest transfer. We must remember that in no sport is there a barbell involved, other than powerlifting, strongman, odd lifting, or Olympic lifting. Even for those, odd lifting and strongman often don’t use barbells. Because of this, the training choice should be based on transfer of training rather than the increase in a 1RM. This does require a paradigm shift, but one that I think is quite beneficial. We remember from Zatsiorsky¹⁰ that transfer of training can be determined by the following equation:

Transfer of training = Result in event/result in trained exercise

At this point someone will say, “I have a team sport, so that’s not possible. I’m going to continue what I’m doing.” While it’s true that this is more difficult in team sport, we can’t say that the performance in the weight room was related to the sport. There are too many confounding variables. We can’t account for the other team, the interactions between team members, the play calling by the coach or individual on the court, or even the environmental factors like the crowd. We do know that we have certain metrics that are predictive of abilities for sports, which are often called Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). For instance, jumping has been shown to be predictive of excellence in volleyball and basketball. For football, it’s been found that the standing long jump is a great predictor when combined with sprint and agility tests. In these cases, when we look at the result in the KPI and divide that by the result in the trained exercise, we can get a great example of where we stand.

If we look at the work by the great Soviet hammer coach and medalist, Anatoliy Bondarchuk, we see that every time they went through the adaptation process, he changed every single exercise. He did not leave one exercise in because it was his anchor. (In this example, I refer to the GPP, SPP, and SDE means. He would keep the throws in, but even then, it might be competition weight, or slightly heavier or slightly lighter)¹¹. Every cycle was entirely new and stay entirely the same until they went through the adaptation process, and then everything changed again¹². He would track and know what exercises had the greatest transfer for the throwing event, and even the athlete. When it was time for a key competition, he would put in the exercises that had the greatest transfer to the event/athlete.

If we re-examine our terminology and look intently at the term “quality,” it may start to help make sense of some things. It allows us to not view things in terms of 1RM, but in terms of how closely it ties into the sport, and how close it transfers. It may not replicate a portion of the sport, but that’s OK. It’s all about the transfer to the sport itself.

So, let’s look at the squat. Once we enter the SPP or pre-season phase, if we alter the back squat to a ¼ squat for a block of training and then a ½ squat for a block of training, we are giving two different stimuli that have a higher transference to the sport. Once we go through those, we may switch back to the ¼ squat and alter it with either an accommodating resistance or a change in bars. We may possibly even change to a lower box step-up for something else that allows the body to re-stabilize and go back through again.

Here is an example of what this may look like:

Many people tend to argue against periodization and say that it’s dead. Then they’ll talk about how they alter from more general to more specific exercises over the course of the year as they move into their season. Having a plan and changing to more specific from more general is periodization. What we must remember is that periodization doesn’t mean doing x sets times y reps at z intensity; it is a plan of what will be done and when for a period of time. Interestingly, this means that many of those who argue against periodization are actually arguing against one form of programming. This is great: We all agree that there needs to be planning, but we argue about what the best plan is.

This is only an example of one exercise. Let’s say, for instance, that over the course of the year we find that the mid-thigh power clean has the greatest transference to the sport we happen to be playing. Is that saying that we don’t ever do the other variations? No. Absolutely not. What it says is that, during the SPP phase, the mid-thigh power clean is our go-to, especially for when we are moving in to what may be the championship. There will be many exercises that have better transfer than others, just do them at the appropriate time.

You may start thinking that all training should be based upon specificity. In certain models that would be fine. In Anatoliy’s models of periodization, everything is in all of the time—meaning that GPP, SPP, SDE, and the competitive exercise are in at all times. You’ll notice that it’s not SPP only, but that GPP is also included at all times. For more traditional models, the GPP phase needs to be there. This will help to prevent injury, and by increasing the strength and size of the GPP overall (strength, mobility, robustness), you seem to increase the SPP’s receptivity for adaptation.¹

Some people will read a study like this and think that it’s telling us that all we need to do is SPP, so that’s all we are doing year-round. This is a mistake with the reader’s interpretation of what the authors are saying. (I know because I asked them.) The study shows that there are squats that are general and there are squats that are more specific. Both types of training (GPP and SPP) are needed, regardless of the periodization model you utilize. Even Bondarchuk, who is famous for specificity, included GPP in his program year-round. (SPP and even more specific types of training, such as the competitive exercise and Special Developmental Exercises, were included).

Why does the GPP phase need to be there if it doesn’t have as great of a transfer then? First, while it wasn’t as great, the authors clearly stated better transfer; they didn’t state that the squat didn’t transfer at all. Second, the phase does have a great amount to do with mobility, injury prevention, and base strength. These are all quite important qualities. The more mobile the athlete is and greater their base strength is, the greater they can push the SPP and, thus, achieve higher transfer.

There has to be balance, and when training is out of balance, so are the results. Share on X

One thing that I think we constantly do wrong is that we tend to overcorrect. As VBT has increased in popularity, people have started doing everything with it. As functional training came into vogue, every exercise was done on a Bosu, Airex, or Swiss ball. As power factor training came into vogue, every exercise was done as a partial. Balance is required for training—if we look back at the physiological aspect, we see that we can have adaptations to the Series Elastic Component (SEC) in the following ways¹³:

• To the muscle cell in terms of myofibril adaptations by increasing heavy chain myosin size (and the ability to increase its strength of holding onto the actin or resisting breaking apart from it); and
• Increases in the efficiency of the sarcoplasmic reticulum’s ability to absorb and release calcium, which allows the actin and myosin to interact with the troponin unlocking the receptor site for the tropomyosin to move and the actin to be grabbed.

Then two neural means are:

• Henneman’s size principle, where high-threshold motor units are preferentially recruited; and
• Rate coding, which deals with the speed at which the inter and intramuscular coordination aids in muscle contraction velocity.

There has to be balance, and when training is out of balance, so are the results.

One question that you may be asking right now is: “Where do I get more specific exercises?” I’d like to point you in the direction of two authors. The first is Anatoliy Bondarchuk, whose books, “Transfer of Training in Sports” and “Transfer of Training in Sports, Volume 2” had a great number of exercise charts showing how athletes responded to various exercises in the throws. For an interesting read, also check out his critique of the Soviet methods to see his views on their periodization models. The other is the work of Dr. Michael Yessis, who developed special exercises for the sprints and jumps. (Interestingly, he did push the ¼ and ½ squats in favor of the back squat for adaptation to the sprints and jumps, more than 30 years ago.) His books, “Build a Better Athlete” and “Biomechanics and Kinesiology of Exercise,” both contain a great number of special exercises with descriptions, pictures and their applications.

These two men, as authors and practitioners, have had a profound effect on the way I view training athletes. Specialized exercises are any exercises that elicit a greater transfer to the sport. There will be a large amount of carryover for exercises among sports, but there are also some sports that have specific exercises that are different.

Specialized exercises are any exercises that elicit a greater transfer to the sport. Share on X

In conclusion, there needs to be a great amount of balance in a program. We must realize that there are multiple ways to produce force, and ensure that all of these are being trained. We must realize that, when you focus on only one thing, something else will fall off. If we only do the general and negate the specific, we tend to not have as high end results. If we only do the specific and negate the general, we tend to get injured and not have as high results because there is no platform upon which to stand (GPP).

Again, while the ¼ and ½ squats do have the greatest transfer, the time to put them in is during the SPP phase of training (pre-season), as this will have the biggest impact on sprinting and jumping performance. The full squat should be done during the GPP phase of training (off-season), as this will have the biggest impact on mobility and general strength.

Not one of the variants is “better” than the other for the body. Rather, there are just times when it is better to do one of the variants over the others. All are needed; the question is when and where to put them for the greatest effect on the sport.

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. Verkhoshansky V and Verkhoshansky N. Special Strength Training: Manual for coaches. Rome, Italy: Verkhoshansky.com, 2011.
2. National Strength & Conditioning Association. Essentials of Strength Training and Conditioning. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2000.
3. Rhea MR, Kenn JG, Peterson MD, Massey D, Simão R, Marin PJ, Favero M, Cardozo, D and Krein, D. Joint-Angle Specific Strength Adaptations Influence Improvements in Power in Highly Trained Athletes. Human Movement 17: 43-49, 2016.
4. Mann B and Austin D. Powerlifting: The complete guide to technique, training and competition. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 2012.
5. Jacobson BH, Conchola EG, Glass RG, and Thompson BJ. Longitudinal Morphological and Performance Profiles for American, NCAA Division I Football Players. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 27: 2347-2354. 2310.1519/JSC.2340b2013e31827fcc31827d, 2013
6. Miller TA, White ED, Kinley KA, Congleton JJ, and Clark MJ. The effects of training history, player position, and body composition on exercise performance in collegiate football players. Journal of strength and conditioning research/National Strength & Conditioning Association 16: 44-49, 2002.
7. Mann JB, Sayers, Stephen P, Cutchlow, Rohrk, Mayhew, Jerry. Longitudinal effect of traditional and velocity-based training on vertical jump power in college football players. Presented at NSCA National Conference, New Orleans, LA, 2016.
8. Rhea MR, Kenn JG, and Dermody BM. Alterations in Speed of Squat Movement and the use of Accommodated Resistance Among College Athletes Training for Power. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 23: 2645-2650. 2610.1519/JSC.2640b2013e3181b2643e2641b2646, 2009.
9. Yessis M, PhD. Build a Better Athlete. Terre Haute, IN: Equilibrium Books, A Division of Wish Publishing, 2006.
10. Zatsiorsky VM. Science and Practice of Strength Training. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 1995.
11. Bondarchuk AP. Ypsilanti, MI: Ultimate Athlete Concepts, 2007.
12. Bondarchuk AP. Champion School: A Model for Developing Elite Athletes. Ypsilanti, MI: Ultimate Athlete Concepts, 2015.
13. Haff GG and Triplett NT. Essentials of Strength Training and Conditioning 4th Edition. Human Kinetics, 2015.