Blog

The mini-hurdle run not only allows coaches to work on perfect timing but also lets us work on lateral strength. Both are attributes that every fast, efficient, and injury-free runner displays.

The push runner who has an extended leg in back and low knee drive often shares the same characteristics of a runner with a crossover gait. Dr. Shawn Allen, of The Gait Guys, and I began investigating this concept years ago. We watched film clip after film clip of runners from a side angle, trying to determine how we could not only prevent injuries but also help athletes run faster.

During this time, one of Dr. Allen’s clients, who had chronic hip and knee pain, was featured running in a local advertisement. We looked at the YouTube clip, where the camera angle was from the front, and quickly discovered the runner had a crossover gait. We watched as she took three strides down the line on the side of a country road. Each stride crossed over the line and landed on the wrong side of her body. Sirens wailed, lights flashed, and the world changed.

Top sprinters land their feet directly under their hips. Share on X

We started filming as many runners as possible from the front and breaking down the filmed movements. Dr. Allen had the ability to test muscles to match the runner’s gait, which enabled us to deduce the problem. We searched for other research on the issue and found very little. So we started to play. YouTube was helpful to watch top sprinters run. Each runner landed their foot directly under their hip. The slower the athlete, the more the hip drifted toward the middle. This was consistent with both distance runners and sprinters. Like a thermometer, we could identify the problem. We wanted to become a thermostat so we could change things.

The Problematic Crossover Gait Motor Pattern: Part 1

The Problematic Crossover Gait Motor Pattern: Part 2

Since we understood that crossing over caused problems, we decided to design exercises to improve the pattern and change running form. We played with basic side planks. However, they did not build the strength necessary to hold the hip in place as a runner’s body weight, doubled, crashes down when the leg hits the ground. Hip hikes on a Swiss ball were an improvement because the foot is in contact with the ground. But they still lacked the appropriate force.

Next, I painted a line down my very long driveway and had my athletes run down the line, focusing on where their foot placement occurred. Sure enough, the athletes felt the stress on their hips. To help them space out their stride and force them to focus on raising their knees up, I placed 6-inch mini hurdles at 1.5 and 1.7m intervals and told them to run through. I could see them start to improve.

After this revelation, I watched Frans Bosch’s Running DVD again. He talked about foot placement relative to the hips. To further stress the hip, Bosch suggested runners fully extend their arms over their heads. We tried it, and it worked.

At this point, using my old school American strength coach mentality, I figured if I added weight, the results would be better. I found myself at a junkyard looking for weighted poles. I found 10, 20, 30, and 35-lb iron bars and had my athletes run with the 10-lb bars raised over their heads. And it worked. I observed noticeable differences in my athletes.

I do not add more than 10 pounds to a runner’s program for quite some time. I look for quickness off the ground first. Then I start to spread out the distance to 1.7m and 1.9m. When the athletes look good at 1.9m, I allow them to add weight. My fastest runners can handle heavier weight.

To add even more stress to the lateral sling, I put pieces of track, approximately ¼ to ½-inch, between the hurdles. This creates additional stress when hitting the ground. When we add speed through the hurdles and short distances between the hurdles, we create a challenging environment.

Keep in mind that this is a progression. A coach can wreck an athlete if they jump to the coolest exercise too soon. Patience is the key.

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 Keni Harrison set the new World Record (WR) for 100m hurdles with a time of 12.20 in July 2016, she erased the 28-year-old record of 12.21 set by Bulgaria’s Yordanka Donkova.

How did Harrison manage to beat Donkova’s time? To find the answer, I dug into the archives of rare and/or unpublished data from Bulgarian studies, and I used my high-speed cameras to capture the world’s best hurdlers.

When Harrison crossed the finish line, the time displayed on the screen was 12.58. But for spectators, Harrison seemed too fast and the rest of the field too far behind for this time to be true.

Yes, Harrison ran 12.20 and no, she did not lean under the photocells. To be exact, Harrison’s time was 12.194. Why did the time 12.58 appear first? There’s a bug in the timing system.

Before analyzing Harrison’s race, I’ll explain how the timing works.

The Timing Bug

OMEGA uses two pairs of photoelectric cells on the finish line so that a time can be shown instantly. Actually reading and interpreting the photo finish takes additional seconds, sometimes minutes. In one case it took years: Donkova’s 12.35 WR in Cologne in 1986 was submitted as 12.34 to the IAAF for ratification, but a closer examination of the photo finish showed 12.35.

One pair of cells is placed 1.10m high from the ground, the second at 1.25m. To stop the clock and to prevent false times (caused by such things as a runner’s hand or a flying animal), both cells must detect movement. This time appears on the stadium board and TV screens. In Harrison’s WR race in London, the clock showed 12.58, which turned out to be the time for the second finisher, Brianna Rollins.

Did Harrison lean too low and go below the radar? No, it’s unlikely, unless a runner dives over the finish line. This did happen recently during the Rio Olympics when Shaunae Miller dived across the finish line in the 400m race. The timing bug also occurred in this race. The screen displayed Miller’s time as 49.51, but the photo finish showed Miller ran 49.44, and Allyson Felix got 49.51.

Miller’s finish followed Kumari Taki’s dive to win the 5000m final at 2016 World U20 Championships:

Kumari Taki 🇰🇪 wins U20 1500 lm world title with style #Bydgoszcz2016 #photofinish pic.twitter.com/EONqqPdCoe

— PJ Vazel (@pjvazel) July 22, 2016

Harrison’s World Record Finish

This photo sequence shows Harrison’s finish:

Figure 1A. Harrison closes to the finish line and the two pairs of cells (black circles on the finish line).

Figure 1B. Harrison’s head meets the upper cell, as indicated by the small red light signal.

Figure 1C. Harrison’s torso meets the lower cell, but there’s too much delay between the two events, and the system doesn’t recognize her as the same object so the clock does not stop.

Figure 2A. The second runner, Rollins, closes to the finish line while the clock is still running.

Figure 2B. Rollins’ body (and possibly Kristi Castlin’s head) meets both cells virtually at the same time, as seen by the small red lights, and she stops the clock at 12.58. After reading the photo finish, Rollins’ time must have been between 12.561 and 12.570 to be attributed an official time of 12.57, according to IAAF rules. OMEGA has released Harrison’s unofficial time to the thousandth: 12.194.

The World Record Race

I combined the data from Bulgarian records with footage of Harrison’s race from videos showing various points of view: three high-speed and four normal speed cameras; two front planes; four panoramic sagittal planes at the start, middle and finish of the race; and one traveling sagittal plane. During the 12.20 race, I recorded times for each interval (8.50m between obstacles) taken at the time of contact of each landing after a hurdle.

2.49, 3.49, 4.45, 5.40, 6.33, 7.27, 8.21, 9.15, 10.11, 11.10

After a 0.149 reaction time, Harrison led the race, passing the 10m mark in 1.98, which the best sprinters achieve during world class 100m finals. I don’t have Donkova’s 10m time for her 12.21 WR, but for her 12.29 WR in 1986, she did 2.01.

Because Harrison didn’t land her leading foot close to the hurdle, her time at the first hurdle is not the fastest ever recorded. Cornelia Oschkenat was timed by Dr. Miskos (Athletics Laboratory UV CSTV, Prague) at 2.47 at the first hurdle during her semifinal at the 1987 World Championships and in 2.48 for 60m hurdles at the European Athletics Indoor Championships (European Indoor) and 7.77 in 1988.

During her career, Donkova tried to use 7 steps to the first hurdle instead of the traditional 8 and managed to decrease her time at the first hurdle touchdown. But then her times slowed down in the race’s first couple of intervals. Since her acceleration pattern suffered, she stuck with the 8-step approach.

It’s interesting to note that the 7-step has been tried for a long time; the first woman under 13 sec. electric time, Chi Cheng, 12.93 in 1970, used 7 steps. But, the 7-step has never really clinched for female hurdlers, unlike their male counterparts. From the start line to the first hurdle, the 13m distance is a closer match to women’s usual sprinting acceleration pattern as opposed to men’s who have a 13.72m distance.

The unit analysis shows that Harrison reached her top speed between the 5th and 6th hurdle, after about 6 sec, similar to normal times recorded for 100m dash sprinters.

1.00, 0.96, 0.95, 0.93, 0.94, 0.94, 0.94, 0.96, 0.99

Donkova’s 12.21 race is yet to be seen on video. The race that’s available on YouTube titled Women’s 100m Hurdles World Record is not the 12.21 race on August 20, 1988, in Stara Zagora. It’s been said the racers ran in the opposite direction to take advantage of the wind. And, as strange as it sounds, only four women were competing. One did not finish and the second place winner was timed at 14.74.

Donkova, then, won by a 2.53 margin. Her touchdown times have never been published outside Bulgaria, and I’m happy to share them:

2.50, 3.47, 4.42, 5.34, 6.24, 7.19, 8.16, 9.14, 10.11, 11.14

0.97, 0.95, 0.92, 0.90, 0.95, 0.97, 0.98, 0.97, 1.03

Note: These times should be taken with a grain of salt because it’s very unusual for an athlete to lose 0.05 from one interval to another, and the 0.90 unit is dodgy.

Excluding Donkova’s possibly not-so-accurate intervals, 0.94 is the fastest unit I’ve found for her, and 0.93 is the fastest unit I know of during 100m hurdles. A 0.94 interval is quick enough to run 12.20, according to the models published in East Germany and the Soviet Union as well as my own recent models using the latest analysis.

A compilation of the all-time best interval units shows that Harrison achieved an outstanding top speed.

• 1-2H 0.97 Lolo Jones (7.72 Doha WI ’10)
• 2-3H 0.95 Gail Devers (12.46 Stuttgart WC ’93), 0.95 Keni Harrison (12.24 Eugene ’16)
• 3-4H 0.93 Lyudmila Narozhilenko (7.68 San Sebastian ’93), Lolo Jones (7.72 Doha WI ’10)
• 4-5H 0.93 Keni Harrison (12.20 London ’16)
• 5-6H 0.93 Brianna Rollins (12.34 Eugene NC ’16)
• 6-7H 0.94 Several women
• 7-8H 0.94 Gloria Uibel (12.44 Roma WC ’87), Keni Harrison (12.20 London ’16)
• 8-9H 0.95 Brianna Rollins (12.26 Des Moines NC ’13)
• 9-10H 0.97 Ginka Zagorcheva (12.34 Roma WC ’87)

To determine a theoretical time for a perfect 100m hurdles race, I added the total of these best world times to the 2.47 approach by Oschkenat and the 0.98 time between the touchdown at last hurdle and the finish line by Devers at 1993 World Championship.

The result is 11.96 for the perfect 100m hurdles. Of course, this is hypothetical because it doesn’t take into account energy distribution.

The perfect time, hypothetically, for 100m hurdles is 11.96. Share on X

Hurdling Technique

It’s a persistent myth that hurdle clearance time is the most important factor in competition results. At the 1991 World Championships, Japanese bio-mechanicians recorded participants’ flight times over the hurdles and run times between hurdles. The results showed that run times have a higher correlation with the final time.

Run times between hurdles, not clearance times, have a higher correlation with final time. Share on X

Yet total run times are not Harrison’s strong suit. Adding in her 9 interval runs without taking into account her hurdle clearance time, her 6.14 is not among the best ever.

Former World Champions Narozhilenko (12.28) and Devers (12.37) and African record holder Glory Alozie (12.44) have sub-6 sec totals.

Harrison’s total hurdle clearance times, 2.76 for 10 hurdles, is among the best. The 1982 European champion, Lucyna Kalek (12.44), and Ginnie Powell (12.45) have a 2.74, and Cindy Billaud did 2.75 for her French record (12.56).

Harrison maintained her shortest hurdle clearance time of 0.27 almost all through the race, while several other women might have hit 0.25 or 0.26, as recorded at 1991 World Championships, but failed to maintain this rhythm.

Donkova, who was a sharp technician, achieved a personal best hurdle clearance of only 0.28 during her 12.21 WR. This is not where she improved over the years. In 1980, she had a 0.31 clearance when she was a 13.24 hurdler while she decreased her run time from 0.73 to 0.64.

It turns out, Harrison has the best combination of all hurdlers.

Of all hurdlers, Keni Harrison has the best combination of flight times and run times. Share on X

The first step after the hurdle is important since that’s where the hurdler accelerates after losing speed from the takeoff in front of the obstacle. The runner also loses velocity during each foot contact so foot contact should be as short as possible.

This is where Donkova excelled with the best times, especially during takeoff, when her contact times were as short as 0.09. She was even timed at 0.083 before the 8th hurdle during the 12.21 WR.

Harrison’s takeoff time is slightly over 0.100 but, at touchdown after the hurdle, she is faster than Donkova at 0.08 vs. 0.083. Only Sally Pearson (12.28 for her 2011 World title) has done better.

Harrison deviates from the model with long air time after the first step. This could explain why, by the third step, she sometimes gets too close to the hurdles. From the front-plane view, you can see that she does side steps. She’s actually running more than 100m.

Training

To achieve 0.93 units in competition, hurdlers work on time or the corresponding speed, 9.14 m/s, by using shorter distances between the hurdles. Harrison has hit 0.92 with 8.25m distance, which is 8.96 m/s, according to her coach, Edrick Floreal. At warm-up before her WR, Harrison used much shorter 7.50m intervals and had best interval times of 0.82-0.83, which is 9.14-9.04 m/s.

Interestingly, Donkova didn’t use distances shorter than 8.10 because her coach believed it would create a different rhythm pattern. They favored 8.15-8.50m intervals.

In August 1988, just days before the 12.21 WR, Donkova ran a significant training workout of 110m with 12 hurdles and 11 intervals at 8.30m distance. The first 5 intervals were run at an average 0.928, exactly as she did during the 12.21 competition, and the remaining 6 in 0.95, demonstrating great top speed and endurance speed.

Flat Speed

The annual progression of the two best hurdlers shows that the differential between 100m hurdle and 100m times, often referred as technical index, improves steeply in their first years and then stagnates.

Keep in mind that their peak 100m times are underestimated because they ran too few races to accurately display their actual potential.

In May 2016, Harrison ran a 100m in 11.35 (0.7), and she called this a bad race. In a properly executed performance, she should be able to run 0.2 faster.

This would be better than Donkova, whose 11.27 personal best (PB) was set in 1982 (0.5) a week after setting the World Leader with 12.44. She must have run faster in the following years if the wind had not been negative for the few occasions she lined up: -1.2 for 11.42 in 1983, -1.2 for 11.44 in 1986, -3.0 for 11.44 in 1987.

Based on Donkova’s best training handheld times, probably achieved in advantageous conditions (wind and altitude), I’ve estimated the corresponding electric times (by adding 0.60):

• 30m 4.16 (100m projection time according to my model: 10.96)
• 60m 7.00 (100m projection: 10.90)
• 100m 10.98

She was probably worth around 11.10 if we also consider her anchor leg times in relays:

• 1987: 10.23 European Cup (fastest of the field, times in the open 100m/anchor relay leg: Marlies Göhr 10.95/10.37, Ewa Kasprzyk 11.45/10.50)
• 1988: 10.26 Olympic Games (Evelyn Ashford 10.83/10.06, Göhr 10.99/10.26, Patricia Girard 11.65/10.48)

Donkova’s step length at her top speed measured during relay races remained similar from 1982 to 1988 (2m22), and her top speed only had marginal gains. Improvement of high-step frequency, especially by decreasing the contact times during the run between hurdles, were her technical trend until 1988.

Can Harrison Capture the World Indoor Record?

Donkova’s indoor 60m hurdles best was 7.74, a WR in 1987.

If Harrison can duplicate her shape next winter, she should be able to run much faster than Donkova’s time, and Sanna Kallur’s current World Indoor Record of 7.68 held since 2008 will be in danger. Harrison will also probably erase Narozhilenko’s 7.63 unratified record due to her 1993 doping offense.

Harrison’s time at 60m was 7.65 (high-speed camera placed at 60m), but theoretically, she could run faster since she had 6 hurdles instead of 5. This winter, she set her PB at 7.77 after a 5th hurdle touchdown of 6.48. Her 1.29 run-in time added to her 6.33 would give her 7.62.

I now expect she’ll have a faster finish.

Author’s Acknowledgments

Special thanks to my friend Daniela who helped me translate Bulgarian material more than a decade ago during endless afternoons. Credits to statistician Aleksandar Vangelov who provided early performance data for Donkova. And I’m grateful to Pr Apostol Slavchev for helping me with documentation for my research.

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

To improve power in the weight room, training hard and heavy comes with a price. Strength training is about breaking down and building up, and athletes can only leverage training adaptations when they maximize recovery. The ideal program strains only the areas that need, and can, adapt to the imposed demands. A shirt that adds appropriate shielding and provides the most comfort makes sense for athletes trying to achieve their best in the weight room and on the field.

Maximal squats, heavy cleans, and explosive jumps with a barbell create collateral damage that does not contribute to building strength. Many athletes and coaches perceive common joint, muscle, and tendon soreness as a cost of doing business.

There’s a big difference, however, between normal soreness and damage to untargeted tissue which may lead to permanent problems.

Even if acute or chronic injury doesn’t occur from heavy training, excessive soreness and pain limit the results of any properly designed strength program. For greater results, the winning formula is to push harder and recover more completely.

Common problem areas for athletes who train hard, even if they have great technique, are the following:

• The Upper Spine: Not everyone’s anatomical structure receives a barbell well on their upper posterior neck. For most athletes, this area isn’t naturally padded by muscle. Even if it is, muscle will always lose to heavy steel. The Apollo SS training shirt solves this problem by covering exposed areas and increasing comfort with state of the art padding.
• Clavicles and Sternum: Front squats, push presses, and heavy cleans place a lot of pressure on the collarbone and breastbone, which are not designed to handle impact forces. The shirt’s built-in high impact pads cover this area precisely for those needing a little assistance with the lifts.
• Anterior Shoulder Area: No matter what grip one uses, racking and reracking a bar on the shoulders can be tough for athletes who don’t have muscular development in this area. Exposed bone can spell discomfort to any athlete, not only those who are smaller in the upper body.
• Nerves, Upper Back, and Shoulders: Some mystery exists in the current science about sensory and motor nerves. Some athletes are highly sensitive and have discomfort in the upper back and shoulders. To eliminate any potential problem, the shirt covers these areas to protect the athlete.
• Trapezius and Other Muscle Groups: Over time, a heavy barbell can wear down other muscle groups in the upper torso. The shirt supports these areas to relieve the muscles and enables coaches to train their athletes harder in the next session.

Discomfort and pain are not caused by imperfect barbell technique; they result from a limit to the design of the human body. Some of the most skilled athletes in international weightlifting and powerlifting wear the Apollo SS shirt.

Pain is not caused by imperfect barbell technique; it results from the human body’s design limits. Share on X

We’ve also seen great results with collision sport athletes who simply need a way to calm the blows of their sport to train effectively. The physical toll of heavy training adds up; many coaches and athletes don’t realize how much recovery time they need to handle the wear and tear of competing, practicing, and training.

When Toughness is Disguised as Macho Foolishness

Some coaches believe a heavy bar crashing or pressing against the body is a sign, or part of, building toughness. We agree that heavy barbells can challenge and teach athletes valuable lessons. Discomfort, however, should come from hard conditioning and not banging up joints and tendons.

NFL coaches and science teams now work together to find the optimal load for hitting and contact using systems like Catapult and other tracking tools. It’s time to direct this attitude to the weight room.

We designed the Apollo SS to protect the areas of the body affected by intense barbell training. We love sensors and tools that measure workouts, but there are not enough solutions available to actually improve high-intensity training. Skin Tech™ is currently protecting players in the NFL, MLB, NHL, NBA, and athletes in both the summer and winter Olympics.

Some athletes roll up towels or use bulky barbell padding, but the experience leaves them frustrated with subpar results. Consider the hypocrisy: specialized bars have massive padding and nearly every leg machine has cushioning for the shoulders. We don’t favor plush spa athlete experiences; we just know that optimal comfort leads to harder efforts and less wear and tear.

For us, toughness is challenging the willpower to push harder. Toughness is not dealing with discomfort or pain; these don’t contribute to physiological improvements in the body. Athletes in contact games like rugby and American football experience enough impact. We want the focus in the weight room to be on building up, not piling on additional pain and trauma.

The Measurable Difference of Training with the Apollo SS Shirt

Recovery from training is a complex process. We’ve done our homework with the science and taken into account the practical considerations of training with correct weight room ergonomics.

Coaches and athletes always ask about a product’s real-world benefits. So what’s it worth? We did some of our own research and looked at the price of impact on athletes playing contact sports. We saw a pattern.

We found that the more impact or loading experienced by an athlete, the longer the recovery needed, all else being equal. There’s a difference between muscle recovery and joint inflammation.

There’s a difference between muscle recovery and joint inflammation. Share on X

The training process breaks down muscle tissue and builds it back up. This is necessary. Soreness is expected and may occur with heavy training. But lingering and excessive joint pain or inflammation only decelerate body recovery. Major pain or discomfort that sabotages sleep and prevents training is unacceptable.

When reporting their willingness to train, athletes are influenced by their physical and training fatigue. We’ve found that willingness specifically to lift heavy with a barbell on the body may not show up with subjective questionnaires, coach and athlete communication, or athlete self-reporting. Not because athletes aren’t motivated to lift heavy or train, but because most athletes don’t look forward to soreness and unproductive pain.

Everyone has a limit, whether physical or mental. We know that even tough athletes who pride themselves on the “no pain no gain” philosophy still benefit from wearing our shirt because it allows them to go harder.

We can care for the majority of athletes that simply use weight training as a means to an end and are willing to go hard provided that reasonable comfort exists when a steel bar goes to the body.

Skin Tech™ innovation adds the ability to safely maximize every athlete’s potential and provides support so recovery is deeper and intensified.

Proprietary Technology and Patent-Pending Design

Skin Tech^™ assembled the utopian training shirt by combining the current leading technologies in both the sport and the protection industries. Every possible function an athlete needs is provided with the most comfortable training shirt on the market.

The Apollo SS delivers the best shielding system to exposed anatomical areas while being ultra-light and incredibly cool. The shirt provides individual, geometric pattern XRD^® Protection foam armor that withstands 90% of the impact from ballistic lifts. It’s resilient to crush loads, has no skin irritants, and is laundry safe. The fabric is designed to allow for ease of motion in any training environment and is built to last.

Skin Tech offers the Apollo SS shirt for both men and women of all ages and sizes. In addition to an array of sizes for different athletes, the shirts can be customized with logos if teams and companies want to promote their brand uniquely.

The Apollo SS was designed to protect muscle, bone, and the nerves. The padding is a mere 6.35 millimeters thick but is able to handle high-velocity and high-load weight training shocks. The geometric patterns are strategically placed for key target areas for both power lifts and Olympic weightlifting. The precise spacing of the patterns allows for a smooth glide to preserve natural motion. In addition to barbell loading, athletes using other weighted instruments like kettlebells and medicine balls will benefit from the shirt’s design.

The Apollo SS uses XRD^® Technology, the leading impact absorption material in the industry. The material boasts an impressive tensile and tear strength index and is rugged enough to handle extreme conditions such as high-speed sports and life-saving professions. The material is surprisingly soft and flexible but is resilient to handle even the most demanding training sessions.

The shirt is cool, breathable, antimicrobial, and designed to resist odors and stains. The reinforced TopCover shield provides added support around the chest and back to reduce muscle fatigue and pressure. The high impact material creates a natural and subtle gap between fabric layers to help release body heat during training. Unlike other protective shirts, the feel is natural and doesn’t irritate the skin. We designed and tested the Apollo SS to be the most comfortable training shirt on the market.

What to Expect and Getting Started

When athletes put on the Apollo SS, they immediately feel the difference. The shirt is ultra-light and feels like a second skin. The high-tech armor covers the areas that need a little more support. The cut is athletic, form fitting, and designed for a personalized experience. Teams can customize their shirts with logos or ship same day if they just want the core essentials. If you have any questions or want guidance on sizing and large orders, visit skintechfit.com and give us a call or email me at [email protected].

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

Sport Science References

1. Ascensa ̃o, A, Rebelo, A, Oliveira, E, Marques, F, Pereira, L, and Magalha ̃es, J. Biochemical impact of a soccer—Analysis of oxidative stress and muscle damage markers throughout recovery. Clin Biochem 41: 841–851, 2008.
2. Brancaccio, P, Maffiuletti, NA, and Limongelli, FM. Creatine kinase monitoring in sport medicine. Br Med Bull 81–82: 209–230, 2007.
3. Cadore, E, Lhullier, F, Brentano, M, Silva, E, Ambrosini, M, Spinelli, R, Silva, R, and Kruel, L. Correlations between serum and salivary hormonal concentrations in response to resistance exercise. J Sports Sci 26: 1–6, 2008.
4. Clarkson, PM, Nosaka, K, and Braun, B. Muscle function after exercise-induced muscle damage and rapid adaptation. Med Sci Sport Exerc 24: 512–520, 1992.
5. Cormack, SJ, Newton, RU, and McGuigan, MR. Neuromuscular and endocrine responses of elite players to an Australian Rules football match. Int J Sports Phys Perf 3: 359–374, 2008.
6. Coutts, A and Duffield, R. Validity and reliability of GPS devices for measuring movement demands of team sports. J Sci Med Sport 11: 500–509, 2008.
7. Coutts A, Reaburn P, Piva TJ, and Murphy A. Changes in Selected Biochemical, Muscular Strength, Power, and Endurance Measures during Deliberate Overreaching and Tapering in Rugby League Players. Int J Sports Med 28: 116–124, 2007.
8. Elloumi, M, Maso, F, Michaux, O, Robert, A, and Lac, G. Behaviour of saliva cortisol [C], testosterone [T] and the T/C ratio during a rugby match and during the post competition recovery days. Eur J Appl Physiol 90: 23–28, 2003.
9. Gill, ND, Beaven, CM, and Cook, C. Effectiveness of post-match recovery strategies in rugby players. Br J Sports Med 40: 260–263, 2006.
10. Hatanaka, E, Furlaneto, CJ, Ribeiro, FP, Souza, GM, and Campa, A. Serum amyloid A-induced MRNA expression and release of tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-a) in human neutrophils. Immunol Lett 91: 33–37, 2004.
11. Hartmann, U and Mester, J. Training and overtraining markers in selected sport events. Med Sci Sports Exerc 32: 209–215, 2000.
12. Hoffman, JR, Kang, J, Ratamess, NA, and Faigenbaum, AD. Biochemical and hormonal responses during an intercollegiate football season. Med Sci Sports Exerc 37: 1237–1241, 2005.
13. King, T, Jenkins, DG, and Gabbett, TJ. A time motion analysis of professional rugby league match play. J Sports Sci 27: 213–219, 2009.
14. Howatson, G and Milak, A. Exercise-induced muscle damage following a bout of sport specific repeated sprints. J Strength Cond Res 23: 2419–2424, 2009.
15. Kinugasa, T and Kilding, AE. A comparison of post-match recovery strategies in youth soccer players. J Strength Cond Res 23: 1402– 1407, 2009.
16. Kyrolainen, H, Takala, T, and Komi, P. Muscle damage induced by stretch-shortening cycle exercise. Med Sci Sport Exerc 30: 415–420, 1998.
17. MacLeod, H, Morris, J, Nevill, A, and Sunderland, C. The validity of a non-differential global positioning system for assessing player movement patterns in field hockey. J Sports Sci 27: 121–128, 2009.
18. Magal, M, Dumke, CL, Urbiztondo, ZG, Cavill, MJ, Triplett, NT, Quindry, JC, McBride, JM, and Epstein, Y. Relationship between serum creatine kinase activity following exercise-induced muscle damage and muscle fibre composition. J Sports Sci 28: 257–266, 2010.
19. McLellan, CP, Lovell, D, and Gass, GC. Creatine kinase and endocrine responses of elite players pre, during and post rugby league match-play. J Strength Cond Res 24 (11): 2908–2919, 2010.
20. Peake, JM, Suzuki, K, Wilson, G, Hordern, M, Nosaka, K, Mackinnon, L, and Coombes, JS. Exercise-induced muscle damage, plasma cytokines, and markers of neutrophil activation. Med Sci Sports Exerc 37: 737–745, 2005.
21. Portas, M, Rush, C, Barnes, C, and Batterham, A. Method comparison of linear distance and velocity measurements with global positioning satellite (GPS) and the timing gate techniques. J Sports Sci & Med 6: 7–8, 2007.
22. Slattery, KM, Wallace, LK, Bentley, DJ, and Coutts, AJ. Effect of training load on simulated team sport match performance. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 37: 315–322, 2012.
23. Smart, DJ, Gill, ND, Beaven, CM, Cook, CJ, and Blazevich, AJ. The relationship between changes in interstitial creatine kinase and game related impacts in rugby union. Br J Sports Med 42: 198–201, 2008.
24. Takarada, Y. Evaluation of muscle damage after a rugby match with special reference to tackle plays. Br J Sports Med 37: 416–419, 2003.
25. Thorlund, JB, Aagaard, P, and Madsen, K. Rapid muscle force capacity changes after soccer match play. Int J Sports Med 30: 273–278, 2009.
26. Tiidus, PM and Ianuzzo, CD. Effects of intensity and duration of muscular exercise on delayed soreness and serum enzyme activities. Med Sci Sport Exerc 15: 461–465, 1983.
27. Vining, RF, McGinley, RA, Maksvytis, JJ, and Ho, KY. Salivary cortisol: A better measure of adrenal cortical function than serum cortisol. Ann Clin Biochem 20: 329–335, 1983.

I grew up in a coach’s house and witnessed the toll that coaching takes on a family. My father coached for 47 years and won 644 games as a basketball coach. By the time I was 15, my dad had coached at five schools and we had moved four times. By then, we were treading water financially. Our family car was a broken-down station wagon with a defective gas gauge and a dented driver’s side door that wouldn’t open. Needless to say, I didn’t drive to my prom.

My mom was the glue that held it all together. Somehow, mom found ways to provide food, clothing, and shelter for six people with limited resources.

In high school, I was ranked fourth in my graduating class and planned to attend college to become a doctor. However, after my first year of pre-med, my gut told me to drop the doctor idea and do what I loved instead.

“Tell me, what is it you plan to do, with your one wild and precious life?” – Mary Oliver, “A Summer Day”

I wanted the life that my father had. I was certain at age 19, and that same certainty has never left me. I wanted to wake up every day excited—excited about the players on my team, the next game, and the next season. I wanted the emotional connection that coaches have with their athletes. I wanted the winning and losing, and everything that went with it.

Most coaching careers end badly. Many are train wrecks. Marriages suffer. Families become dysfunctional. Every year, hundreds of coaches resign “to spend more time with their family.” If a coach is going to survive the long haul, he must take care of his family first. Nothing ends a coaching career faster than problems at home.

Take care of your family first if you want to survive as a coach in the long term. Share on X

I write this with a proud but humble heart. This article is not an attempt to impress anyone. As I enter my 36th year of teaching and coaching, I believe I have something of value to share with others. My survival guide may not be your survival guide. Even though my 18 tips are unique to my life, some of them are universal. I hope young coaches may benefit.

1. Go Home for Lunch

I live four minutes from Plainfield North High School. For more than 30 years of my career, I have lived within a four-minute drive of my workplace.

To my knowledge, I am the only teacher at Plainfield North who goes home for lunch. Rain, sleet, or snow, I go home. Stale air and fluorescent lighting can distort your senses. In addition, eating lunch with unappreciated, underpaid, curriculum-driven teachers is no way to keep your spirits high.

But here’s the more important issue. If you live close enough to go home for lunch, you also have a quick drive to work and a quick drive home. I work with teachers who endure a two-hour round-trip commute. I guarantee you one thing: those teachers aren’t going to coach long. With coaching, my workweek can approach 70 hours. If I added six to 12 hours of driving to a 70-hour week, something’s going to break.

2. Choose Wisely

In my introduction, I mentioned my mom. She was a mother of four by the age of 30 and gave up a promising career, like most women of the ’50s, in order to become a wife and a mother. My dad chose wisely. Not only did he marry an attractive high school valedictorian from a solid family, but he also married a girl who understood sports. Three of my mom’s brothers played college football; two of them became career football coaches.

Venus & Mars marriages may not work so well for coaches.

I married Jill in 1983. We were both teachers. Before we got together, I knew Jill attended every home basketball game at Harrisburg High School. I was the head basketball coach. I also learned Jill was a huge football fan.

To this day, a road trip to a college football game ranks near the top of Jill’s favorite activities. On our 20th anniversary we traveled to Austin, Texas, where we experienced the Sixth Street music scene every night and attended Texas Longhorn football practices during the day. I’ll never forget a booster pointing out their redshirt freshman, Vince Young, and describing him as a tall Michael Vick.

3. Buy a Backyard Pool

In 1993, I won a small settlement for a wrongful dismissal as head basketball coach. We invested around $3,000 into a backyard pool for our family of six. For the next 11 years, our pool was the center of family life.

As a coach, I worked 50-70 hours every week from August until May. In my first eight years of teaching, I coached football, basketball, and track. Over the past 35 years, I’ve coached 72 teams. And, as every coach knows, coaching doesn’t end when the season is over.

For the career coach, summer must become summer vacation. Creating a backyard playground makes sense.

4. Discourage Baseball

Before you question my patriotism, let me explain. I am a lifelong baseball fan. I sat in the bleachers of Wrigley Field when the ticket price was $1.25 (1976). I attended the famous Disco Demolition Night at Comiskey Park in 1979. I played baseball until I defected to the track team in high school. I’ve played fantasy baseball my entire adult life. I named my 2016 teams, “Quantum Entanglement” and “Nikolaus Kopernikus.” I have baseball cred.

My boys played Whiffle ball in the streets. I played catch with my sons like every good American father. They also played Little League baseball.

With three boys playing on three teams in three leagues, Jill and I started to question our quality of life. We initiated a tag team plan. We had three jobs to share: delivery, attendance for a couple of innings, and pickup. The baseball community was probably appalled at our behavior. The normal family would get to the game 30 minutes ahead of time and set up their lawn chairs, with their aunts and uncles and grandparents also joining them. Not us.

Eventually, it got to the point where our oldest son, Alec, was offered a spot a team that would travel to other towns. Recognizing the detrimental effect this would have on summer vacation, I offered Alec the opportunity to attend three basketball camps of his choice in lieu of baseball. Alec attended Duke, Illinois, and Indiana. Yes, I bribed my son to ditch baseball.

Today, youth baseball is the tail that wags the dog for many American families. An alarming number of kids age 6 to 18 are paraded all over the country to play in tournaments and gain national exposure. Parents invest thousands into a sport that was once relatively free. When families follow their prodigies from game to game, the fabric of family life changes. Forget about that backyard pool.

When I think of a coach giving up summer vacation in order to follow their kids’ baseball teams from Tucumcari to Timbuktu, I just shake my head.

5. Rethink Obligations

I was blown away by the book, Essentialism: The Disciplined Pursuit of Less, by Greg McKeown. I believe it to be the best coaching book ever written, even though it’s not a coaching book.

I’ve learned to say no. I have declined hundreds, if not thousands, of graduations, graduation parties, baptisms, First Communions, confirmations, funerals, weddings, school plays, family get-togethers, coach’s parties, and just about everything else you can imagine. I boycott basketball and haven’t watched an entire baseball game for years. I’m getting more selective every year.

Remember, these survival tips are mine. You may disagree. Throughout my coaching career, I’ve made decisions to simplify my life by going big on the things that mattered most to me. I’ve de-emphasized or eliminated many things that others hold dear.

Please understand I am not criticizing those who live lives of duty and obligation. I respect those who show up for their niece’s middle school graduation. I respect people who attend the funerals of distant relatives and friends of friends. Those people have made their choices and I have made mine.

6. Throw Friends Overboard

If my goals are to be a top-notch chemistry teacher, a solid coach, and the patriarch of a large family, obligations are not the only things that may get sacrificed. Friendships may also have to be reevaluated.

I learned at an early age that playing poker on Wednesday nights might not be family friendly. Going out with the guys on Saturday night was not a healthy pursuit. Road trips with college buddies may not be in the cards.

The people I call my friends today are coaches I work with and coaches from other schools. I may not spend time in friends’ backyards, but I have friends.

This gets back to McKeown’s Essentialism. Being a good friend is a wonderfully admirable trait, but it may not fit in with chemistry, coaching, and four kids. McKeown explains: “The word priority came into the English language in the 1400’s. It was singular. It meant the very first or prior thing.” In the modern world, people become overwhelmed with dozens of priorities. Too many priorities “draw us in and drown us in shallow waters.”

7. Reading Is Essential

Books are always available. They never demand my attention, and they don’t make appointments. I’ve read nearly 1,000 books in the past 40 years. To me, reading allows me to travel without leaving my home. I can’t imagine my life without reading.

When money was tight, I got my books from the public library. My Kindle is now my library. Reading fuels my teaching and coaching. Reading quiets my mind and feeds my spirit. Because of reading, I’m never bored. Never being bored is highly underrated.

8. Running Is Essential

Strangely, reading and running are connected in my brain. Back in the ’80s, my wife and I attended a show at Second City in Chicago. When I’m at a comedy club, I try not to get noticed. Nothing good comes from being singled out by a comedian. Well, on this night, I got singled out. The comedian on stage pointed at me and asked, “What are your hobbies?” I cringed and meekly answered, “Reading and running.” “The Most Boring Man in the Room” was an improv classic.

Running and reading have become the common thread of my life. Both are relatively free. Both can be done without going somewhere in a car. Both make me feel healthy. When I’m feeling stressed or out of control, I always find that two things are missing in my life: reading and running.

When my kids were young, every run involved pushing a baby jogger. Not only was I taking care of myself, I was also parenting. Biking, the cousin of running, serves as my alternative workout. My wife and I both rode bikes with permanent child seats attached.

9. Money: All You Need Is Enough

My father never carried a wallet; never slipped me a $5 bill. His pockets were always empty. Dad brought his paychecks home and handed them to my mom. Some people’s minds never stray from the profit margin. The struggle for the legal tender is the alpha and omega of many American men. Not my dad.

What if I had grown up in a family where money symbolized success?

As a first-year teacher in 1981, I was assigned five classes of low-level science in a 100-year-old building with no air conditioning and plaster falling off the walls. I coached football, basketball, and track. My paycheck was $499, twice a month. Renting a trailer cost me $160 and my school loan payment was more than my rent. My teaching salary didn’t exceed $52,000 until I was 47. If I measured success based on my paycheck, I am a career failure.

Teachers and coaches measure success on a different scale. Our success cannot be quantified (though poorly informed people think otherwise).

I grew up in a family who had enough to live on. My kids grew up with enough.

There’s nothing divine about living paycheck to paycheck. Small setbacks cause high anxiety. One of my life’s regrets is not being able to pay for my kids’ college educations. My 26-year-old son, Troy, recently refinanced $106K of student loans. He will pay $925 a month for the next 20 years. If I had stuck with medicine, my kids would be debt-free.

In my ITCCCA Hall of Fame speech, I told the audience, “When Jill and I got married, we were about $20,000 in debt and we rented a house. Here I am 30-some years later, and we are $20,000 in debt and we rent a house.”

10. Take Your Kids to Work

There was no separation anxiety when our kids went to kindergarten because they went to school with their mother. Whether Jill was teaching 2nd, 3rd, or 4th grade, her classroom was right down the hallway from Adrienne, Alec, Troy, and Quinn. The perfect job for a mother puts her in the same building as her kids.

All four of my kids attended my high school. I had the privilege of teaching Chemistry-I, Chemistry-II, and Anatomy Physiology to Adrienne and Alec at Harrisburg High School. In Plainfield, I taught Honors Chemistry to Troy and Quinn.

I never coached my daughter, but I coached Alec’s freshmen and sophomore football teams. I was varsity offensive coordinator when Troy started as a wide receiver during his junior and senior years. Quinn was my quarterback in sophomore football. Alec, Troy, and Quinn ran track, and all three were hurdlers.

By the way, I quarterbacked my father’s sophomore football team and started for his varsity basketball team. Dad was my World History teacher at Princeton High School in 1973.

Having keys to the gym is one of the few perks of coaching. On most Sundays, I would take my kids to the gym. It seemed like they could play there forever.

I don’t think there was ever a track meet where a couple of my kids didn’t ride the bus. They witnessed every locker room and every sideline. Not many jobs are as kid-friendly as coaching.

To this day, I share coaching with two of my boys. Alec coaches football and track at Edwardsville High School. Quinn has been my right-hand man in football and track for the past three years. Soon, he will also be certified to teach.

11. Attendance Is Not Required

I’ve known many coaches who expect their wives to support them by attending their athletic events. This is unhealthy.

Attendance at events should never be required. After a week of teaching 2nd grade (aka, “The Death March”), Jill would often require an extensive period of rest and recovery. Heading out to a Friday night football game or an all-day Saturday track meet would have done her in.

Don’t force a spouse to attend every game or meet. Any involvement should be their choice. Share on X

By the very nature of a coach’s job, the wife of a coach will be involved; very involved. Coaches take their work home. During the season, I am a coach from the time I wake in the morning until the time I go to sleep at night, and then I dream it.

Your wife may want to be your assistant, or the team mom, or super-fan. She may want to sit in the stands and bask in your popularity and hear all the lovely things parents say about you. No problem. Just make sure the involvement is her choice and not yours.

And, on the subject of attendance, never force your wife to attend coach’s parties after games; especially those football parties. The Neanderthal nature of football will often segregate the group into football-talking men in one room and babysitting women in the other. Once again, attendance is fine but not required.

12. Raise Free-Range Kids

It’s strange that so many people prefer free-range chickens, but choose to cage their kids. I don’t know when all of this changed, but parenting today can be a soul-crushing job.

At the risk of sounding like an old codger who talks about the good old days, here goes. Jill and I were born at the end of the Baby Boom. We were born before the pill made it much easier to plan births and limit family size. As kids, we walked to school and walked home. We went barefoot in the summer, climbed dangerous trees, and ate wild berries, green apples, and anything else that looked edible. We made up our own games in the backyard, made our own rules, and fought our own fights. Our dogs ran the neighborhood with us. Bikes would take us places we had never been.

When Jill and I became parents, necessity demanded we raise our kids the way our parents raised us. We were busy people with four kids and no money. Our kids walked from their school to my practice without supervision. Ninety-nine percent of my kids’ athletic development took place without uniforms, travel teams, or personal trainers. Needless to say, we didn’t arrange playdates for our kids.

If we would have raised our kids like the zombie apocalypse parents of today, there’s no way I could have continued to coach. I don’t know how modern parents do all they do. I’m sure it takes lots of sacrifice. I’m just not sure it’s necessary.

Here’s the good news: Kids don’t have to take up all of your time. Free-range kids grow up to be strong and healthy adults. As a bonus, parents of free-range kids also get to live as strong and healthy adults, instead of babysitters and chauffeurs.

13. All Work and No Play Makes Jack a Dull Boy

Coaches need to seriously consider Stephen King’s message from The Shining. Coaches are 24/7 during the season. Raising a family is a 24/7 job for two adults. What could possibly go wrong?

When Jill and I had kids, our lives changed a bit, but nowhere near the colossal change of modern parents. We didn’t give up pizza and beer. We still enjoyed live music. We still went on vacation.

Once, we drove our four kids all the way to Mexico. Actually, we got out of the car in Brownsville and crossed the Rio Grande by walking over a bridge. Another time, we drove to Las Vegas and stayed seven nights. Who takes four kids to Vegas?

We couldn’t afford it, but we went on vacation every year.

The financial advisor, Dave Ramsey, would be appalled at my lack of fiscal accountability. The idea of putting an expensive vacation on a credit card is totally irresponsible. On the other hand, my kids had only one childhood. Vacations were the best thing we did.

14. Golf Is an Addiction

Golf is a wonderful, but addictive, game. I’ve seen countless coaches resign from coaching “to spend more time with the family.” Their public declaration is a ruse. Instead, these ex-coaches play golf every day and, within a year, announce their new position as a dean, athletic director, or assistant principal.

The last time I played golf was in the 1983 “Elks Scramble” in Eldorado, Illinois, three months before I got married. I remember the day well because I lost a small fortune playing craps at a post-tournament party. I haven’t played golf since.

Seriously, golf is a time-eating monster. Playing 18 holes of golf steals the day. If this happened once per week, there wouldn’t be a problem. However, coaches don’t play golf, they intensely compete. When you want to be the best you can be, you work at it every day. When you add socializing to the time commitment, the harm to your family and coaching career may be significant.

When you consider the expense, golf can be viewed as the cocaine addiction of the sports world.

Don’t get addicted to golf. Instead, do something inexpensive, healthy, and family friendly… run.

15. Consider Writing

I did not write my first article until after my youngest son graduated from high school. It seems strange that my hobbies are now running, reading, and writing. Writing does not quiet my mind like running and reading, but there’s a special relationship between all three.

How is my writing related to running and reading? When I run, my mind gets creative. Almost all of my ideas come to me when I’m running. No one taught me to write. Reading provides my only training as a writer. The knowledge that a sentence either sounds right or sounds awkward is a product of being a reader.

Why is writing a survival tip for coaches? Writing forces you to organize your thoughts. Writing helps you to refine your coaching philosophy and articulate your beliefs.

Writing helps organize your thoughts, refine your coaching philosophy, articulate your beliefs. Share on X

If you can’t organize and prioritize your thoughts, how can you coach? Articulation is not just talking: It’s speaking in a way that connects with your athletes. Bad coaches get lost in minutia. Good coaches see things simply and emphasize the critical points. Writing is an effective way to condense and distill your thoughts.

16. Make It Look Easy

Some people have taken the advice, “fake it till you make it.” I don’t like faking it. Presenting your material with confidence is a good thing, but your material needs to be good, too. I have no respect for coaches who don’t attend clinics and don’t read.

One of my favorite Bob Dylan quotes is, “But I will know my song well before I start singing.” It takes years of work to make things look easy.

If someone shadowed me on a typical school day, he or she would probably be disappointed. I make my job look easy. No one would see the work I did to relearn the chemistry that I had long-forgotten. (I started teaching chemistry in 1997, 18 years removed from college chemistry.) No one would see the evolution of my teaching methods; making my classroom easier to manage and more fun to teach. No one would see the mistakes I made and the lessons I learned.

17. Less Is More

American high schools are inexpensive teenage daycare centers, but coaches are not babysitters. As a track coach, I’m no one’s babysitter. Coaches chase excellence. We are not in the business of keeping kids busy until it’s time for dinner.

My track team is focused on results, not practice. Like Steve Jobs, I am focused on content, not process.

I’ve witnessed “process coaches” who filled practice with nonsensical time-eaters. Below is a parody based on a couple of guys I’ve observed in my coaching career. You wouldn’t believe the garbage I’ve seen them do in an attempt to fill two hours (or three hours) of practice time.

Old School Sprint Practice (2 hours)

• Allow sprinters to play grab-ass (10 min)
• Take roll and rant about those not present (10 min)
• Stretch and waste time warming up (20 min)
• Explain workout and listen to sprinters complain (10 min)
• Preach about how today’s athletes lack toughness (10 min)
• Run 10 x 200 into the wind (30 minutes), with first 200 slow and each one after getting progressively slower
• One mile cool-down (10 minutes)
• Team meeting about lack of leadership and low enthusiasm (20 min)

My sprint practice starts at 2:45 and we never go past 3:30. We do the essentials and we go home.

Regardless of the sport, practice should be short. The maximum length of any practice, including football, should be no more than two hours.

Regardless of the sport, practice should be short. Do the essentials and then go home. Share on X

Short practices are good for coaches and the families of coaches. More importantly, short practices are good for student-athletes and the families of student-athletes. I’ve witnessed my own sons come home from football practice too tired to eat. How can this be good for a teenager?

18. Divide the Labor

My grandparents led a life typical of the WW2 generation. My grandfather owned an auto parts store and my grandmother ran the home. I don’t think my grandfather ever did laundry, dishes, cleaning, cooking, or any other domestic jobs. My grandmother’s work never earned her a dollar. Life was good, especially for my grandfather.

Modern life requires a different arrangement. If both parents have full-time jobs, domestic work must be shared. For some reason, many coaches are alpha male WW2-types who come home from a 10-hour day and expect a duty-free evening.

No coach can survive without harmony at home. Raising four kids and keeping up with domestic work was overwhelming at times, but we got it done. The operative word is, of course, we.

+++

If someone asked me to sum up my article in 140 characters or less, I would answer: “Find the work you love, invest your heart and soul, then find a way to balance work and family.”

We all need to ask ourselves, “Am I investing in the right activities?”

Essentialism has taught me that we all have a choice. We can be good at a few things or we can be half-assed at everything. If you don’t have an end game, you may live by default, not by design.

“If you don’t know where you are going, you will probably end up somewhere else.” – Lawrence J. Peter

Too many people fail to make a high level of contribution because they spread themselves too thin. Their career becomes an attempt to look good, rather than actually being good. Their fraudulent performance forces them to echo the ideas of their bosses to appear competent and important.

Recently, Mike Pence, Trump’s vice presidential pick, described himself as a “Christian, Conservative, Republican, in that order.” It’s important to define yourself. If you can’t define yourself, someone else will.

I’m not a Christian Conservative Republican. I am a teacher and a coach. I am also a husband, father, and soon-to-be grandfather. Balancing coaching, teaching, and home life allowed me to be reasonably good at all three. Believe me, a state championship would be meaningless without a happy home. Winning on Friday night would seem hollow if not for my classroom.

To all of you young teacher-coaches out there, always appreciate the uniqueness of your job. You inspire kids and chase excellence on a daily basis. You have the opportunity to share your work with your spouse and kids. When you fight through those tough weeks, remember summer vacation is coming soon.

I remember telling my daughter, “It’s spelled J-O-B, not F-U-N.” I am very fortunate to have a job that still stirs my blood.

I hope my survival tips will help coaches stay in the game.

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

Age-predicted heart rate formulas have long been used in the athletic and fitness communities as a way to measure and safely prescribe exercise intensity, but little research exists about how those equations were derived. And there are numerous discrepancies surrounding these formulas which are considered commonplace.

Further research is needed to determine more valid and reliable methods to measure maximum heart rate for all age groups, genders, and fitness levels within practical resource means.

Developing a standardized approach to achieve more valid and reliable methods to measure maximum heart rate has been an ongoing challenge to scientists, especially considering the number of variables that can affect testing protocol.

These same variables can greatly affect the implementation of heart rate training on a daily basis. This potentially renders it less than adequate for prescribing specific intensities during a session with the intent to achieve a particular adaptation.

The most commonly used and well-known formula is 220 minus an individual’s age, which gives the age-predicted heart rate maximum value (Robergs & Landwehr, 2002). Unfortunately, this formula, nor any other derivative of age-predicted heart rate max, has accurately predicted maximum heart rate on a consistent and individualized basis within a reasonably narrow window of standard deviation.

In fact, this formula was never derived from original scientific evidence, but rather, from observation and compilation from other invalidated research sources (Robergs & Landwehr, 2002). There are numerous variables unaccounted for by these formulas. These include training experience, stress level, efficiency, adaptation level, hemoglobin content of the blood (oxygen carrying capacity), training phase, recovery status, health status, pre-existing health conditions, medications, and more. All of these can drastically affect heart rate and perceived exertion at a given exercise intensity each day.

Physiologically, to compete with the demand for oxygen delivery to the muscles and blood distribution requirements, the natural cardiac response to physical exertion is to increase the heart’s contractility and stroke volume to supply this demand. The two variables that directly play into cardiac output (CO) are stroke volume (SV) and heart rate (HR) such that CO = SV x HR. Therefore, if either one or both of these is amplified or diminished, CO is proportionally affected.

Heart rate max generally decreases with age and diminishing fitness levels and is also influenced by gender (Esco et al., 2015). The most accurate way to determine this value is by maximum exercise testing. Because this is not always practical or feasible for the general population, a heavy reliance on age-predictive formulas has ensued.

Daniels (2014) discusses the correlation between heart rate, velocity at VO2 max (vVO2 max) and blood lactate relating to training adaptation over time. The notion is that with advancement in training, the measured heart rate and blood lactate values associated with an improved VO2 max and vVO2 max were once the values representing lower levels of fitness and speed at a given intensity (Daniels, 2014). Essentially this means that, if a runner can perform at a faster speed with the same heart rate and blood lactate production levels as he or she has done at slower speeds in the past, they have adapted to a given training stimulus and become more efficient as a result.

In this respect, heart rate can be utilized to measure and record training adaptations over time. Relatively speaking, a given starting heart rate per intensity can be compared to the measured heart rate at the same intensity over time.

Typically exercise intensity is prescribed as a percent of the heart rate maximum, which is initially predicted with the infamous age-adjusted calculators, or sometimes through a graded exercise test.

The question remains, if the starting maximum heart rate is predicted incorrectly, does this affect the derived percentage intensities? Or is it all relative regardless of how inaccurate the initial starting number? Or, if the max heart rate is off by 10%, then the subsequent percent heart rates also will be 10% off. This is equivalent to all of them being 100% accurate, right? Let’s test this theory:

According to Daniels (2014), the associated heart rate intensities for a given running pace are distributed as follows:

• Easy/Long Run Pace: 65-79% of Max HR
• Marathon Pace: 80-85% of Max HR
• Threshold Pace: 82-88% of Max HR
• Interval Pace: 90-100% of Max HR
• Repetition Pace: 97+% of Max HR

So if we have John Doe, age 45, with a Predicted Max HR of (220-45 = 175), his respective heart rate measured in beats per minute (bpm) would be as follows:

• Easy/Long Run Pace: 65-79% of Max HR – 114 to 138 bpm
• Marathon Pace: 80-85% of Max HR – 140 to 149 bpm
• Threshold Pace: 82-88% of Max HR – 144 to 154 bpm
• Interval Pace: 90-100% of Max HR – 158 to 175 bpm
• Repetition Pace: 97+% of Max HR – 170+ bpm

Now if John Doe’s actual heart rate were measured at 186 bpm by a graded exercise test, representing a 6.3% difference in maximum heart rate, the values would be as follows:

• Easy/Long Run Pace: 65-79% of Max HR – 120 to 147 bpm
• Marathon Pace: 80-85% of Max HR – 149 to 158 bpm
• Threshold Pace: 82-88% of Max HR – 153 to 164 bpm
• Interval Pace: 90-100% of Max HR – 167 to 186 bpm
• Repetition Pace: 97+% of Max HR – 180+ bpm

As we can see from comparing the actual versus the predicted numbers, the actual appropriate intensities for John are staggered by nearly an entire pace level up, which represents a 6 bpm to 10 bpm difference from the predicted values. Since there is not an even distribution across all intensities, it isn’t safe to assume that all adaptations to training are relative to the initial measurements. Clearly the values are not directly proportional to one another.

Coaches take a large risk prescribing exercise based on predicted percentage of heart rate values. Share on X

Coaches take a large risk when prescribing exercise based on predicted values. There is some overlap at the lower intensities of training, so having John keep his heart rate at an average of 132 bpm for an ‘easy run’ would satisfy both the predicted and actual ranges. However, if John performs his intervals at 160 bpm, in reality, only satisfies the threshold category of training. This which means John would achieve a drastically different outcome from that training session.

Daniels (2014) does note that these generic formulas may be useful for estimating heart rate for a large group of people. On an individual basis, however, there are more accurate ways to prescribe intensity that involve actual performance-based values and account for an athlete’s specific physiology and training background.

Nikolaidis (2014) compared the use of three separate heart rate max equations against a measured maximum in an age group-distributed sample of sport athletes under 18 years-old. Two of these equations are widely used, and one has recently been developed, respectively:

1. Fox-HRmax = 220-age
2. Tanaka-HRmax = 208 – (0.7 x age)
3. Nikolaidis-HRmax = 223 – (1.44 x age) (Nikolaidis, 2014)

To physically measure heart rate max, all of the athletes participated in a graded exercise field assessment involving the 20m shuttle run endurance test (Nikolaidis, 2014). A total 147 athletes across a wide variety of sports (soccer, futsal, basketball, and water polo) were assessed for both a predictive and actual measurement. The values were then compared for data analysis.

This study found that none of the predictive heart rate equations provide accurate values of heart rate max in the sample of young athletes. The Tanaka-HRmax equation underestimated the actual max, and Fox-HRmax and Nikolaidis-HRmax overestimated the actual max across the whole sample.

Equations that overestimate this value can lead to athletes working at a higher intensity than desired and those that underestimate can lead to a lack of stimulus for adaptation. The equations could not be validated in this study. If, however, they are the limiting factor in developing an exercise program, the Tanaka-HRmax equation can be used when coaches want to avoid overtraining. The Fox-HRmax and Nikolaidis-HRmax equations can ensure that adequate intensity stimulus is provided (Nikolaidis, 2014).

In a similar study involving female collegiate athletes from 19 to 25 years-old, three general equations, and two female-specific equations were compared for accuracy against a treadmill-based graded exercise test using the Bruce protocol (3-minute stages with consecutive increases in speed and grade) (Esco et al., 2015). With this protocol, expired gas fractions are monitored by a metabolic cart to assess the respiratory exchange ratio of oxygen to carbon dioxide.

This gives insight as to how the individual is handling the increasing work rate and shows when they pass through the aerobic-anaerobic threshold and the VO2 max is approaching (as indicated by a plateau in oxygen consumption). The highest recorded value of VO2 is then matched with the corresponding heart to determine the maximum heart rate value of an individual athlete (Esco et al., 2015).

The three general predictive formulas used were:

1. Fox-HRmax = 220-age
2. Tanaka-HRmax = 208 – (0.7 x age)
3. Astrand-HRmax = 216.6 – (0.84 x age)

The two female-specific formulas were:

1. Fairburn-HRmax = 201 – (0.63 x age)
2. Gulati-HRmax = 206 – (0.88 x age) (Esco et al., 2015)

All of the equations resulted in large limits of agreement, ranging 10 bpm above and below the mean error, which is not a promising indication that any of these formulas provide a veritable function in exercise assessment (Esco et al., 2015).

The two female-specific formulas were “more accurate” than the three general equations. However, they still tended to over-predict when compared to the actual measured value. When graded exercise testing is not feasible due to a lack of availability of resources, other exercise-based protocols can be implemented, such as the 20m shuttle test mentioned earlier, 2 x 200m sprint trials, and similar assessments (Esco et al., 2015).

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. Daniels, J. T. (2014). Daniels’ Running Formula (3rd ed.),. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
2. Esco, M. R., Chamberlain, N., Flatt, A. A., Snarr, R. L., Bishop, P. A., & Williford, H. N. (2015). Cross-Validation of Age-Predicted Maximal Heart Rate Equations Among Female Collegiate Athletes. Journal of Strength & and Conditioning Research, 29(11), 3053-3059. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000978.
3. Nikolaidis, P. T. (2014). Age-predicted vs. measured maximal heart rate in young team sport athletes. Nigerian Medical Journal, 55(4), 314-320. doi: 10.4103/0300-1652.137192
4. Robergs, R. A., & Landwehr, R. (2002). The surprising history of the “Hrmax=220-age” equation. Journal of Exercise Physiology (online), 5(2), 1-10.

Coaches can develop psychologically motivated athletes with positive self-regard by creating self-worth and a sense of belonging and by limiting judgmental comparisons to other athletes’ success. Coaches can also boost autonomy in their athletes by encouraging self-monitoring, performance reflection, and honest evaluation of physical and emotional well-being.

An athlete’s motivation plays a fundamental role in performance and perceived ability. Motivation comes from internal and external sources, so both nature and nurture contribute to the whole drive of the athlete.

In many ways, the coach plays a pivotal nurturing role by responding to an athlete’s emotional and physical needs. The surrounding climate dictated by the coach, whether it’s critical or motivational, affects the athlete’s psychosocial well-being.

Research delineates two types of climate atmospheres: task-oriented and ego-oriented (Reinboth & Duda, 2004). Task-oriented climates encourage the mastery of the task at hand, skill development, and knowledge acquisition, while ego-oriented climates focus on the individual’s performance and effort relative to other competitors (Reinboth & Duda, 2004).

Stress is an important consideration in an athlete’s overall well-being and can be inversely related to self-esteem. Coaching pressures often cause distress to those athletes who have an egocentric mindset and performance climate. An ego-involved climate can endanger the athlete’s self-esteem with constant social comparison and questions about their adequacy (Reinboth & Duda, 2004).

The same, however, is not true for athletes who aim to master tasks (Pensgaard & Roberts, 2000). In the task-focused climate, self-esteem can be built up gradually with individual development where improvement is only measured by comparing to oneself based on work ethic. Emphasis on the process rather than the immediate outcome contributes positively to self-esteem (Reinboth & Duda, 2004).

Emphasis on the process, not the immediate outcome, contributes to an athlete’s self-esteem. Share on X

In a study by Ruiz-Tendero and Salinero Martin (2012), the researchers found that coaches and athletes equally regarded dedication as the most influential factor of motivated success.

In the same survey, both coaches and athletes voted injuries as the number one factor negatively impacting performance. There is an ego-driven belief that enduring pain and winning are the strongest measures of an athlete’s reputation and success.

Coaches should strongly urge athletes to be smart about their competitive mindset and the damaging consequences of training ignorance. When sustained injuries challenge the athlete’s mental fortitude, mental toughness is better measured with humble honesty rather than stubborn pride.

Coaching environments can either foster or forgo mental toughness, a supplementary component in the motivational toolbox. A supportive environment acknowledges “feelings and perspectives, the use of non-controlling actions and feedback, the provision of meaningful rationales, and the nurturing of individuals’ inner motivational resources” (Mahoney, Gucciardi, Ntoumanis, & Mallet, 2014, p. 282).

Controlling environments provide just the opposite: intimidation, reward manipulation, and negative regard for emotional influence on performance (Mahoney et al., 2014).

One of the best coaching skills is the ability to bring positive enthusiasm to athletes. A 2014 study found a positive correlation between athlete optimism and race times and an inverse relation to negativity (Mahoney et al., 2014).

Without guidance, encouragement, and positive feedback from the coaches, athletes may experience discouragement, lack of motivation, unwarranted anxieties, and burnout.

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. Mahoney, J. W., Gucciardi, D. F., Ntoumanis, N., & Mallet, C. J. (2014). Mental Toughness in Sport: Motivational Antecedents and Associations with Performance and Psychological Health. Journal of Sport Exercise Psychology, 36(3), 281-292. doi: 10.1123/jsep.2013-0260.
2. Pensgaard, A. M. & Roberts, G. C. (2000). The relationship between motivational climate, perceived ability and sources of distress among elite athletes. Journal of Sports Sciences, 18(3), 191-200. doi: 10.1080/026404100365090.
3. Reinboth, M. & Duda, J. L. (2004). The motivational climate, perceived ability, and athletes’ psychological and physical well-being. The Sport Psychologist, 18(3), 237-251.
4. Ruiz-Tendero, G. & Salinero Martin, J. J. (2012). Psycho-Social Factors Determining Success in High-Performance Triathlon: Compared Perception in the Coach-Athlete Pair. Perceptual & Motor Skills: Physical Development and Measurement, 115(3), 865-880. doi: 10.2466/08.25.PMS.115.6.865-880.

 

As head track and field coach at The Classical Academy High School in Colorado Springs, I’ve led our team to 13 Colorado State Championships: 7 girls’ championships and 6 guys’ championships.

I’m often asked, “What’s the secret?”

I don’t believe there’s a specific secret, but if you want to build a winning culture for your program, you need to avoid these three common mistakes.

You are Not Present

As the head coach, I attend everything we do. If a coach is not a presence in the building, there’s a disconnect. It starts with me and ends with me. When we have practice or a weightlifting session with the strength coach or smaller training sessions, I make a point to be there, or I’ll lose that presence with my team.

You Fail to Build Mental Toughness

Coaches undermine themselves constantly when it comes to their team’s mentality. In other words, they lose the mental war. In Colorado, for example, the weather is not great in the Spring. I combat that by always practicing outside, no matter how miserable it is; we don’t succumb to forces outside of ourselves.

Do not create a “victim of circumstance” mentality. I’ve spent a lot of time shoveling the track because, for us, we are going to win regardless of adversity. I am the start of that. We like the phrase, “Shared suffering is shared reward.” And that shows in our team’s mental toughness.

You Promote a Self-Centered and Numbers-Centered Culture

We de-emphasize individualism and numbers. We make a big deal of our team environment because it gives us motivation, retention, and a reason to run. If a kid’s only motivation is their own success, their passion will hinge on their times and their numbers. Ultimately, they’ll feel empty and will fall short. We make a point to motivate kids with a sense of shared community.

We motivate our high school athletes with a sense of shared community. Share on X

We don’t have team goals. We don’t go into a season thinking we’re going to win the state championship; we de-emphasize all of that. When we’re tempted to ask ourselves, “What do we want to do as a team?” we try to instead ask, “What kind of team do we want to be?” Team competition and motivation occur naturally because of the nature of the sport, and we don’t have to talk about times and competition to make that happen.

 

Want to Become a Better Coach This Year?

Glazier Track and Field Clinics is offering free clinics around the country this Fall and later in the Winter and next Spring. Quality coaches are good learners. Time spent at a clinic can be the best opportunity to build your coaching knowledge, experience camaraderie as a staff, and lay the foundation for next season.

Clinics this Fall:

• Atlanta – 9/16-18
• Dallas – 9/30 – 10/2
• Los Angeles – 9/30 – 10/2
• N. Virginia / D.C. – 9/16-18

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

 

Bob Sevene is one of the coaches who has had a profound impact on my coaching career. In a speech he delivered many years ago called, “Building Your Own Road to Success,” Bob began with a line I will never forget: “I could have coached Mary Decker all wrong and she would have gone out and run a 4:20 1500.” That line really surprised me because it’s something I never expected a coach of elite athletes to say. From that point on, I was hooked. I copied just about every word Bob shared after that.

Bob’s point was that, as coaches, we can get carried away by our own sense of importance. He emphasized that distance running is basically 90% attitude and ability, and 5% coaching.

Bob believed that all coaches basically have five methods at their disposal: overdistance, fartlek, intervals, repetition, and sprint training. Over the years, we have learned a great deal about each of these, and most coaches have developed a good grasp of these methods. But Bob said that it is the skill at applying these elements that separates the average coach from the great coach, or, more realistically, the average athlete from the great athlete.

Bob also impressed me with his candid analysis of the top training systems that many of us have adapted to our specific situations. Bob pointed out that younger coaches need to understand that these well-recognized systems were designed by individuals who have worked with high quality, genetically gifted, world-class athletes.

That made sense to me, because even in my limited expertise as a small school high school coach, the years I was most frequently invited to speak at state association clinics were the years I was blessed with state champions or record holders.

Bob believed that the problem with focusing on “winning coaches” is that these coaches can be influenced by the particular athletes they have been training. He applauded their approaches, though, and acknowledged their contributions to the profession; noting that their programs are not only solid, but based on years of experience and experimentation. Nevertheless, the reality is that these coaches work with athletes between the ages of 18 and 30 who have been training and racing since their early teens. Their performance levels also have made them attractive to club coaches, and this means that they have advanced training ages.

Bob’s insights focused on coaches like me—individuals who work with high-school-aged runners with varying degrees of motivation, commitment, and talent. Distance runners are not made overnight, but over years of focused training. Because of this reality, Bob emphasized the importance of patience and gradual development. Long before approaches like David Brailsford’s concept of the “aggregation of marginal gains,” Bob grasped the significance of small gains adding up to remarkable improvement.

'Patience is really the only secret recipe for a prolonged and successful career.' ~Bob Sevene Share on X

He noted that the legendary Boston Bill Rodgers ran for more than seven years before his first marathon and, even with that background, he did not finish the race. “Patience,” Bob said, “is really the only secret recipe for a prolonged and successful career.”

Bob enjoyed sharing the objectives that he tried to achieve through his training. He mentioned the significance of developing speed, building strength, and sustaining gradual development.

“Incorporate speed,” he said, “or near all-out speed, in every workout.” I liked that, because it fit with my emerging overarching philosophy. It emphasizes the significance of training to race and not simply training to train.

I also found three other points of his to be great advice. First, he believed in devising training simulators of what he referred to as the “critical psychological stages of competition.” These are things like hanging with a competitor and drafting, racing tactics, and what he called the “moment of truth”—when an athlete needs to go through what he refers to as the common denominator of all racing: the ability to handle pain.

Second, Bob suggested creating ways to avoid boredom, and increase motivation and enthusiasm. This concept is still held in high regard to this day. As contemporary coach Frans Bosch notes regarding strength gains, “Variability, and avoiding monotony, must be major cornerstones of training.”

Third, Bob emphasized maintaining consistency in life rhythms and patterns. Without regularity,” he said, “even the best training is all but useless.”

So Bob, if you’re reading this, thanks for all that you’ve done for me. You were the first “big time” coach who advised me to evaluate the ideas of others, not with the intent of immediately adapting their proven systems, but to see if I could incorporate their ideas into my overarching philosophy. Your goal was to help coaches like me to think, and to evaluate our training in order to add—or in some cases, get rid of—the ingredients for achieving our goals. “Above all,” you said, “devise your own system of training geared to the lifestyle and goals of your athletes.”

Your great advice served me well for the greater part of the first 40 years of my coaching career, and perhaps explains why I still look forward to fall cross country and spring track.

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

As a coach, I am probably like most of you reading this article. I do not have a master’s degree or a doctorate, and I do not have years of research under my belt. What I do have are 22 seasons of coaching experience, the hundreds of speeches I have listened to, and the thousands of pages of articles I have read. All three have helped shape my ever-evolving coaching philosophy.

Like most high school track-and-field coaches, my team at Lake Forest High School (IL) does not have access to an indoor track. We spend most of our time before spring break in a gym, a hallway, the wrestling room, or the weight room. We adapt and persevere out of necessity.

Part of our recent sprint success at Lake Forest can be attributed to the fact that we get a lot of great multi-sport athletes out for our program. Our three themes for a successful pre-season and early-season sprinting program—Acceleration, Coordination, and Variation—are another huge factor. Everything done in the general and specific preparation phases of the season revolves around those three themes.

Acceleration

Acceleration is an essential element for nearly every event in track and field, and almost every sport in the world. Football is often described as a game of inches. People get to those inches by accelerating to them. Acceleration wins games and races. Part of the reason football, basketball, and soccer players make such great track-and-field athletes is because they already have a lot of experience with acceleration. Perhaps the greatest enticement we can make for multi-sport athletes to come out for track and field is that we will teach them proper acceleration.

Acceleration should be taught on day one and should still be a focus the last week of the season. The importance of acceleration in sprinting events can hardly be overstated. The ability to accelerate to top speed appropriately will not only help the athlete get ahead early in the race, but will also help them achieve a higher top speed. But not all acceleration starts out of the blocks. Relay members, jumpers, and pole vaulters also need to learn proper acceleration in order to succeed in their events.

When teaching acceleration, progression of position is more important than progression of distance (1). Progressing from a 10m start to a 20m start to a 30m start is very logical. But progressing from a two-point start to a three-point start to a four-point start to a block start will help you get the best out of your athletes. The two-point start is the most logical place to begin, as it closely mimics the start of acceleration in other sports (2). Regardless of fitness level or experience, all athletes should begin with the two-point start. Some coaches introduce block starts on day one. However, until an athlete is able to properly accelerate without a block, they should not be given the much more complex task of starting with a block.

There are dozens of ways to practice acceleration (falling starts, push-up starts, kneeling starts, etc.) and dozens of other drills to help with acceleration (wicket drills, acceleration ladders (3), stair hops, etc.). There have also been hundreds of articles written about the proper start mechanics, but all that research can only be applied after systematic work on acceleration. Most athletes naturally want to sprint too soon, and start their acceleration by moving their head. This initial action causes them to stand up right away, display frontside mechanics too early, and curb their acceleration (4). Consistent and repeated exposure to proper acceleration work can fix crucial mistakes such as these.

Consistency of acceleration can win meets as well. However, that consistency does not come to athletes who have coaches with lackadaisical approaches to acceleration development. The long jump, triple jump, high jump, pole vault, and javelin athletes with consistent coordination will hit their marks more often. Hurdlers have to hit that first hurdle in stride or risk having their entire race compromised. Consistency in the handoffs is a goal of every 4x100m relay team. Athletes who have weeks and month of practice in acceleration will be more consistent as the outgoing runner, which is a huge deal in a race where 0.05 seconds often determines the difference between winning and not winning, qualifying and not qualifying, and scoring and not scoring.

Acceleration is the suggested first macrocycle in a short-to-long program. Even when the focus shifts to power, top speed, speed endurance, or any other theme, acceleration remains a priority. Every block start, hill repeat, interval, handoff, run-through, and approach will help the athletes hone their acceleration in a specific environment. The base for all this work is built in the first part of the season.

Athletes with poor acceleration lose races, while athletes with effective acceleration win them. Share on X

Simply put, athletes with poor acceleration lose races. Athletes with effective acceleration make winning look easy.

Coordination

The emphasis placed on coordination was perhaps the most confusing aspect of all of the coaching journals I read and the presentations I watched as a young coach. Every top coach I studied, from Boo Schexnayder to Loren Seagrave to Tony Veney, seemed to talk quite a bit about how important coordination was to sprinters and phosphate athletes. How could this be?

Does it take great coordination to run in a straight line? Yes, it does! Running at top speed is an exceptionally coordinated skill. Almost everybody can see how running the 4x100m relay or the hurdle events can take incredible coordination, but the coordination needed for the general sprinting events is often overlooked (5). Have you ever seen a robot run on two feet? Nope. Running at top speed is basically a repeated process of falling and catching yourself several times a second. It is an extremely complex, coordinated task.

Multi-sport athletes have great success in track and field due partly to superior coordination. Share on X

Part of the reason multi-sport athletes have such great success in track and field is because of their superior coordination. Football players, traditionally, make the best track-and-field athletes because of their combination of speed, strength, power, explosion, and mindset. But do not discount their amazing coordination as well. The most coordinated events in track and field are the hurdles, and there is a long list of great football players who were also outstanding hurdlers (Bo Jackson, Roger Craig, Willie Gault, Rod Woodson, Tyrone Wheatley, Qadry Ismail, Ted Ginn Jr., Jamaal Charles, Robert Griffin III, Jabari Greer, Brian Hartline, Todd Gurley, Ezekiel Elliott, Devon Allen, etc.). Basketball, soccer, volleyball, field hockey, lacrosse, wrestling, baseball, handball, and tennis athletes also have incredible coordination.

Virtually everything done in track-and-field practice will have some coordination element to it, and the more you can match the activity to the event, the better. Sprinting at top speed is in itself a great coordination exercise. You can also add coordination to your practice plan during the warm-up, speed drills, plyometrics, body weight circuits, and lifting routines. Most sprint programs have basically melded their warm-up and speed drills together. The days of jogging followed by static stretching are long gone. Skipping, backwards running, bounding, galloping, and various other locomotor activities are great at developing general and specific coordination, but only if done while closely mimicking proper running form. Such drills also contribute to flexibility and elasticity while also getting the athletes ready for the demands of a track-and-field practice.

Dynamic stretching activities such as walking lunges, side lunges, knee grabs, flamingoes, speed skaters, and the like deal with balance, which is an aspect of coordination. However, they are not as applicable to sprinting coordination due to the fact that the athletes are never airborne. Adding an element of balance to weightlifting, such as having the athletes use a physio ball instead of a bench for bench press, can have great proprioceptive benefits. However, these should also be considered a buttress to your coordination activities, instead of a pillar.

The previous section of this article was about acceleration, and this section is very much about deceleration. Every athlete will decelerate at the end of a race. Much of that deceleration is due to poor race modeling and energy system failure (6). But deceleration is just as often caused by lack of coordination due to central nervous system (CNS) fatigue (7).

Coordination exercises build up the CNS, in essence giving your body a bigger “battery.” A long sprint will erode even the most fit athlete’s CNS. Those with superior coordination will be able to keep themselves upright and headed toward the finish line because they are able to maintain the proper posture. You will notice athletes falling apart and losing coordination more in their second, third, and fourth events of a meet because their CNS is fried. They may have the energy to get to the finish line, but their eroded coordination makes the journey more difficult.

The erosion of coordination is also present at practice, which is why the tasks that require the most coordination should take place immediately after a proper arousal warm-up (8). Starts, acceleration, top speed work, handoffs, fast hurdle work, intense intervals, run-throughs, plyometrics, and the like should come first. More stationary activities, like hurdle mobility, body weight circuits, medicine balls, balancing routines, and weightlifting should take place near the end of the practice session.

Be patient and involved when working on coordination, because the neuromuscular system takes time to develop. Building the pathways to improved recruitment, force production, and coordination is not an overnight task. Extremely gifted athletes can master new tasks relatively quickly, while we mere mortals will need guidance, patience, and repetition. That is why coaching and monitoring athletes during all their activities is so important. There is a point and purpose to every drill and every skill. Some athletes just go through the motions but, as a coach, you must ensure they are active in putting their foot to the ground, instead of letting gravity do the work (9). Results are maximized when adequate time and care are taken to develop appropriate coordination.

Variation

Athletes need to learn movement patterns common to their sport, but they also need variety to avoid overworking their muscles, tendons, and ligaments. Planned variances should be employed throughout the course of the training program. Variety enhances adaptation by increasing the complexity of the training stimulus. This forces the body to adapt in different ways, making it inherently better at adaptation (5). A good variety of skills, drills, and exercises can help your athletes become strong, healthy, and competitive.

There are many ways to apply the variation principle to your early-season practices. You can start implementing this principle right away with your warm-up and speed drills. As mentioned earlier, the days of jogging followed by static stretching are long gone. The lack of variety is one huge reason for this. Instead, those skips, bounds, and drills that aid your athletes with coordination are also adding necessary variety.

Performing a variety of drills can be great, but varying the way you do each drill can be beneficial as well. We do not learn by constantly repeating the same solution to a movement problem, but by constantly solving new movement problems (11). Rather than just having the athletes do bounds, you could set out cones and have the athletes aim to land next to each cone on the bounds. These cones can then be lengthened, shortened, or mixed-up to add variety. The distances and heights can be varied for mini-hurdles and box jumps. The athletes will see it as a challenge as well, since it’s different from most maximum effort challenges inherent in sport.

The central nervous system is basically a computer programmed by repetition (10). But the CNS also needs variation to assess all the possibilities of movement in between known skills. Repetition is great for rhythm and learning, but jumping the same way every time can lead to overuse injuries and micro-trauma (11).

One of my favorite track videos, below, is not of a race or a competition. It is of a drill, and the commentary is not even in English.

Video 1: Stefan Holm Hurdles Training

The video shows Stefan Holm, the 2004 Olympic Gold medalist in the high jump, who holds a personal best of 7’10.5” despite standing only 5’11”. The spring in his legs is impressive, of course. Also note that he is training for the high jump without actually high jumping. The next video shows how he adds variety to his training by “high jumping” six different ways. The variety keeps him jumping while decreasing the risk of overuse injuries.

Video 2: Six Degrees of Jumping – Stefan Holm

He still has to work on approaching the mat correctly and negotiating his body over the bar, but he is giving his muscles some variety and therefore reducing his chances of an overuse injury. Of course, this is a man who had been a world-class high jumper for a decade before the video was made. High school jumpers will need time to develop the muscle memory and rhythm of the event. But variety can be a great way to keep your athletes healthy, hoppy, and happy.

For instance, having the entire team do hurdle drills can help them with their hip strength and mobility. It can also help the coaching staff discover which athletes may be naturals at hurdling. We have days in the first few weeks of practice when each athlete rotates between four stations: high jump, long/triple jump, pole vault, and hurdles. The event coaches get a chance to discover which athletes have talent in their discipline, and the athletes get some exposure to a variety of different training activities. The time at each event station is short—around 20 minutes. After a few weeks, the time is increased, but the choice of stations is decreased. Athletes have to specialize eventually, but giving them exposure to new events helps with talent identification and variation of training.

Variation can be applied to your weight-room sessions as well. For our first two lifting cycles, we give the athletes a choice on most exercises to use the machine, the bar, or the free weights. The main benefit is that, with up to 60-70 sprinters and jumpers lifting, the increased options will lead to less standing around. Another benefit is that the athletes come from different weightlifting backgrounds and may be more comfortable with one type of lifting over another. We specialize our lifts later in the season, but early on the variety helps us in numerous ways.

As your season progresses, limit the athletes to the drills and skills that best aid in their systematic retrieval of information. If every week is a new series of gimmicks and drills, the level of skill acquisition is greatly diminished (7). Be wary, however, of taking too much out of your program. Insufficient diversity in exercise choices, especially later in the season, can create declines in flexibility and elasticity (8).

Where Is the Endurance?

Some of you may be looking at these themes and wondering how we get our athletes in shape. First off, I would like to say that “in shape” is a generally meaningless phrase. Being “in shape” can mean 100 different things. People too often confuse good cardiovascular endurance for being “in shape.” If a football player and a cross-country runner both try out for the basketball team, odds are the football player—though his cardiovascular endurance will almost certainly be lower—will be in better shape for the basketball season. The cross-country athlete will surely be in better shape for long, sustained bouts of exercise, but the football player will be used to the stop-start motion, cutting, jumping, and constant acceleration and deceleration of basketball.

The phrase ‘in shape’ is generally misused. ‘In shape’ is not having good cardiovascular endurance. Share on X

Coordination and variation can be two great themes, even for distance runners (12). The best distance runners I have ever had the pleasure of coaching were all great athletes.

Back in 2003, I was as an assistant cross country coach at Eau Claire Memorial High School (WI) under head coach Mark Johnson, whom everybody called “Mojo.” The skips, bounds, hops, sprints, hurdle drills, and dynamic stretches of Mojo’s warm-up looked straight out of a sprinting practice.

Our best guy was Ryan Loshaw, who was a school record holder, city champ, and conference champ, and placed 15th at the state championships. He was also an All-State swimmer on the sprint relays, and now does professional CrossFit competitions. (He has put on around 40 pounds of muscle since high school.) Our best girl was a freshman named Katie Bethke, who was the school record holder, city champ, conference champ, and sectional champ, and placed seventh at the state championships. She started for the varsity basketball team all four years, was All-State in soccer three years, and played professional soccer for five years after graduating from a record-breaking soccer career at the University of Minnesota.

Billy Bund, the best distance runner I have coached at Lake Forest, played football and baseball his freshman year of high school. He didn’t run a step until his sophomore year, and ended up in the Top Five at state championships in cross country and the 1600m run.

Distance runners need endurance work, of course, but they can also benefit from the coordination and variation aspects described here. Speed workouts can also have a dramatic effect on distance runners (13). IMG Academy coach Loren Seagrave points out that a main difference between national class and world-class distance runners is not necessarily their resting heart rate or VO2 max: It’s their 20m fly time (9). Speed kills, no matter what the distance.

Sprinting and jumping build speed. Endurance does not build speed. A great pre-season and early-season program that focuses on themes of acceleration, coordination, and variation can help your sprinters, hurdlers, and jumpers achieve their end-of-season goals.

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

References

1. Sanders, Gabe. “Acceleration Progression – Working from the Top Down.”
2. Gifford, Matt. “Developing a Contest-Specific Acceleration Model.”
3. Gifford, Matt. “The Acceleration Ladder.”
4. Seagrave, Loren. “New Neuro-Biomechanics of the Start & Acceleration.” February 6, 2016. WISTCA Clinic, Madison, WI.
5. USATF Coaching Education Programs – Level 2 Sprint/Hurdles/Relays
6. Thomas, Latif. “3 Reasons Sprinters Fall Apart at the End of Races.”
7. Veney, Tony. “The Complete Guide to Track & Field Conditioning: Sprints & Hurdles.”
8. Schexnayder, Boo. “The Complete Guide to Track & Field Conditioning: Jumps.”
9. Seagrave, Loren. “New Neuro-Biomechanics of Max Velocity Sprinting.” February 5, 2016. WISTCA Clinic, Madison, WI.
10. Fichter, Dan. “Train the Nervous System.” June 18, 2016. Track-Football Activation Consortium III, Lombard, IL.
11. Smith, Joel. “Plyometrics.” June 18, 2016. Track-Football Activation Consortium III, Lombard, IL.
12. Christensen, Scott. “Coordination as a Primary Physical Component in Cross Country Training.”
13. Pickering, Craig. “Should Distance Runners Do Speed Workouts?”

The day-to-day demands on an athlete can be psychologically difficult. Training is often monotonous and improvement can occur at a steady rate at best. There are many reasons for athletes to doubt themselves, their coaches, or their training programs. The mind can have a crippling effect on performance during all facets of training and competition.

There are great resources available that discuss the common psychological issues that athletes face. Areas of traditional sport psychology include the following:

• Stress Management and Relaxation
• Arousal Regulation
• Self-Talk
• Imagery and Visualization
• Goal Setting
• Confidence and Self-Esteem
• Attention and Focus

While all topics are beneficial, and it is certainly a good idea to learn these strategies, some topics are more useful than others. Take the topic of confidence, for example. I feel that workshops using self-assessment questionnaires and other methods of self-analysis are often a waste of time. The majority of psychological traits are deep and complex, and are not simply surface issues. Many traits have been ingrained from early life experiences and the societal brainwashing that we are subjected to daily.

I have made the statement, “Genetics win,” many times, and we can talk about nature versus nurture for days. The fact is, they both play a part. I do believe, however, that you can change these learned traits through strong belief and focus, and allow yourself to live through a perspective that you choose. Ultimately, you CAN change your life’s path.

Instead of simply repeating the content of hundreds of texts discussing the clinical aspects of applied sport psychology, I wanted to take a deeper look at perspective and how it can affect every outcome in a person’s life.

Fearless Desire

I begin by discussing the ultimate psychological destination: fearless desire. Fearless desire is achieved through a process of awareness, understanding, and change, and is directed by mastering situational perspective. In my opinion, it is our ultimate goal.

Failure & achievement are essential to growth & development, along with the need to embrace fear. Share on X

This detachment from fear and consequence allows for a freedom that is associated with both failing and achieving. Both are essential to the process of growth and development, as you can’t have one without the other. Fear places athletes in a virtual stranglehold and limits all human potential, both physically and mentally.

For example, consider a child and how intense they can be when they want something. When they want it, they REALLY want it. In fact, for a lot of children, that thing—whatever it is—becomes the center of their life for that brief moment. They have no consideration for others, no thought of consequences, and no fear of outcomes. A child is able to truly live in the moment and practice fearless desire without conscious thought. This is incredibly powerful.

Unfortunately, by the time we reach our teen years, it is nearly impossible to eliminate experience from our psychological makeup. Our minds become so cluttered with experiences and opinions that making clear, non-biased decisions is no longer natural. Embracing fear is an important step toward freeing yourself from this destructive pattern of self-perspective.

A fearless desire doesn’t mean disconnecting with emotions. Instead, it means using them to our benefit by understanding how to leverage fear and change our perspective. Athletes face fear on a daily basis. Self-doubt, fear of failure, and fear of vulnerability are very common and require strategic thought and action, which I will discuss throughout this article. The creation of a mindset of freedom and exploration begins with a deeper look into perspective and how it shapes our lives.

Perspective, or the Lack Thereof

According to Merriam-Webster, perspective is “the capacity to view things in their true relations or relative importance.”

Perspective is an incredibly powerful word. It is commonly used to ground people, and to keep them in touch with (someone’s) reality. It is rarely used for positive reasoning.

Perspective can severely hold you back, especially when you are daring to dream big. Athletes who dream are in a powerful position. The feeling that anything is possible is a difference-maker when unlocking the restrictions that society places on us. When a dream becomes a purpose, it provides an influence like no other. There isn’t a drug, psychologist, or parenting book available that can do more for a child’s focus, self-esteem, and desire to achieve than the pursuit of a dream. A dream establishes an identity, and that develops a passion like no other.

As parents, mentors, role models, and coaches, we need to do all that we can do to light the fire of a dream and let it burn for as long as possible. Encouraging an opposing perspective doesn’t mean being reckless or harnessing false hope. It means encouraging those that want it, those that need it, and those that have it. It means teaching how to identify oneself through a dream and how to live with a purpose. After all, it is through failure that we succeed, through process that we learn, and through a dream that we live.

How often have you been told to “get your head out of the clouds,” or that “you need to come back down to earth”? I bet it’s happened many times. It seems that we are always being told what we can’t do and what we shouldn’t think, and that certain things are just not possible. In a culture where dreams are laughed at and extraordinary ability is viewed as abnormal, I am here to tell you that it is through a lack of perspective that you just might persevere long enough to achieve your dreams.

Optimism Is a Choice

A healthy mind is determined by one thing, and that one thing is your thoughts. Your thoughts control everything—every emotion and every act. You are your thoughts. This can be a great thing, but it can also derail every chance you have of success.

Optimism is closely linked with perspective and how you CHOOSE to perceive certain situations. I emphasized “choose” because you always have a choice. Life is about routine and habit. Human beings subconsciously stick with what they know and, as a result, often get stuck in a particular mindset. More often than not, we focus on negative desires, negative influences, and negative outcomes. Why is this? Well, it ties in closely with my previous thoughts on perspective. We have been conditioned to focus on the risks and negative “what ifs” associated with trying something different or difficult. We no longer associate the possibility of achieving greatness with our view of ourselves.

When someone truly believes in themselves and accepts the potential of great personal achievement, they can become unstoppable. Unfortunately, getting to that point can be very difficult. Revising perspective or learning to see perspective in an entirely new light can help tremendously. Here’s how:

Practice the Law of Attraction. You have likely heard this before. I truly believe in the Law of Attraction, even though it can’t be explained through science or data. It is a belief much like religion or faith, and I understand why many people would be skeptical about this. I’ll just ask this: Given that we all have a choice whether to think positively or negatively, why would you choose to think negatively? Change the way you think and you’ll change many outcomes in both your sporting and personal lives.

Realize that you can’t achieve without trying. One of the main reasons for the endless cycle of negative thoughts creating negative outcomes is the fact that negative people never give themselves a chance. You’ll never score if you never shoot. Negative people don’t shoot because they already believe they are going to miss. Missing in life is no different. You’ll be truly amazed what you can accomplish if you’d only give yourself a chance. It all starts with belief. You can’t desire what you don’t believe in. Be optimistic and start believing now!

Create a resilient mindset. Resiliency is an incredibly important attribute. I would put it in my Top 5 must-haves for becoming a great athlete. Condition yourself to have a thick skin, and to never stay down when you feel like you’ve been knocked to the floor. An optimistic outlook on life is one piece of the resiliency puzzle.

Separate yourself from others. Perspective is reality according to the views and opinions of others. It is often based on events and consistencies that have nothing to do with you. Separating your reality from the histories of others is important, as you should never fear an outcome based upon another person’s personal experiences. You create your own reality and, as much as society wants you to succumb to its sheep-like ideology, success is often down to you and your actions alone.

Don’t let your perspective be based on other people’s experiences and opinions. Create your own. Share on X

Live in a bubble. Dreams, motivation, drive, and laser-like focus go hand in hand. The relentless pursuit of a dream places a person in an almost abstract world where anything goes; creating the ultimate freedom. There are no limitations, no interferences, no opposing views, and no negative energies. It will eliminate noise, increase confidence, and generate positive self-talk and an overall sense of well-being. These are all important qualities to have when aiming to achieve personal greatness.

Get out of a rut. If you’ve been around sports long enough, you know that success and development are never smooth sailing. There are many ups and downs, and sometimes the downs persist for several weeks or months. During times of struggle, the reality of failure can be tough. This is an ideal time for an athlete to alter their perspective to aim for a new goal and a new direction within their sport. For example, this could be the excitement of following a new program or seeking a new coach.

Identify with those who are like-minded. Choose your training partners wisely. Surround yourself with those who share your perspective on the present and the future. A coach’s words and actions should be aligned with the perspective of the individuals that he coaches. He should aim to enhance all positive attributes linked to it and get rid of those that are detrimental. Amazing achievements can be made through teamwork and support.

Make excuses. Real excuses are important. For instance, if you jumped poorly but had a hurricane-force wind in your face, you certainly need to recognize that. If you can truly justify something that’s happened, whether negative or positive, you have a greater chance of either putting it behind you or using it for your future benefit. An athlete who has been taught to never make excuses can lose sight of clear and obvious reasons that justify a performance.

When you’ve put your heart and soul into a goal, like many track and field athletes have, the last thing you want to do is accept failure if: a) you were not in control of it; or b) you didn’t do all you could to prevent it from happening. Remember: Your perspective and perception of an event will shape your response to it, and that will decide your future path. Allow for real excuses, as they can often give you the motivation you need to achieve your future successes.

Cultivating the Fire

Through careful nurturing, your personal fire can create the greatest opportunity for developing perspective. There are several stages to the process and recognizing them can give you the best chance of persevering when your journey hits a roadblock.

Stage One begins with exposure. This is when you experience something new for the first time. A sport, game, sound, person—whatever it is, it provokes a feeling that is hard to describe. You certainly know it when you feel it. This newfound passion soon becomes how you identify yourself. My own fire began this way when I was 15 years old. That’s when I fell in love with sports and, specifically, jumping. My fire has remained lit ever since; even through a lot of heartache and tears.

Stage Two is instant reward and gratification. Everyone loves Stage Two. Typically, during these immediate stages of practice and obsession, you develop quickly, improving your skills and knowledge of a sport. Confidence is at an all-time high at this point and you have no doubt that this was your calling all along. Very little effort is required during these early stages, as it all flows effortlessly and you feel yourself on track to becoming the next great athlete in your sport.

Then, just like that — Boom! A figurative punch in the face. Stage Three is the first roadblock or plateau. Although normal, this stage throws a lot of people. This isn’t where most people give up, however. It’s too early for that! Most people will have enough desire to get through this first struggle; instead, this is actually where the obsession hits an all-time high.

Still as motivated and obsessed as ever, you reach for the books and begin learning everything possible about your sport. Soon enough, you begin improving again, but this time the progress has slowed considerably. Right around this point is when you realize just how far from your goal you still are, and your excitement begins to wane. Doubt begins to take over, practice begins to feel like a chore, and you lose motivation and start to miss training days. The vicious cycle of negativity and bad excuses has begun. This is where most dreams end.

Further improvement at this point may take three months, or three years, so don’t be discouraged by the lack of instant gratification and improvement. At this stage, everyone improves at a different rate and, for many athletes, this slow, incremental growth is debilitating. However, the point is that, except for physical limitations related to age, there isn’t a set time frame for personal development. Everyone develops at their own rate, and it make take years for some people.

Throughout my coaching career, I have seen dozens of athletes quit too early, whether because of time, money, or other realities of life past college. Of course, these are all understandable reasons and I can’t comment on personal decisions. However, self-doubt fueled by slow improvements, poor training and coaching, and the failure to achieve poorly established goals are far too common reasons for quitting early.

I can promise you that no high school or collegiate athlete has reached their personal ceiling. They haven’t yet done all they can to ensure further development and they simply haven’t spent enough time trying. Sure, many athletes fail to improve after high school and college, but this is often because of poor lifestyle choices, training, coaching, and other related factors. Again, these athletes haven’t done all they can to improve.

Their personal dream ended right when they were no longer willing to go the extra mile; when they resigned themselves to the fact that they could no longer achieve that dream. Athletes in this situation aren’t able to control their thoughts anymore, and their perspective has become so negative, untrusting, and controlling that they no longer believe in their journey. The chance of potential “failure”—often in the eyes of others—is no longer worth it in their own eyes.

The most important decision an athlete can make is to keep their dream alive as long as possible. Share on X

But your actual potential is largely irrelevant. You’ve heard that the journey is greater than the end result, and I echo this statement emphatically. If your dream was truly real, what you learn about yourself throughout the journey can’t be matched. The single most important decision you will ever make is to keep the fire burning for as long as possible.

Filtering the Noise

The topics discussed here can be difficult to achieve. Therefore, athletes must put themselves in the best possible situation to succeed emotionally, socially, and physically. Your mindset drastically changes with your environment. No matter how disciplined you are, it is human nature to be influenced by your surroundings. Perhaps your healthy diet doesn’t quite fit with the eating habits of your roommates. Or, Friday night is party night in your house but you have competitions on Saturdays. Your life isn’t “normal,” and you can’t do what your non-athlete friends and family might do.

As an athlete, if the majority of your time isn’t spent with like-minded people, you place yourself in a difficult situation. Even the most strong-willed people have a perspective that’s deeply affected by their surroundings and the people with whom they surround themselves. Perspective will decide every act and decision that you make.

Every aspect of your life can be viewed as noise if it doesn’t support your goal. We are all surrounded by noise—some more than others—and it is often impossible to get rid of it all. I can’t tell you how many athletes I’ve worked with who suffered because their “support system” was anything but supportive.

Stress management and focus are two areas of sport psychology that relate to this concept. Recovery from the physical and emotional stressors of day-to-day training is largely impacted by the athlete’s ability to deal with those stressors in a positive way. Living in a stressful environment with people who choose destructive actions will make recovery impossible. “Stressful” can refer to financial issues, lack of sleep, arguments with a significant other, studying problems, or difficulty maintaining a social life, to list just a few.

Identifying the noise may be easy, but then you also have to decide to filter it. Much like the food you eat, your life choices can either help your journey or hurt it. Every choice you make will contribute in some way to your end result. Deciding to go “all in” can make the difference you’ve been so patiently waiting for.

View your journey as a great block of ice and each decision you make as an axe sculpting the art of your life. Take it seriously.

A Resilient Mindset

I once asked an Olympic gold medalist if he saw a sport psychologist or did any formal psychological preparation. He said he never considered it because he never had any psychological problems. As I got to know him, I quickly realized why: He never let anything bother him. No matter what happened on or off the track, his perspective was incredible. His outlook on life enabled his confidence and motivation to remain high at all times. His resilient mindset is the underlying reason for his longevity and success.

I believe the relationship between a person’s perspective and their spirit is clearly evident. Perspective shapes your existence. What kind of existence do you have? What kind of existence do you want?

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

There are numerous factors, both genetic and adaptive, that can affect an athlete’s efficiency. When a non-athlete first begins a training program, there are significant neuromuscular adaptations that must occur to their most basic coordination patterns in order to lay the foundation for biomechanical efficiency. This efficiency, also known as “running economy,” is usually measured by the consumption of oxygen per kilometer run, per kilogram body weight. In other words, better running economy equates to a more efficient utilization and recycling of oxygen during a workout. There is a direct parallel between running economy and performance, in that the greater the running economy, the more efficient the runner, and the better the performance.

Running economy has been found to be a better predictor of performance than VO2max. In fact, when comparing runners with a similar VO2max, running economy can differ by as much as 30%, and substantially demarcates elite from trained recreational and untrained individuals. The intrinsic and extrinsic factors that may be modifiable will be discussed individually in order to gain a better understanding of the variables at play in an athlete’s running economy.

Intrinsic Factors

Intrinsic factors consist of fundamental anatomical movement patterns and their corresponding physics in application, which collectively produce a specific performance outcome. Typically, they are trainable up to the athlete’s genetically predisposed limits of athleticism, through experience and careful program design.

Spatiotemporal Factors: The Gait Cycle

Running velocity can be thought of as the product of stride frequency (cadence) and stride length. Increasing either one of these can lead to improvements in speed. Runners will adopt an innate frequency and stride length based on anthropomorphic factors such as height and weight, in a process called self-optimization; this subconscious tuning leads to near optimal efficiency for a given runner. This self-optimized frequency and stride length often differs from mathematical optimums by 3% in each category, leading researchers to believe that there is a range of optimum in which a runner can perform without compromising running economy. For example, the optimal range for stride length would be from the runner’s preferred stride length to minus 3% of the preferred. This range applies to well-trained runners, but be cautious of generalizing this to a novice athlete, as self-optimization seems to occur mainly with experience.

Experienced runners seem to self-optimize their stride frequency and length for optimal efficiency. Share on X

Vertical oscillation is another spatiotemporal factor that can be altered to improve efficiency. This parameter is a measure of the vertical displacement, or “bounce,” that occurs within a runner’s stride. Vertical oscillation tends to increase with fatigue and decrease when an athlete is running barefoot or with improved running economy. Theoretically, reducing vertical displacement improves running economy by attenuating the metabolic cost related to the supported body weight and reducing work against gravity. The higher the bounce in a runner’s stride, the more impact that needs to be absorbed with each landing foot. This can be costly over the long run, resulting in unnecessary fatigue. Therefore, encourage your runners to minimize vertical oscillation in their strides.

Ground contact time is a final factor in this category, and is highly debated in the field. Some studies say that short ground contacts are metabolically costly due to the high force production and requisite recruitment of expensive fast-twitch muscle fibers. Other studies have said the opposite: that long contact times are more metabolically expensive due to the lengthened “braking,” or deceleration, phase. What is true is that decreasing speed during the contact phase is not desirable. Therefore, regardless of contact time, deceleration is the least economical factor in this discussion.

Individuals with a rearfoot strike often exhibit longer ground contact times. More importantly, they decelerate with each stance phase, which can greatly affect running economy. The biggest determinant of metabolic cost is the distance ahead of the hip that the foot lands when initial contact with the ground is made. Ideally, the foot contacts the ground directly under the hip, and not out in front, for the most economical return of energy.

Kinematics: Movement Patterns

Many kinematic factors have been studied as potentially limiting factors in a runner’s overall economy. Cross comparison studies have found the following to be beneficial in improving kinematic efficiency:

• Greater plantarflexion velocity
• Greater horizontal heel velocity at initial contact
• Greater maximal thigh extension angle with the vertical
• Greater knee flexion during stance
• Reduced knee range of motion during stance
• Reduced peak hip flexion during braking
• Slower knee flexion velocity during swing
• Greater dorsiflexion during stance
• Slower dorsiflexion velocity during stance
• Greater shank angle at initial contact

We can examine leg-extension at toe-off, stride angle, and foot strike patterns more closely because they’re the parameters with the most supporting evidence. Reducing leg extension at toe-off can be accomplished by either one or a combination of reducing plantarflexion and decreasing knee extension as the runner pushes off the ground. This error can be seen most often in runners that exhibit an exaggerated reach behind the body with each stride. The leg extensor muscles can function closer to optimal when some tension remains in the slight flexion of the hip and knee joint at the end of this phase. This partial flexion also means that less energy will be required to move the leg into the swing phase of full flexion by lowering the moment of inertia.

Stride angle is a relatively new research topic, defined as the angle of the parable tangent of the center of mass at toe-off. Larger stride angles have been shown to lower VO2 at a given velocity, by decreasing stride length or increasing swing time, which makes for more efficient recycling of oxygen at a given pace. The trade-off of increasing swing time is often an increased vertical displacement, so it’s important to consider multiple factors when assessing an athlete for these inefficiencies.

Finally, according to empirical evidence, the effect of foot strike on running economy may be negligible with the following exception. Evidence surrounding optimal foot strike patterns shows that habitual forefoot strikers lose no efficiency when switching to a rearfoot strike; however, habitual rearfoot strikers show significantly worse economy when adopting a forefoot strike at slow (<3m/s) and medium (3.1-3.9m/s) speeds. A runner’s primary foot strike pattern should remain consistent, especially in the case of heel strikers, in order to maintain optimal efficiency.

Kinetics: The Forces That Cause Motion

The kinetic force that results in movement is the summation of multiple component forces such as deceleration (braking) plus acceleration (propulsion). Ground reactive force (GRF) is measured in three planes of motion: anterior-posterior, medial-lateral, and vertical. It is most ideal to have a high anterior-posterior propulsive force, low anterior-posterior braking force, and low medial-lateral and vertical forces in order to be most economical. In addition, changing the kinematic joint angles has been shown to reduce muscular strain during force generation, thereby improving economy.

The cost of force production has been reevaluated many times within the research, but the synergistic task-by-task approach is the most accepted of late. This theory proposes that 80% of metabolic cost can be attributed to body weight support and forward propulsive forces, 7% to leg swing, 2% to lateral balance, and 11% to inexplicable costs such as braking forces, ventilation, and cardiac work. See Figure 1 for a graphic representation.

The magnitude of the GRF has a linear relationship with the vertical displacement of the runner. Using the spring-mass model, a spring’s stiffness can be calculated as the ratio of deformation (vertical displacement) to the vertical GRF; in the case of a runner, this number represents the stiffness of the entire musculoskeletal system. Leg stiffness is the ratio of maximal vertical force to maximal leg spring compression, and greater leg stiffness has been associated with a better running economy based on stretch-shortening principles on a cellular level.

Numerous extrinsic factors can affect leg stiffness. For example, exertional fatigue, increased surface compliance, and cushioned footwear all decrease stiffness and GRF, resulting in an attenuation of running economy. There are various methods to improve muscle tendon stiffness, with the most notable being plyometric training. Neuromuscular training and activation plays a pivotal role in stiffness as well.

Neuromuscular Activation and Recruitment

The creation of optimal muscle recruitment patterns is essential for developing the most efficient mechanics possible, thereby conserving the greatest amount of energy per stride. Well-trained advanced runners are known to have extremely refined muscle recruitment patterns as compared to novice athletes. Greater muscular activation in the lower limbs has been correlated to an increased VO2 at a given velocity, which consequently makes it detrimental to running economy. When more muscle fibers are recruited, there is a greater oxygen demand in those muscles, which increases the metabolic cost and lowers efficiency. Novice athletes have greater neuromuscular activation but, with experience, this process fine-tunes almost automatically to a more precise and ideal recruitment pattern.

Preactivation, also known as muscle tuning, is a prerequisite to ground contact with the potential to enhance GRFs via the stretch-shortening cycle. Simultaneous coactivation of agonist and antagonist muscle groups such as the quadriceps and hamstrings has been found to impair running economy. This is simply due to the fact that one muscle group cannot work as efficiently when the other is inhibiting its full activation with an opposing movement. A degree of relaxation is necessary, though some coactivation is also requisite to keep the leg from collapsing.

Extrinsic Factors

Running shoes and surface compliance are two of the main factors that affect running economy in the extrinsic category. There appears to be an optimal level of cushioning that is conducive to efficiency. Studies have shown that shoes with 10mm of cushioning tend to be more beneficial for running economy than either 0mm or 20mm of surface cushioning. Furthermore, running on grass is more economical than sand, based on the stifling of mechanical work on the latter surface.

Optimal level of cushioning in running shoes & surfaces is necessary for the best running economy. Share on X

A firmer terrain enhances the ability to generate more energetic return, and a firm surface with some compliance such as grass can give an even greater return due to the elastic rebound properties it possesses. By the same token, softer shoes lose more energy during the stance phase than a stiffer, motion-controlled shoe. Shoes with more forefoot flexibility allow for greater propulsive forces to be generated, and reduce the strain on the gastrocnemius muscle during slow-speed running (<3m/s). The data shows that a shoe with a medium level of cushioning and flexibility may be ideal for maximizing return and efficiency. Trunk and upper limb biomechanics are less researched aspects of form, though unnatural or inconsistent movement patterns can clearly alter the balance of lower limb mechanics, thus reducing economy. In studies where the arm swing was suppressed, a decrease in peak vertical force and increase in knee and hip flexion angles were observed—both caused a slackening in muscle stiffness. Altering arm swing mechanics through training can prove to be more detrimental than simply allowing the natural balance to develop over time.

Developing Economy Through Training

Although no long-term studies have been conducted regarding the effect of training strategies on running economy, short-term interventions of 3-12 weeks are well supported. A study involving trained runners with poor economy found that spatiotemporal factors of running gait could be trained and improved after only three weeks of audio feedback. Four-week interventions utilizing minimalist footwear have shown promise in improving running economy, mostly by creating a more anterior footstrike and strengthening muscle-tendon stiffness.

When researched in the literature, popular acclaimed running techniques such as Pose, Chi, and midstance-to-midstance running have been shown to neither improve nor worsen efficiency. There is simply no evidentiary support for the claim that any of them improve running economy. Their implementation failure lies in the lack of specificity in targeting biomechanical factors, and/or targeting too many at the same time.

Anthropomorphic factors also play a role in how altering biomechanics may affect the individual. For example, asking an athlete with long legs to decrease their stride length results in increases in VO2 and decreases in economy; the same is true when asking an athlete with shorter legs to increase their stride length. More research is needed in this area to determine how best to customize the optimal stride range based on anthropomorphic qualities.

Future studies investigating the effects of longitudinal interventions will be helpful in drawing more reliable conclusions regarding the modifiable factors of running economy. What is clear is that many intrinsic spatiotemporal, kinetic, kinematic, and neuromuscular factors, as well as extrinsic factors, are at play collectively, and they all tie in to performance-related outcomes. Optimizing one or many factors can produce positive training effects in both trained and untrained athletes, and performance improvements will be quick to follow.

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. Bonacci, J., Chapman, A., Blanch, P., & Vicenzino, B. (2009). Neuromuscular adaptations to training injury and passive interventions. Sports Medicine, 39 (11), 903-921.
2. Moore, I. S. (2016). Is there an economical running technique? A review of modifiable biomechanical factors affecting running economy. Sports Medicine, 46, 793-807.

Nutrient timing has been the subject of many research studies, and has always been controversial among athletes, researchers, exercise physiologists, and dietitians. A number of researchers have even made reference to an “anabolic window of opportunity.” The idea behind this “anabolic window” is to try maximizing exercise-induced muscular adaptations and facilitating the repair of damaged tissue [1]. Some researchers even claim that certain nutrient timing can increase fat-free mass [2].

This article will deal with the post-exercise period, which is often considered the most critical part of nutrient timing. In it, I’ll try to analyze if such an “anabolic window” really exists.

Protein Breakdown

One of the biggest claimed benefits of post-workout nutrient timing is the attenuation of muscle protein breakdown.

Spiking insulin levels stop breakdown of muscle protein, not increased amino acid availability. Share on X

While it’s a common belief that muscle protein breakdown inhibition is achieved by increasing amino acid availability, it is actually achieved by spiking insulin levels [3,4]. Although the mechanism by which insulin reduces protein breakdown is not clear, it has been suggested that insulin-mediated phosphorylation of PI3K/Akt inhibits transcriptional activity of the proteolytic Forkhead family of transcription factors, resulting in their sequestration in the sarcoplasm away from their target genes [5]. In addition, down regulation of other aspects of the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway are also believed to play a role in this process [6,20].

Nevertheless, whether benefits truly extend into practice is still questionable; especially when muscle protein breakdown is only slightly elevated immediately following exercise, and then rises rapidly afterward (increasing as much as 50% at the three-hour mark, and elevated proteolysis can persist for up to 24 hours of the post-workout period) [4].

In addition, the effect of increased insulin levels on net muscle protein balance plateaus in the range of 3–4 times normal fasting levels (15-30 mU/L) [6], and this range can be easily reached with the consumption of a typical mixed meal prior to exercise.

For example, one study [7] examined many metabolic effects during the five hours after ingesting a meal containing 75g of carbohydrate, 37g of protein, and 17g of fat. This meal raised insulin three times above fasting levels within half an hour of consumption, five times greater than fasting levels after one hour, and two times greater than fasting levels after five hours.

Another study [8] showed that it took approximately 50 minutes to cause blood amino acid levels to peak after a 45g dose of whey protein isolate was ingested. Insulin concentrations, on the other hand, peaked 40 minutes after ingestion, and remained elevated enough to maximize net muscle protein balance (15-30 mU/L) for approximately two hours.

Thus, the classic post-exercise objective to quickly reverse catabolic processes to promote recovery and growth may only be applicable in the absence of a pre-exercise meal. It remains questionable as to what, if any, positive effects occur with respect to muscle growth from spiking insulin after resistance training.

Protein Synthesis

Another major claimed benefit of post-workout nutrient timing is that it increases muscle protein synthesis. A number of studies have investigated whether this “window” truly exists when it comes to protein synthesis. While evidence from these studies might support the superiority of post-exercise protein intake versus carbohydrate only, or non-caloric placebo [9-13] resulting in the common recommendation to consume protein as soon as possible after a workout [14,15], there is little evidence-based support for this practice. For example, one study [16] showed no significant difference in leg net amino acid balance for six grams of essential amino acids coingested with 35 grams of carbohydrate taken one hour after exercise and then three hours after exercise. In addition, another study [17] also found no significant difference in net protein synthesis between the ingestion of 20 grams of whey immediately before exercise and the same meal consumed one hour after the exercise.

One the other hand, it is important to mention that the opposite results have also been found. For example, one study [18] found that ingestions of essential amino acid and carbohydrate meals led to greater protein synthesis in the post-exercise group as compared to the pre-exercise group. Moreover, another study [19] demonstrated a clear benefit to consuming nutrients as soon as possible after exercise, as opposed to delaying consumption. Protein synthesis of the legs and whole body was increased threefold when the supplement was ingested immediately after exercise, as compared to just 12% when consumption was delayed. However, a limitation of the study was that training involved moderate-intensity, long-duration aerobic exercise. Therefore, the increased fractional synthetic rate was likely due to greater mitochondrial or sarcoplasmic protein fractions, as opposed to the synthesis of contractile elements [4,20].

In conclusion, the available data lacks any indication of an ideal post-exercise timing scheme for maximizing muscle protein synthesis [20].

Muscle Hypertrophy

Many studies [21-27] investigated the effect of post-exercise protein ingestion on muscle hypertrophy. As shown in Figure 1 [20], the results of these trials contradict each other, apparently because of different study designs. For example, many of these studies used both pre- and post-workout supplementation, making it impossible to isolate the impact of post-exercise intake only. Another example is the unmatched protein consumption in the control group. Hence, we are not able to confirm if these positive outcomes were influenced by ingestion timing, or by a larger protein intake throughout the day.

Moreover, some of the studies were conducted early in the morning—a situation that might lead to an overnight fast workout, which can skew the results in favor of the post-exercise feeding groups. Other limitations to these studies might be the use of untrained participants (as muscular adaptations in those without resistance training experience tend to be robust, and do not necessarily reflect gains experienced in trained subjects) and the addition of other supplements (e.g.: creatine) to the participants’ meals, which can create the differences seen between the treatment and control groups.

These confounders emphasise the difficulty in drawing smart conclusions as to the validity of this “anabolic window.”

In addition to these findings, a recent multi-level meta-regression of randomized controlled trials was conducted to determine whether protein timing is a good strategy for enhancing muscle hypertrophy [28]. This analysis comprised 23 studies that included 525 subjects with 47 treatment or control groups. A simple pooled analysis of protein timing without controlling for covariates showed a small to moderate effect on muscle hypertrophy (Figure 2) [28]. However, in the full meta-regression model, controlling for all covariates (the class of the group, whether or not the groups were protein matched, training status, blinding, gender, age, body mass, and the duration of the study), no significant differences were found between the treatment and control groups (Figure 3) [28]. Moreover, the reduced model was not significantly different from the full model. In addition, with respect to hypertrophy, total protein intake was the strongest predictor of effect size (ES) magnitude.

These results refute the commonly held belief that the timing of protein intake in and around a training session is critical to hypertrophy and indicate that consuming adequate protein in combination with resistance exercise is the key factor for maximizing it.

Strength

The same multi-level meta-regression of randomized controlled trials [28] was also conducted to determine whether protein timing is a good strategy for enhancing strength. The simple pooled analysis of protein timing without controlling for covariates showed no significant effect found on muscle strength (Figure 4) [28]. In addition, the full meta-regression model, controlling for all covariates (the class of the group, whether or not the groups were protein matched, training status, blinding, gender, age, body mass, and the duration of the study), also found no significant differences between treatment and control for strength, and the reduced model was not significantly different from the full model.

On the other hand, there are a few limitations to this analysis. First, the timing of the meals in the control groups varied significantly from trial to trial. Some studies provided protein as soon as two hours post workout, while others delayed consumption for many hours. Second, the majority of the studies evaluated subjects who were inexperienced with resistance exercise. It is well-established that highly trained individuals respond differently to the demands of resistance training compared with those who lack training experience [28]. In part, this is attributed to a “ceiling effect,” whereby gains in muscle mass become progressively more difficult as a trainee gets closer to his genetic hypertrophic potential.

To conclude, these results refute the belief that the timing of protein intake in and around a training session is critical to increase strength.

Evidence-Based Support of an ‘Anabolic Window’ Is Far from Decisive

This “anabolic window” hypothesis is usually based on the assumption that the athlete is in a fasted state prior to a workout, during which an increase in muscle protein breakdown causes the pre-exercise net negative amino acid balance to persist into the post-exercise period, despite training-induced increases in muscle protein synthesis [4,20]. Thus, if the resistance workout is actually being done after an overnight fast, it would make sense to provide immediate nutrition for the purposes of promoting muscle protein synthesis and reducing proteolysis [20].

If a pre-exercise meal was consumed, this meal can function as both a pre- and post-exercise meal, depending on its size and composition. One study [16] found that ingestion of six grams of essential amino acids (a relatively small amount) immediately before the workout was able to elevate blood and muscle amino acid levels by around 130%, and these elevated levels remained high for two hours after the workout. Other research [17] showed that an intake of 20 grams of whey immediately before the workout caused an elevation in muscular uptake of amino acids of 4.4 times greater than pre-exercise resting levels during the workout.

These findings suggest that even a small to moderate pre-workout protein, taken right before a resistance workout, is enough to sustain amino acid delivery into the post-workout period. Therefore, the next scheduled protein-rich meal (whether it occurs immediately or a few hours after exercise) is likely sufficient for maximizing recovery and anabolism [20].

However, given the fact that the anabolic effect of a meal lasts five to six hours [29], it is worth mentioning that an athlete who might train before lunch or supper—where their last meal was finished five to six hours prior to their workout—should consider a post-exercise protein intake. That is, when a workout is initiated more than five hours after the previous meal, the recommendation to consume protein as soon as possible seems logical.

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. Kerksick, C., T. Harvey, J. Stout, B. Campbell, C. Wilborn, R. Kreider, D. Kalman, T. Ziegenfuss, H. Lopez, J. Landis, J.L. Ivy, and J. Antonio. “International Society of Sports Nutrition position stand: Nutrient timing.” J Int Soc Sports Nutr. (2008): 5-17.
2. Ivy, J. and R. Portman. “Nutrient Timing: The Future of Sports Nutrition.” North Bergen, NJ: Basic Health Publications, 2004.
3. Biolo, G., K.D. Tipton, S. Klein, and R.R. Wolfe. “An abundant supply of amino acids enhances the metabolic effect of exercise on muscle protein.” Am J Physiol 273(1 Pt 1) (1997): E122-129.
4. Kumar, V., P. Atherton, K. Smith, and M.J. Rennie. “Human muscle protein synthesis and breakdown during and after exercise.” J Appl Physiol 106(6) (2009): 2026-2039.
5. Kim, D.H., J.Y. Kim, B.P. Yu, and H.Y. Chung. “The activation of NF-kappaB throughAkt-induced FOXO1 phosphorylation during aging and its modulation by calorie restriction.” Biogerontology 9(1) (2008): 33–47.
6. Greenhaff, P.L., L.G. Karagounis, N. Peirce, E.J. Simpson, M. Hazell, R. Layfield, H. Wackerhage, K. Smith, P. Atherton, A. Selby, and M.J. Rennie. “Disassociation between the effects of amino acids and insulin on signaling, ubiquitin ligases, and protein turnover in human muscle.” Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 295(3) (2008): E595–604.
7. Parkin, J.A., M.F. Carey, I.K. Martin, L. Stojanovska, and M.A. Febbraio. “Muscle glycogen storage following prolonged exercise: effect of timing of ingestion of high glycemic index food.” Med Sci Sports Exerc. 29(2) (1997): 220-224.
8. Power, O., A. Hallihan, and P. Jakeman. “Human insulinotropic response to oral ingestion of native and hydrolysed whey protein.” Amino Acids 37(2) (2009): 333–339.
9. Tipton, K.D., A.A Ferrando, S.M. Phillips, D. Doyle Jr., and R.R. Wolfe. “Postexercise net protein synthesis in human muscle from orally administered amino acids.” Am J Physiol 276(4 Pt 1) (1999): E628–634.
10. Miller, S.L., K.D. Tipton, D.L. Chinkes, S.E. Wolf, and R.R. Wolfe. “Independent and combined effects of amino acids and glucose after resistance exercise.” Med Sci Sports Exerc. 35(3) (2003): 449–455.
11. Borsheim, E., M.G. Cree, K.D. Tipton, T.A. Elliott, A. Aarsland, and R.R. Wolfe. “Effect of carbohydrate intake on net muscle protein synthesis during recovery from resistance exercise.” J Appl Physiol 96(2) (2004): 674–678.
12. Tipton, K.D., T.A. Elliott, M.G. Cree, S.E. Wolf, A.P. Sanford, and R.R. Wolfe. “Ingestion of casein and whey proteins result in muscle anabolism after resistance exercise.” Med Sci Sports Exerc. 36(12) (2004): 2073–2081.
13. Tipton, K.D., T.A. Elliott, A.A. Ferrando, A.A. Aarsland, and R.R. Wolfe. “Stimulation of muscle anabolism by resistance exercise and ingestion of leucine plus protein.” Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 34(2) (2009): 151–161.
14. Phillips, S.M. and L.J. Van Loon. “Dietary protein for athletes: from requirements to optimum adaptation.” J Sports Sci. 29(Suppl 1) (2011): S29–38.
15. Phillips, S.M. “The science of muscle hypertrophy: making dietary protein count.” Proc Nutr Soc 70(1) (2011): 100–103.
16. Rasmussen, B.B., K.D. Tipton, S.L. Miller, S.E. Wolf, and R.R. Wolfe. “An oral essential amino acid-carbohydrate supplement enhances muscle protein anabolism after resistance exercise.” J Appl Physiol 88(2) (2000): 386–392.
17. Tipton, K.D., T.A. Elliott, M.G. Cree, A.A. Aarsland, A.P. Sanford, and R.R. Wolfe. “Stimulation of net muscle protein synthesis by whey protein ingestion before and after exercise.” Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 292(1) (2007): E71–76.
18. Fujita, S., H.C. Dreyer, M.J. Drummond, E.L. Glynn, E. Volpi, and B.B. Rasmussen. “Essential amino acid and carbohydrate ingestion before resistance exercise does not enhance postexercise muscle protein synthesis.” J Appl Physiol 106(5) (2009): 1730–1739.
19. Levenhagen, D.K., J.D. Gresham, M.G. Carlson, D.J. Maron, M.J. Borel, and P.J. Flakoll. “Postexercise nutrient intake timing in humans is critical to recovery of leg glucose and protein homeostasis.” Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 280(6) (2001): E982–993.
20. Aragon and Schoenfeld. “Nutrient timing revisited: Is there a post-exercise anabolic window?”. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 10 (2013): 5.
21. Esmarck, B., J.L. Andersen, S. Olsen, E.A. Richter, M. Mizuno, and M. Kjaer. “Timing of postexercise protein intake is important for muscle hypertrophy with resistance training in elderly humans.” J Physiol 535 (Pt 1) (2001): 301–311.
22. Cribb, P.J. and A. Hayes. “Effects of supplement timing and resistance exercise on skeletal muscle hypertrophy.” Med Sci Sports Exerc. 38(11) (2006): 1918–1925.
23. Willoughby, D.S., J.R. Stout, and C.D. Wilborn. “Effects of resistance training and protein plus amino acid supplementation on muscle anabolism, mass, and strength.” Amino Acids 32(4) (2007): 467–477.
24. Hulmi, J.J., V. Kovanen, H. Selanne, W.J. Kraemer, K. Hakkinen, and A.A. Mero. “Acute and long-term effects of resistance exercise with or without protein ingestion on muscle hypertrophy and gene expression.” Amino Acids 37(2) (2009): 297–308.
25. Verdijk, L.B., R.A. Jonkers, B.G. Gleeson, M. Beelen, K. Meijer, H.H. Savelberg, W.K. Wodzig, P. Dendale, L.J. van Loon. “Protein supplementation before and after exercise does not further augment skeletal muscle hypertrophy after resistance training in elderly men.” Am J Clin Nutr 89(2) (2009): 608–616.
26. Hoffman, J.R., N.A. Ratamess, C.P. Tranchina, S.L. Rashti, J. Kang, and A.D. Faigenbaum. “Effect of protein-supplement timing on strength, power, and bodycomposition changes in resistance-trained men.” Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab 19(2) (2009): 172–185.
27. Erskine, R.M., G. Fletcher, B. Hanson, and J.P. Folland. “Whey protein does not enhance the adaptations to elbow flexor resistance training.” Med SciSports Exerc 44(9) (2012): 1791-1800.
28. Schoenfeld, et al. “The effect of protein timing on muscle strength and hypertrophy: A meta-analysis.” Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 10 (2013): 5.
29. Layman, D.K. “Protein quantity and quality at levels above the RDA improves adult weight loss.” J Am Coll Nutr 23(6 Suppl) (2004): 631S–636S.