Blog

Speed development tools, ranging from traditional stopwatches to timing gates to GPS devices, have evolved and proliferated over time. Recently, the next evolution of toolsets has emerged—phone-based 2D kinematics powered by computer vision. These tools initially sprang up in areas such as baseball and golf (swing and throwing analysis) but are now making their way into the speed ecosystem to help provide kinematic analysis.

The next evolution of toolsets has emerged—phone-based 2D kinematics powered by computer vision—making their way into the speed ecosystem to help provide kinematic analysis, says @hi_c88. Share on X

Today, if a coach is interested in the underpinnings of how their athlete generates their speed or time, there are a few options. The first and most timeless option is the simple combination of video and a coach’s eye/intuition. While this approach is enduring for a reason, it relies on years of experience and does not generate objective data.

The second option is for a coach to invest significant time and money in a multi-camera 3D-markered or markerless solution and find people/companies to help process that data. While this option does provide the highest quality of data (it is essentially “lab-grade”), the cost for equipment alone can be more than $50,000, and the barriers to processing that data are high—requiring at least one person with a graduate-level degree in biomechanics and a person with significant computer programming experience. Additionally, the setup time and portability of this type of system are quite cumbersome, limiting its practicality.

The third option, and probably the most prevalent for those trying to generate objective data, is to use “enhanced video” capture tools like Kinovea or Dartfish. These tools allow coaches to capture video and generate data by manually tagging events throughout the video, providing the building blocks to calculate the desired metrics. The downside of this option is that it’s a manual, drudgery-filled process—meaning that for most coaches, it truly can’t be scaled for use with an entire population, rendering it more of a “one-off” type of activity than something that can be routinely incorporated into a practice, like timing gates or GPS devices can.

With the recent advancement of computer vision, there is now a fourth option for coaches that provides its own set of advantages and disadvantages—single-camera 2D kinematics tools. This past September, I helped build and launch one of the first of these tools: BreakAway Speed, an iPhone-based, 2D, markerless biomechanics capture system. The general setup concept is table-stakes among the various solutions—videos of athletes are captured at 240 fps to ensure the highest fidelity, and distances are calibrated using either cones or football field lines. Users can perform multiple types of tests—flys, accelerations, or changes of direction—and receive their results back in just a few minutes.

There are multiple benefits to incorporating this type of solution into your coaching toolkit (or paired with existing technology, i.e., timing gates) that I want to share here, chief among them being:

1. Automated kinematic analysis.
2. Ease of data-sharing with athletes.
3. Ease of use with a software solution.

Automated Kinematic Analysis

As discussed, for most coaches, kinematic analysis has simply not been accessible due to significant barriers to entry—namely, the expensive financial costs of hardware or untenable time investment needed to get data at scale. Coaches can invest in expensive 3D capture systems such as Vicon, Qualisys, and Theia, which provide gold-standard data but are typically impractical cost-wise—not to mention they present significant constraints operationally. I’ve used fantastic software like Kinovea to create kinematic data manually; however, from experience, doing that at any level of scale becomes a significant time investment.

Kinematic analysis has not been accessible due to pricy hardware costs or untenable time needed to get data at scale. A simpler choice is beginning to appear, led by products like BreakAway Speed. Share on X

A new third choice is beginning to appear—headlined by products like VueMotion, Ochy, and my product, BreakAway Speed. These products offer a simpler version of the expensive 3D setup mentioned above.

With one camera view, AI tracks each point on the body (heel, toe, knee, elbow, etc.) for each video frame. These points are then turned into sprint-specific kinematic metrics (like stride length) using biomechanical calculations. While this single-camera setup will never be as accurate as eight-camera marker-based pose detection, proponents of these solutions feel that the slight decrease in kinematic accuracy is outweighed by the dramatic decrease (more than 100x less) in price and accessibility. Detractors of these solutions may argue differently.

However, coaches now have access to an entirely new set of ways to quantify how their coaching is impacting a runner. By leveraging this new, objective information, they can optimize sprint techniques and monitor the effectiveness of coaching interventions. Coaches can receive metrics they currently get from timing gates/GPS devices (things like max speed and time), along with new metrics such as stride length, contact time, thigh angle separation, and more.

We’ve even seen customers utilize both technologies simultaneously; using timing gates for that truly instant feedback (<1 second) in conjunction with BreakAway Speed allows for instantaneous feedback in addition to metrics explaining how that time occurred just a few minutes later. Because tools like BreakAway Speed cannot capture a sprint distance greater than 20 yards due to AI limitations, users can still truly capture an entire 40-yard dash with timing gates while setting up a tool like BreakAway Speed to only maybe capture the 20- to 30-yard split or the 0–10 start, giving a more detailed window into how that 40-yard dash time occurred.

Additionally, asymmetry metrics are included to better help with return to play and rehab scenarios. These metrics generally take a few minutes to generate, so while they don’t have the immediacy you would get from a timing gate solution, they are typically processed quickly enough to still allow for on-field feedback.

Lastly, because these solutions are video-based, coaches can blend what they see with their eye from video analysis with the objective data generated by the AI, fusing the time-honored tradition of video review with more novel, data-driven approaches.

Facilitating Data Delivery to Athletes and Education

A significant benefit of these types of solutions is that a coach only needs their phone to record and receive data. This makes life easier during the “data capture” part of a coach’s workflow. Another benefit is that, by being phone-based, the distribution of this data to their athletes can also be enormously simplified. With these solutions, coaches can simply assign videos to their athletes on the application and enter their phone numbers to have their data automatically delivered to the athlete.

When data is processed, it is then delivered to the coach and the athlete simultaneously! Athletes receive all their data and a social-media-friendly video to show off how fast they ran.

Video 1. Example of BreakAway clip sent to an athlete.

With this type of automated coach-to-athlete connection, data delivery doesn’t just go from coach to athlete but also from athlete to coach, enabling scenarios for remote coaching or digital evaluations to be much more efficient. Because this data is rather complex for anyone to digest fully, these tools can incorporate simple AI-powered explanations of their data to better help athletes (and coaches) with the education process on how to apply this data.

Data delivery doesn’t just go from coach to athlete but also from athlete to coach, enabling scenarios for remote coaching or digital evaluations to be much more efficient, says @hi_c88. Share on X

Software, Not Hardware

One challenge with solutions such as GPS devices and even timing gates is the simple fact that they are hardware. Especially with GPS devices, they require non-trivial operational work such as tagging, charging, setting up, and distributing devices, in addition to dealing with vests. To be clear, these tools certainly have their place, drive significant value, and can be used in conjunction with 2D kinematic tools.

The simplicity of an iPhone-based app enables easy supplementation of these tools—athletes can be assessed while wearing a GPS device or by using Freelap cones as the markers. Having multiple layers of applied data can then give a more holistic evaluation.

Lastly, because these tools only require your existing iPhone or iPad, they can be offered at a more affordable price, comparable to having a Netflix subscription rather than purchasing an appliance.

While still early, automated 2D kinematic analysis tools for fundamental athleticism are here and ready for utilization by coaches. As AI and computer vision continue to improve, these tools will only get more accurate, improving the quality of data generated and steadily closing the gap between single-camera and multi-camera solutions.

Additionally, as the technology and businesses based on this technology evolve, the scope of movements that can be analyzed will also increase. Currently, most solutions focus on linear running, but in the near future, users will be able to analyze hurdle jumps, triple jumps, broad jumps, and vertical/drop jumps, just to name a few. The template is built—and as it progresses, it will go both deeper (increased accuracy) and wider (more movement types).

Today, though, by unlocking kinematic analysis, facilitating data sharing, and being an easy-to-deploy/purchase software, a tool like this can drive significant value for coaches looking to make their first investment or add on to their existing technology stack.

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

We’ve entered an era in sports performance where the concept that speed is trainable is not only accepted, but often heavily promoted. The thought process has transitioned from “you’re either fast or you’re not” and “speed can’t be taught” to an entire speed-based industry in and of itself. This is not a hot take, as I’ve personally benefited from a coaching background that is heavily focused on speed training, which I now consider one of my competitive edges. But that’s not the purpose of writing this article; the purpose is to highlight how to do it at a high level.

However, speed training is still administered through the same method as all other training: coaching. Because of this, the challenges lie in the same age-old problems experienced in any coaching scenario: working with large numbers of athletes and having a limited amount of space and/or equipment. I’ve coached in the private sector with one athlete for an hour with $20,000 of equipment, and on the flip side I’ve had 100 athletes on a turf football field in the middle of July with no equipment and 35 athletes in a weight room with a strict 15-minute time limit. It would be very easy to lean into the limitations and abandon speed training altogether, deferring to simpler and more traditional training methods (such as lifting) to check off the box of helping your athletes become better. Put succinctly, I’ll be addressing solutions for:

1. Challenges with large numbers.
2. Issues with space limitations.
3. Problems due to lack of equipment.

Video 1. Here’s a video of my athletes performing a “Banded A-Run to Sprint.” This is a great drill because it only requires 10 yards of space, involves twice the number of athletes at once, and one band only costs $30 (something I’ve written about before).

I’m not suggesting I have a few magic tips that will make speed training with 100 athletes as simple as coaching a one-on-one session—let’s be honest. But what I am saying is that with a mindset shift and a few creative ideas, you can significantly level up your speed training and get even better results for your athletes despite functional limitations. I can summarize this in a simple alliterative phrase: compromises and complexes. Let’s get into the solutions by addressing these challenges.

With a mindset shift and a few creative ideas, you can significantly level up your speed training and get even better results for your athletes despite functional limitations, says @CoachBigToe. Share on X

Compromises & Complexes

The first and most foundational concept here is understanding that coaching speed training sessions and working around these limitations is not always going to be ideal. Taking a 100% perfect speed training session and turning it into 75% or even 50% as effective will do significantly more for your athletes—short and long-term—as opposed to the alternative of it being a 0% effective session (not doing it at all). You’ll have to make compromises when programming, structuring, and running your speed training sessions to ensure completion, which is one of the most important variables when getting your athletes faster. With this in mind, let’s get into our first challenge, as well as possible solutions.

1. Speed Training for Large Groups of Athletes

Although not a unique limitation to speed training, one of the keys to effective training sessions with large groups of athletes is to keep everyone moving. This increases athlete engagement, makes the sport coaches happy (if they’re watching), and minimizes the opportunities for athletes to lose focus/become distracted.

This can create a conflict in true speed training, however, because athletes need to be recovered enough (rested between reps) to run fast enough to actually make speed gains (+95% of their fastest speed, which I’ve written about ad nauseam at this point). So, needlessly moving around just for the sake of moving around can potentially defeat the purpose of the session.

The general rule of thumb for this is 1 minute of rest for every 10 yards sprinted. Now, what happens when you’re doing flying 10-yard sprints with a 30-yard build? Three to four minutes rest? And here’s another question: does rest have to be standing around?

Another rule of thumb (to make it a rule of thumb-thumb): rest time per sprint ends up being about the same time as a slow walk back from that distance of sprint. A hard 10-yard sprint and 10 to 15 yards of a controlled deceleration turns into 20 to 25 yards of slow walking back, which ends up being around a minute.

Another rule of thumb: rest time per sprint ends up being about the same time as a slow walk back from that distance of sprint, says @CoachBigToe. Share on X

“But Matt, they can still get distracted walking back with their friends.”

You’re absolutely correct, reader. But you can mitigate this by setting the expectation from the beginning: “We’re doing sprints of X yards, decelerate and slowly walk back. However, I’m giving you the responsibility to find the line to focus during your sprint, relax and talk on the way back, and lock back in for the next rep.”

Video 2. Here’s an example of athletes running in “waves.” I had my athletes in lines of five to perform our Flying 10’s.

The next compromise is simply just being creative in trying to incorporate most (if not all) athletes at once. This can be dividing the group into X number of “waves” and having the waves take turns instead of having one athlete run at a time. If you have 20 athletes, divide them into four groups of five. If you have 100 athletes, divide them into 10 groups of 10. If you have 50 athletes and the space, divide them into 25 groups of 2 for “partner races.” That way, once the round is complete and you’re into the flow of the workout, all the athletes are either sprinting or walking back.

Although this does make it a little harder for you as a coach to actually coach—because there are significantly more athletes to watch at once—the output given by the athletes can be significantly increased. You can coach it like this: “Make groups of three. Within your group, find people you want to beat in a race and also talk some trash to. Line up in your groups.” Boom, effort levels just increased by 100%.

Another option is “waterfall starts:” have athletes go one after the other with a one- to two-second delay. This keeps them focused so they know when their turn is and allows you to coach them one at a time. Yes, watching 10 to 30+ athletes basically in a single-file line is a skill. But that’s where the compromise is: fewer athletes allows for more detailed coaching and more athletes limits you to less-detailed coaching. The waterfall start allows for quick feedback for each athlete, so coaching can be as simple as “more knee drive, good rep, stay smooth, big arms, more knee drive, good rep.”

Fewer athletes allows for more detailed coaching and more athletes limits you to less-detailed coaching, says @CoachBigToe. Share on X

Video 3. An example of a “waterfall” start with my athletes performing Banded Bounding. This has athletes go one-by-one down the line.

Last, almost anything can be made into a partner drill. A great example would be a multi-direction agility series with one-steps and crossovers—instead of having 3 groups of 10 with me doing all the pointing, I had all my athletes partner up. One partner is reacting and one partner is pointing. This is actually more beneficial to me as a coach because instead of pointing and organizing the drills, I say: “Let’s get two rounds of six points per partner. I’ll be walking around and coaching.”

This does create a little bit of (controlled) chaos, which isn’t for every coach, but gives you another tool to do better speed training for your athletes.

2. Speed Training with Limited Space

The foundational question you must ask yourself when dealing with limited space is: “How do I maximize not having a lot of space in order to set myself up for success during the times when I will have a lot of space?” The type of speed that requires the most space is top speed, as acceleration and change of direction can be easily done in 10 to 20 yards.

The type of speed that requires the most space is top speed, as acceleration and change of direction can be easily done in 10 to 20 yards, says @CoachBigToe. Share on X

First, let’s break down what goes into effective top-speed running and whether you need space for it: 1) actually running at top speed—needs space; 2) good top-speed mechanics—does not need space; and 3) the qualities that make someone fast, such as lower body stiffness—does not need space. Only one of the three components of top speed, albeit the most important one, needs space.

Using the dribble series as an example, here’s a great way to groove smooth and upright top speed cycling that only requires 5 to 10 yards of space. Although it doesn’t take forever to learn, it’s boring and there are only so many variations of this you can do. But that’s the compromise: becoming a “dribble warrior” and perfecting those drills during winter might be boring, but it will set you up for significantly more success than starting your top speed technique from ground zero on the first day of spring.

Lower body stiffness is a necessary quality to run a fast top speed, as athletes experience multiple times their body weight in force during ground contacts of around 100 milliseconds. Plyometrics are a fantastic way to develop that quality—building up stiffness of the ankles, knees, and hips requires little space and is a great foundation to ensure your athletes can handle top speed forces when they do get space.

Video 4. Here’s an example of my athletes doing drills in limited space to improve their top speed sprinting. This includes the dribble series and straight leg bounds.

Bonus: fast hip flexors are an underrated piece of good top speed mechanics that can also be developed with zero space.

3. Speed Training with Limited Equipment

I’m extremely excited to add onto my “c” alliteration from above and expand from “compromises and complexes” to “complexes and controlled chaos.” Controlled chaos with complexes can be the answer to limited equipment because it eliminates the bottleneck on training sessions. Instead of long lines forming to use equipment, athletes losing focus, and the flow of the session being disrupted, complexes both utilize equipment and keep all the athletes moving.

The foundational concept of this lesson isn’t a question, but rather a statement: just because you have a thing (equipment) in your training doesn’t mean it has to be the only thing. Equipment doesn’t have to be used by all the athletes all at once, it just has to let the workout be efficient and effective.

Video 5. Here’s an example of a speed complex: a heavy resisted sprint to a medball throw sprint ending with a timed acceleration in timing lasers. Instead of twelve athletes for one piece of equipment if it were to be one exercise at a time, using a complex turned it into four athletes per one piece of equipment.

A complex in speed training is just like super-setting exercises in the weight room: performing one exercise then the next and so on until all the exercises are done once, then going back to the first one. Is this ideal? Sometimes, yes. Complexes can be used for potentiation and higher output when sequencing the exercises in a heavy-medium-light order, where the previous exercise’s feeling makes the next exercise easier. Other times, it’s not ideal. Sometimes athletes need to groove an exercise for three, four, or even five straight reps to receive coaching and feedback, put it into practice, then solidify the improved technique. But again, sometimes speed training requires compromise and won’t always be ideal.

A complex in speed training is just like super-setting exercises in the weight room: performing one exercise then the next and so on until all the exercises are done once, then going back to the first one, says @CoachBigToe. Share on X

Let’s say you have 5 sleds and 15 athletes—you could definitely have athletes line up in groups of 3 and take turns, but that involves a lot of standing around. Instead, you could have 5 athletes doing a technique drill on the wall, 5 athletes doing a sled sprint, and 5 athletes racing each other, then everyone rotates to the next exercise.

This is where the controlled chaos comes in: you aren’t going to have as much control and you’ll have to give some autonomy to the athletes to navigate through the complex themselves. However, it’s super easy to set the expectations: “There’s a lot of you (athletes) and only five sleds. We have a wall drill, a sled sprint, and a race. Each group of five will rotate to the next exercise together. I’m going to stand in the middle and watch and coach. Let’s get three rounds in. But if we can’t do this appropriately, we won’t use the nice things (the sleds) and we’ll do something boring instead.” This creates a better speed workout than not using the sleds at all.

You aren’t going to have as much control and you’ll have to give some autonomy to the athletes to navigate through the complex themselves, says @CoachBigToe. Share on X

Lastly, keep in mind the number of athletes you’ll be consistently working with. For example, I’ve hugely benefited from using a 1080 Sprint in my career. In my previous job at a private facility, I worked with 1 to 12 athletes at a time, where the 1080 Sprint makes a ton of sense. And although I’m sad I don’t have it at my current job at a university, it doesn’t make the most sense in this type of training with 30+ athletes at once. It makes more sense to have equipment that I can get more of (i.e., is cheaper) that can incorporate more athletes at once, like my favorite double-band set up.

Conclusion

Speed training can be done effectively and at a high level regardless of the number of athletes or amount of space and equipment. The only difference is that it won’t always look the same. Solutions for maximizing an hour of training with one athlete are significantly different than with 100 athletes, although the same principles still apply.

If I had to summarize working around the common challenges in speed training, it would be simple answers to this question: “How do I compromise to help me maximize the current situation (a lot of athletes, limited space/equipment) to move the needle towards helping my athletes get faster?” Be creative! Get more athletes involved and moving at once and incorporate technology as a piece of the puzzle instead of the whole puzzle itself.

Every track season cannot be the best of your career as a coach, but last season was just that for me. As coaches, we want to set lofty goals for our athletes while also setting realistic expectations for their success and achievement. But there were moments as this last season progressed that made me wonder if our goals were high enough.

For example, we used the Freelap timing system last season to time our workouts. I ensured the batteries were fresh in the chips the athletes wore and the towers that would pick up the athletes’ signals and record their times. We had a speed day, and the workout was three 40-yard dashes out of blocks—we’d been working up to this distance, and the kids were looking forward to seeing their 40 times. I took my time measuring 40 yards, had my athletes write their names on the recording sheet in the order they were going to run as usual, and went to the end line to record all their times.

Last season was the best track season in my career as a coach, but there were moments as it progressed that I wondered if our goals were high enough, says @DillonMartinez. Share on X

The first athlete to go was our fastest sprinter. Already a state champion in the 100 and 200 the previous year (2022), we knew he was going to have a fantastic senior season. We had worked tirelessly on his block starts, general technique, and mechanics, as well as a yearlong lifting plan that he religiously adhered to. We were all excited to see what he would put down in a 40-yard dash.

He got set, exploded out of the blocks, and accelerated through the finish line, looking as smooth as ever. It was a great-looking rep! But when I looked at my phone for his time, I was upset—I had clearly mis-measured the distance. It had to be too short. The Freelap registered a time of 4.29.

I stood up, looked at the other coach, and said, “Shoot—I was sure I measured it correctly, but it says he just ran a 4.29! I’ll re-measure.” He just looked at me and said, “I don’t know, that looked fast.”

I apologized to the athletes and told them I messed up and had to re-measure. As I pulled the tape closer to the line, I realized I wasn’t going to be short. It was 40 yards, right on the button. I was in disbelief.

His next two reps—using different chips, I might add—were 4.30 and 4.38. But it wasn’t just him—all the athletes were putting down times that both they and I were beyond happy with. It was a day I won’t soon forget and a moment that told me the season was going to be special.

The 2023 season saw school records broken in the 100 (10.58), 200 (21.39), 400 (49.08), and 4×100 (43.00); it also resulted in a 100- and 200-meter state championship to top it off, as well as our 4×100 relay taking third in the Wisconsin Division 2 finals. 2023 will be challenging to top—not just this year but in all the years to follow.

Before the 2023 season, I published an article outlining my entire season practice plan and my thoughts behind it. Due to the weather and other facility issues we all face in Wisconsin, we had to make on-the-fly adjustments. But the plan as laid out was almost perfectly followed. Here are five takeaways from 2023 and how those impact my plans for the 2024 high school track season in Wisconsin.

1. Prioritize Speed Early and Often

Most of my sprinters are three-sport athletes coming off either a basketball or wrestling season. These sports are inherently more demanding on the cardiovascular side than what we do as sprinters, so they had a good work capacity base built already. This allowed me to focus on speed work (which will also build endurance).

Conversely, these sports don’t touch the velocities I want their bodies to be able to endure come track season. Because of this, I got them sprinting right away to start the acclimation process, with a HUGE focus on proper mechanics. Sprinting at top speed, in my opinion, is asking for trouble if it is not done using proper mechanics. This leads me to my second point.     

2. You Can Only Run as Fast as Your Technique Allows

I despise the term “warm-up,” and you won’t hear me say it at my practices. Instead of a warm-up, we do TECH. This is always the first thing we do. It focuses on preparing the central nervous system to sprint at maximum velocity while engraining proper sprinting patterns and technique into the athletes. This is the most focused portion of practice. TECH serves as technique work, core strength workout, plyometric workout, and isometric workout, and helps my athletes learn how to coach up one another.

TECH serves as technique work, core strength workout, plyometric workout, and isometric workout, and helps my athletes learn how to coach up one another, says @DillonMartinez. Share on X

During this time, we will do many common drills you might see at any track practice: A-series drills, bounding, rolling starts, and the like. But you will also see our athletes coach each other like you haven’t seen before. My goal is to teach myself out of a coaching job. This means that I have thoroughly taught my athletes what proper sprinting technique looks like to the point I am confident that if I missed a day of practice, they could coach each other and still come out of the session better.

Secondly, we do a vast array of isometric work. Isometrics strengthen without impact. Many athletes fall victim to shin splints early in the season because the volume of stress on the body—specifically the lower leg—dramatically increases suddenly. Isometrics allow me to specifically target the ankle complex and strengthen it without having to pound my athlete’s legs into the ground.

We do what I call “A iso holds,” where athletes hold the perfect max velocity position, on one foot, then I have them elevate their heel so they are only on their forefoot and hold for 30 seconds at a time. We do ankle iso squats, where we hold a squat a bit above parallel but they have their heels as high off the ground as possible, and a plethora of other isometric movements that help strengthen the positions I want my athletes strong in.

Personally, I think all athletes, regardless of their sport, should do TECH at the start of practice every day, but I digress. Taking the time to truly teach my athletes the proper mechanics early in the season, and then intently working on them every day in new ways that the athletes couldn’t predict, allowed for maximum neural coding to take place between the brain and the body. This resulted in flawless technique by my sprinters without them having to think about it. It was a habit, and it was a difference-maker.

3. Planning Using Time Under Tension

The only thing I care about is how my athletes perform at the state meet. I want my athletes to be the freshest sprinters with the least mileage when they walk into the Wisconsin state meet held at Roger Harring Stadium on the University of Wisconsin Lacrosse Campus. To ensure this, I plan out my season using a time under tension (TUT) method. This has been the biggest game-changer for me in my planning strategy.

I plan out my season using a time under tension (TUT) method. This has been the biggest game-changer for me in my planning strategy, says @DillonMartinez. Share on X

I estimate how many seconds my athletes will be at max velocity in a workout, then add up the total time in the week to get weekly TUT. Then, I use that number to create a base, load, peak, de-load, and cycle. In 2023, during the three-month season, my athletes recorded a total of 20 minutes of time under tension, with the heaviest load being 4.25 minutes in one week coming at week 7 of the season. Note: I counted meets as time under tension for the week; I will not be doing that for the 2024 season.

For the 2024 season, we’re cutting the load even more. As of this writing, we are planning for a total of 338.5 seconds of TUT for the season. Here is an example of base, load, peak, and taper weeks for this coming season. Mind you, this is 338 seconds at max velocity, with as close to perfect form as possible.

I provide all the coaches on staff with my “workout plan rationale” each year—the coaches, athletes, and parents all know I have a reason for everything we do. This mitigates coaching conflicts, as well as parental conflicts. Here is my rationale for the 2024 season:

• This training schedule has three cycles, with a focus on coming into the last two weeks of the season as fresh and as fast as possible. The first three weeks of the season will focus on teaching our system of sprint development to the athletes and introducing their bodies to the stimuli we want them to get acclimated to for the rest of the season. We will practice three days a week to ensure no shin splints develop due to a rapid increase in usage that will lead to nagging issues into the late season. The first three weeks will act as the base for the rest of the season.
• Week 4 will see a jump in volume (75 seconds of time under tension) and act as a loading week for the peak volume week we will see in week 5 (80 seconds of time under tension). Eighty seconds, with the bulk of the volume coming on one day (60 seconds), will be the most volume the athletes will experience in practice all week. Following this, the focus will switch from building a base of stimulus to increasing max velocity and power output.
• Weeks 6–9 will act as a taper from the peak of week 5 and will primarily focus on extending the drive phase of athletes and helping them reach max velocity further down the track while also emphasizing staying relaxed late in the race. Weeks 6–9 will see huge tapers ranging from 56%–93% from the peak in week 5. This will help the athletes recover while also eliciting a hormonal response that will hopefully make the next reload phase (weeks 10 and 11) more effective.
• During the reload week, the athletes will only reach 21% of the volume accumulated during the peak week (week 5) of the season. Following the reload week, we enter into tournament time. During these two weeks, we will focus on keeping the athletes fresh while intentionally not letting speed become detrained. We will do this by programming five seconds under tension during week 12 and only 3.5 seconds in the week of the state meet. We want healthy, fresh, and fast athletes going into state.

4. Lift

Our school is beyond blessed to have our strength and conditioning handled and implemented by Three Rivers Performance. Since they took over, football has won three straight state titles (21, 22, and 23), and the playoff depth for every team in the school has increased.

For track, we lift three days a week before practice. Now, ideally, lifting is done after speed work. But because we don’t have a track on our school’s campus, we have to bus our athletes to a track, and they go home from there. Regardless of that, Eddie Hodges (owner of Three Rivers Performance) plans the lifts in a way that will support the speed work we will be doing that day. Lifts take 30 minutes, and they are efficient. Everyone on the track team lifts: sprinters, throwers, distance.

5. Field Events

Field event work will come second to speed work. Even if an athlete is only a jumper, they will always participate in the speed workout that day before working on their field event. The best way to jump farther or higher is to be able to sprint faster. Sprinting is the best plyometric known to man! They will benefit far more from speed work than from event-specific drills in the long run. With that said, on days when no speed work is planned, they can spend all practice after TECH working on their event.

I will also take this time to argue that your throwers should also participate in speed work weekly, says @DillonMartinez. Share on X

Now, I will also take this time to argue that your throwers should also participate in speed work weekly. I outlined my experience working with a Division 1 discus thrower this winter on X. The overall takeaway was that by increasing his max velocity, we were able to increase his maximum power output.

On day one, his max power output was 886N. This number comes from his 10-meter fly time of 1.31. There are some great articles about “truck stick”—check them out. After 10 sessions of speed work, we got his flying 10 meter down to 1.21, which equates to a 964N output. This increase in power output alone theoretically translates to being able to throw a discus 8.8% farther. Increasing velocity increases power, which increases the implement distance thrown. With that said, I will be advocating for our throwers to do speed work with us at least once a week. Speed truly is the tide that raises all ships.

Onward and Forward

With my 2024 practice plan completed, I can only hope that when it’s done, I’ll be able to reflect on the season with as much enthusiasm as the previous year. Putting the time in to meticulously plan will allow you to monitor progress within your program in a detailed manner year to year.

After many seasons, you will clearly be able to see what works and what needs to be added or subtracted for your practice plan based on the data collected over time.

Good luck to all the coaches and athletes this year! May 2024 be your best season yet!

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

At the bottom of the ocean, 12,500 feet down off the southeast coast of Newfoundland, lies what remains of the Titanic. In 1912, the deepest an underwater diver could go without catastrophic disaster—aka death—was 60 feet. At that time, experts claimed a human would NEVER be able to go deeper than 400 feet, even in a submarine, due to the immense pressures of the dark ocean. In 1986, however, Robert Ballard operated the first expedition down to the once-lost Titanic.

Since then, divers have taken scuba gear as deep as 1,090 feet and survived to tell the tale. The trick to them getting out of these depths is how well these professionals manage their approach in and out of the water. A first-time snorkeler would be a fool to think they can immediately try a deep dive without proper acclimation and training. Due to the bends (a decompression sickness), the deepest scuba dive took only 15 minutes to reach the bottom but 13 careful hours to return to the top. Unfortunately, implosion and disaster can occur when details are missed, as with the Titan submersible.

As strength coaches, we find ourselves in a different “depth” debacle.

The History of Motion (Not in the Ocean)

Do you remember the early 2000s, when squatting below parallel was a cardinal sin? Physical therapists and your local high school football coach had one thing in common—they believed deep squats were bad for your knees. After a 2003 study showed that deep dorsiflexed squats put larger stress on the knee, weight rooms across America saw a transformation.¹

An unintended consequence of limited ROM squats was that coaches could slap even more weight on the bar. Instead of a safer weight room, you’d find dozens of teenagers quarter-squatting with their lives on the line and “mysterious” knee pain to follow. But if you look at many college and professional weight rooms today, you’ll see slant boards and nothing but bottomed-out squats—so, what happened?

Researchers re-evaluated the data and made an unfortunate discovery. Our limited range of motion in the weight room did not positively impact the overall health of the knee on the field. For example, rates of ACL tears went from 8.1 out of 1,000 players in 1995 to 11.1 out of 1,000 players in 2012.^2,3

Was something we were doing in the weight room not transferring to the field? As injury rates continued to climb, the infamous study on dorsiflexed squats being bad was challenged, and we found ourselves trying to squat deep again. Eventually, powerlifting depth became the standard, and a lot of ego lifters started hearing “not low enough” from their coaches. Big weights were still moved, but there was a standard that had to be met for a lift to “count.”

However, like all things, this also had its flaws. There were many coaches who believed that “deep” wasn’t “deep enough.” Thus, we entered the EXTREME depth era. Hitting these extreme depths could only be possible by acclimating to the dangers of deeper waters. As squat maxes in the 2010s looked more like bench press maxes in the 1990s, coaches found themselves lacking the “intensity” that came from big weights and camaraderie.

And yet, after 30 years of the squat evolution, we still debate how athletes should perform the double knee bend. Like political parties, we have professionals squaring off on social media platforms and swearing their allegiance to the “one true way” to train while demonizing the other party. But the point of growing the body of research and learning better ways to train was never to adopt dogma and tribalism but rather incorporate everything that did work into a more ideal, holistic training system. The question is not what range of motion (ROM) to train athletes in, but rather, how we should train in ALL OF THESE ranges of motion.

The question is not what range of motion (ROM) to train athletes in, but rather, how we should train in ALL OF THESE ranges of motion, says @endunamoo_sc. Share on X

Many coaches already dabble in many different depths and positions, but for the rest of this article, I want to express how OUR PROGRAM uses the entire ROM to create better and healthier athletes.

1. The Elastic/Power ROM

(Initial quarter of a movement—higher speed and mostly fascial movements)

The next time you watch a sporting event, I want you to look at the depth of each athlete’s movement in a typical play. No matter the event, you will find that the majority of time is spent at the top half of all ranges of motion. This includes explosive jumps, top-speed sprints, football tackles, soccer kicks, swinging a bat, and so much more. These positions encourage a more fascial-dominant movement style, which can be performed at higher speeds with less ground contact time. Pop Warner and tee-ball coaches refer to this range as the “ready position,” but for today’s purpose, we will refer to it as the Elastic ROM.

Many Broccoli Bros at the local gym will load a squat or bench as heavy as possible and then perform a “quarter” rep…and while many coaches demonize this behavior, is it really so bad? It depends on the desired goal. Just like a snorkel can serve a purpose in diving pursuits, so can a partial range of motion exercise. When it comes to the top of a partial range of motion, here are three examples of what I do to manage these components in my programming:

1. Speed of movement – A greater rate of force development can be achieved in a more mechanically advantageous position. Because of this, more speed-intended concentric movements like loaded jumps or dynamic trap bar deadlifts should be performed in this ROM.
2. Potentiating movements – Pairing like ROM movements with their athletic counterparts (for example, loaded jumps with sprints and isometrics with jumps) is a great way to improve performance without exacerbating fatigue. With adequate rest in between, hang power cleans are a great tool to potentiate jumps.
3. Game-specific rapid eccentrics – Although slow eccentric movements are a growing trend among social media coaches, rapid eccentric training is a great way to improve sports performance in athletes.⁴ These can be loaded movements, like a dynamic speed squat, or unloaded plyometrics, like hurdle hops.

Although slow eccentric movements are a growing trend among social media coaches, rapid eccentric training is a great way to improve sports performance in athletes, says @endunamoo_sc. Share on X

Training power-specific qualities requires a more detailed program since velocity is one of the first qualities to fatigue in a training session. The Power ROM is most effectively developed at the beginning of a session, with less total volume than some other components. Depending on the athlete’s work capacity, you can perform up to 10 reps in a set at this ROM at high speeds, or you can break it up over a few sets. Using the reference that most athletes peak at 30–45 effort jumps in a game, we should consider keeping the total reps in this range to encourage higher outputs. Accumulating too many bad reps due to fatigue could negate some of the positive training effects we are looking for.⁵

Another way to reduce fatigue and keep velocity high is by using equipment that naturally decreases the movement an athlete can go through—for example, high handles on a trap bar or resting a bar on the pins during a bench press. This is also a great time to quantify power by using devices that measure speed or watts produced. A lower-cost method to add speed and intent is by timing sets or racing reps between athletes—timing a set of five trap bar speed deadlifts or barbell sprinter squat jumps can increase the effort from athletes.

We can also pair overcoming isometric movements with like-skilled athletic movements to maximize plyometric training at the beginning of a session. Getting an athlete to a tetanic contraction during an isometric takes time, but it’s a great way to freely quantify effort. Unfortunately, fatigue is still the enemy, forcing our overcoming isometrics to be done for five seconds at most.

2. The Muscular/Strength ROM

(Muscular-dominant movements in sports)

Another layman’s term for this ROM would be “powerlifting range,” but it can apply to some of the full Olympic lifts and your typical hypertrophy-focused exercises. This range does a great job at hitting multiple training needs, as it allows for substantial load, can be done relatively explosively, and can introduce a lot of fatigue to an athlete.

For starters, let’s talk about putting some size on your thighs. There are many theories on how to maximally stimulate hypertrophy and neurological stimulation; a formula that some use is:

(weight lifted/intensity) x (reps x sets) x (range of motion)

The Strength ROM is a much greater range than the Power ROM, but it is not so extreme that it cannot be loaded maximally and done for several reps in a row relatively quickly. When you think of a squat (back/front/overhead), this ROM is below parallel (hip crease below top of knee) but not so deep that we lose the amortization phase of movement (isometric point between eccentric and concentric).

Like an exploratory submersible, athletes can spend a lot of time at this depth without running out of energy, allowing them to put in a lot of training volume. In current strength and conditioning, this is the most common ROM used, and if you post a video without hitting “depth,” the powerlift bros will let you know about it. Ideally, this ROM is used for:

1. Ideal strength development ROM – Anecdotally, millions of powerlifters worldwide have shown that significant load can be lifted in this range. Likewise, we periodically see high-level athletes enter this ROM as they perform high-power movements during their sport. Typically, these higher-force movements include larger ground contact times and slower eccentric loading than the aforementioned fascial range. Athletes with concentric-dominant tendencies will do better in this ROM than their more eccentric counterparts. This ROM also greatly develops the amortization phase because the braking occurs in a less mechanically advantageous position (more muscular loading than ligament). This is why traditional power lifts like bench presses, squats, and deadlifts are great. Because we still see a large amount of high-force performance in this ROM, we want to train it effectively with relative load.
2. Optimal hypertrophy stimulating ROM – Since putting on functional size is an important part of many sports—but introducing too much fatigue can result in impaired sports play—we want to spend the least amount of time necessary to encourage muscle protein synthesis. This ROM combines the degrees of movement and possible load lifted to encourage a greater mechanical stimulus for “growth.”

Fatigue is a crucial component to consider when building a training program. If we burn too much energy at the wrong time, we will inhibit the quality of work we can do throughout a session. Training the strength ROM is best done toward the middle or end of a session where speed is no longer the focus, but we have not over-exerted athletes beyond their ability to move heavier weights.

This looks like your more traditional strength training exercises, such as back squats, deadlifts from the bar or hex handles, or barbell or DB bench presses to the shirt. This can also include more power-specific drills like kneeling or half-kneeling medball throws. The overall volume needs to be dictated by the athlete’s max recoverable volume, but the sets will have reps of 1–10 with only a few working sets per day per exercise.

As much as some in the S&C community want to abandon the idea of lifting heavier loads in favor of higher speeds or alternative styles of training, there are arguments to keep bending bars and getting PRs. Neurological adaptations to heavier weights seem to be unique and valuable, and we should still include them in sports training, thus why I have called this the “Strength” ROM.⁶

As much as some in the S&C community want to abandon the idea of lifting heavier loads in favor of higher speeds or alternative training styles, there are arguments to keep bending bars & getting PRs. Share on X

3. The Tissue Capacity ROM

(The extreme range of motion a tissue can currently support)

I would call this the “modern” ROM, but there have been guys like Charles Poliquin preaching the importance of this for years. This ROM laughs at the coaches and PTs from yore who claimed performing deeper squats would implode your knee like a mismanaged submarine on the ocean floor. Without proper acclimation and a great plan, these depths can mean disaster for the unwitting. Range of motion goes beyond “traditional” depths and focuses on the individual’s max capacity of a joint and its surrounding tissues. We can also call this the End Range of Motion (EROM), but most individuals will have a current capacity they are limited to and a true capacity they can work toward.

This end ROM is much harder to achieve any substantial load in and lacks the speed potential of other ROMS, but it plays a crucial role in preparing soft tissue for the EXTREMES of sports and life. Share on X

Although this EROM is much harder to achieve any substantial load in and lacks the speed potential of other ROMS, it plays a crucial role in preparing soft tissue for the EXTREMES of what might happen in sports and life. When an athlete experiences tendonitis or even tears/trauma to connective tissue, it is always because the demands of the moment supersede the preparedness of the structure. Ideally, we would use this EROM for:

1. Improving connective tissues’ durability – Large ranges of motion put greater stretch and load on connective tissues like tendons and ligaments. Many athletes struggle with bouts of tendonitis, and “prehab” should be considered for hotspot areas within specific sports. Large ROM training should be included as a holistic approach to improving the health of athletes.
2. Enhancing proprioception at extreme ranges of motion – If you’ve never managed this challenging range, you won’t move efficiently in it. Like transitioning from a snorkel to a scuba tank, more details have to be managed in order to come out unscathed. We want athletes to have cognitively been in this range (even if at lower speeds and loads) to help them manage that situation better.
3. Increasing overall “flexibility” – We are learning that flexibility is a very neurological response. An athlete’s nervous system will inhibit them from entering a space if it is deemed “unsafe.” By using load and frequency, we can encourage our nervous system to trust a range of motion without just putting the brakes on. Although our bodies are just trying to protect us, something as simple as reduced ankle dorsiflexion can increase the risk of an ACL tear.⁷

It wasn’t that long ago that doctors couldn’t confirm the ability of ligaments like the ACL to thicken/hypertrophy due to training. Traditional, partial ROM lower-load training did not seem to cause a positive change that could be recognized with any confidence. However, when researchers looked at athletes whose sport demanded maximum EROM-loaded movements, they were able to see significant ligament thickening.⁸

It would seem that the greater the ROM and stress placed on connective tissue is, the greater the adaptation and, thus, resilience. Large ROM movements can affect not only the structure but also the stability of the limbs they are associated with. Many cruciate ligaments have morphologically different sensory nerve endings, turning them into a large contributor to proprioception.⁹

This training range is unique because its application varies depending on the individual or training goal. It can be done at the beginning of a session with lighter loads and longer times under tension—almost as a warm-up—or at the end as a capstone to a tough session with more weight, faster speeds, or higher volumes. Just like an athlete’s ability to generate speed or power in the first ROM or the amount of weight they can lift in the strength ROM, the abilities of athletes to move in this ROM greatly vary. Because of this, it is important to mediate load, understand it’s more fatiguing for some than others, and possibly use devices like slant boards or assisted straps for larger movements at specific joints.

As with all movements, we want to stay within an athlete’s current capacity and expand that over time, but since this has the most degrees of movement, it is more likely to cause a problem if your athletes are moving “poorly.” A great way to teach movement quality in this space with VERY LOW risk or irritation is with yielding isometrics. By performing longer-duration active holds (30 seconds or greater), not only will athletes build confidence, but their connective tissues will also get a greater response to the stress.

If absolute strength in this ROM is the goal, performing submaximal and higher-rep movements at the end of the session can also be done. By finishing a session with controlled sets of 10 or working sets that last longer than 30 seconds, athletes can “restore” some movement qualities that might have been inhibited by faster or harder training. For many older athletes who have not engaged in this type of training from an earlier age, you will need to lower their movement expectations at first or provide them with assisted devices to create flexion in some of the joints.

Working at Depth

Not every coach is trying to discover treasure in the Titanic, but that doesn’t mean our athletes shouldn’t be prepared for the extremes that each depth can bring in sports. There isn’t always time or energy in every training session to develop each position properly, but any coach can program to include all of these ROMS over the course of a week with all of their athletes.

You wouldn’t send a scuba diver to the Mariana Trench in a 1912 suit, and you probably shouldn’t send someone to the pitch, field, or court without the proper preparation, either.

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. Fry AC, Smith JC, and Schilling BK. “Effect of knee position on hip and knee torques during the barbell squat.” The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2003 Nov;17(4):629–33. doi: 10.1519/15334287(2003)017<0629:eokpoh>2.0.co;2. PMID: 14636100.

2. Powell JW and Barber-Foss KD. “Injury patterns in Selected High School Sports: A Review of the 1995–1997 Seasons.” Journal of Athletic Training. 1999;34(3):277–284.

3. Joseph AM, Collins CL, Henke NM, Yard EE, Fields SK, and Comstock RD. “A multisport epidemiologic comparison of anterior cruciate ligament injuries in high school athletics.” Journal of Athletic Training. 2013;48(6):810–817.

4. Hernandez JL, Sabido R, and Blazevich AJ. “High-speed stretch-shortening cycle exercises as a strategy to provide eccentric overload during resistance training.” Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports. 2021;31(12):2211–2220.

5. Ben Abdelkrim N, El Fazaa S, and El Ati J. “Time-motion analysis and physiological data of elite under-19-year-old basketball players during competition.” British Journal of Sports Medicine. 2007 Feb;41(2):69–75; discussion 75. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2006.032318. Epub 2006 Nov 30. PMID: 17138630; PMCID: PMC2658931.

6. Jenkins NDM, Miramonti AA, Hill EC, et al. “Greater Neural Adaptations following High- vs. Low-Load Resistance Training.” Frontiers in Physiology. 2017:8.

7. Fong CM, Blackburn JT, Norcross MF, McGrath M, and Padua DA. “Ankle-dorsiflexion range of motion and landing biomechanics.” Journal of Athletic Training. 2011 Jan-Feb;46(1):5–10. doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-46.1.5. PMID: 21214345; PMCID: PMC3017488.

8. Grzelak P, Podgorski M, Stefanczyk L, Krochmalski M, and Domzalski M. “Hypertrophied cruciate ligament in high performance weightlifters observed in magnetic resonance imaging.” International Orthopaedics. 2012 Aug;36(8):1715–1719. doi: 10.1007/s00264-012-1528-3. Epub 2012 Mar 25. PMID: 22447073; PMCID: PMC3535026.

9. Johansson H, Sjölander P, and Sojka P. “A sensory role for the cruciate ligaments.” Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. 1991 Jul;(268):161–178. PMID: 2060205.

As one of the co-founders of the RockDaisy Athlete Management System, I’ve had the privilege of collaborating with a wide range of organizations, from high school to professional teams to everything in between. During my interactions with coaches and athletes, I’ve consistently observed a shared aspiration: the pursuit of peak performance.

One valuable tool in this journey toward excellence is the baseline athlete performance test. This assessment provides a snapshot of an athlete’s current abilities and offers numerous benefits that can lead to better training, performance, and overall success.

A baseline athlete performance test provides a snapshot of an athlete’s current abilities and offers numerous benefits that can lead to better training, performance, and overall success. Share on X

What Is a Baseline Athlete Performance Test?

A baseline athlete performance test is an evaluation designed to measure an athlete’s physical and functional capabilities at a specific time. This test serves as a reference point or starting point for assessing an athlete’s performance and progress. It typically involves one or more physical assessments and measurements, including strength, speed, endurance, agility, flexibility, and more.

In Figure 1 above:

• The Baseline** score (first column in blue) would be the first test within the selected date range.
• The Most Recent column displays (40 Yard Sprint) values for each athlete.
• The Most Recent column also displays colored arrows to indicate improvement from the Most Recent score as compared to the Baseline

**Note: You can perform a baseline comparison for any metric you store in RockDaisy AMS.

What Period Should You Use for a Baseline Athlete Performance Test?

The period for a baseline athlete performance assessment can vary depending on the specific goals, circumstances, and testing frequency. Two of the most common baseline time frames I’ve observed are:

1. 1. Short-Term Baseline: Preparing for a single event or competition. For this purpose, a baseline assessment may remain relevant for a few weeks or months leading up to the specific event.

 

1. Seasonal Baseline: In many sports, athletes undergo baseline assessments at the beginning of each season (e.g., pre-season). These assessments help establish a starting point for the season and guide training programs. They typically remain relevant for the duration of that season, which may range from a few months to several months.

Configure your baseline report by selecting the following:

1. Baseline Date Range
2. Metric To Compare
3. Conditional Format

**Note: The Baseline test score is the first test within the selected Baseline Date Range.

Seven Benefits of Baseline Athlete Performance Tests

How can you and your athletes benefit from baseline athlete performance assessments?

1. Personalized Training Programs

One of the primary advantages of baseline athlete performance tests is the ability to tailor training programs to an individual’s specific needs. By identifying an athlete’s strengths and weaknesses, coaches and trainers can design workouts that address areas requiring improvement. This customized approach enhances training efficiency and effectiveness.

2. Goal Setting and Tracking

Setting clear, measurable goals is essential for any athlete’s development. Baseline tests provide a benchmark against which athletes can set realistic, achievable objectives. As athletes train and retest periodically, they can track their progress and adjust their goals accordingly, boosting motivation and focus.

3. Injury Prevention

Identifying physical weaknesses or imbalances through baseline tests allows coaches and athletes to address potential injury risks. By targeting areas of vulnerability, athletes can incorporate injury-prevention exercises into their training routines. Strengthening these weak points can help reduce the risk of injuries during competition.

4. Performance Optimization

Baseline tests help athletes optimize their performance by pinpointing areas for improvement. Athletes can work on weaknesses, enhance their strengths, and fine-tune their skills to maximize their overall performance potential.

5. Competition Preparation

For athletes preparing for competitions, knowing their baseline performance levels is invaluable. It helps them fine-tune their training regimen to peak at the right time, ensuring they are in the best possible shape when it matters most.

6. Objective Feedback

Baseline tests provide athletes with objective feedback about their abilities. This information can be beneficial for athletes looking to secure scholarships, join competitive teams, or advance their careers. Objective data can serve as evidence of an athlete’s capabilities.

7. Motivation and Accountability

Knowing they are being assessed and measured can motivate athletes to give their best effort in training. Baseline tests create a sense of accountability and a competitive edge that can push athletes to strive for excellence.

Baseline tests create a sense of accountability and a competitive edge that can push athletes to strive for excellence. Share on X

Realize Your Potential

In the world of sports and athletics, where small improvements can make a significant difference, baseline athlete performance tests have become indispensable. These assessments offer personalized insights, goal-setting capabilities, and injury prevention strategies. Whether you’re a high school athlete, a college player, or a professional competing at the highest level, embracing baseline tests can help you unlock your true athletic potential.

RockDaisy has worked with numerous organizations, from high school to the pros. Our Athlete Baseline report is one of many reports that are ready to use and/or customizable to your needs. With our unique data visualization tools, we provide insight into your data outside of just the raw numbers.

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

“When it’s your time to make a difference in a kid’s life, are you going to be courageous enough to do it?”

During his opening presentation for Feed The Cats Southern California at Crean Lutheran High School, just up the road from The Great Park in Irvine, Tony Holler challenged the attendees to consider this simple question. In that moment, on the big screen Holler replayed an iconic clip of Portland Trailblazers Coach Mo Cheeks stepping in to help a young singer get back on track after she stumbled over the words in the National Anthem, providing her just enough support so that she could right herself and carry the song through to a rousing finish.

Not all coaching moments will have that public or profound of an impact, but as self-professed essentialist, Holler’s point cuts to the core of coaching: are you willing to make a difference?

Not all coaching moments will have that public or profound of an impact, but as self-professed essentialist, @pntrack’s point cuts to the core of coaching: are you willing to make a difference? Share on X

Easy enough, right? But it’s not—because a difference is, by definition, not the same. The same is easy—it’s known, it’s repeatable, it’s low-risk. Across 14 presentations and two days, Tony Holler, Chris Korfist, and JT Ayers took different angles on that essential question: given the chance, are you going to do what it takes to make a difference in a kid’s life?

Though the audience was largely a three-way split amongst track coaches, football coaches, and S&C coaches, Holler and Korfist delivered a range of insights that apply equally to coaches in any sport. More importantly, those points were ones that might not get made in sport-specific seminars—as in, not the same.

Been to a softball coaching clinic? Just show us new infield and outfield drills, my kids are bored to tears with all of mine!

Been to a soccer coaching course? Just show us which formation to play so we can stop getting hammered in the midfield!

When the time comes, here are three takeaways from Holler and Korfist to make difference.

1. Start with Joy

When crafting his core principles, Holler says he wanted to create value statements he considered broadly inarguable—who would oppose or vigorously dispute “make practice the best part of a kid’s day”? And yet, day-in and day-out on the field, this simple notion is tacitly challenged by coaches whose practices are, in design and execution, entirely joy-less and a part of the day that the players grind through.

For youth sport coaches, whose athletes are coming to training from a long day of school and likely looking at a pile of homework to finish when they leave, more work is not the best value you can offer for their crunched time.

Start with joy.

Why not? Well, happiness is hard. It takes risk. It takes opening yourself up to judgment. It takes trying new and different things, some of which completely flop—and if you coach groups of teenage girls like I do, you know they have a sharp side-eye for adult missteps, flaws, and failures.

You can do the same warm-up, the same conditioning, the same drills and you won’t risk judgment for it because, hey, it may be miserable and boring but it’s the same, we’ve been doing it forever and will not outwardly fail.

But the days when you walk off the training ground and your athletes are sweating and breathing hard with that live bounding electricity in their eyes and exclaiming to each other “that was fun,” you know you are on to something. Instead of having players who find excuses to miss your practices, you’ll have players who will make excuses to miss other commitments in order to make your practices.

When it’s your time to make a difference in a kid’s life, are you going to be courageous enough to do it?

My 17-year-old is a two-sport varsity athlete and across the past four club/travel/high school seasons of soccer and softball she has played for nine head soccer coaches and five head softball coaches and in some of those seasons, the phrase “that was fun” has not only never been spoken…I doubt it ever crossed the players’ minds.

Because it never crossed the coach’s mind either—that this is a game, these are kids, and it should be fun.

Holler’s “FTC Endless Feedback Loop” is another simple and self-evident reality that longtime sport coaches will recognize as a truth…but may need a jolt and spark to initiate in their own settings.

What happens when you make practice the best part of a kid’s day? They are happy and excited. What happens when your players are happy and excited? You as a coach are inspired to do the best coaching job you can to turn that energy and motivation into success. What happens when you as a coach are inspired to bring your A-game every training session? Your players are happy and excited…and so it goes.

And, equally, the opposite is true.

When a coach loses sight of joy, the kids start looking at the calendar and playing out the string. And once the kids are just riding out the season, then the coach is just riding it out. Which, if you’ve been there—can’t this season just end, already?—tends to be miserable all around.

“I think joy creates winning,” Holler said. “I don’t think misery does.”

2. Where the Rubber Meets the Road Is More than a Business Cliché

Whether loading for a swing or planting for a shot, with both my softball and soccer players I frequently cue “force comes from the ground up” and in those moments I’m generally speaking to intent—to deliver force you have to want to drive off of something.

Okay, super—so now what exactly does that interaction between the studs of a cleat and the turf or dirt actually look like, and how can you better train the foot to execute that critical athletic function?

Yep, got me there.

And not just me—former Air Force star quarterback Beau Morgan attended the seminar with a pair of his former teammates, and as I was chatting with him he readily whipped off a shoe to show a wrecked foot. Morgan mentioned how if he’d had a coach who understood how to train the feet when he was younger, he would have had an even better high school track career and then the cup of coffee he had with the Cowboys in the NFL may have been more than just that quick hot sip.

Korfist discussed how to put pressure on “the tripod” of the foot and, even more interestingly, how the foot would find a different (and less effective) tripod if the full foot wasn’t consistently accessed. Where the foot becomes a fulcrum in acceleration, how the fastest athletes tend to land slightly open-footed on the outside of their foot, and ways he trains foot positioning with slant board jumps and prime times were thought-provoking points that apply across all sports.

“Whatever your foot doesn’t do, the rest of your body will do.”

Visualize that for a moment. For softball coaches, volleyball coaches, and basketball coaches, how often have you heard a player described as having “bad feet” as a catchall phrase for the fact that they just don’t look very athletic when executing certain skills?

Whatever your foot doesn’t do, the rest of your body will do, says @korfist. Share on X

The rest of their body is trying to do something their feet need to be trained to do first. One of Korfist’s entire slides was nothing more than a black and white quote from Swiss physiotherapist and researcher Romain Tourillon:

“Many practitioners understand that the human foot complex is the underestimated link of the kinetic chain, and can be the limiting factor in explosive tasks such as sprinting, cutting, or jumping.”

Video 1. Chris Korfist demonstrates wall drills he performs with his athletes to improve the quality and direction of force from the ground.

3. Ask Yourself: Are We Practicing What We Want to Get Better At?

Describing early-season training with his sprint group, Korfist noted that they had been beginning every session on the wall working on foot progressions, knee drive, and other keys to improving speed—in some cases, spending the better part of the session on these movements.

Joy does not have to look like recess—learning and mastering something new and challenging that makes them better at the sport they care about is one of the ways your best athletes have fun.

This was what Korfist wants his athletes to get better at, so he makes it a focus of his training—for coaches in all sports, there’s that basic question: are you practicing what you want to get better at?

A couple years ago, when I was taking the US Soccer C-License course, as an icebreaker the instructor asked us to go around the room and say why we were there in the first place. One of the sharpest coaches in the group, Jake, said that he’d signed up because he’d hit a point where he knew he could roll up any time, any place, and execute a perfectly adequate training session. Needed no planning or effort, maybe jot a note or two on a Post-It, maybe just wing it, didn’t matter—he could lead players through 90 minutes that looked, felt, and functioned like a practice.

Except, he realized those rote sessions weren’t accomplishing anything but clocking time—so he was there to learn new ways to be purposeful and design training sessions that matched how he wanted his team to play in games.

Similar to Korfist, Holler gears his training to the qualities he wants his athletes to be good at. Not surprisingly, he keeps that simple:

• Sprint Fast
• Jump High/Jump Far
• Lift Heavy
• Bounce

Video 2. Tony Holler showing a few of the “X-Factor” workouts his athletes do to jump high, jump far, and bounce.

As a coach, looking at your training sessions, you can ask yourself if you’re getting better at what you want to get better at or if you’re just getting better at knocking out the same, seamless 90 minutes on the field.

And, then, you can ask yourself again: When it’s your time to make a difference in a kid’s life, are you going to be courageous enough to do it?

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

An effective start and initial acceleration can set the table for the rest of the run. Optimizing force application, the switching of limbs, and maximizing momentum early on can allow a seamless transition to max velocity (top speed) and an optimal balance between stride length and stride frequency.

Improving skills in these areas when using a standing start can provide valuable stepping stones to success with other starting positions: i.e., three-point, four-point without starting blocks, and four-point with blocks.

Caution

I know it can be tempting for athletes to want to try out new things that are learned, but if they’re not in sufficient condition, intense sprinting can result in injury. There are many fine programs out there that feature a variety of exercises and methods to prepare the body for the rigors of sprinting, and it goes without saying that paying sufficient attention to proper warm-ups, stretching, and cooling down is vital. After the next section, however, the focus of this blog post will be on technique.

A Word About Physical Development and Strength Training

In our society, we can get away with not having to do very much physical labor and exercise. Contrast this with our ancestors, whose survival included a necessity to perform manual labor, walking, etc.—this obviously provided our forefathers with a better fitness base than we typically have today. I like to keep this in mind when I advise and train athletes in strength training. My thoughts go toward contributing to their general fitness base and letting it benefit sprinting as it will.

Having said that, I also believe it is valuable to be aware of the muscles that are more directly related to sprinting success and give them the attention they are due. Admittedly, since I coach middle school and high school athletes, strength work is addressed mainly with bodyweight exercises, medicine balls, lifting tires, and doing hills in various ways.

Lastly, learning to recruit the glutes effectively is universally understood as a key aspect. This glute recruitment video is worth looking at, as it references external and internal pelvic rotation and the big toe being in contact with the ground—aspects that relate to various exercises used in training, as well as to sprinting. In addition, the book Running by Frans Bosch and Ronald Klomp also details how the glutes work with the quads, hamstrings, and calf muscles through each stage of the sprint.

Learning and Teaching

This blog article is directed toward coaches, as well as athletes who are mature enough to receive instruction on technique and effectively apply it. The ways that athletes receive information and apply it may differ. Coaches and athletes need to realize this.

Stu McMillan made a great observation of the types of cues his athletes benefited from. He said, “Athletes generally fit into two categories, ones that can feel the foot on the ground really well, as opposed to the ones that feel the limbs in space really well.” So, for upright running, some may respond better to cues similar to “pushing down into the ground,” while others relate better to “driving the thigh into space or their hand up into space.” So the cue, “drive the hand up up up up, and that may bring the entire system up,” may work for some athletes, while “feel the foot go straight down, straight down, step down, recover up, straight down,” may work better for others.

Athletes trying to focus on cues they aren’t good at receiving can disrupt their rhythm and timing. In short, it’s important to choose words carefully, says @TheYouthTrainer. Share on X

There are also athletes who, at top speed, feel their feet on the ground and others who don’t. Rhythm and timing are important parts of sprinting, and athletes trying to focus on cues they aren’t good at receiving can disrupt their rhythm and timing. In short, it’s important to choose words carefully—ALTIS coaches even talk about how “mood words can significantly enhance outcomes for coaches and athletes alike.”

Power Perceived

The following quote is from a course I took with ALTIS, and speaks to much of what I’ve said to this point and what I’ll be saying afterward: “As it relates to our key words as an efficient retrieval of a technical concept, power is important only during early acceleration—when time on the ground is in excess of time in the air. Once flight time exceeds ground contact time (in most elite sprinters, somewhere around the sixth to ninth step), the word ‘power’ is no longer effective, and we should move on to words that more accurately describe our technical objective for the remainder of the run. However, because the speed reached in the initial steps highly correlates with the speed reached at maximum velocity, it is important that the athlete maximize this portion of the run. Power is a word that resonates with most athletes, and when they have the time required to feel a horizontal push during initial acceleration, power is most useful in reminding the athlete of the specific objective and feel.”

I also think something easily relatable to athletes is Jonas Dodoo’s statement describing the section of the race where the feeling of power is more prevalent: “Most of the effort is at the end of the push.” However, as described earlier, some athletes may be more aware of the pump of the knees during this time.

The Start Defined

In his book, The Mechanics of Sprinting and Hurdling, Ralph Mann said the start consists of three steps. In the context of using starting blocks, he refers to the start as “Block Clearance,” “Step One,” and “Step Two.”

I like to refer to the start as part of “Getting Out,” with the understanding that a big enough force and big enough movements will be used and directed up the track (explained later).

Starting Progression

Since I believe that the performances and skills demonstrated out of a standing start can be looked at as a prerequisite to success with other starting positions, as well as having carry-over value, I get pretty detailed in my approach. I believe standing start practice has particular value when wearing training shoes or racing flats on a surface that offers a reasonable degree of traction. Obviously, wet grass and sand on a track are not good choices.

With a standing start and without spikes, the athlete must use a high level of skill to master body positioning, balancing strategies, force application, and directions of force to be able to start explosively and effectively move up the track. “Effectively moving up the track” includes success in dealing with the landing forces associated with the standing start, which, in my opinion, won’t be as great as those encountered from aggressive three- and four-point starts and those with starting blocks. In my mind, this constitutes a step in the process of developing eccentric strength, as well as improving coordination, timing, balance, etc.

A fundamental element of sprinting is establishing and maintaining a large split at the knees during acceleration, as you can see in this Carmelita Jeter video. Addressing hip mobility and strength supports this. The large split is also an essential part of the “knee lift motor pattern,” which is necessary to produce the powerful vertical force into the track, a key to max velocity (explained later). Once again, standing starts provide the ultimate specific “lead-up” activity.

Ideally, at the end of the day, this progression will lead to how world-renowned sprint coach John Smith described the start and initial portion of a sprint: “It isn’t about thrust as much as it is about balance—about each step being so perfectly placed that it sets the stage for optimizing the power of the next step.”

Standing Start Basics

While positioning the body to get out to a good start, it is important to assume a starting stance at an appropriate position in relation to the starting line. Novices often assume a position where their center of mass is too much to the rear of the starting line.

For the “set” position in the standing start, there should be a hip hinge movement at some point, where the torso goes forward, the hips move back some, and the back is straight. Ideally, bending skillfully and being poised to start explosively include preparing the glutes to be recruited in anticipation of taking the body forward and upward during the starting action.

Ideally, bending skillfully and being poised to start explosively includes preparing the glutes to be recruited in anticipation of taking the body forward and upward during the starting action. Share on X

The head should be ahead of the starting line, and the shoulders should at least be up to the line but probably ahead of the line to some extent. The hips should feel close enough to the line, with the feet aligned with the knees and hips. The knee and shin of the forward leg in the starting stance should feel close enough to the line, with the body bent to some degree while anticipating the push-off. About two-thirds of the weight is centered over the position of the front leg in the starting stance.

FYI—I do not like the standing start method of “stand up straight with little or no bend at the knees, lean forward, then collapse at the joints” in response to the starting command. This will not serve as an effective lead-up to other starts, as trying to simulate this with three- and four-point starts can—as Dan Pfaff points out—result in projection angles that are too low and balance issues that athletes try to correct with zigzag running.

There is a quote related to standing starts from the article “What is the Drive Phase in Sprinting, Part 3” that may also be helpful: “You can’t push from your toes as toes are meant to grip. The gripping toes create stability for the push off. This is the key to force application and push mechanics when starting from a standstill (traction).”

Soft Standing Starts 

To lessen the wear and tear on the legs during warm-up runs and many training runs, I often allow athletes to do “soft starts.” This means the athletes are allowed to move to the line and roll, skip, and otherwise move into the starts as they wish. Requiring the athletes to be completely stationary before starting can be pretty stressful for the legs. Stu McMillan of ALTIS also explains and shows athletes moving into starts in this video.

Decelerate Properly

When running any distance, it is important to pay attention to how to slow down. If the athlete simply turns off their concentration and lets gravity slow the body down after crossing the finish line, injuries can occur—i.e., hamstring injuries. This video does a great job of explaining this.

Overcoming Inertia

Inertia is a quality that lets something stay still if it is still or keeps it moving if it is moving. In the context of a race, the starter/official wants the athletes to be still when in the “Set” position so as not to gain an unfair advantage, but as you see very often, sprinters get away with subtle movements before the gun.

Overcoming inertia requires applying a force, but in a race, it is also important to be able to apply the force quickly to get out with or ahead of the competition. So, one of the challenges in starting is to come up with a way to be ready both to react quickly and begin moving powerfully up the track.

There are numerous ways to be effective, related to being coiled and ready to uncoil like a spring, along with the athlete focusing on how the body or body part will move in response to the gun rather than focusing on the starter’s gun. It is no different when using a standing start, although certain details will be specific to that particular starting position.

Shin Angles

When in the standing start position, typically, the shin of the front leg is not angled forward in any noticeable way. During the starting action after being required to be stationary, however, there is a subtle movement of the front foot off its spot, and a forward shin angle occurs as the front leg joins the rear leg for the push-off as the body moves forward. Note that in this video below (this is also clearly evident in football wide receivers).

For three- and four-point starts, where the movement of the front foot off of the spot does not occur, and the front shin is already at a forward angle when in the “Set” position, 45 degrees to the ground is suggested; this is closely related to the departure trajectory.

In my mind, an athlete, recognizing these differences, can increase body awareness, coordination, and timing by learning how to achieve an optimal level of power for the push-off for each starting position.

Although the shin is angled at the intended departure trajectory for three- and four-point starts, there is at least a little reduction in the angle between the shin and the ground during the push-off. This is evident in this slow-motion start video; however, a sprinter with good leg stiffness qualities should not exhibit much of a reduction in shin angle during three- and four-point starts. The slow-motion start video features former world record holder Asafa Powell. He obviously has good leg stiffness, and you can see that his shin angle doesn’t reduce very much.

More on Standing Start Footwork

A foot movement that is not acceptable is one in which the rear foot steps backward to initiate the push-off. I believe this is often done when the feet are not sufficiently spread initially, but also if the athlete just isn’t aware of what I described above or is not able to effectively pull it off. Regardless, I feel that this negatively affects hip height, among other things.

A foot movement that is not acceptable is one in which the rear foot steps backward to initiate the push-off, says @TheYouthTrainer. Share on X

When athletes doing a standing start are allowed to roll or fall into the start, the subtle movement of the front foot off the spot typically won’t occur since the rolling forward creates the forward shin angle. Note this when watching this athlete subtly roll into his start.

Three-Point and Four-Point Starts

So that this blog article isn’t overly long, I won’t give step-by-step details about three-point and four-point starts, but I will first point to a few vital considerations and then to specific areas where standing start skills can carry over.

Vital Considerations

When using blocks, having sufficient spacing for the positions of the pedals, as well as allowing part of each foot to be on the track, are important aspects benefiting from the learning progression I’m describing. Some high-level athletes may be able to be effective with their feet off the track and up on the block pedals, but this isn’t suggested for most athletes.

The suggested spacing for starting blocks—two shoes from the line for the front block and three shoes from the line for the back block—is too far from the starting line for four-point starts without blocks. Conversely, many high schoolers who are not allowed to use blocks during prelims in a track meet, but do have good spacing for the feet without blocks, try to use the same foot placements when they are allowed to use blocks during the finals. The result is a position that is too close to the line and cramped.

The bottom line is that when doing standing starts, it is pretty easy to figure out how to be positioned at the line, including how to space the feet, so that obstacle is easily negotiated, and the focus can be on improving body positioning, balance, etc. However, when trying to do three- and four-point starts, if the feet are not in a good position, the start will never be a great one, and a lot of practice will be in vain. Another important starting block basic element is described in #3 below.

Six Areas Where Standing Start Excellence Can Carry Over

1. Being in the right position in relation to the starting line.
2. Properly centering weight over the position of the front leg.
3. An athlete able to position, balance, and explode out of a standing start position should be able to do so from a three- and four-point stance without it being a strain on the hands and arms. Often, the athlete will need to learn how to skillfully rise from the “On Your Marks” position, letting the hips go up and back some at an angle so that too much weight won’t be on the hands. Having said this, the athlete has to be careful not to have the hips move backward in such a way as to have the momentum going backward when ready to respond to the gun.
4. A major aim is to be able to aggressively and powerfully project up the track into a high post with the first step, as seen in the photo below. There should be a punching-type knee action, with the first stride being completed by dropping/pulling the leg back down aggressively as the body moves forward and the trailing leg called into action rapidly and as linearly as possible. Again, pulling this off from the standing start position provides a great stepping stone toward the future.
5. With great starting skill, a goal should be, as Maurice Greene said, to “use as much power as possible, but use as little energy as possible.”
6. Seamless transition to max velocity, with a great balance of stride length and stride frequency

(Photo Courtesy of ALTIS)

Important Arm Movement Detail of the Three- and Four-Point Starts

To properly involve the arms during the start, instead of just picking the hand(s) off the track, the arms should make a sweeping motion through a good range of motion, with the hand opposite the front leg sweeping back and up. This is demonstrated at about the 2-minute 20-second mark of this video, featuring Olympic gold medalist Justin Gatlin and Coach Brooks Johnson.

For three-point starts, the same goes for the action of the hand that is on the ground; the only difference is that the hand going forward comes from a different position.

If the arms don’t move properly in coordination with the legs, the push may be shortened or premature. Arm action needs to continue to be in sync with the legs and general running movements to maximize performance.

Importance of Max Velocity

Although the start and initial acceleration are important, the crucial aspect for sprinters to develop is max velocity (top speed). What we covered previously helps put the athlete in a position to maximize max velocity, and each detail explained below relates strongly to max velocity development.

(Photo by Daniel A. Anderson/ZUMA Wire/Icon Sportswire)

Linear and Rotational Aspects of Sprinting

Although there are definitely linear aspects to sprinting—i.e., the athlete is trying to travel a straight line up the track from point A to point B—and side sway running actions are inefficient, it is important to understand that running features rotational actions that counterbalance one another. Dan Pfaff explains in this video how the hips and shoulders coordinate in this way. Again, relating to the athletes, how they feel the rotation is key and an essential part of their ability to continue to effectively apply force as the feet spend less and less time on the ground.

Go to the 27-minute and 40-second point of this video for a nice description by Jonas Dodoo about force application during upright sprinting at high speeds. When you have time, I suggest checking out the whole video.

Understanding the Effects of Horizontal and Vertical Ground Forces 

Sprinting is a combination of horizontal and vertical ground forces. Mann states, “The amount of Vertical force produced during the Block portion of the start, as well as the next two steps, is actually virtually the same as the Horizontal force.” This may sound surprising to many coaches who equate vertical force with “popping up.”

It is important to keep in mind that the objective is to direct the combined forces at an ideal trajectory. Sometimes, it takes watching film to see how close an athlete came to the suggested “High Post” position with the first step, again, shown in the image from ALTIS above.

Critical First 10 Meters

After the first three steps, Mann states, “The Mechanics of the Sprint begin a transition from a powerful Horizontally directed drive to a more Vertically directed effort seen in the Maximum Velocity Sprint Mechanics.” This is not, however, to minimize the importance of horizontal forces. Alluding to the first 10 meters, Mann states this is where “the production of Horizontal ground force is of critical importance.”

Although this should have the effect of having the athlete move through space in a relatively low-to-the-ground, leaning-forward posture, it is a mistake to tell the athlete to try to stay low.

The hips and torso should rise together, and there are different cues to help the athlete rise correctly. Dan Pfaff likes to say “hips climbing” and some may say “rise through the hips” since one effect is that the legs will exhibit less bend at the knees as the hips rise. Two of John Smith’s drive phase cues that I got from some of his materials are “simulate running downhill” and “Keep arms in front (reach out—don’t overdo it though).”

After the First 10 Meters Through Maximum Velocity

As the athlete continues to accelerate, and once again, with vertical forces becoming more and more primary, there will come a time to transition into what I like to refer to as a “pelvic repositioning” and the “top speed gear.” In the book Running, Bosch and Klomp describe this by stating, “At the moment when velocity is nearly maximum, the trunk is then directed more upright while the pelvis is pushed farther forward.” Again, I also refer you back to the “knee lift motor pattern” as being essential for powerful vertical force production.

Mann adds, “The maximum velocity that the athlete can produce is dependent upon how long productive Horizontal forces can be applied. Once Maximum Velocity is reached, the goal must be to produce the large level of Vertical force required to maintain proper Mechanics while continuing to produce the small amount of positive Horizontal force needed to maintain Maximum Velocity.”

In other words, there is a bounciness that has the athlete moving forward at top speed. During the bounciness, the feet are pushing up, not lifting the head and chest. Describing the posture, Lorenes Seagrav likes to say, “tummy tight, back flat, hips facing up (butt tucked).” John Smith likes the cue “chin down.” I also like the cue of “imagining that there is a string from the sky attached to the top of the head, pulling upward.”

Important Max Velocity Technical Aspects

When transitioning into the top speed gear, B skip drill dynamics become more of a part of the strides. This awesome video explains critical do’s and don’ts for the strides during this phase. The whole video is great, but you can forward to the 27-minute, 30-second mark for what I’m specifically referencing.

I also like Usain Bolt’s max velocity cues, “shoulders down and knees up, swinging from the hips.”

Applied to the 40-Yard Dash

Unlike a 100-meter dash, for the 40-yard dash, it is possible to accelerate from the starting line all the way through the finish line without any deceleration. In fact, the acceleration phases are abbreviated to try to arrive at top speed more quickly and take that top speed to the finish line. This means that the rhythm of running a 40-yard dash should be a little quicker than the rhythm of running a 100-meter dash.

Unlike a 100-meter dash, for the 40-yard dash, it is possible to accelerate from the starting line all the way through the finish line without any deceleration, says @TheYouthTrainer. Share on X

The Standing Start Is a Skill

Although I don’t believe it necessary for the athlete to feel that they have perfected the standing start before moving on to other positions, I do feel it helpful that the athlete recognizes attempts to be skillful with the standing start can give them a deeper understanding of how to utilize the early portions of the race to maximize 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

The Skyhook contact mat is a wireless jump mat that can be used to assess an assortment of jumps. The mat connects to a free training application that captures and tracks data over time, allowing you to upload your team rosters and track your jumps through indicators such as jump height, airtime, and ground contact time. It can also calculate an individual’s reactive strength index (RSI). There is really no limit on the assessments that can be performed since it allows you to create your own jumping assessments in a custom protocols option.

The objective of this review is to give my personal experience with the product, explain what it is and how it works, and examine three major factors when comparing it to similar products:

1. Functionality
2. Durability
3. Pricing

This product has vastly improved our testing efficiency and saved us precious amounts of time in doing so. This article is meant to help other coaches better decide if the Skyhook contact mat is right for them and whether it could similarly benefit those they work with.

What Is the Skyhook Contact Mat?

The Skyhook mat resembles a battle shield, with a jumping surface area of 31 inches by 31 inches and a weight of almost 30 pounds. Its solidity stood out to me immediately when I first received the mat. I’m told the mat is made from a secret, proprietary polyurethane blend, and I have no doubt that this mat will last, seeing as how I’ve tried to break it multiple times with no success. The package also includes the charger and battery to power the mat, along with a digital setup guide.

I’m told the Skyhook contact mat is made from a proprietary polyurethane blend, and I have no doubt this mat will last, seeing as I’ve tried to break it multiple times with no success. Share on X

While not a tangible piece of equipment, the training application that comes with the mat takes the product up a level. The ability to connect to the mat via Bluetooth and use it to evaluate an array of assessments online or offline is a powerful capability. The data gets saved into a cloud-based storage system that you can access to show trends in training, improvements, averages, and more.

Video 1: Skyhook app walkthrough.

How to Set Up the Skyhook Contact Mat

When setting up the Skyhook mat, the first thing you’ll need to do is download the Skyhook application on your phone or tablet. The app is compatible with both iPhone and Android and comes with the purchase of the mat. There isn’t a subscription fee, which was nice to see and rare with a cloud-based training software.

Once the app is downloaded, it will walk you through creating a profile via email to log in, and you can then begin utilizing the mat to its full capabilities. This entire process will take you a few minutes at most.

When logged in, you first need to start using the mat to connect to Bluetooth via your phone or tablet. The mat does disconnect and go into sleep mode if there is a long break during its use.

The sleep mode helps preserve battery life (and it took an entire week of use until I needed to charge my mat for the first time). The charging guidelines from Skyhook state that the battery will last 2–4 hours with consistent use over multiple hours and can last up to 7–10 hours for less consistent use over 1–2 days. I can vouch for this with my sporadic use matching the latter pattern.

The battery takes 12 hours to charge fully—while that is quite a long time, I recommend just charging it after each use, and you should never have a dead battery on your hands.

Skyhook Mat Training Use

When beginning to go through the app, it can initially seem like a lot—I recommend just playing around with the app and discovering options for yourself. The app even has a setting called “Playground,” which is essentially a demo-mode option for this exact purpose and does not save any of the collected info.

The Skyhook’s app has a customization option that walks you through creating your own jump assessments specific to your athletes. Share on X

The Skyhook contact mat can be used to test several preprogrammed jump assessments, and it also has a customization option where it will walk you through creating your own jump assessments specific to your athletes.

Video 2. How to create custom jump protocols in the Skyhook app.

The app does briefly explain the assessments to the user, giving a short description of how to perform the test and what it’s testing. I think this could be improved by including more information, such as why you would want to perform the assessment and, if possible, even a brief video of the assessment.

To some extent, having so many options can be a bad thing since it floods coaches with information and assessments that may not be relevant to their situation. Giving the why and videos could potentially make it clearer to the user what jump assessments would be most appropriate for their athletes and situation.

How the Skyhook Mat Has Worked for Me

The Skyhook mat has saved me considerable time when performing vertical jump assessments and collecting the data. I primarily work on the tactical side of strength and conditioning, occasionally working within athletics on a small scale. I was initially concerned that the Skyhook mat would be overkill for my situation—like trying to kill a fly with a shotgun—since I do not and cannot perform many of the jump assessments with the police officers I work with.

I have still found significant value in the product, and it makes the jumping assessments that we use with our police recruits easier to execute. Much of my job isn’t at a set location, so I feel comfortable moving the mat and using it with a variety of locations and surfaces, and even outside!

We had performed most of our previous vertical jump testing with a Just Jump mat, so there was an initial concern about the change in data since the Skyhook mat does not function off the Just Jump formula. This would render our previous information worthless if the Skyhook mat were used in the future; it wasn’t a major issue but a large inconvenience. Skyhook, however, created a Just Jump Adjustment that you can enable in the settings to make your data points comparable to those tested in the past with a Just Jump mat.

Skyhook created a Just Jump Adjustment that you can enable in the settings to make your data points comparable to those tested in the past with a Just Jump mat. Share on X

Something that I haven’t done yet with the Skyhook mat, but that I’ve done in the past with other products and plan to do moving forward, is use the vertical jump as an assessment for readiness. (I discuss this in a prior article, “Four Low-Cost Athlete Readiness Tools  to Enhance Your Program.”) Having the app show trends throughout the jump and being able to identify specific points—such as the average, median, max, and minimum of various jumps and metrics—would make it easier to quickly gauge the vertical jump as a readiness assessment within any size group.

How It Compares

When comparing the Skyhook mat to other products that assess jumping, there are two that immediately come to mind: the Just Jump mat and stick-based alternatives, such as the Jump USA Vertec (and clearly, the Just Jump mat is what coaches will find most comparable to Skyhook).

I considered three major factors when comparing these products: functionality, durability, and price.

1. Functionality

I find the Skyhook mat to be superior in functionality for a few reasons, the first being that it can perform multiple jump assessments and includes the ability to create your own assessments with little to no limitations.

I understand that the other options allow you to perform more than just a standard vertical jump, but the Vertec and similar stick options only give you the height jumped. They don’t include things such as hang time, ground contact time, and RSI.

The Skyhook training app enables you to track and save all your athlete’s information, which enhances the user’s experience and can aid in the training process by offering information to make better programming decisions. Neither comparable product can do this.

2. Durability

The durability of the Skyhook mat is something that I find to be of extreme value. I’ve used comparable products in every other location I’ve worked, and those haven’t always stood the test of time when put through the wringer.

I’ve used comparable products (to the Skyhook contact mat) in every other location I’ve worked, and those haven’t always stood the test of time when put through the wringer. Share on X

Whether it be the cords of the mats getting stepped on and torn by high school students or sticks breaking off from college athletes swatting too hard, the durability of these pieces has created headaches over extended periods. I prefer to purchase training equipment one time only, then use and abuse it for its lifetime.

My primary concern with the Skyhook mat was its charging cord, which connects the battery. This is its weak point and the only thing likely to break or wear on the product. It also isn’t very easy to fit the battery into the mat unless you get the wire to push it in just right.

Diving deeper into the product, though, I discovered that Skyhook recently corrected this on their newest generation model. (I have an older model.) The newly upgraded model removed the wire and is now connected through a magnet on the port and battery instead.

This is important, not only because SkyHook corrected a potential weak spot on the product but also because it shows the company continues to improve upon its product, something that we should be able to expect from all companies.

3. Price

With all of that said, the price point on the Skyhook mat matches its quality. The Skyhook contact mat costs $1,389. This is higher than comparable products, with the Just Jump mat priced between $790 and $893 and the Vertec at $925. (And other similar companies sell their stick vertical jump testers for even less.) These prices don’t include shipping, taxes, etc.

While the price for Skyhook is higher, I find the product to be worth the extra cost if you plan to utilize jump assessments on even a semi-routine basis. This is due to the previously discussed increased functionality and durability.

Ultimately, coaches will have to make this decision based on what is best for them and their situation.

Exercises, Setting, and Demos

Free Jump

The Free Jump setting is not necessarily meant to be the Vertical Jump setting, although I’m sure many, like me, will use it as such. Instead, the Free Jump is described as “jumping with no limits”—basically, you can do whatever on the mat, and it will measure the jump height.

You can go into the jump settings and edit this function, which will help prevent common double jump mishaps, and even change its name, or you can create your own vertical jump testing assessment.

Video 3. Vertical jump on Skyhook.

Single Depth Jump – Height

This assessment starts with the athlete off the Skyhook mat—they will essentially perform a hop, drop onto the mat and use it as a springboard to jump as high as possible, and then land back on the mat. This is a more advanced test for lower-body power and jumping ability since the individual lands and rebounds into the jump.

The assessment measures height from the single jump, and this can be made more specific by using the custom creator and performing it off specific box heights.

Video 4. Single-depth jump for height.

Video 5. Single-depth jump from a 6-inch box.

4/2 RSI

The RSI assessment with the Skyhook mat begins with the individual off the mat. From there, they will jump onto the mat and perform four jumps. While it will measure all four jumps, only the best two will be evaluated.

Finding an athlete’s RSI is beneficial because it demonstrates how well someone can utilize the stretch-shortening cycle, moving from an eccentric to concentric muscle contraction—essentially what we see in the world of sport or when high operators need to execute their jobs at high outputs.

Video 6. Completing four jumps for the RSI test on Skyhook.

10-Second Ground Time

The 10-second ground time jump assessment examines the total ground contact time during the period. The ability to produce force quickly and minimize contact time is a crucial trait for many in athletics, and this assessment is great for teaching athletes to be freer, more fluid, and more reactive when it comes to jumping. 

Video 7. Using duration to assess ground contact time.

Five-Jump Air Time

The five-jump assessment is the only preprogrammed assessment measuring air time. For this assessment, you will do exactly as it sounds, performing five continuous back-to-back jumps on the mat, and it will calculate your time spent in the air.

This test could be utilized with individuals who need to maintain their power for a particular amount of time, even if it doesn’t line up perfectly; a basketball player would probably not get five back-to-back chances in the same series to get a rebound, but it still helps broaden their abilities and provides a fun challenge.

Video 8. A five-jump test measuring time in the air.

Single Hurdle Jump

Another jump to assess ground contact time is the single hurdle jump. Starting off the mat, with a hurdle between you and the mat, you will perform a hop over the hurdle. Upon landing, you want to explode back up like you touched hot lava and land off the mat.

I chose to use a smaller hurdle of 6 inches, but this could be modified for more advanced individuals at larger heights: 8 inches, 10 inches, 12 inches, etc.

Video 9. Single hurdle jump test to assess GCT.

Custom Options

Weighted Jumps

One of the first custom jump options I created was a weighted vertical jump. I found value in this because most of the individuals we work with can make the connection of performing tasks with weight greater than their body weight, and it is still a valid test to demonstrate the ability to produce force.

When utilizing this protocol, I chose to use 10% of the individual’s body weight; for example, a 200-pound individual would hold a pair of 10-pound dumbbells for 20 pounds total.

Video 10. Using Skyhook’s custom jump protocols, a weighted jump performed with two dumbbells.

Paused Jumps

One could dive deep down the rabbit hole of vertical jump variations. Things such as where you place your hands, the angled position of the hips, and other small details can all affect the athlete’s vertical jump and be of value to a coach in certain circumstances.

I like having a paused training option when working with athletes because it can give some information on whether an athlete is more force- or velocity-dominant. Share on X

I like having a paused training option when working with athletes because it can give some information on whether an athlete is more force- or velocity-dominant. I know there are other ways to find this, and the coach’s eye can give you a great idea, but this is another option that will not cost you a lot of time.

Have athletes hold the bottom position of the jump for a three-count before taking off—just be mindful of them dropping down too quickly and the mat attributing that as the jump. You can edit the jump recorded through the custom options to prevent this.

Video 11. Holding the bottom position in a pause jump.

Single-Leg Vertical Jump

While not as common, performing single-leg vertical jumps can be great in sports where jumping is a main facet, such as basketball, volleyball, and track. It is also helpful to show any large imbalances between limbs that could provide some value and just get your athletes more comfortable performing max effort jumps from a single leg.

I’ve personally used the single-leg vertical jump tests in the past with track athletes and programs. It can create a lot of clutter when tracking, something the Skyhook would have helped with all those years ago.

Video 12. Single-leg vertical jump to two-footed landing.

Be Creative, Have Fun

The strength of the Skyhook mat is that the custom options are only limited by the coach’s ability and creativity. I think this is crucial for a product designed to measure jump performance because jumps really have no limitations.

The Skyhook mat’s custom options are only limited by the coach’s ability and creativity. This is crucial for a product designed to measure jump performance because jumps really have no limitations. Share on X

Use assessments in warm-ups to perform multidirectional jumps, use the mat to perform jumps in the lateral plane, and/or have jumping competitions of all different metrics—be creative and have fun.

Video 13. A wide range of jumps can be performed on the Skyhook and tracked in the custom protocols.

Final Take

Overall, the Skyhook contact mat is a fantastic product that can help improve a coach’s ability to assess jumping metrics and collect that information in an organized fashion. The addition of the training application greatly improves its functionality, and the brute durability of the product helps me justify its value regardless of its higher price point.

Coaches should assess where their values lie with using training tech, but I have no doubts that this product offers a significant amount of value.

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

In the world of strength and conditioning, athletes often perform hundreds or even thousands of jump-based exercises or movements throughout their annual training cycle as a means to develop explosive power and athletic performance. For these athletes, jumping is only part of the equation; landing safely from each jump in a manner that minimizes risk of knee injury bears immeasurable importance.

While strength and conditioning coaches often spend much of their time instructing their athletes on the mechanics of maximizing jump performance and explosive power (and rightfully so), not as much instruction or time is typically given towards landing safely or efficiently.

This is problematic since poor landing mechanics can significantly increase injury potential to the athlete, notably to the knee. Over 25% of all athletes who experience an ACL tear will not return to their previous activity levels even with successful surgery and rehabilitation, and athletes who undergo ACL reconstruction are 15 times more likely to re-rupture than those without history of ACL rupture.^1,2

Over 25% of all athletes who experience an ACL tear will not return to their previous activity levels even with successful surgery and rehabilitation. Share on X

While training for maximal jumping ability is critical to optimizing an athlete’s performance, optimal vertical jump performance doesn’t mean much if an athlete sustains an injury upon landing. As such, optimal biomechanics when landing from a jump task are just as critical to develop as when executing the jump itself.

Why Look at Jump Landing Mechanics?

While contact-based knee injuries within sport are essentially non-preventable, non-contact knee injuries should be of particular interest to strength coaches and clinicians due to the largely modifiable neuromuscular factors that can be implemented to reduce or eliminate their occurrence.³

Non-contact knee injuries are prevalent within sport, with approximately 18% of these injuries arising within game play and 37% arising within practice or training sessions.⁴ Biomechanical errors involving knee valgus and stiff landings, among other such faults, are associated with increased injury risk to the athlete.

While numerous movement screening protocols have been designed to identify potential injury risks and aberrant movement patterns, many of these screens do not analyze an athlete’s jump-landing mechanics—an integral sport-specific task for many athletes. This is not to say that other screening protocols should be discouraged; rather that the coach or clinician must account for all facets of the athlete’s sport and implement movement screening protocols in line with their sporting tasks, including landing from a vertical jump.

The coach or clinician must account for all facets of the athlete’s sport and implement movement screening protocols in line with their sporting tasks. Share on X

As an example, Everard et al. conducted a research study to identify the relationship between the Functional Movement Screen (FMS) and the Landing Error Scoring System (LESS). While both systems have been shown in numerous studies to be reliable and valid, the results from Everard et al. found that performing well on one screen did not indicate an athlete would perform well on the other.⁵

As such, screening for, and revealing, biomechanical flaws within an athlete’s movement should include both generalized movement patterns as well as sporting-specific tasks to maximize the athlete’s overall safety and wellbeing. In the case of athletes whose sporting tasks involve jumping (basketball, volleyball, etc.), ensuring optimal biomechanics when landing should not be overlooked.

How any identified biomechanical issues are corrected will depend on multiple factors, including the particular faults identified, needs of the athlete, and scope of practice for the coach or clinician. As such, it is important to realize that there is no universal approach for how jump landing mechanics should be rectified.

As a result, the following is a discussion of the Landing Error Scoring System as it pertains to screening for non-contact knee injury risks in athletes, but it does not offer specific insight regarding corrective intervention. An individualized approach should always be taken for each athlete.

The LESS Test

The LESS is a screening tool developed to identify the risk of potential non-contact knee injury in athletes, notably for ACL injury (though associated risk such as meniscal and MCL injuries can also be factored). The premise of the system is that identification of biomechanical (body position-based) errors present within the lower extremities during jump-landing can lead to reduction of injury risk via corrective interventions, such as hip and knee strengthening, improving proprioceptive awareness, and overall landing technique.

The premise of LESS is that identification of biomechanical errors present within the lower extremities during jump-landing can lead to reduction of injury risk via corrective interventions. Share on X

The jump-landing task is recorded via video from two different cameras—one recording the sagittal plane (recording the athlete from the side) while the other records the frontal plane (recording the athlete from the front). Each camera is placed 3 meters away from the landing zone at a height of 1 meter above the floor.

The system works by evaluating 17 different biomechanical occurrences that take place throughout the body during the jump-landing task (also termed a drop-vertical jump). The examination for scoring can be divided into three categories:

1. Jump-landing technique as it relates to position of the trunk and lower extremity position upon connecting with the ground.
2. The scoring of faults involving foot position between initial ground contact and maximal knee flexion.
3. Movements of the trunk and lower extremities that occur between initial ground contact and maximal knee flexion.

Scoring for the 17 items uses a dichotomous scoring rubric for the first 15 items (see the scoring sheet below), noting either the presence or absence of a movement error; a score of 0 indicates an absence of error while 1 denotes the presence of an error. Item 16 (joint displacement) and 17 (overall impression) can be scored with three potential outcomes (see scoring list below). The analysis and subsequent scoring are done manually by a trained individual upon analyzing the recorded video at a later point in time.

A higher overall score of the test indicates a greater number of movement errors arising during the jump-landing task and therefore correlates with higher risk for potential non-contact knee injury for the athlete.

Testing Procedures

To perform the test, the athlete stands on a 30-centimeter jump box. Then, when given verbal command, the athlete jumps forward off the box with both feet, lands at a pre-measured distance of 50% their body height in front of the box, and immediately performs a vertical jump with maximal effort.

Validity and Reliability of the LESS Test

Any strength coach or clinician incorporating standardized tests into their athletes’ testing—be it performance-based or prevention-based—should ensure the test is valid and reliable (validity assesses if the test measures what it claims to measure, and reliability assesses if the test is able to consistently measure results).

Any strength coach or clinician incorporating standardized tests into their athletes’ testing—be it performance-based or prevention-based—should ensure the test is valid and reliable. Share on X

The LESS test has been shown to be both valid and reliable for the assessment of jump-landing biomechanics as it pertains to injury risk within athletes.^6,7 The test also exhibits excellent expert vs novice interrater reliability when assessing 3D kinematic motion patterns utilized for scoring of the LESS.⁸

Strengths & Weaknesses of the LESS Test

As with any test or system, inherent strengths and weaknesses can be found within the LESS. The extent of each respective strength and weakness will largely be determined by the coach or clinician regarding their own unique situations, resources, etc.

Strengths of the Landing Error Scoring System

Naturally, the inherent strength of the LESS is its repeated scientific-backing to be a valid and reliable screening tool toward the risk of non-contact knee injury in athletes.^6,9,10,11 One could argue that identifying and preventing ACL and other associated non-contact knee injuries through appropriate intervention is the ultimate strength of any screening system. As a result, any inherent weaknesses of the system (discussed below) might be seen as more of an inconvenience, as injury prevention is worth its weight in gold.

Of notable interest, the LESS has been shown to be valid and reliable for various populations and has been shown to identify risk of re-injury in athletes having undergone ACL reconstruction, making it a noteworthy system for directing areas of focus for the athlete’s rehabilitation and eventual return to sport.¹² Additionally, within the ACL reconstruction population, the LESS has shown to reveal greater extent of landing errors for female populations when compared to their male counterparts.¹³

The LESS has been shown to be valid and reliable for various populations and has been shown to identify risk of re-injury in athletes having undergone ACL reconstruction. Share on X

Limitations & Practical Considerations

The requirement of dedicated video equipment to capture and thereafter analyze jump-landing mechanics in athletes has been seen as an impediment by many clinicians and coaches, particularly for organizations with a modest budget or for professionals who must record and thereafter manually analyze high volumes of athletes at a later point in time. Understandably, the need for a coach or clinician to acquire video equipment, establish a testing area, set-up equipment, and watch recorded videos is often seen as a barrier to implementing LESS screening into athlete testing.

Additionally, when testing large groups of athletes, the need to account for different landing positions with each athlete (landing distance is determined by the athlete’s height), can create an additional inconvenience by moving any visual landing target for each athlete. Interestingly, different landing distances are often reported within literature, though some authors have concluded that landing distance should be kept at a standardized distance of 50% the athlete’s height since different landing distances can produce different biomechanical results, leading to different scoring and subsequent categorization of errors.¹⁴

Real-Time Analysis: Modifications to the LESS

In an attempt to overcome any perceived issues involving practicality of the LESS, modifications to the system have been developed, allowing for real-time analysis to be performed either by an examiner or through dedicated software designed to capture, analyze, and interpret jump-landing mechanics in real-time.

In the case of real-time scoring being performed by a trained coach or clinician, the modified LESS is used. For real-time analysis and scoring performed by dedicated software, the traditional LESS is utilized.

The Modified LESS

With the modified LESS, a 10-characteristic jump-landing rubric is used in place of the traditional 17-point rubric. This allows for simplification of the test so a trained examiner can observe and score the athlete’s performance in real-time, negating the need for video capture and later analysis. The tester watches the athlete perform two drop-jumps from the front and two more from the side. All other metrics (box height, jump distance, etc.) remain the same.

This modified version has been shown to have high levels of interrater reliability, making it a practical and reliable screening tool for professionals working with the athlete.⁷

Computerized real-time analysis

With the advancement of modern technology, research has been undertaken to determine if computerized real-time video analysis can be a valid and reliable means to performing the LESS assessment. If the ability exists for dedicated software to perform such an immediate analysis, the LESS could become a much more efficient and practical system to incorporate for coaches and professionals working with teams and large numbers of athletes.

With the advancement of modern technology, research has been undertaken to determine if computerized real-time video analysis can be a valid and reliable means to performing the LESS assessment. Share on X

Currently, researchers have examined the ability to automate traditional (i.e., non-modified scoring) LESS scoring through dedicated software and found doing so to be valid and reliable. One study by Mauntel et al. found a real-time markerless motion capture software to have the same reliability in identifying biomechanical errors as expert raters.¹⁵ When using these particular systems, it should be noted that different software programs exist; however, many of these software applications rely on using 3D motion analysis or depth sensor cameras, which may still be cost prohibitive for some coaches or organizations.

Another study by Hébert-Losier et al. looked at automating the LESS through deep learning software from 2D video when combined with machine learning methods, which eliminates the need for depth sensor cameras, allowing for analysis through traditional video recording. Results were favorable, with the authors noting that deep learning software will allow reliable scoring interpretation using smartphone cameras and a subsequent app, paving the way to great accessibility for coaches, teams, and clinicians looking to incorporate the LESS into their athlete assessments.¹⁶

It should be noted that the authors of this study mention that further study of these software systems and programs will be required to further enhance the scoring agreement between the automated system and manual scoring done by coaches or clinicians beyond their current levels.

Final thoughts

If jumping is all about performance, landing is all about safety. A dedicated effort should be made by strength coaches, clinicians, and other professionals to deliberately assess, identify, and correct jump-landing errors in their athletes to reduce the risk of non-contact knee injuries. The LESS provides a reliable and valid means to do so.

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. Brophy RH, Schmitz L, Wright RW, et al. “Return to Play and Future ACL Injury Risk After ACL Reconstruction in Soccer Athletes From the Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) Group.” Am J Sports Med. 2012;40(11):2517-2522. doi:10.1177/0363546512459476

2. Paterno MV, Rauh MJ, Schmitt LC, Ford KR, Hewett TE. “Incidence of contralateral and ipsilateral anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury after primary ACL reconstruction and return to sport.” Clin J Sport Med Off J Can Acad Sport Med. 2012;22(2):116.

3. Emery CA, Roy TO, Whittaker JL, Nettel-Aguirre A, Van Mechelen W. “Neuromuscular training injury prevention strategies in youth sport: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” Br J Sports Med. 2015;49(13):865-870.

4. Hootman JM, Dick R, Agel J. “Epidemiology of collegiate injuries for 15 sports: summary and recommendations for injury prevention initiatives.” J Athl Train. 2007;42(2):311.

5. Everard EM, Harrison AJ, Lyons M. “Examining the relationship between the functional movement screen and the landing error scoring system in an active, male collegiate population.” J Strength Cond Res. 2017;31(5):1265-1272.

6. Hanzlíková I, Hébert-Losier K. “Is the Landing Error Scoring System Reliable and Valid? A Systematic Review.” Sports Health Multidiscip Approach. 2020;12(2):181-188. doi:10.1177/1941738119886593

7. Padua DA, Boling MC, DiStefano LJ, Onate JA, Beutler AI, Marshall SW. “Reliability of the landing error scoring system-real time, a clinical assessment tool of jump-landing biomechanics.” J Sport Rehabil. 2011;20(2):145-156.

8. Onate J, Cortes N, Welch C, Van Lunen B. “Expert versus novice interrater reliability and criterion validity of the landing error scoring system.” J Sport Rehabil. 2010;19(1):41-56.

9. Everard E, Lyons M, Harrison AJ. “Examining the reliability of the Landing Error Scoring System with raters using the standardized instructions and scoring sheet.” J Sport Rehabil. 2019;29(4):519-525.

10. Ramang DS. “The landing error scoring system as a tool for assessing anterior cruciate ligament injury.” Adv Sci Lett. 2017;23(7):6694-6696.

11. Padua DA, Marshall SW, Boling MC, Thigpen CA, Garrett WE, Beutler AI. “The Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) Is a Valid and Reliable Clinical Assessment Tool of Jump-Landing Biomechanics: The JUMP-ACL Study.” Am J Sports Med. 2009;37(10):1996-2002. doi:10.1177/0363546509343200

12. Bell DR, Smith MD, Pennuto AP, Stiffler MR, Olson ME. “Jump-landing mechanics after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a landing error scoring system study.” J Athl Train. 2014;49(4):435-441.

13. Kuenze CM, Trigsted S, Lisee C, Post E, Bell DR. “Sex differences on the landing error scoring system among individuals with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.” J Athl Train. 2018;53(9):837-843.

14. Hanzlíková I, Hébert-Losier K. “Clinical implications of landing distance on landing error scoring system scores.” J Athl Train. 2021;56(6):572-577.

15. Mauntel TC, Padua DA, Stanley LE, et al. “Automated quantification of the landing error scoring system with a markerless motion-capture system.” J Athl Train. 2017;52(11):1002-1009.

16. Hebert-Losier K, Hanzlikova I, Zheng C, Streeter L, Mayo M. “The ‘DEEP’landing error scoring system.” Appl Sci. 2020;10(3):892.